Should Wake adopt a controlled choice model as a way to promote diversity without going to neighborhood schools?
That's the approach pitched in an op-ed piece today by Richard Kahlenberg, who says controlled choice would "honor school integration, minimize mandatory student reassignment and maximize parental choice." Kahlenberg, a senior researcher at The Century Foundation, is a big booster of Wake's current diversity policy who is trying to make the best of the recent school board election results.
Under controlled choice, all of Wake's schools would essentially become magnet schools. Parents would select from schools within a zone with the district making the final choice to promote diversity.
The challenge is that controlled choice models are something usually done by much smaller school districts. Charlotte-Meckelnburg tried a variant on this after ending busing for diversity in 2002 before scrapping it after determininig it was too cumbersome.
Kahlenberg cites Cambridge Public Schools in Massschusetts, which was the first to use controlled choice. The 6,000-student district has the goal of each grade in each school being within 15 percentage points of the districtwide K-8 percentage of F&R students.
Cambridge has had mixed success achieving that diversity goal.
If controlled choice sounds familiar, it's what school board candidate Carlene Lucas had promoted in District 2.
Comments
Moving the thread where there is more room
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 15:23 — pmI've been busy actually working.
What are you implying? That I wasn't working at 10 or 11 last night when I posted this or that the folks who "took me to the mat" this morning weren't? I can't tell which; it seems you are trying to make a point, but--then ya don't.
the nonsense you spewed.
Nice.
In my opinion, that removes one of the strongest "tools" for academic success, the community.
I have yet to see any study that suggests going to the same school as the kids on your street improves achievement.
It is not a cause and effect relationship.
Of course it is.
People who give a damn tend to be more successful in life and make more money.
Oh, don't get me wrong. Here is where I agree with you. Unlike you, however, I am not satisfied from walking away from the kids who have parents that don't give a damn. Look, I am about as strong a "free market" kinda guy as you are going to find. But kids are not market players free to pursue their own best interests.
The kids of wealthy parents do not do better in school because they have more money, they do better because their parents demand it.
Again, I agree with mostly. Data does suggest that at a certain degree of poverty, money actually is a determining factor. But yes, it is parental involvement and attitude. And that tracks very strongly with wealth.
You know what cracks me up
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 09:33 — jenmanYou know what cracks me up about this? Way back when, Assignment By Choice presented a 'cluster school' model as a way to still have some diversity while keeping schools nearby. They were shot down without hesitation.
I've seen other suggestions from diversity policy supporters that were offered by critics long ago. WCPSS and the BOE had no interest in even discussing those alternatives back then. I guess they've had a sudden change of heart. lol
these are all the
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 09:42 — AngelaWthese are all the "diversity at all costs" supporters scrambling now that they see the parents have spoken. and the "protected" magnet parents panicking at the thought of no magnets (NOT true, BTW)...
There will have to be a high
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 06:12 — RevHiDThere will have to be a high level of parental choice, as well as some incentives for diversity in a neighborhood based system, or it will turn from "social engineering" to "social darwinism." We cannot allow education to turn into survival of the kids with the fittest parents.
Careful
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 08:50 — TrailerParkGirlCareful your bigotry is showing. Your post assumes parents of one demographic group are superior to others.
Not sure if you've read this blog much longer than reading it, but some time back one parent posted one time saying that although their spouse lost their job and they would now qualify for F&R, they refused to do it because they did not want the negative labels that came with it. I can totally understand their position.
Exactly
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 11:50 — pmYour post assumes parents of one demographic group are superior to others.
That's the whole point. Of course parents of one demographic are "superior" to others. Children of parents who value education do better in school than kids whose parents do NOT value education.
Parents who are "more wealthy" value education more than parents who are "less wealthy".
Does this mean ALL rich parents care? Nope. Does it mean ALL poor parents don't care? Nope. It means that it trends.
Which is why this whole diversity thing has all ya'll twisted around. You think that diversity means a black child sitting next to a white child. Or a poor child sitting next to a rich child. It is about the parents and the environment they creat.
Who is all ya'll?
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 21:56 — TrailerParkGirlThe status quo crowd defines diversity as black sitting next to white or poor next to rich. I sure as heck don't define it that way. Diversity to me means people stop stereotyping and assuming a black person is this way and a white person that way or a poor person is this way and rich person that way and instead view people as individuals.
“Diversity to me means
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 23:29 — user12345“Diversity to me means people stop stereotyping and assuming a black person is this way and a white person that way or a poor person is this way and rich person that way and instead view people as individuals.”
It seems to me we attain your goal by either mixing and living together breaking down stereotypes or staying separate and live in ignorance of each other so we have not knowlege or stereotypes of each other.
