Anonymous wrote:Until the city is more integrated, the public schools won't be. Take a look at the charters and the specialized high schools, which are generally more integrated.

Agree with this -- when neighborhoods are segregated, so are schools, and the solutions if you don't integrate neighborhoods aren't very appealing.

I also think orgs like Empower Ed sometimes ignore a lot of the challenges with school integration that don't have much to do with racism or classism, but are just practical. Like that sometimes different racial and socio-economic demographics have different approaches to parenting and education, and to reconcile them, everyone has to give a little. Or that parents might ultimately decide it's not healthy for their kid to one of only a very small number of kids at their school of a specific demographic, not because they are racist, but because that can lead to unhealthy peer dynamics.

The lottery means that even if you shift boundaries in a way that makes the catchment more integrated, it might not lead to a more integrated school unless you address the above issues in a way that feels comfortable for people. But even as I'm writing this I'm hearing the objections (it's not about making white people comfortable, etc.). But actually comfort matters to everyone. You can't expect people to just be uncomfortable, indefinitely, especially when the system also provides them with other options.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many Charters are super integrated. Even the fancy ones -- BASIS, DCI and Latin fit the actual definition of integrated (no one race more than 70 percent of the population).

Other charters are not integrated but at serving their low-income populations better than the DCPS schools (like DC Prep getting everyone into college).

DCPS schools in gentrifying neighborhoods are sometimes integrated and there is an opportunity here to be a model. Like I feel Garrison actually serves all demographics well.

Other DCPS schools are not integrated because the housing is segregated. Do people really want to run busses between Ward 3 and EOTR or something? This sounds like a mess.

BASIS might meet the letter of the law definition of integration, but I don't think a school with 6% of students at risk in a city with a public student population that's 45% at risk is actually what anybody is talking about when they say integration.

Pffft.

At least it's possible for very poor children to attend BASIS.

Jackson-Reid, Janney, Murch, Deal, etc. all impose de facto wealth tests on their students. If your parents can't afford a house in Ward 3, sorry you have to go somewhere else!

Ward 3 i sexpensive, but it has public housing and many subsidized apartments. You don't have to buy a house.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many Charters are super integrated. Even the fancy ones -- BASIS, DCI and Latin fit the actual definition of integrated (no one race more than 70 percent of the population).

Other charters are not integrated but at serving their low-income populations better than the DCPS schools (like DC Prep getting everyone into college).

DCPS schools in gentrifying neighborhoods are sometimes integrated and there is an opportunity here to be a model. Like I feel Garrison actually serves all demographics well.

Other DCPS schools are not integrated because the housing is segregated. Do people really want to run busses between Ward 3 and EOTR or something? This sounds like a mess.

BASIS might meet the letter of the law definition of integration, but I don't think a school with 6% of students at risk in a city with a public student population that's 45% at risk is actually what anybody is talking about when they say integration.

Poster child for why these discussions go nowhere in DC. OP admits a school is integrated but thinks it is the wrong kind of integration, and therefore doesn't count as integration.

OP wants us all to know if we can't solve ALL the problems at once then we shouldn't solve any.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many Charters are super integrated. Even the fancy ones -- BASIS, DCI and Latin fit the actual definition of integrated (no one race more than 70 percent of the population).

Other charters are not integrated but at serving their low-income populations better than the DCPS schools (like DC Prep getting everyone into college).

DCPS schools in gentrifying neighborhoods are sometimes integrated and there is an opportunity here to be a model. Like I feel Garrison actually serves all demographics well.

Other DCPS schools are not integrated because the housing is segregated. Do people really want to run busses between Ward 3 and EOTR or something? This sounds like a mess.

BASIS might meet the letter of the law definition of integration, but I don't think a school with 6% of students at risk in a city with a public student population that's 45% at risk is actually what anybody is talking about when they say integration.

That's because these integrationist don't actually want integration -- they want white kids to go to majority-minority schools. That's what they explicitly say on the "Integrated Schools" website, for example.

Then the coopt the word integration, which has an actual meaning, because they know it's a value our society is aiming for.

Then when you point out schools that actually are racially integrated, they said "I don't think that's what anybody is talking about when they say integration."

