The New York Times published a lengthy article about New York City’s complicated and byzantine high school admissions process, which was launched 14 years ago to give choice to every student. With few (if any) exceptions, neighborhood high schools were a thing of the past. Students went to school fairs and scanned a lengthy catalogue to review the offerings of hundreds of high schools across the city. Zip code mattered not at all. Some schools had specific entry requirements, such as a difficult entrance examination or a talent audition. Most were open admissions. Now, a generation later, the results are in:
Under a system created during Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s administration, eighth graders can apply anywhere in the city, in theory unshackling themselves from failing, segregated neighborhood schools. Students select up to 12 schools and get matched to one by a special algorithm. This process was part of a package of Bloomberg-era reforms intended to improve education in the city and diminish entrenched inequities.
There is no doubt that the changes yielded meaningful improvements. The high school graduation rate is up more than 20 points since 2005, as the administration of Mayor Bill de Blasio has built on Mr. Bloomberg’s gains. The graduation gap between white and black or Hispanic students, while still significant and troubling, has narrowed.
But school choice has not delivered on a central promise: to give every student a real chance to attend a good school.
Fourteen years into the system, black and Hispanic students are just as isolated in segregated high schools as they are in elementary schools — a situation that school choice was supposed to ease.
The average black or Hispanic student attends an elementary school where 80% of his or her classmates are black or Hispanic.
The average black or Hispanic students attends a high school where 79% of his or her classmates are black or Hispanic.
It wasn’t supposed to be this way.
Within the system, there is a hierarchy of schools, each with different admissions requirements — a one-day high-stakes test, auditions, open houses. And getting into the best schools, where almost all students graduate and are ready to attend college, often requires top scores on the state’s annual math and English tests and a high grade point average.
Those admitted to these most successful schools remain disproportionately middle class and white or Asian, according to an in-depth analysis of acceptance data and graduation rates conducted for The New York Times by Measure of America, an arm of the Social Science Research Council. At the same time, low-income black or Hispanic children like the ones at Pelham Gardens are routinely shunted into schools with graduation rates 20 or more percentage points lower.
While top middle schools in a handful of districts groom children for competitive high schools that send graduates to the Ivy League, most middle schools, especially in the Bronx, funnel children to high schools that do not prepare them for college.
The roots of these divisions are tangled and complex. Students in competitive middle schools and gifted programs carry advantages into the application season, with better academic preparation and stronger test scores. Living in certain areas still comes with access to sought-after schools. And children across the city compete directly against one another regardless of their circumstances, without controls for factors like socioeconomic status.
Ultimately, there just are not enough good schools to go around. And so it is a system in which some children win and others lose because of factors beyond their control — like where they live and how much money their families have.
The New York City public schools are highly segregated. The demographics are challenging. According to a report from The Century Foundation, the city school system is predominantly black and Hispanic (and has been since 1966, when whites became a minority): As of 2015, citywide student demographics2 were 27.1 percent black, 15.5 percent Asian, 40.5 percent Hispanic, 14.8 percent white, and 2.1 percent identified as “other.” Nearly 77 percent of students were classified as living in poverty, while 12.5 percent were identified as English language learners, and 18.7 percent as students with disabilities. With a total enrollment of 1.1 million students, of whom only 14.8% are white, it is hard to see racial balance, except in isolated instances, because the opportunities are limited.
The choice system is difficult to maneuver, even with the help of a guidance counselor. Eighty thousand students apply to 439 schools, broken up into over 775 programs. When Michael Bloomberg took office as mayor, the city had 110 high schools, most of them enrolling thousands of students. Most students went to their zoned high schools. Bloomberg eliminated zoned high schools and embraced small high schools, with the support of the Gates Foundation.
Rare is a 13-year-old equipped to handle the selection process alone.
The process can become like a second job for some parents as they arm themselves with folders, spreadsheets and consultants who earn hundreds of dollars an hour to guide them. But most families in the public school system have neither the flexibility nor the resources to match that arsenal….
The citywide graduation rate for all kinds of high schools is 72.6 percent, according to the Education Department. But that average masks sharp variations between schools based on their admissions methods. When Measure of America analyzed the rate for each method, it found that selectivity and graduation rates declined essentially in lock step, and that as graduation rates fell, the students were more likely to be poor and black or Hispanic…
Kristen Lewis, one of the directors of Measure of America, said the data revealed, in essence, two separate public school systems operating in the city. There are some great options for the families best equipped to navigate the application process. But there are not enough good choices for everyone, so every year thousands of children, including some very good students, end up in mediocre high schools, or worse…
An analysis by the Center for New York City Affairs at the New School found that half of all students who got top scores on state tests came from just 45 middle schools out of more than 500. And 60 percent of students who went to specialized high schools came from those same 45 schools. None of those middle schools are in the Bronx.
