The Future of School The Future of School Integration:Integration:

Socioeconomic Socioeconomic Integration as an Integration as an Education Reform Education Reform

StrategyStrategyRichard D. Kahlenberg, Senior Fellow, Richard D. Kahlenberg, Senior Fellow,

The Century FoundationThe Century Foundation

March 7, 2012March 7, 2012

Century Foundation/Fordham Century Foundation/Fordham Institute/Howard UniversityInstitute/Howard University

National Press Club, Washington, D.C.National Press Club, Washington, D.C.

Districts Pursuing Districts Pursuing Socioeconomic Socioeconomic

Integration TodayIntegration Today 80 U.S. Districts, educating 4 million 80 U.S. Districts, educating 4 million

students, using socioeconomic status as a students, using socioeconomic status as a factor in student assignment. Examples:factor in student assignment. Examples:

Cambridge, MA. All schools should fall Cambridge, MA. All schools should fall within + or – 10 percentage points of district within + or – 10 percentage points of district average for free and reduced price lunch average for free and reduced price lunch (40%).(40%).

Chicago, IL. 85% low-income so begin by Chicago, IL. 85% low-income so begin by integrating a subset of magnet and selective integrating a subset of magnet and selective schools, with the goal of integrating more as schools, with the goal of integrating more as middle-class return.middle-class return.

Two Reasons for Growth in Two Reasons for Growth in Socioeconomic IntegrationSocioeconomic Integration

Socioeconomic integration produces significant Socioeconomic integration produces significant racial diversity in a manner that’s perfectly legalracial diversity in a manner that’s perfectly legal Among 4Among 4thth graders nationally, 24% whites eligible free graders nationally, 24% whites eligible free

and reduced lunch; 70% African Americans; 73% and reduced lunch; 70% African Americans; 73% LatinosLatinos

Graduated income tax legally fine by income, not by Graduated income tax legally fine by income, not by race.race.

Enormous benefits to preserving racial integration.Enormous benefits to preserving racial integration. Not just a clumsy proxy. Research: Academic Not just a clumsy proxy. Research: Academic

benefits of integration not from proximity to benefits of integration not from proximity to whiteness but middle-class environmentwhiteness but middle-class environment Racial Desegregation in Charlotte vs. Boston (1970s)Racial Desegregation in Charlotte vs. Boston (1970s) Roosevelt Perry Elementary in Louisville.Roosevelt Perry Elementary in Louisville.

Three Sections in the Three Sections in the BookBook

(8 chapters)(8 chapters) Benefits and Costs of Socioeconomic Benefits and Costs of Socioeconomic

IntegrationIntegration Logistical and Political Challenges to Logistical and Political Challenges to

Socioeconomic IntegrationSocioeconomic Integration Federal Policy Implications of Federal Policy Implications of

Socioeconomic IntegrationSocioeconomic Integration

Ch 2: Heather Schwartz Ch 2: Heather Schwartz Montgomery County, MD Montgomery County, MD

StudyStudy RAND researcher Heather Schwartz tests the RAND researcher Heather Schwartz tests the

effectiveness to two strategies: extra resources effectiveness to two strategies: extra resources (class size reduction, professional development, (class size reduction, professional development, extended learning time) in high poverty “red extended learning time) in high poverty “red zone” schools ($2,000 more/pupil) vs. zone” schools ($2,000 more/pupil) vs. “inclusionary housing” policy that allows low-“inclusionary housing” policy that allows low-income students to attend low poverty “green income students to attend low poverty “green zone” schools with fewer resources. zone” schools with fewer resources.

Examined 858 children randomly assigned to Examined 858 children randomly assigned to public housing units scattered throughout public housing units scattered throughout Montgomery County and enrolled in Montgomery Montgomery County and enrolled in Montgomery County public elementary schools 2001-2007.County public elementary schools 2001-2007.

Public Housing Students in Green Zone Public Housing Students in Green Zone Schools Outperformed Those in Red Schools Outperformed Those in Red

Zone SchoolsZone Schools

Source: Heather Schwartz, “Housing Policy Is School Policy.” in The Future of School Integration (New York: The Century Foundation, 2012), p. 45, Figure 2.6.