It seems
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 21:57 — TrailerParkGirlIt seems some people may need to think about diversity differently. Look at the attached diversity wheel (it's just one of many versions), then think about how your way of thinking often defines people by just one box of the many on that wheel. The attached version left out socioeconomic background, but I've seen that one on other versions.
Why must we define people by just one box? How many people once you've gotten to know them fit neatly into a stereotype you have of a group based on just one of those boxes?
Except for shut-ins how would people in this day and age here stay so separate as to live in ignorance of each other?
http://www.hrsa.gov/culturalcompetence/curriculumguide/Diversity%20Wheel.jpg
Stereotypical thinking
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 08:53 — SDR256Isn't it a stereotype to think that a neighborhood or a school has to have just exactly a certain recipe to be successful? What about a kid who learns best by being around those who make him feel most comfortable? Or, what about a kid who needs the stimulation of a variety of people around him? What about the cultural characteristics that come out of people with a common experience of some sort living together - music, culture, food, enterprises, teams? Shouldn't those differences be supported as well?
What about this school? What in your mind might have made it anything other than successful?
http://www.issues-views.com/index.php/sect/1000/article/1017
The only thing that needs to be consistent about a group's participants to be successful, is their character. Character has no color. Character has no religion or political party.
I am afraid public
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 09:49 — user12345I am afraid public education is not as customized as you would like ... it appears it is being driven to the lowest cost per unit ($/student). WCPSS has 140k "units" they need to be safely sheppard from 1st to 12th grade and emerge with enough skill and knowledge to take a job or go to college. Customization is great but can be costly.
“What about the cultural characteristics that come out of people with a common experience of some sort living together - music, culture, food, enterprises, teams? Shouldn't those differences be supported as well?”
I think of that common experience of sharing being the family where we live together and we pass on our culture to our kids. I would prefer that school expand on my family culture so my kids emerge more robust individual ready for a global world outside the neighborhood.
And that is a bigger issue
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 13:43 — shearertwAnd that is a bigger issue that should be addressed in the communities themselves, not the public school system. Some of these "demographic" communities need to look in the mirrow for solutions instead of blaming everyone else.
Maybe - Maybe Not
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 14:19 — pmAnd that is a bigger issue that should be addressed in the communities themselves, not the public school system.
You may be right. Either way, when those children walk through that door, the district has to educate them. They'll use teachers, books, curriculum, “grouping”, assistants and any other method which will get the most out of those kids. If one way of developing strong schools that produce strong students is to create an environment that encourages learning and motivates staff, faculty, administration and parents; well, I don’t see that as having much downside. You?
"If one way of developing
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 15:05 — shearertw"If one way of developing strong schools that produce strong students....."
The may be many "ways" to do that. Clearly the bussing for diversity "way" has failed to do so. That way developed the appearance of "strong schools" but did not produce "strong students". Also, the significant downside was that it does NOT motivate parents. If fact, it did the opposite. Similarly, controlled choice will leave communities fractured and the door wide open for more social engineering. There's plenty of room in our schools to improve teachers, books, curriculum, grouping, assistants, etc. There's no room for social experiments. ALL social experiments have unitended consequences. Why take that chance (again) with our kids?
Not so sure
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 17:35 — pmClearly the bussing for diversity "way" has failed to do so.
You have data that supports that?
Also, the significant downside was that it does NOT
motivate parents.
Independent of the school my child attends, I will be there to apply the
pressure on the teacher and the administration to make sure that it is safe and
promoting the proper quality of education I expect. I am very surprised
that you would not provide that same support simply because your child might be
attending a school you don't want to go to.
There's plenty of room in our schools to improve teachers,
books, curriculum, grouping, assistants, etc.
So. I see. So, you are just going to tax and spend?
ALL social experiments have unitended consequences.
Social experiment? What are you talking about? I am discussing the fact that education success trends with wealth. YOU are talking about some nonsense that education success trends with...with...well, with something that you haven't named yet. All I hear from you is that you want to go to a school close to you and be able to ensure you have vacations with your friends. Not one thing about educational success.
Why take that chance (again) with our kids?
Very dramatic. Well played.
Sorry for the late response,
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 08:56 — shearertwSorry for the late response, I've been busy actually working...
FYI – I don’t have any friends to go on vacation with….
"I am discussing the fact
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 18:30 — woodstock"I am discussing the fact that education success trends with wealth."
This only true if you ignore the special challenges that, for instance, students from low-income families face...which is what Wake County has been doing. If you address those challenges -- many of which are community-based challenges -- they can be overcome. The KIPP schools are one example of an approach that works.