The Times’ article focused on a middle school in the Bronx called Pelham Gardens. About 95 percent of the middle school’s students are black or Hispanic, many of them the children of Jamaican immigrants or immigrants themselves. Most of them come from poor families…
Last year, 146 seventh graders at Pelham Gardens took the state tests. On the English exam, 29 passed, which requires a score of at least 3 out of 4. Fifteen did that well in math. Only seven scored at least a 3 on both tests.
This means that a majority of the children had no real chance of getting into the most selective schools, like Manhattan/Hunter Science High School or Townsend Harris High School in Queens, where students must have a 3 or higher on the tests. The high school directory lists 29 programs in the city that did not accept anyone with a score lower than 3 on the math exam.
In a system with 1.1 million students, change is difficult. School segregation tends, inevitably, to mirror housing segregation. Housing segregation tends to reflect family income ad deliberate government policy decisions made decades ago when locating large housing projects. The choice plan assumed that students would be freed form the constraints of their zip code and that choice would promote desegregation. As the article shows, it has not.
My only comment (a long one) is: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/590f5c17e4b056aa2363d62b
Excellent comment! Thank you.
I completely agree.
The obsession with the belief that if you just put 30% of the kids who are struggling academically into a school that is high achieving they will turn into high achievers seems absurd. And if we just move the 30% high achievers from that “good” school into that failing school, the rest of the 70% of the kids who have serious struggles academically will turn into scholars – that also seems absurd.
The only reason people are talking about that is because it is the cheapest reform possible. Let’s just switch up the schools and it will all be fine. It’s the same idiocy that makes people believe if we just cull the top 10% of motivated at-risk parents and let a charter school with unlimited funds serve them and kick out the ones that they don’t want to serve, all will be fabulous.
In fact, it is just as likely that a student in a struggling school who wants to learn is given special attention that they would not get among 900 other high achieving students.
Last year’s valedictorian at a specialized high school went to MIT and credited the teachers at a middle school disdained by most affluent parents for her success. Overall proficiency levels when she attended that middle school hovered around 20 to 25%. But that did not mean that students who wanted to learn did not get an excellent education.
That is what no one talks about. The fact that there ARE students graduating and thriving in those high schools. Not “despite” being in those high schools, but because there are caring teachers in those high schools who are thrilled to have a student who is engaged and is there to learn.
No one has done a study about whether a top performing student does better in a school of top performing students or one in which she is only among the top 10% or 20%.
And yet we want to spend inordinate money to upend the current system instead of spending it for what we know works because the richest parents demand it for their kids — very small classes, lots of resources, at a cost that $40,000/year per non-special needs child doesn’t cover and thus those parents are expected to donate even more to cover education.
Pretending that busing to achieve 30% middle class and 70% low income at-risk kids in every school is something that people who don’t want to raise taxes on the rich want us to believe because asking inconvenient questions like why are the billionaire reformers sending their kids to schools charging $40,000/year while insisting that public schools are wasting money because they don’t achieve 100% success on less than half of that. Despite educating a group of students that is far more likely to struggle than those private schools that insist $40,000/year doesn’t cover their costs.
^^ Here is the article
http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/ny/2016/06/23/from-abcs-to-mit-brooklyn-techs-valedictorian-helps-inspire-students-at-her-former-middle-school/
Thanks, Stevenelson.
Instead of criticizing the NYC DOE’s incredible gains in HS graduation rates, how about working hard to extend financial aid to more than just 20% of Calhoun’s student body? Better still, how about making Calhoun truly free for the most disadvantaged families? Calhoun’s insistence that family’s pay a minimum of $1,500 annually (plus fees) makes it a complete pipedream for a huge number of families, from the homeless to the working poor.
http://www.calhoun.org/page.cfm?p=646
Well, Tim, a bit hard to glean the relevance of your comment, but so be it. I am acutely aware of the conflicts inherent in working in a private school, albeit it a progressive, diverse, inclusive place. But that hardly disqualifies me from commenting on or participating in public education. It’s my obligation as a citizen.
As to “incredible gains” . . . ???? That is among the facile talking points used to support largely unsuccessful reform efforts over these past few decades. But, that’s another topic altogether, for another time.
Even the reform-enthusiastic NY Times is skeptical. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/10/nyregion/graduation-rate-in-new-york-state-hits-a-new-high-79-4.html
I find it amusing how many reform folks love to hammer my point of view by focusing on my job rather than my argument.
