New York City public schools include eight high schools that admit students on the basis of a single score, a rigorous test that all applicants musty take. That requirement is set in state law.
Mayor de Blasio wants to increase diversity by scrapping the single test.
The de Blasio administration wants to increase diversity at the schools, which are dominated by white and Asian students, and small numbers of Black and Hispanic students.
“The city’s specialized high schools — considered some of the crown jewels of New York City’s education system — accept students based on a single test score. Over the last decade, they have come under fire for offering admissions to few students of color: While two-thirds of city students are black or Hispanic, only about 10 percent of admissions offers to those schools go to black or Hispanic students…
“Right now, we are living with monumental injustice. The prestigious high schools make 5,000 admissions offers to incoming ninth-graders. Yet, this year just 172 black students and 298 Latino students received offers. This happened in a city where two out of every three eighth-graders in our public schools are Latino or black.
“There’s also a geographic problem. There are almost 600 middle schools citywide. Yet, half the students admitted to the specialized high schools last year came from just 21 of those schools. For a perfect illustration of disparity: Just 14 percent of students at Bronx Science come from the Bronx.”
In the past, efforts to change the admissions requirements of these specialized high schools have been blocked by the Legislature, which includes a number of graduates of the specialized schools.
Chalkbeat summarized the specifics of the mayor’s plan:
“De Blasio’s solution, laid out in an op-ed in Chalkbeat, would set aside 20 percent of the seats at the eight schools for students from low-income families starting next school year. Students who just missed the test score cut-off would be able to earn one of those set-aside seats through the longstanding “Discovery” program. Just 4 percent of seats were offered through that program in 2017.
“The mayor also said he plans to push state lawmakers to change a law that requires admission at three of the schools to be decided by a single test score. That’s something de Blasio campaigned for during his run for mayor in 2014 but hasn’t made a priority since.
“Most significantly, de Blasio says for the first time that he backs a system of replacing the admissions test with a system that picks students based on their middle school class rank and state test scores. The middle-school rank component is especially notable, as an NYU Steinhardt report found that the only way to really change the makeup of the elite high schools would be to guarantee admission to the top 10 percent of students at every middle school.
“If all of these changes were implemented, de Blasio says that 45 percent of the student bodies at the eight high schools would be black or Latino.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
So, given that 5 out of the 8 specialized schools aren’t covered by state law why hasn’t he tried things with those schools first?
As a Stuy grad, Stuy parent and former Stuy teacher, I wrote up my thoughts on the subject here:
http://cestlaz.github.io/posts/shsat
Thoughtful stuff, Mike.
If the goal is to expand opportunity for students from all kinds of backgrounds, this would be progress. There are MANY limitations on the value of a single test score.
I agree. De Blasio promised to seek multiple measures when he ran in 2013. Better late than never.
I guess you take the good with the egregious and repugnant. More diversity at these schools: YES.
A selection of a pro-charter chancellor: NO!
He is Bill de-Blah-Blah at best. Not saying much.
If Mayor de-Blameworthy thinks his cozying up to charters is going to get him other really progressive things done, like hikes on City property taxes, hikes on high income earners in NY City, a luxury tax, and a full day Pre-K in EVERY school in the NY City, think again.
It’s NOT happening. Cuomo and the IDC and state GOP control those shows.
Add this to the mayor’s bedtime activities with Mulgrew and their prurient fondness and fetish for tying test scores to teacher and leadership evaluations, and you get yet another “good guy” who has turned out to be a dud, a fraud, and a spineless go-along-to-get-along-to-maintain-my-career type of politician.
NO thanks . . . .
To bad. I still think Bill has potential. I wish he’d fulfill it. Maybe Shirlene can smack some sense into him.
I truly have no idea what your point is here.
You can’t have full day pre-k in every school because there is not room. No one wants that. However, you can have full day pre-k spots for every NYC parent who wants one. And right now there are some 68,000 pre-k seats. Full day. All over the city. It is a success.
There is nothing spineless about calling for a change to specialized high school admissions. It is pretty much the one sure thing that will get middle class parents completely riled up, as the 120+ responses at the link demonstrate. What de Blasio and Carranza did is guaranteed to make them hated. It is brave.