That's kinda what I said
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 21:48 — pmThis only true if you ignore the special challenges that, for instance, students from low-income families face..
Right. I get that; everyone gets that. It's why children of poor collegiate graduate students do fail out of school.
many of which are community-based challenges
Like what. What are these community based challenges and what solutions do you have that don't include immersing these children in schools where adults demonstrate they care?
The KIPP schools are one example of an approach that works.
KIPP schools. You understand that parents who care enough to enroll their kids in KIPP are NOT the parents who ignore their children, right? KIPP is an opt in program and requires many many hours of committment; not to mention school on Saturdays.
Ha. School on Saturdays! The irony is Rich that the very same crowd punishing YR for taking precious time away from siblings and neighbor friends would advocate school on Saturdays.
And what 12345 said!
"Rich people?" What's that got to do with anything?
Okay. Stop. You need to go study some education theory and come back. Are you kidding me?!? What does household income have to do with academic achievement?
Personally, I'd like to be one.
If your family income is $55k you make more money than 60% of America. Not sure whereyou are relative to that number; don't really care. Just threw it out there.
you may be willing to try something different.
Okay. It appears that I'm the one that has to stop. Your post is simply too painful.
Making a KIPP school (or any of a number of other options) available to
those poor families makes them better off, not worse off.
But Bob; the time! The TIME man! How are they going to recoup those lost hours with friends and family! Think about the time!
I thought the opposition to diversity and YR was that certain families had to re-order their lives in order to go to school. Now, with this KIPP conversation it appears that you are quite willing to allow, even suggest, that those very same families you WEEP over should continue to sacrifice. That really, only you and your families should not.
Not sure if that is indicative of a certain thing or attitude or not. Only that it should be pointed out and noted.
Literal
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 09:28 — SDR256Geez. Can we keep our eyes on the goal here? No one wants to shove KIPP EXTREME down anyone's throat any more than busing and YR should have been shoved down anyone's throat. KIPP is idea in a whole palette of options that could be/should be considered by the board WITH the parents. That is why WSCA backed this board. They committed to listening to/working with parents.
Can you imagine that conversation? "What about this program is inspiring to you? What would work for this community? What would not work? What are the trade offs?"
Who said we have to take KIPP hook line and sinker? There are other hopeful models out there to be borrowed from as well, like the Boy's Latin School in Philadelphia, or Geoffery Canada's work in Harlem.
You said:
"You understand that parents who care enough to enroll their kids in KIPP are NOT the parents who ignore their children, right? KIPP is an opt in program and requires many many hours of committment; not to mention school on Saturdays. ?"
Gee, isn't that sad? Seems like there are two challenges: Families in desperate situations who DO care enough about their kids to do whatever may be necessary to get them a good education, but have been hamstrung by the public school system - and for these parents KIPP might be a lifesaver.
And, the 'parents who ignore their children'. Lord. How heartbreaking. These children need us the most. And throwing verbal bombs at each other over a blog isn't going to solve anything. I thought that the program of community involvement from the Boy's Latin School in Philadelphia - "it takes a village" - that I posted a couple of days ago - showed a glimmer of hope. But in the end, this can't happen without conversations with that community. Even if it is not these parents themselves, I don't think we can imagine from here what solution may fit and work.
For struggling parents
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 07:34 — SouthEastWakeMomFor struggling parents trying to keep their children out of gangs, KIPP, with its extended hours, could very well be a solution for their family. We'll never know unless we try.
You guys are awesome
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 14:54 — pmFor struggling parents trying to keep their children out of gangs,
KIPP, with its extended hours, could very well be a solution for their
family
You can't make this up! Not what, 2-3 weeks past an election and you you've already changed your tune. Bob--where are you here in defense of these children's time with their brother and sister? Or their neighborhood friends?
How long will it be before you change your tune from "just give those struggling schools the money and resources they need" to "we should be spending the money more equitably; it's not fair they those schools get more money."
My guess---not very long. Not very long at all.
uh...
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 15:34 — Bob_SconceI'm right here. I've been finding this thread hard to follow. And, for some reason, the formatting is messed up in my browser.
I think he's right-on -- the extended hours
may be good for some families. My objection is when the district
basically forces families into bizarre schedules that conflict with that family's needs (and, in many cases, also with common sense). But, if a family volunteers for a schedule that does
meet its needs, more power to them. Besides, that time is being spent productively -- it's not like they're just sitting on a bus.
Why is anybody arguing against giving poor parents an option to pick a different school? Since when does having a choice make you worse off?
Exactly
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 07:52 — JSBinNCWe will never know unless we TRY. SEWM you hit the nail - instead of doing the same things, over and over - that we have PROOF about them not being effective... try something else! ANYTHING else!