Hi, Steve,
I don’t think my comment was irrelevant, but perhaps it was unfair, seeing as I don’t know the whole story behind Calhoun’s mandatory minimum parent/guardian contribution, and whether you have opposed or supported it.
I can assure you, though, that there are many, many children living in New York City and the metropolitan area who are academically qualified to attend Calhoun, who would benefit greatly from a Calhoun education, and for whose families $1,500 + fees (for multiple years) represents an absolutely staggering, unattainable amount of money.
If you have tried to get Calhoun to change this policy, then I apologize. If you have not yet tried, I encourage you to do so in your final 50 days at the school–it will be a very healthy thing for the Calhoun community. Good luck.
Tim,
Your comment was both irrelevant and unfair. Steve is head of a NYC private school. Private schools are very expensive. Unlike charter schools, he is not seeking public funding. Parents pay for their choices.
You are the hypocrite in this exchange.
Very much appreciate your civil response, Tim. While the “policy” you cite is accurate, we are fair and subjective in making aid awards and often use discretion. No family receiving tuition assistance is asked to pay anything if it is a hardship. In fact, many families are proud and glad to pay something. Remarkably, many relatively poor families even make small annual fund donations. Our school is very committed to social justice, both in policy and practice. But we are still a privileged private school and have plenty of ambivalence.
Steve, that is great to hear that Calhoun will pay tuition and fees in full for the most disadvantaged, but then I have to ask why the school’s website very pointedly and directly states otherwise.
”
Are there any full tuition grants?
All grants are for partial assistance, though awards vary greatly in size depending on the financial circumstances of the family. Families are expected to contribute a minimum of $1,500/year toward tuition.”
http://www.calhoun.org/page.cfm?p=646
I don’t want to add to what is already probably a crazy amount of work for you over the next 50 days, but having the website’s content aligned with school policy seems important.
Tim,
Calhoun is a private school. The board can do whatever it wants.
Success Academy is a privately managed charter school that does whatever it wants and exists by taking public money away from genuinely public schools. Its board includes some of the wealthiest hedge fund managers in the nation.
Be sure to tell Paul Ryan hi when he visits tomorrow. Were you there to greet Ivanka?
I don’t think you are in a position to tell a private school that takes no public money what they should do.
I don’t know of any rallies that Calhoun has held to demand vouchers or any public funding. That means they are free to make their own decisions.
The results were in a long time ago. In 2013, we (the Education Law Center) filed an OCR complaint charging that the NYC high school admissions system results in segregation that negatively impacts children of color. http://www.wnyc.org/story/302318-nyc-ignores-cracks-in-high-school-choice-system/ And we pointed out that DOE had data showing this for years.
OCR dismissed the complaint because to them, “choice” sanitized any problems with segregation/discrimination
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
I attended the Middle School (MS 144) written about in the article. Back then, our middle school fed into Christopher Columbus High School. Columbus High School was a large high school with a mix of students from the surrounding Bronx neighborhoods. We had clubs, sports, and even a swimming pool. When Bloomberg came, he shut down Columbus. Now, this historic school is a shell of itself – housing a myriad of segregated “small schools” with pretentious sounding names. My son, who attends high school in a suburb of NYC, has the opportunity to join dozens of clubs, band, orchestra, and dozens of sports. The students in the small schools lack this rich opportunity. Bloomberg created a mess that is limiting students’ “choices” with the help of a fellow billionaire. But, why ask a teacher before you mess up kids’ lives? Apparently being wealthy makes you an expert.
“The average black or Hispanic student attends an elementary school where 80% of his or her classmates are black or Hispanic. The average black or Hispanic students attends a high school where 79% of his or her classmates are black or Hispanic.”
For a little context, 70% of the students in NYC’s public schools are black or Hispanic.
Excellent point.
Even this article asks the wrong question. No one wants to address the real issues: validity of the evaluations and the wealthy trying to keep their taxes low.
AMEN, West Coast Teacher.
And GATES needs to crawl under a rock forever.
How about sending rich kids to schools in impoverished neighborhoods? Maybe those rich kids would learn that they are NOT so special after all.
It’s all backwards.
tRump and his children went to expensive, exclusive schools. The amount of the tuition doesn’t seem to reflect an increase of morality, ethics or the recognition that all people deserve respect. I would hate to judge these wealthy schools by the example these people have set.
