moving forward

With critical parents now on board, New York City will move forward with district-wide diversity plan

PHOTO: Christina Veiga
Parents and school leaders met on Oct. 19 to discuss the new admissions plan.

After a long and public battle over how to integrate schools on the Lower East Side, the New York City education department has finally won over some critical parent advocates — a crucial step as officials move forward with the de Blasio administration’s first district-wide diversity plan.

The plan creates a new admissions process for students entering pre-kindergarten and kindergarten in the small, segregated district in Lower Manhattan with the goal of getting each school to enroll roughly equal percentages of needy students. The changes will take effect this fall as families apply to schools for the following year.

Last month, when the city first announced its proposal for District 1, which also includes the East Village, the local Community Education Council accused officials of not acting boldly enough and disregarding the community’s vision for what an integration plan should include.

Since then, the department appears to have eased some of their concerns. Most notably, it added students with disabilities to the list of student groups that each school must admit in proportions roughly equal to the district average.

As department officials held public meetings in each of the district’s roughly two-dozen schools over the past month to sell the plan to parents and get feedback, they also were more responsive to members of the education council, said Naomi Peña, the council president who had been one of the department’s most outspoken critics.

“There has been a major shift in the way the DOE has compromised with the community,” she said, adding that the council is now generally supportive of city’s plan. “I think they understand if you want to be successful you have to work with parent leaders.”

Whereas requests for information had previously languished without response, she said officials recently worked through the weekend to run enrollment simulations based on questions from parents. She also said department officials assured her that they will closely monitor the plan — and that they have agreed to make changes if the new system fails to show results.

“This is like when you’re in the last round of boxing,” she said. “However we get to a diverse community is what I’m looking for.”

District 1 elementary schools do not have zones that determine enrollment. Instead, families apply to any schools they choose. While overall the district enrolls a diverse mix of students, many schools do not reflect that. For example, the poverty rate at East Village Community School is just 22 percent — a fraction of the district average of about 70 percent. Meanwhile, virtually all of the students at P.S. 15 Roberto Clemente are poor.

Under the new system, students who are learning English, live in temporary housing, or qualify for free and reduced-price lunch will get first dibs on offers to about two-thirds of the seats in every school — a percentage meant to mirror the share of those students across the entire district. More privileged students who don’t fall into any of those categories will be given preference for a third of seats in each school.

Based on feedback from the public meetings, the city said Thursday that it will also consider whether a student has a disability when making enrollment offers as a way of ensuring that those students are evenly spread across the district.

“We know that all students benefit from diverse and inclusive classrooms, and District 1 is taking an important step forward with their districtwide diversity plan,” schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña said in a statement.

In another change, the city is urging — but not requiring — families to list five school choices on their applications. Families who do so will have a better chance of getting one of their choices. The idea is to encourage parents to consider a wider variety of schools so that parents of the same race and class don’t stick to the same schools.

The change comes after some wealthier parents voiced concerns that needy students from outside the district could get priority for seats over their children. Last year, about 47 percent of applicants to District 1 schools lived in other districts, according to the department.

“We moved here in part because of the quality of the schools in District 1 and the diversity,” David Hung, a parent whose son is entering pre-K next year, said at a recent community meeting that was held before the department’s final plan was announced. “So it’s both somewhat troubling and ironic that as a result of this policy — which I’m very supportive of — that we may in fact not be able to have our kids attend District 1.”

City and parent leaders hope that a new “Family Resource Center,” which opened this month and will provide parents with information about all the district’s schools as they fill out their applications, will expand the range of schools that parents consider.

The new system comes after two years of work by parents, district, and school leaders who landed a state grant to pursue integration strategies in the district — and follows a series of delays and false starts. Advocates had hoped to make these enrollment changes last fall.

Advocates say they hope the process there will serve as an example for other districts, as support for integration strategies grows across the city.

“This is a great way to show how a true community plan can be led, and fingers crossed can be a model,” Peña said.

Chalkbeat explains

How school desegregation efforts could change, or not, after DeVos’s move to scrap Obama-era guidance on race

PHOTO: U.S. Department of Education
U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos visiting the Christian Academy for Reaching Excellence in Miami.

The Trump administration’s decision to withdraw guidance dealing with race in school admissions last week wasn’t just about colleges.

School districts across the country have grappled with how to integrate their schools, too. And one of the seven documents withdrawn by the education and justice departments offered a roadmap for districts looking to voluntarily integrate their elementary and secondary schools.

This move is important symbolically — particularly in light of a surge of discussions about the persistence of segregation in public schools. But it’s not likely to have far-reaching policy implications, since only a handful of districts voluntarily use race in school assignment decisions.

Here’s what we know about what this change might mean for K-12 schools. Keep in mind that the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has authored a number of the key affirmative action opinions, puts things in even more flux. Critics of affirmative action hope Kennedy’s replacement will join other conservative judges to further limit the consideration of race in state and local policies, including school admissions decisions.

What was this guidance?

What’s relevant to K-12 education is a 14-page Obama-era document that explained how school districts can attempt to racially integrate schools without getting into legal trouble. (The document was targeted at districts that wanted to adopt desegregation policies on their own, not districts bound by federal desegregation orders.) That’s what DeVos rescinded.

It offered advice for school districts looking to make policy changes to diversify schools. Districts should first consider factors like students’ neighborhood or poverty level. But, the guidance read, “if a school district determines that these types of approaches would be unworkable, it may consider using an individual student’s race as one factor among others.”