Whether this is the best way to go about making changes is up in the air. It will obviously be the beginning of a discussion. But de Blasio is trying to do the right thing despite knowing it is a sure fire way to be hated by almost everyone. And his idea for a small work around the law to reserve some seats next year for discovery program candidates from the most disadvantaged schools is a reasonable start.
And if more progressive politicians actually did this as de Blasio has done over and over again and received no credit for — from ending stop and frisk despite calls that it would increase crime to instituting universal pre-k to fighting (yes fighting) the expansion of charters — this country might be better off. First de Blasio wandered into the school integration battles and now the specialized high schools. Do you know how much easier it would be politically to do nothing? He is willing to pay the price because he thinks it is the right thing to do.
We get a lot of talk and little action from politicians who call themselves progressives. de Blasio is trying and doing things. And I will take that – including his failures – over more empty progressive slogans.
You’re the mayor. You have choice. You actually have quite of a bit of pure autonomy in some areas. You can choose the chancellor.
You don’t choose a chancellor who cozies up to and supports charter schools.
BTW, charter schools increase segregation dramatically. Look at the data. Ask Diane . . .
Go ahead and suport de Blasio even with his failures. I choose to not do so. Too much is at stake in protecting public schools for me. I won’t speak for you.
“You don’t choose a chancellor who cozies up to and supports charter schools.”
I agree. Why don’t you tell me all the ways that Carranza and cozied up to and supported charter schools since taking office.
If your sole basis for that is him making a single comment about charters that is very similar to Elizabeth Warren’s comments about good public charter schools, then I think I will wait for a little more real evidence before I condemn him.
Are you also convinced that Cynthia Nixon is anti-union because of a few words she used in talking about the MTA? If you try to tell me that Cynthia Nixon is cozying up with the anti-union folks and she supports the anti-union movement, I will also tell you that I prefer to wait to judge her on her actions and not a few words.
So feel free to try to convince me that Cynthia Nixon is anti-union and a fake progressive and so is de Blasio. But I am going to judge them on the entirety of their actions and not simply some words taken out of context. And I still believe they are both progressives.
I understand that Carranza spoke to a UFT meeting and defended charters. His comment to the Times was not a gaffe. I think you should accept that he likes charters.
Thanks for the new information. I will definitely watch Carranza’s actions closely.
The mayor could change the admissions of 5 out of 8 specialized HS unilaterally without a vote of the Legislature — which he apparently refuses to do.
Darn right!
I used to wonder that, too, but then I looked more closely at the demographics of those other significantly smaller high schools. Four of the five are already much more diverse than Stuy and Bronx Science. Brooklyn Latin is 28% African American and Latino. HSMSE is 26%. HSAS is 17%. York is 12%. Those five are small high schools compared to the Big 3. Why create a firestorm where the return is very little when we all know the bigger issue is the other 3, and especially Stuy.
But HSAS has only 25% of students on free or reduced lunch (I think it’s 17% free and the rest reduced but don’t have the actual data in front of me) which is far worst than the big three in terms of poverty.
Does this mean it’s ok to swap out poor Asian students for less poor Black or Latino students?
In any case, why not look at the reasons for the different numbers at Brooklyn Latin, HSMSE and York . Same test but they have “better” numbers. What gives?
What if they change the criteria at HSAS? Will it increase the number of disadvantaged students? What about changing it at one of the other schools you mentioned – will they do even better? Better being defined as BdB’s imaginary vision of Utopia.
It makes absolutely no sense to make wholesale changes as is being proposed which basically give the chancellor 100% control over the process when you can actually run some tests, collect data, and systematically work to improve things.
If you doubt what I’m saying about giving the chancellor total control, take a look at my blog post later today – I’m linking to the legislation.
I read your excellent blog post! I agree with almost all your points although I had some comments and if I have time I’ll post more above.
But to address one of your questions: “But HSAS has only 25% of students on free or reduced lunch ……Does this mean it’s ok to swap out poor Asian students for less poor Black or Latino students?”
I checked the 2017 data and the 9th grade class at HSAS has nearly 3 times as many white students as Asian students. Not only are 60% of the students in that 9th grade class white, but only 6 of the 64 white students are economically disadvantaged! So it would be affluent white students being swapped out, not poor Asian students.
There are 214 total white students at HSAS (57% of the students are white, according to the NYSED data) and only 15 of those 214 white students are economically disadvantaged. That is less than 7%. But 57% of the 14 African-American students are economically disadvantaged.
