Reply to Studies on "integrated schools"

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Studies on "integrated schools""

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous]Totally agree.

Obviously, the NPR stories are not really "studies" and some of the studies are hidden behind pay walls. Moreover, many of these don't actually directly support the 
claims for which they are being cited.  In addition, the case studies that people are claiming absolutely confirm that integrated schools are better for all students approach integration in different ways. Some of the school systems promoted economically desegregated schools by offering school choice, which potentially promotes buy in for higher SES families and allows motivated lower SES students the opportunity to learn in a more positive environment. You can't say that positive outcomes under those circumstances necessarily support forced redistricting to promote more diverse student populations.

If you actually read these studies and advocacy pieces, you will see that there is no consistently proven approach to "integration" and "diversity" and no definition of what these words actually mean.  As you point out, some of the studies showing the benefit of greater "diversity" involve areas in which an entire school system is high poverty and an adjacent system is wealthy. which is not the case anywhere in this region.  One study being cited to show that white students do not do worse in a school where the majority of students are minorities was controlled for socioeconomic status.  So all that study shows is that when controlling for SES status, the skin color of classmates makes no difference.  Duh.

In one of the sources cited, Richard Kahlenberg, a major proponent of school integration, stated the case educational integration, and said:

[quote]There are three reasons [why integrated schools are better]: the kids, the parents and the teachers.

Kids who have big dreams and are expecting to go on to college are less likely to cause disruption, cut classes and are more likely to be academically engaged.

On average, those peers are found more often in economically mixed than in high-poverty schools.

It's also an advantage to be in a classroom where your peers are high-achieving. For example, children of professionals have bigger vocabularies on average than low-income students, and that will rub off.

As for the parents, again, not attaching any blame, but middle-class parents are more likely to be PTA members and volunteer in class. That parental involvement benefits every child in a school.

And finally, the teachers deemed more effective are more likely to be found in economically mixed schools. That has to do with those first two factors. It's easier to teach in a school with fewer discipline issues and with parents who are there to help out.[/quote]

So basically non poor families and students from those families create a better environment that helps to lift up disadvantaged students from lower SES families. That makes sense. Schools with too many poor kids are more likely to have problems associated with poverty and schools with fewer poor kids are more likely to have greater stability, higher expectations more involved parents, happier teachers, etc.  That's the reason why we want economically integrated schools. But it doesn't prove that everything will be peachy for higher SES kids in high-poverty schools.

The article continues:

[quote][b]In New York City, where I live, as your report notes, 77 percent of students live in poverty. How do you create economically mixed schools if there aren't enough middle-class kids to go around?[/b]

I worked with Chicago Public Schools on their socioeconomic integration plan. The district is 85 percent low-income.[b] My recommendation was not to ensure that every school was 85 percent low-income, because high-poverty schools are bad for students. In Chicago what they've done is to begin with magnet and selective-enrollment schools. You want to create a virtuous cycle where people can see examples of success.[/b]

[According to the recent report, Chicago's selective enrollment or "exam high schools" are much more racially balanced than their counterparts in Boston and New York City. And in those Chicago schools students from all backgrounds are keeping up academically and graduating at very high rates.]

[b]It almost sounds like a chemistry experiment — you have to control the conditions very carefully and titrate your mixture until it hits that tipping point.[/b]

The long-term aspiration is that, as you develop more socioeconomically integrated schools, that the overall demographics of the public school system could shift. We saw that in Cambridge: Over time, more middle-class and white people came back into the district, stopped using private schools and stopped moving away once their kids got to be a certain age.[/quote]

So, the leader of the school integration movement is[b] not [/b]recommending that all schools have the same percentages of lower SES students, because high concentrations of poverty aren't good for any students. Keep that in mind.

The studies showing benefits are not applicable if moving students for greater socioeconomic diversity does create low poverty schools.  I have not seen any studies showing that reducing poverty concentrations in a school from 70 to 60% would  make any difference to poor students.  If you are a student going from a low poverty school to that new 60% poverty school, you are now in what all studies suggest is a less than ideal learning environment and there is no justification for the move except for the assertion that it is good for students to learn to get along with different types of people (unless the justification is overcrowding at an adjacent school).  It is not surprising that parents are concerned.  The mere fact that you come from a stable family with educated parents does not guarantee success in school any more than being born poor guarantees failure.  Based on personal experience at a school with a growing FARMS population, as that population has grown, so too have discipline and other problems. It is not every kid, but the frequency has increased. At some point, the balance tips to where the concentration of poverty is bad for everyone.

Given the way lower income housing is distributed, it would be impossible to make all schools low poverty without significant busing.  That's a huge problem.

Another problem in this debate is that we are approaching it in a vacuum and that is what is making even reasonable parents who are concerned about boundary changes look like resource hoarding racists. If there were established perimeters and definitions on terms like "diversity" and "integration", debate could be more civil.  What are people really afraid of?  Some may be focused on real estate values but not everyone is. I just looked at a teacher survey in my county and saw that at the high school level, for the three high schools with the highest concentration of poverty, almost 90% of the teachers responding said that student behaviors interfere with student learning. The opposite was true in the low poverty schools. That's what worries parents about redistricting.

I am all for giving disadvantaged children better opportunities. From a personal standpoint, I'm willing to give up something for my family and my own children for the greater good. I don't live in Montgomery County, but I do live in a racially and economically diverse area.  In fact, the population of the schools my kids attend mirrors that of the county. We chose our diverse community for many reasons and we love it.  This means that the schools my children attend are not the Great Schools top ranked, but I believe in them and believe that my children can learn effectively there. I would not choose a top ranked school with no diversity, because I don't think that is a good environment for my family. I want them exposed to different types of people.  At the same time, I didn't choose to live in Baltimore City for a reason and I would not want my children to attend the school with the highest concentration of poverty in the county.

Desegregation is good because high poverty schools are bad for everyone. But you can't write off concerned parents as racists just because they fear having their kids in an less desirable educational environment characterized by concentrated poverty.  Some of you apparently have perfect kids who are destined to be model, high achieving students anywhere, but my kids need help in terms of outside tutors and parental guidance to stay on track. Studies have not necessarily shown that students with educated parents do well no matter what the concentration of poverty in their schools; in fact, studies show the opposite.  It is true that parental education has been found to be one of the strongest factors in student success, but that also undermines support for improving outcomes through integrated schools. You can't have it both ways.

Many working parents are giving everything to support their kids in already diverse, lower poverty schools right now. Some of us have kids with anxiety or other special needs who have significant hurdles to overcome, even with economic advantages.

We have obvious inequities within our society and the education system alone cannot solve the problems associated with poverty. Small changes which allow more low income students to be educated in schools with low concentrations of poverty might be a step in the right direction supported by the vast majority. The studies suggest that buy-in to desegregation efforts is essential, so some level of choice or assurance that those who have scarified to live in a lower poverty environment will not see their children involuntarily moved to high poverty schools would go a long way toward focusing this debate and making it more productive.  This is not to say that providing opportunities for poor kids does not matter.  It is simply to say that  we need to make changes over time.  When adjustments are being considered, you have to be realistic about what is likely to be gained and what is being lost.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics