Although Brown v. Board of Education eliminated school segregation 58 years ago, the idea of bussing students to integrate them more effectively is still going strong in some school districts. Today, the issue is not race as much as it is socioeconomic status—integrating wealthy and low-income students into a diverse student body that performs better academically. Does it work? The answer depends on who asks the question.
In this TED Talk, Kandice Sumner sees the disparity every day in her Boston classroom. In this inspiring talk, she asks us to face the facts and change them.
School Assignments by Socioeconomic Status Not a New Idea
USA Today reported more than two years ago that more than 60 school systems used socioeconomic status as a factor in school assignments. These schools made this decision primarily to improve performance in schools with a high concentration of poverty.
“To the extent that we can eliminate the highest concentrations of poverty, or spread more thinly those concentrations of poverty, I think we make the environment a little less challenging for students and staff to be successful,” Michael Rice, superintendent for Kalamazoo Public Schools in Michigan, told USA Today at the time.
Wake County in North Carolina was one of the first school districts in the country to consider bussing based on income level. In 2000, this school district shifted its bussing policy from one based on race to one based on a student’s household income level. For many years, it was a shining example of what socioeconomic desegregation could do. The schools were more integrated than other schools in the state, and test scores for low-income and middle-class students were higher than in other districts around the state.
However, the school board in Wake County voted down the desegregation policy in 2010. The Los Angeles Times reported that the board voted in a new “community school zone” program, met with a wave of opponents. Those who protested the new policy stated that it would create a situation of “have” and “have-not” schools, with some schools boasting a much higher percentage of poor African-American students.
Socioeconomic School Assignments a Hot-Button Issue
The controversy in Wake County proved to be heated. Some parents believed that sending kids to school farther from home was harmful—both to the students and the school as a whole.
“They take these poor kids who are struggling and do their very best to spread them around and create the appearance of healthy schools,” Joe Ciulla, a parent of a Wake Forest student, told USA Today.
In the American Educational Research Association video, Gregory Palardy opines that"The major finding is that socioeconomic composition of the high school impacts attainment - both high school graduation and college enrollment."
One of the board members who voted down the school assignment policy in 2010, John Tedesco, said that while the previous assignment policy had been well-intended, it took choice away from families of all income levels. Instead of choosing a school through an open enrollment policy, families were assigned a “home” school based on socioeconomic status. The goal of Wake County schools at the time had been to ensure at least 40 percent of the student population at each school qualified for free or reduced-price lunches.
However, not everyone was in agreement about eliminating the school assignment policy. William Barber, head of the North Carolina NAACP, said of the board’s decision to drop the policy, “It’s morally wrong. It’s legally wrong. It’s economically wrong.”
How School Assignment Impacts Students
One reason for the controversy is that compelling evidence supports both sides of the coin. In other words, there is no black-and-white solution to the issues of race, income level, and academic performance. Those who subscribe to one train of thought or the other can find plenty of ammunition to fuel their debate.
For example, a recent op-ed piece in the New York Times sang the praises of desegregating schools according to socioeconomic class. In the piece, Dr. Richard D. Kahlenberg, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation, cited studies showing that middle-class schools are 22 times more likely to be high-performing than high-poverty schools. Dr. Kahlenberg states in his article, “Poor children can learn to high levels, but they are much more likely to do so if they are surrounded by peers with big dreams, a community of parents who are in a position to volunteer in class and know how to hold school officials accountable and talented teachers with high expectations.”
Michelle Rhee, founder and CEO of Students First, also wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times stating that research has shown that socioeconomic integration clearly benefits low-income students. In her piece, Rhee states, “The quality of a child’s education should never be determined by the concentration of poverty in his or her school.”
This video describes the Phase II Student Assignment Plan in the Charlotte-Mecklenberg School District. Phase II focuses on home school attendance boundaries and high school feeder patterns.
However, a third piece written for the Times by Terry L. Stoops, director of education studies at the John Locke Foundation, calls the former Wake County school assignment policy a “failure” and suggests that schools cannot buy their way to success through bussing. Stoops cited evidence that disadvantaged students in the county stalled out in their academic performance after the school assignment policy was implemented.
With educators on both sides of the school assignment issue, it seems nearly impossible to come to a consensus on whether socioeconomic integration should be the future education model. However, most of these education experts make one point clear. Whether socioeconomic integration is part of the equation or not, the ability of families to choose the best school for their children appears to be one of the most telling factors for student success.
Questions? Contact us on Facebook. @publicschoolreview
