Gary
Orfield and Erica Frankenberg of the Civil Rights Project at UCLA have
collaborated once again on a weighty book, one
that looks at the civil rights implications of choice. Just published this month by University of California
Press it makes a central contribution to the policy analysis field.
I
will give more space to selected excerpts here than I will consume with my own
observations. Two facets of the book I
would highlight, however, are that it includes important new empirical studies,
and also that it is not anti-charter
and choice. Indeed, the authors provide
many examples throughout the book of ways that choice has always held
integrative potential, and still does – if policymakers pay careful
attention.
The
authors write:
Our
intent was to produce a volume that would be accessible and based on clear
evidence, to help readers critically assess assumptions about school choice and
the civil rights implications of the choices and decisions being made in their
communities. Because much of the debate in this arena is ideologically driven,
we grounded our examination in specific cases as a way to illustrate the
relationships between policies and their effects on segregation and opportunity
for poor and minority families, evidence from which readers could draw their
own conclusions about school choice (pp. ix-x).
The
authors have largely achieved this goal. One chapter that ought to be assigned reading
for education law and policy students, by Erica Frankenberg and Genevieve Siegel-Hawley,
focuses on the lack of directives at the state level to regulate charter school
segregation levels. In the absence of
clear federal policies about preventing segregation in charters that receive
federal funding, states also feel little pressure to enact such policies. This is not only a dereliction of
responsibility, but a missed opportunity:
Aside
from diversity requirements and nondiscrimination obligations, there are other,
seemingly race-neutral decisions about charter schools that could have significant
consequences for their ability to attract a diverse student enrollment. For
instance, the lack of legislation extending charter transportation across
district lines undercuts one of the sector’s integrative strengths: the
opportunity to attract a diverse student body across such boundaries. Since
most school segregation today exists between districts, charters represent an
important opportunity to override the lines dividing school systems. (p. 134)
Case
studies from Louisville, Hartford, and Berkeley show such integrative
possibilities and explain the policy tools used to achieve them (i.e.
controlled choice, magnets, and use of planning zones), while Amy Stuart Wells
and colleagues update what is known about the outcomes of inter-district
transfer programs. A recurring theme
throughout is that parents are still eager for diverse schools for their
children, as evidenced by competitive admissions for many urban-suburban
interdistrict plans, and demand that exceeds supply for magnets in just about
every metropolitan area.
Barus
Gumus-Dawes, Tom Luce, and Myron Orfield of the Institute
for Race and Poverty make a sound contribution to the gridlocked debate
about charter school outcomes in New Orleans, which ought to be read widely -- but
probably will not be. First, they
examine achievement data to show that the achievement differences among sectors
– Recovery School District (RSD), Orleans Parish Schools, and suburban schools
– outweigh those between RSD charters and the city’s regular public
schools. In the RSD, the authors write,
“charters can use admission requirements, enrollment processes, discipline and
expulsion practices, transportation policies, location decisions, and marketing
or recruitment efforts to shape their student bodies clearly implies that
selection bias is almost certainly working to make pass rates in charters, all
else being equal, greater than those of traditional schools” (p. 175). They encourage a consideration of the use of
magnet schools as an addition to the current almost exclusive focus on
charters. Also viable, they write, would
be to explore a regional plan, similar to Raleigh’s or Louisville’s:
“In 2009 there were three times as many
students in suburban public schools as in the city system. The racial and
income mix of the full regional school system clearly provides much more
potential for integration efforts than the city alone. An effective regional
system would also likely fare better in competition with the private system
than the city alone” (p. 179). If, that
is, there are constituencies left there who would embrace higher levels of
integration as a goal. With Governor
Jindal’s private-school voucher plan newly expanded, discussions of racial
segregation aren’t particularly lively in Louisiana, unless you are a federal
judge noting that it interferes with a standing desegregation order.
I will give Gary Orfield the last word
about the application of market incentives, unfettered, to public schools. He writes in his chapter entitled “Choice
Theories and the Schools”:
Getting the best results from
competition requires enforcement of the rules of the game by government. When
one uses the promise of private gains as the basic engine of change, one must
channel that great force to produce real gains and limit harm. The drive for
profits is a powerful motivator, and if it is possible to get more while doing
less by cheating, the market will be corrupted…It is ironic that the same
ideology that assumes people are inherently inclined toward evil and corruption
in politics and therefore need to be watched and limited somehow believes that
people in markets are not subject to the same temptations. What we see in many
discussions of school choice is a school produced by an ideal type of market
instead of the real situation facing the most disadvantaged schools. (p.47)
Lesson learned: Federales necessarii
sunt. Federal regulation is not the answer
to every problem in education, but in this case, some ground rules desperately
need clarification and enforcement.
By: ElizabethDeBray
No comments:
Post a Comment