If you “swapped out” African-American students for White students at HSAS, it would become more economically diverse as well as diverse otherwise.
But in any event, in a school where each grade is only about 100 students, replacing 10 affluent white 9th graders with 10 African-American or Latino 9th graders each year might make the statistics look better but I don’t think de Blasio is interested in optics that don’t change the experience for many students.
But that doesn’t address why BdB refused to try something at those schools rather than go nuclear to blow up the test – that’s what I’m not clear on.
I agree with most of what you said but I do believe that BdB is only concerned with optics. His changes will not help NYC schools overall and I believe they’ll hurt the city. His changes will basically give the chancellor the right to do whatever they want to determine who gets into the specialized schools so he’s removing an objective but flawed metric and replacing it with a political one. This can’t be good.
This will also give him and future politicians cover so that they won’t have to actually address the issues with NYC schools. As long as they massage the formula to get the “right” breakdown in the specialized schools they can create an illusion of equity and fairness.
Here’s are two quotes from the NYTimes article that indicates the mayor is exerting some of his clearly defined powers to improve racial inequities and MAY be open to taking on a legal challenge:
“Mr. de Blasio announced another, smaller change on Saturday, one the city can do on its own. Beginning in the fall of 2019, the city would set aside 20 percent of seats in each specialized school for low-income students who score just below the cutoff; those students would be able to earn their spot by attending a summer session called the Discovery program. Five percent of seats for this year’s ninth graders were awarded this way, the city said.”
“Some education advocates who are pushing for admissions changes are unlikely to consider Mr. de Blasio’s proposal to be exhaustive. A 1971 state law says a single test must be used for admissions at Stuyvesant, Bronx Science and Brooklyn Technical High School, but many legal experts have said the city could reclassify the other five schools, allowing them to change how students are admitted. Mr. de Blasio has long held that the city cannot make such changes on its own, though he recently said he would “revisit” the issue.”
My sense is that Mr. De Blasio is cautiously selecting his battles. He’d rather engage the Governor and legislature in a fight to eliminate test-based admissions in all schools instead of fighting an inevitable court case to determine if he in fact CAN reclassify five schools…
Still, Leonie, you must be pleased with this aspect of the Mayor’s and Charles Barron’s proposed plan, because I know you were outraged that only 44% of specialized school offers went to female applicants last time around.
I’m no Stuy student, but my math tells me that equals 38% of offers going to boys. Ah, sweet Equity!
I attended a selective magnet high school in Philadelphia many years ago. I do not know how selective the entrance criteria were as only some students had to take an admission test, but I didn’t have to take the test. I think it depended on some standardized score, but I don’t know for sure. The school was integrated. The class was reduced by at least twenty percent by 10th grade. The academics were rigorous and demanding with several hours of homework each night. Many minority students survived the freshman year along with white students, and we lost both white and black students in the cut process. Students at the school seemed to reflect the many neighborhoods in the city along with a few students that had entered from private schools. They may have had some type of balancing system from the city’s public schools so they did not only accept students from the northeast, a mostly white part of the city in those days. It is possible to provide demanding academics in an integrated setting.
Re: “dominat[ion] by white and Asian students” —
Just to be clear about the demographics of the specialized high schools:
Whites make up about 24% of the students at the eight specialized schools. Asians make up about 61%.
Whites make up about 15% of the students in the entire public school system. Asians make up about 16%.
So whites are over-represented in specialized high schools by about nine percentage points. Asians are over-represented by about 45 percentage points.
De Blasio is not proposing to increase the number of seats at specialized high schools or to create new ones. So if we’re going to substantially boost the number of Black and Latino students, that’s going to require substantial reductions in the number of seats for white and Asian students. And anyone with a pair of eyes can see which of those two groups (I hate to even talk about “whites” and “Asians” as a group, but that’s what this kind of thing reduces you to) is going to bear the brunt of that burden.
When people talk about how to increase “diversity” in NYC’s specialized high schools, what they’re really talking about is how to reduce the number of Asian students at those schools. If I were a parent of an Asian student at a specialized high school, I would not be happy about this at all. I know quite a few, and can confirm that they’re not.
Middle schools will become more diversified as Asian parents realise it’s to their advantage for their kids to be in the top 10% of 98% Black middle school.
There will be a few years of turmoil and then the ethnic mix in the specialised High School will be the same again.
LOL.