From the actual study by Measures of America:
“NYC has made striking progress in boosting the rate of on-time high school graduation. In 2005, less than half of all public school students graduated high school in four years, compared to 72.6 percent of students in 2016—an impressive 26-percentage-point increase over the decade. Two school reforms in particular, starting in the early 2000s, fueled these gains. The city closed some thirty extremely large high schools with graduation rates below 40 percent, opening in their stead more than 200 smaller schools, a measure that had “a systematic and large impact on graduation rates” for the students who would have otherwise attended the shuttered schools. And the city implemented a new system of universal high school choice; it required that all eighth graders select, rank, and apply to up to twelve high school programs from among the 700-plus that the city offered.”
It’s weird that the content and tenor of this graph didn’t make it into the Times piece, and weirder still that the Times would describe this as a “broken promise”! To reiterate: the small high school movement and high-school choice in general have spurred substantial and enduring gains in graduation rates.
Click to access NYCHSAdmissions_2017_Final.pdf
Well, I’ve read the work too. However, it does not account for what the Times acknowledged as nearly constantly shifting standards. That makes it difficult to lend great credibility to the numbers. Also, there seems little evidence that the graduates, even if greater in number, are actually well-prepared to succeed thereafter.
One of the dirty secrets about so-called “choice” is that the schools, public or charter, are the ones choosing students, not the other way around.
The root issue, that few will acknowledge, is that a lot of kids are extremely difficult, if not impossible, to educate to a high level. Thus, if it school wants to look good, it must skim –preferably in underhanded ways. This usually fools most observers. Steve Nelson is not fooled.
Don’t blame the schools; blame the lack of coordinated support in neighborhoods where families need it most. As a NYC public school teacher, I have taught in all kinds of schools. NYC public school teachers are well trained and extremely dedicated to their students. Our curriculum and pedagogy are relatively standardized throughout the city with the understanding that individual teachers and schools MUST meet all learners specific needs. Yes, each school is different but that difference is a direct response to what each neighborhood needs, and schools, unfortunately, can only do so much. Change the conversation from failing schools and terrible teachers; it is simply not true.
Diane, please take a moment to highlight what is happening in Charlotte, NC as our school board tries to change school boundaries to increase economic mobility. Some national attention might shame some of these parents into realizing that what is best for the most in need is best for the rest of us.
Take my word for this as I am a social worker in the NYC school system. Under Bloomberg the system suffered dearly with teachers, students and other school personel being moved around like the pawns he thought we were. Mike Bloomberg did so much damage to the schools in NYC so let me explain:
1. Bloomberg closed great schools that offered so many options for students for small schools with little resources, small cramped space and everyone on top of each other including social workers in the same offices as secretaries.
2. Bloomberg took every teachers parking permit away leaving teachers and other educators like myself to fend for a parking spot in the south bronx.
3. Bloomberg created the ATR pool which is a group of teachers with 15 or more years of experience to be housed in school lounges and out of the classrooms with the goal of firing as many teachers as he could.
4. Mike Bloomberg stated that we could have 80 students in the classroom if the teacher is a “good” teacher
5. MIke Bloomberg closed ALL of the teacher cafeterias in all NYC schools leaving teachers to have no where to eat lunch – reason Bloomberg closed all the teacher cafeterias is because he said they lose money
6. Mike Bloomberg did not give the teachers a raise since 2005 and left the mayors office in 2014 with expiring contracts for all city workers including teachers, police, fire dept. all because the miser did not want to give anyone a raise.
7. Mike Bloombergs net worth went from 5 Billion when he took office in 2002 to 40 Billion when he left in 2014. How is that possible?
8. MIke Bloomberg kept guidance counselors, social workers in the ATR pool basically just sittiing around every day because he wanted to fire as many people as he could who were makiing a decent salary- meanwhile the students were suffering with no social emotional help in the schools
9. Intead, MIke Bloomberg had so called “not for profit” organizations come into the schools and have people with less than bachelor degrees play social worker and counselor with the students
10. Mike Bloomberg had 3 school chancellors during his tenure. The first one Joel Klein had ZERO education experience instead he was a lawyer. Klein later had to resign as he was so hated by teaches he was not allowed in the schools. Then Bloomberg hired Kathy Black a debuntante (Betsy Devos type) with not education experiece at all in fact she worked in the publishing industry if you can believe that one. Kathy Black lasted all but 3 months as parents demanded he get rid of her.
Mike Bloombergs tenure in the NYC schools has been a disaster and let no one tell you anything different just listent to the soldiers in the trenches for the truth.
This is a complex issue impossible to sum up accurately in an article. It sounds like some decisions made by Bloomberg changed the school climate (and not for the better) which needs to be re examined and revised with an eye on the needs of both the student body and faculty.