My facebook feed often suggests posts like this one: The Top ten school districts in the Nation! https://k12.niche.com/rankings/public-school-districts/best-overall/. These posts really piss me off.
Firstly, it is the kind of post that piques a sense of competitiveness. Is my kid going to the best school or district? Am I doing a good job as a parent to secure the best education for my kid? How does my district rank (haha. I know my answer to that one already…)?
But secondly, these are effectively socioeconomic segregation lists masquerading as “best” lists.
It took no more than ten minutes of unscientific research to confirm my suspicions. Of the top 5 school districts in the country:
- #1 reported an average household income of $146,529
- #2 reported an average household income $179,744
- #3 reported only 3% of children received free/reduced lunch
- #4 reported an average household income of $272,792
- #5 reported only 12.2% kids on free/reduced lunch
My district? 80% poverty rate.
Now, of course, there are school districts that do a better job with their administration of budgets, teacher support and development, etc. Not all districts/schools perform equally even when controlled for socioeconomics. However, when all of the “bests” are also always among the wealthiest, a correlation between the two is difficult to ignore.
It is well known that API is linked to scocioencomics. In fact, API has more to do with family income than it does with teacher:student ratio, per-pupil spending, teacher salary, or percentage of English Language Learner students. It is no surprise that API has also been dubbed the Affluent Parent Index. Adding in other measures of “best”-ness then, such as extracurricular opportunities (with many funds raised by parents in the community), number of Advanced Placement classes offered, teacher retention/stability/experience, the wealthier the community, the more likely a school or district will be able to rank.
Measuring what makes a school – or teacher – good is notoriously difficult and some things are, obviously much easier to quantify. Test scores and AP offerings are handy little nuggets we can easily grasp. But these are only part of a school’s story and only part of the experience that kids will carry with them into adulthood. As long as we continue to settle for this narrow definition of “best,” the gulf between wealthy and poor schools will only widen (Why poor schools might actually be good for middle class kids).
So can we please stop circulating these “Best/Affluent” ad nauseum? It is no wonder that school segregation is so damn prevalent.
Historically and contemporarily as you point out, it continues to be. It will take communities organized around the principles of equity, celebration and realization that diversity in all its forms, be it socioeconomically, culturally, linguistically, and racially, is a necessary asset to build the future. As a long time employee of LAUSD, I’m at least somewhat encouraged that this dialogue is beginning. http://laschoolreport.com/playa-vista-dispute-reflects-classicism-and-major-issues-facing-lausd/
But we have much work to do. This online space is helpful.
I’ve been following that playa vista issue… quite a mess. But agree that it is, at least, coming out in the open. Hooray Cortines on that one!
I think, too, there seem to be “bigger stakes” when kids hit middle/high school (which is what the playa vista story illustrates). Integrated/ing schools are hard, but seem to be a bit easier when talking about elementary school. nationally, that is, indeed, the case. and certainly that my family (and many others i’ve talked with) felt that same kind of uptick in “oh, crap, am i doing the right thing?” when our kids were starting middle school. but, so far so good in our situation! i wonder, though, as time goes on and as the conversation around segregated schools gains momentum, how this story will play out at different grade levels….