The more I see and read about what is going on within WCPSS - these clowns are SO AFRAID OF CHANGE. To them - change is scary and it's a loss of control - even if it means potenitally huge advantages and gains for the very children they are supposed to be focused on. Around here - "the way we have always done it" is the answer for everything. It's pathetic. One of the most beneficial traits we can impart to our children is the ability to adapt to change.... to reflect and learn from what has been done and mistakes that have been made. Yet the supposed "leadership" in our communities refuses to do just that.
"clowns are SO AFRAID OF
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 08:07 — user12345"clowns are SO AFRAID OF CHANGE. To them - change is scary and it's a loss of control -"
Maybe the downside of change is too punishing ... they are hemmed in by State and Federal mandates, skin flint CC and have a lot of liablity (e.g. young children in their care) so doing anything different has a lot of financial, personal and professional risk.
Nice stream of
Tue, 10/27/2009 - 14:57 — woodstockNice stream of consciousness, but you say nothing; you offer nothing.
You must know that KIPP administrators do not just walk in and say, "hey, who's interested?" It involves community and parental outreach and education. You engage parents who may not normally be engaged and you enlighten them to the idea that their child has all the capabilities they need to succeed, but that there are some dynamics that need to change.
The solutions are not easy or they would be in-place by now. Something dramatically different needs to occur to stem the tide of faliure. School on Saturdays and extended hours are a small sacrifice to make if the alternative is a lifetime of financial hardship and lack of opportunity.
“…. students from
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 19:11 — user12345“…. students from low-income families face......The KIPP schools are one example of an approach that works.”
We are the low-income families being forced into KIPP? KIPP requires a lot of parental commitment, a contract, uniform, and a longer school day and school on Saturday. Rich people rebel at having to go to school on Saturday so why are you imposing it on low-income families. Rich families bitch when their childcare, vacations, music lessons are disrupted, but you are happy to impose those impositions on low-income families because who do not have other choices. It is as if you decided boot camp would be the answer and now in order for them to get a decent education they have to comply with a number of rules and regulation that are not required of rich families. It sounds like blackmail – if they want out of their failing neighborhood school than enlist in KIPP boot camp or hit the highway. Why won’t you just fix their neighborhood school like you would for a rich family instead of making them jump through loops in your little social experiment?
Forced?
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 20:07 — Bob_SconceNobody's talking about forcing anybody into anything. Heck, poor families are currently being forced into schools that are failing their children. How would you like it if the only "option" that the district gave you was one where only one of your two children will graduate from high school? Making a KIPP school (or any of a number of other options) available to those poor families makes them better off, not worse off.
I dispute this premise that the school district somehow has the ability to "fix" failing schools, whether they're populated by poor or rich students. The district is littered with failing schools and, so far, hasn't had much success at "fixing" them. If anything, the district seems particularly adept at "breaking" successful schools.
"Rich people?" What's that
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 20:20 — woodstock"Rich people?" What's that got to do with anything? What is your issue with rich people? Personally, I'd like to be one.
Right now, if you are a student from a low-income family in Wake County, you have about a 50-50 shot at graduating... and you and the status quo seem to fine with that. This disparity seems to suggest that low-income students face different challenges than most students. It makes sense to me that those challenges may require a different approach to school and academics. One of those different approaches is the KIPP approach. If the future success of your child is in jeaprody because the traditional school approach is not working, you may be willing to try something different. As you know, KIPP is never mandatory, so it is a choice ...and one that many families opt for when presented with the success they offer.
The bottom line is the the status quo and traditional school model does not work -- or at least is not working here in Wake County -- for a lot of low-income students. Part of the reason has to do with the fact that academics are not a priority at home. That is why programs like KIPP have extended school hours. It is a practical response to what is missing in the low-income students' home life where education may not have the same priority it does other families. KIP is not a "social experience," it is proven approach that produces measurable improvement in the academic performance of low-income students.
Data....
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 18:12 — Bob_SconceOh, geez, where to start...
The abysmal graduation rate among F&R students
The abysmal EOG passage rate among F&R students
The number of WCPSS schools that have failed to meet Adequate Yearly Progress
The number of "Schools of Progress" or "Priority Schools" in WCPSS
How can those be called a success?
How much time
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 21:17 — pmHow can those be called a success?
So, what will you consider success and what will you consider failure as it relates to the new board? By how much will these measures have to improve for you to say "this works." And when will I begin to seeour district begin to reap the rewards?
how long
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 21:59 — loriacHow long has the current busing for diversity been going on?
How long have graduation rates been declining?