Montgomery County Montgomery County StudyStudy

Low-income public housing students in low Low-income public housing students in low poverty schools performed at .4 of a standard poverty schools performed at .4 of a standard deviation better in math than low-income deviation better in math than low-income public housing students in higher poverty public housing students in higher poverty schools with more resourcesschools with more resources

Low-income students in green zone schools Low-income students in green zone schools cut their large initial math gap with middle-cut their large initial math gap with middle-class students in half. The reading gap was class students in half. The reading gap was cut by one-thirdcut by one-third

Most of the effect (2/3) was due to attending Most of the effect (2/3) was due to attending low-poverty schools, and some (1/3) due to low-poverty schools, and some (1/3) due to living in low-poverty neighborhoodsliving in low-poverty neighborhoods

Ch 3: Jeanne L. Reid, Ch 3: Jeanne L. Reid, “Socioeconomic Diversity “Socioeconomic Diversity

in Early Learning”in Early Learning” Examines 2,966 four-year-olds in 704 Examines 2,966 four-year-olds in 704

Pre-K classrooms in 11 states.Pre-K classrooms in 11 states. Being in a classroom with above Being in a classroom with above

average socioeconomic status for the average socioeconomic status for the sample has a positive effect on sample has a positive effect on language and math outcomes.language and math outcomes.

Effect size comparable to two Effect size comparable to two important aspects of learning: a child’s important aspects of learning: a child’s own SES and instructional quality.own SES and instructional quality.

Ch 4: Marco Basile, “The Ch 4: Marco Basile, “The Cost-Effectiveness of Cost-Effectiveness of

Socioeconomic School Socioeconomic School Integration”Integration”

Nation’s first cost-benefit analysis of Nation’s first cost-benefit analysis of socioeconomic integration. socioeconomic integration.

Logistics and Politics of Logistics and Politics of Socioeconomic School Socioeconomic School

IntegrationIntegration

Ch 5: Ann Mantil, Anne G. Perkins, Ch 5: Ann Mantil, Anne G. Perkins, and Stephanie Aberger, “How and Stephanie Aberger, “How Feasible is Socioeconomic School Feasible is Socioeconomic School Integration.”Integration.”

Ch 6: Meredith P. Ch 6: Meredith P. Richards, Kori J. Stroub, Richards, Kori J. Stroub,

and Jennifer Jellison and Jennifer Jellison Holme, “Interdistrict Holme, “Interdistrict

Choice”Choice” NCLB Choice across district lines “would NCLB Choice across district lines “would meaningfully expand access to higher-meaningfully expand access to higher-performing schools for students in over performing schools for students in over 80 percent of eligible sending schools”80 percent of eligible sending schools”her-Performing Schools”her-Performing Schools”

Space constraints and driving distances Space constraints and driving distances would not prevent inter-district choice would not prevent inter-district choice programs from greatly enhancing the programs from greatly enhancing the quality and quantity of choices available quality and quantity of choices available to students.to students.

Ch 7: Sheneka Willams Ch 7: Sheneka Willams “The Politics of “The Politics of

Maintaining Balanced Maintaining Balanced Schools”Schools”

Differing Experiences in 3 districtsDiffering Experiences in 3 districts Lessons LearnedLessons Learned

Chapter 8: Federal Policy Chapter 8: Federal Policy ImplicationsImplications

Charter schools vs. Magnet SchoolsCharter schools vs. Magnet Schools Different underlying theories: unions the Different underlying theories: unions the

problem vs. segregation the problem.problem vs. segregation the problem. How to Turn Around Failing SchoolsHow to Turn Around Failing Schools

Fire teachers and bring in nonunion charters. Fire teachers and bring in nonunion charters. Secretary Duncan said in Chicago, “We moved the Secretary Duncan said in Chicago, “We moved the adults out of the building, kept the children there, adults out of the building, kept the children there, and brought in new adults.”and brought in new adults.”

Research suggests segregation a core issue – Research suggests segregation a core issue – Magnet schools can be turnarounds.Magnet schools can be turnarounds.

Examples of Magnet Schools as Turnarounds – an Examples of Magnet Schools as Turnarounds – an idea Senator Harkin has embraced.idea Senator Harkin has embraced.

Contact InformationContact Information

Richard D. KahlenbergRichard D. Kahlenberg Senior FellowSenior Fellow The Century FoundationThe Century Foundation 1333 H Street, N.W. 101333 H Street, N.W. 10thth Floor Floor Washington, D.C. 20005Washington, D.C. 20005 kahlenberg@tcf.org www.tcf.org