Say what you really mean. Words matter.

+1

Consultant class euphemisms are the worst.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many Charters are super integrated. Even the fancy ones -- BASIS, DCI and Latin fit the actual definition of integrated (no one race more than 70 percent of the population).

Other charters are not integrated but at serving their low-income populations better than the DCPS schools (like DC Prep getting everyone into college).

DCPS schools in gentrifying neighborhoods are sometimes integrated and there is an opportunity here to be a model. Like I feel Garrison actually serves all demographics well.

Other DCPS schools are not integrated because the housing is segregated. Do people really want to run busses between Ward 3 and EOTR or something? This sounds like a mess.

BASIS might meet the letter of the law definition of integration, but I don't think a school with 6% of students at risk in a city with a public student population that's 45% at risk is actually what anybody is talking about when they say integration.

That's because these integrationist don't actually want integration -- they want white kids to go to majority-minority schools. That's what they explicitly say on the "Integrated Schools" website, for example.

Then the coopt the word integration, which has an actual meaning, because they know it's a value our society is aiming for.

Then when you point out schools that actually are racially integrated, they said "I don't think that's what anybody is talking about when they say integration."

Say what you really mean. Words matter.

This. There are actually quite a few DCPSs with a lot of racial and economic diversity, which creates a fabulous environment for all the students. But these schools would not meet the definition of "integration" that some people seek.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm watching the DC Council Hearing on the education related agencies (UDC, DME-Deputy Mayor for Education, State Board of Education, DC PCSB, etc). The testimony from the EmpowerEd group is that the DME must be focused on school integration as a priority and push the necessary school boundary changes that lead to integration goals even if there is pushback.

What are your thoughts? I have lots of priorities for education like more gifted programs, improved middle school options, better curriculum, support to keep teachers in the profession, etc but changing school boundaries for the purposes of integration isn't high on the list.

What does “more” integration even mean in DC. It’s one of the most integrated districts in the country

They didn't define what it meant. The specific testimony was "And when we do boundary studies with the knowledge that school
segregation is still a profound problem and integration is a powerful tool for improvement- we need courage from the DME to actually make courageous decisions (even if there is pushback) to work towards real school integration."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many Charters are super integrated. Even the fancy ones -- BASIS, DCI and Latin fit the actual definition of integrated (no one race more than 70 percent of the population).

Other charters are not integrated but at serving their low-income populations better than the DCPS schools (like DC Prep getting everyone into college).

DCPS schools in gentrifying neighborhoods are sometimes integrated and there is an opportunity here to be a model. Like I feel Garrison actually serves all demographics well.

Other DCPS schools are not integrated because the housing is segregated. Do people really want to run busses between Ward 3 and EOTR or something? This sounds like a mess.

BASIS might meet the letter of the law definition of integration, but I don't think a school with 6% of students at risk in a city with a public student population that's 45% at risk is actually what anybody is talking about when they say integration.

That's because these integrationist don't actually want integration -- they want white kids to go to majority-minority schools. That's what they explicitly say on the "Integrated Schools" website, for example.

Then the coopt the word integration, which has an actual meaning, because they know it's a value our society is aiming for.

Then when you point out schools that actually are racially integrated, they said "I don't think that's what anybody is talking about when they say integration."

Say what you really mean. Words matter.

The funny thing is that this is the reason that integration for integration's sake is a low priority IMO. When neighborhood schools get better, they get more integrated -- which in DC has meant more white families opting into the neighborhood school. We've seen that over and over. For me, big priorities are improving instruction, rigor, course offerings etc and doing that will meet the priorities of better schools, better academic outcomes and also integration.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many Charters are super integrated. Even the fancy ones -- BASIS, DCI and Latin fit the actual definition of integrated (no one race more than 70 percent of the population).

Other charters are not integrated but at serving their low-income populations better than the DCPS schools (like DC Prep getting everyone into college).

DCPS schools in gentrifying neighborhoods are sometimes integrated and there is an opportunity here to be a model. Like I feel Garrison actually serves all demographics well.

Other DCPS schools are not integrated because the housing is segregated. Do people really want to run busses between Ward 3 and EOTR or something? This sounds like a mess.

