School Integration in Manhattan piece in the Atlantic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

Seems like nothing could be more unfair and more segregated than DCPS and its neighborhood based boundaries.

Disagree completely. The highest-performing, most functional and best run schools in the system are neighborhood schools and best practices does not dictate scrapping what works well. I'm all for instituting methods of sharing the joy, e.g. PTA capacity building programs (perhaps wealthy PTA to poor PTA pairings) and modest revenue sharing arrangements, but not for dismantling points of light in a badly administered school system. That's like arguing that G-8 countries shouldn't have strong economies because the Least Developed countries don't. Dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

Seems like nothing could be more unfair and more segregated than DCPS and its neighborhood based boundaries.

Inversely, it isn't necessarily "fair" that the lottery system provides an advantage to families that can transport their children to their location of choice - assuming that they 'win' the lottery.

If economic diversity is actually important to the charter system, then charters should have a specific mandate to provide enrollment preference to disadvantaged families within proximity to the schools. Of course, schools like YY, CMI, and the new MV are locating in areas where it is difficult for poor families to access. The result ends up the same as DCPS boundaries.

As it should be. Common sense dictates that low SES families who struggle with standard English and don't speak Spanish or Chinese at home definitely don't belong in 50% Spanish and Chinese immersion programs. Put them in such programs for many years, and they come out without a good grasp of two languages. What have you achieved?