You're right, though - the new board will have to define some measure of success when they take office.
Do I have any expectation that they will fix everything their first month in office? Let's get real - they've got an ungodly mess on their hands, and they don't even know the secret handshake yet. Why not ask Mr. Keith Sutton these questions? He's already been sworn in. What's he done for you lately, except question some employee awards.
of course it is, the Revver
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 09:13 — AngelaWof course it is, the Revver is all about "choice" so long as it is hers and her magnets.
that F&R family? that would be us....but I don't dare even though there are families that don't qualify technically, but "do" through WCPSS...go figure..
In that case
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 21:49 — TrailerParkGirl"that F&R family? that would be us"
In that case you must immediately cease and desist all the following things that you have been doing: being a GAD parent, caring about your children's education, caring about education for all children in Wake County, caring about education at all, volunteering at schools, providing snacks for your child, being able to read, write and think for yourself, helping your child with homework, and going to teacher conferences. Don't you know F&R parents don't do these things? Didn't you get the elitists' memo on how low income people are supposed to behave?
Hubris parade
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 05:01 — Dadof3Oh, yes, social theorist, heal us.
Thanks, but no thanks. We've got kids to raise, not experiments to perform.
Kahlenberg works for the The
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 01:18 — woodstockKahlenberg works for the The Century Foundation, "a nonprofit liberal think tank public policy research institution founded on the belief that the prosperity and security of the United States depends on a mix of effective government, open democracy, and free markets. The Foundation is headquartered in New York City and also has an office in Washington, D.C. Its staff, fellows, and authors produce books, reports, papers, pamphlets, and online publications. The Foundation also hosts policy related events and workshops for various audiences, including policy experts, journalists, college students and other academics, and the general public. It also manages several ongoing policy projects and operates a number of Web sites on various policy-related topics."
"The Century Foundation was founded in 1919 by Edward A. Filene, an American businessman, social entrepreneur, and philanthropist, under the name of The Cooperative League. The organization’s mission was to act as an advisory committee for Filene in disbursing his funds in a way that could best benefit the world. Renamed the Twentieth Century Fund in 1922, and then The Century Foundation in 1999, the Foundation has sought liberal, progressive solutions to the nation’s problems."
Enough said. No thank
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 06:26 — changewcpssEnough said. No thank you. We have kids to educate and families to raise. Leave the experimentation in Science class.
Precisely. It seems that
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 06:45 — woodstockPrecisely. It seems that Kahlenberg likes to use Wake County as his laboratory and our children as his lab rats.
While his own kids go to one
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 08:55 — CaryCurmudgeonWhile his own kids go to one of the least-diverse schools in his area.
Static
Sun, 10/25/2009 - 20:03 — SDR256I got so worked up with the nerve of Dr. Kahlenberg coming BACK here to tout his new book that I almost didn't read the rest of it. I know that his new book cautions against busing for diversity, which is SUCH a crock of you-know-what that he came here in February telling us we would go to hell unless we continued busing for diversity.
So, I understand now that there are subtleties to this proposal of his. Whatever. Truth is, if we had followed his lead in February, we would have NOTHING else but the scraps from the table offered by the status-quo crowd. As it is, having voted independently we can now encourage our representatives to choose from the innovative solutions slate that we've hoped they would consider.
Some choices will be more "controlled" than others
Sun, 10/25/2009 - 18:26 — occum_sharpeJust as Attendance Zones don't work in Charlotte (Compare Grey Zone demographics, graduation rate, and test scores with the other attendance zones, Blue, Green, and Violet, in Charlotte), they won't work in Wake County.
Certain areas of the county (Southeast Raleigh, Eastern Wake County) will have high concentrations of poor minority children while other areas (Western Wake) will have high concentrations of wealthy parents.
Students in the highly poor minority zones will have a more "controlled" choice between multiple schools that have high concentrations of students in poverty.
It's no wonder public school
Sun, 10/25/2009 - 18:19 — red_balloonIt's no wonder public school systems fare poorly. The focus on social engineering will produce culturally diverse students who albeit will be inept when it comes to competing with other students whether from the USA or elsewhere.
more social engineering
Sun, 10/25/2009 - 17:18 — loriac'with the district making the final choice to promote diversity.'
What does that mean? Who gets to decide the 'correct' diversity?
I am totally against any board continuing any more of this social engineering. If there are lotteries to go to certain school, make them real lotteries.
The school district would
Mon, 10/26/2009 - 07:27 — KeungHui (author)The school district would make the final choice based on the preferences parents would request. That's why the choice is controlled. In theory, the choices would be near where the parent lived so they'd get something even if it's not the closest school.