BASIS might meet the letter of the law definition of integration, but I don't think a school with 6% of students at risk in a city with a public student population that's 45% at risk is actually what anybody is talking about when they say integration.

Pffft.

At least it's possible for very poor children to attend BASIS.

Jackson-Reid, Janney, Murch, Deal, etc. all impose de facto wealth tests on their students. If your parents can't afford a house in Ward 3, sorry you have to go somewhere else!

If it's really such a high priority then maybe DME shouldn't have botched the Maury-Miner presentation. Failing to notify the Miner PTO was the cherry on top-- they only found out because the supposedly awful Maury parents told them.

Not a priority. Maury-Miner. 'Nuff said.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many Charters are super integrated. Even the fancy ones -- BASIS, DCI and Latin fit the actual definition of integrated (no one race more than 70 percent of the population).

Other charters are not integrated but at serving their low-income populations better than the DCPS schools (like DC Prep getting everyone into college).

DCPS schools in gentrifying neighborhoods are sometimes integrated and there is an opportunity here to be a model. Like I feel Garrison actually serves all demographics well.

Other DCPS schools are not integrated because the housing is segregated. Do people really want to run busses between Ward 3 and EOTR or something? This sounds like a mess.

BASIS might meet the letter of the law definition of integration, but I don't think a school with 6% of students at risk in a city with a public student population that's 45% at risk is actually what anybody is talking about when they say integration.

That's because these integrationist don't actually want integration -- they want white kids to go to majority-minority schools. That's what they explicitly say on the "Integrated Schools" website, for example.

Then the coopt the word integration, which has an actual meaning, because they know it's a value our society is aiming for.

Then when you point out schools that actually are racially integrated, they said "I don't think that's what anybody is talking about when they say integration."

Say what you really mean. Words matter.

School integration matters a lot to me, but I see it as a community and individual priority, and not necessarily the responsibility of DCPS. Of course neighborhoods factor into a school makeup, and schools are going to look different by ward. But, there are a lot of schools that aren’t reflective of their neighborhood makeup, and that’s usually because UMC families opt out of their IB school and into something else. There are schools with poor leadership resulting in teacher turnover, and other challenges, and those issues should be addressed by DCPS. There are also many instances of schools not being as integrated as they could be because people opt out due to perceptions, bias, because that’s what everyone else they knows does, etc—and that’s where I think efforts to support more integrated schools can be effective.

You can get integration real easy in a way that doesn't drive families with options out of the system. Create a magnet program EOTP for middle school kids with at grade level math and reading scores. Heavily equity-lottery it so at-risk kids have a much higher chance of getting in. Promote it at the elementary schools. Send letters to the at-risk kids who qualify. Voila, UMC parents will be trying to get their kids in.

Anonymous wrote:Many Charters are super integrated. Even the fancy ones -- BASIS, DCI and Latin fit the actual definition of integrated (no one race more than 70 percent of the population).

Other charters are not integrated but at serving their low-income populations better than the DCPS schools (like DC Prep getting everyone into college).

DCPS schools in gentrifying neighborhoods are sometimes integrated and there is an opportunity here to be a model. Like I feel Garrison actually serves all demographics well.

Other DCPS schools are not integrated because the housing is segregated. Do people really want to run busses between Ward 3 and EOTR or something? This sounds like a mess.

BASIS might meet the letter of the law definition of integration, but I don't think a school with 6% of students at risk in a city with a public student population that's 45% at risk is actually what anybody is talking about when they say integration.

Anonymous wrote:Integration is very important to me and I am engaged in it, but it is generally overtaken by other priorities on this board.

I'd say mostly, this board wants differentiation and to not have children of board participants in the same schools as students with behavior problems. Those goals do not go well with generalized integration.

There are also more general segregation/race and class relations issues, with a major one being a distribution of income and educational attainment that is at the edges with nobody in the middle (we have a bunch of high income advanced degree holders and HS-or-worse educated low income parents, nothing in between in DC).

I feel like with a colossal amount of money differentiation could be at least improved, since it's largely a staffing question. Behavior could be better managed with more 1:1s and a greater willingness to approve nonpublic placements or more public schools for level 4+ IEPs. But without a willingness to pay for it nothing changes.