It’s hardly a push for wide-scale race-based policies, but it left some room to use race if districts find they had exhausted alternatives.

This guidance was necessary, some argue, because the Supreme Court has weighed in on this issue in a complex way. A 2007 case, Parents Involved v. Seattle School District, struck down Seattle’s school assignment plan for its reliance on race to make admissions decisions.

“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in a widely quoted passage of the opinion. But Kennedy, the key fifth justice in the majority, didn’t fully sign on to this — continuing to allow districts to use race as a factor, but not the sole one.

“A district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population. Race may be one component of that diversity, but other demographic factors, plus special talents and needs, should also be considered,” Kennedy wrote. “What the government is not permitted to do … is to classify every student on the basis of race and to assign each of them to schools based on that classification.”

The Bush administration issued its own interpretation of the ruling in 2008, encouraging school districts not to consider race, though it did not say that doing so was prohibited in all circumstances. By publishing a guide for using race in 2011, the Obama administration was offering practical help but also sending a message that its goals were different.  

Erica Frankenberg, a professor who studies K-12 desegregation at Penn State, said the user-friendly way the guide was written was part of the Obama administration’s strategy to encourage districts to integrate their schools.

Did any school districts use it?

According to recent research, 60 school districts in 25 states have school assignment policies meant to create more diverse schools. Of those, just 12 districts take race into account, rather than just socio-economic status. (Using socio-economic status isn’t affected by this debate about race-based admissions.)

But it’s hard to tell if the guidance was a deciding factor for any school districts.

“Even with the 2011 guidance in place, voluntary integration is still an incredibly complicated thing to do,” said Frankenberg. In addition to a plan being in compliance with the law, this approach require garnering political will and tackling logistics like transportation.

Why are some people concerned about it being rescinded?

The guidance represents the official viewpoint of the administration, but the underlying law hasn’t changed. It does mean that districts won’t have the backing of federal government when it comes to race-conscious integration policies. That might make districts using race more fearful of a lawsuit.

“This is a legal intimidation strategy from a very conservative administration that is really intent on not having race a part of decision making and policy,” said Liliana Garces, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin who studies race, law, and education.

The move to rescind the documents fall into set of decisions by the Department of Education to deprioritize voluntary desegregation. Last year, the department discontinued an Obama-era grant program that was intended to help schools increase socio-economic diversity. (According to The Atlantic, 26 districts had been interested in applying for integration grants before that program was scrapped by the DeVos administration.)

To no longer have [the guidances] as an official stance is certainly at the very least, a missed opportunity to use the bully pulpit,” said Frankenberg, who supports race-based integration efforts.

Others support the move, arguing that attempts to use race in public policy are unconstitutional.  

“Being opposed to racial preferences is not being against diversity, which is what the critics will claim: It’s simply being against discrimination,” Roger Clegg, of the anti-affirmative action Center for Equal Opportunity, told Education Week. “The federal government should not be going out of its way to encourage such discrimination.”

What does research say about school integration?

It’s found that low-income students and students of color benefit from racially integrated schools. One recent study found that graduation rates of black and Hispanic students fell modestly after the end of a court order mandating desegregation plans. Another study found that Palo Alto’s school integration program led to big boosts in college enrollment among students of color (though, surprisingly, also led to an uptick in arrests).

Research has also shown that income is not a good proxy for race when looking at academic outcomes — even when accounting for differences in family income, black students were substantially less likely to complete high school and enroll in college. Other research has shown that attempting to use income to integrate schools by race isn’t nearly as effective as using race directly.

sounding off

New Yorkers respond to Mayor Bill de Blasio’s push to overhaul admissions at elite but segregated specialized high schools

PHOTO: Benjamin Kanter/Mayoral Photo Office
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio earlier this year.

Mayor Bill de Blasio’s push to better integrate New York City’s specialized high schools was met with fierce pushback but also pledges of support after the mayor announced Saturday he would work to overhaul admissions at the elite schools.

The reaction foreshadows the battle that lies ahead if de Blasio is going to convince lawmakers to sign off a key piece of his plan.

Considered the Ivies of the city’s high school system, eight of the nine specialized high schools admit students based on the results of a single entrance exam (the remaining performing arts school requires an audition.) The most significant but controversial change de Blasio is proposing is to scrap the test in favor of a system that offers admission to top students at every middle school, which requires a change in state law for some of the specialized high schools.

Many alumni from those schools have fought fiercely to preserve the entrance exam requirement, worrying that changing the admissions rules will lower academic standards.

Many made the familiar arguments that the city should instead focus on improving the quality of middle schools, or expand access to gifted programs, to serve as a feeder into top high schools.

Alumni who would like to see the Specialized High School Admissions Test remain in place likely have many lawmakers on their side. New York State Senator Toby Ann Stavisky, a Democrat who represents several Queens neighborhoods, released a statement that she “couldn’t disagree more” with the mayor’s proposal.

The reaction also captured concerns about how the changes could impact Asian students, who make up a disproportionate share of enrollment at the specialized high schools. Those students are also likely to come from low-income families.

But others took to social media to support the mayor’s proposal. Specialized high schools have enrolled an increasingly shrinking share of black and Hispanic students: While two-thirds of city students are black or Hispanic, only about 10 percent of admissions offers to those schools go to black or Hispanic students.

Some thanked the mayor for taking action after campaigning for years to make changes.

And not all alumni were against the changes. Also included in the mayor’s plan is an expansion of Discovery, a program that helps admit low-income students who just missed the cutoff score on the entrance exam.