FLERP! says: “When people talk about how to increase “diversity” in NYC’s specialized high schools, what they’re really talking about is how to reduce the number of Asian students at those schools.”
Trying to make this about race when the only students being affected are those near the current cut off for a high school seems to suggest you believe that it is Asian students and not white students who are admitted with the lowest scores. Why would you assume that? For all we know most of the students being displaced would be affluent white students.
Stuyvesant is 75% Asian, but only 44% economically disadvantaged. No doubt there would be affluent students of many backgrounds who might lose their seat to a valedictorian with high state test scores from a very low-income school that currently sends no kids to specialized high schools.
While there are some parents at specialized high schools who are unhappy, there are also many who understand that attending an enormous NYC public school where the likelihood of having even one African-American student in their children’s class is almost nil is not a desirable situation.
Not only is it undesirable, it is also self-fulfilling, because some high scoring African-American students either choose not to rank Stuy or look for a more diverse non-specialized and private schools.
No one believes that a student who takes the PSAT and is a National Merit Semi-Finalist has special academic abilities that the student who takes the PSAT and is not a National Merit Semi-Finalist has. Everyone understands that not having an extremely high score on that one day exam is not a sign that the student is not very smart. Colleges are happy to take the SAT scores of students taking it multiple times.
My kid may have a tougher time getting into a specialized high school now. But there are plenty of other good high schools, too. And having at least some more diversity is a very good thing.
But why stop here?
Let’s campaign to increase diversity and inclusion in the Nobel Prizes for science and medicine, and in the Fields medal for mathematics.
Why should actual achievement in science and mathematics be the sole criterion?
And for that matter, why not systematize this approach to all tests in science and mathematics: in addition to your answers, you check a box for your race, and if you are of a favored race, your score is automatically increased!
Once you understand that the assertion that “2+2 = 4” can be a micro-aggression against someone who doesn’t get this answer, the way is clear.
“Why should actual achievement in science and mathematics be the sole criterion?”
It sholdn’t. Because achievement is “measured” by test scores. Because opportunity is not equitable; students do not come from equally resourced lower schools. Because socio-economic factors influence performance. We have to try to level the playing field. Not an easy task.
You’re confusing achievement with a test score.
Which of these schools, if any, recruits students not by scores on a single academic test but by auditions–music, dance, theater, film, non-fiction writing including poetry– or portfolios of their art work? Has the city and state with a legitimate claim to world class venues for the arts outsourced all of those studies from its public schools?
None of the specialized schools. LaGuardia still does auditions but also looks at the academic record (which has been a bone of contention, at least as portrayed in the media over the last few years). A couple of other schools I think also do auditions. I don’t know about art portfolios.
LaGuardia does art portfolios, too.
There is a gubernatorial election underway in NYS. The DNC, which pledged to stay out of State races, broke its promise in NY, throwing their support behind the incumbent Governor, Andrew Cuomo. Mr. Cuomo has repeatedly stymied Mayor De Blasio’s efforts to avoid the expansion of privatized charter schools and his efforts to secure more funds for NYC public schools.
Mr. Cuomo and the DNC are about to face a litmus test. The Governor and the DNC now have an issue before them that would not cost the taxpayers in the State a dime and would provide social justice for impoverished minorities in the city. Will they offer full throated support for the change Mr. De Blasio is advocating even though “…the State Legislature… has shown little appetite for such a move.” or will they remain silent, thereby supporting the status quo argument that test-and-punish reform is the best way to achieve social justice?
From where I sit, anything less than full throated support from the Governor’s office will send a message to every teacher in the state that standardized tests are the best and only way to measure “success”. I am sure I am not the only one who will be monitoring this legislation in the weeks ahead. I hope the Governor and the DNC do the right thing and give the Mayor their unqualified support— because he IS doing the right thing.
https://wp.me/p25b7q-29W
We agree that the mayor is doing “the right thing” on this issue. Glad to see so much support for reducing reliance on a standardized test as the measure of whether a student is admitted to a school.
“Cuomo’s education policy: stick it to teachers”
Cuomo is the testing king
Testing kids is just his thing
Cuomo loves the testing fad
Cuz it makes the teachers mad
Nothing makes him feel a man
More than testing all he can
Cuomo loves the testing fight
Nothing more than purest spite
With Cuomo, it’s “My way or the Highway”
The arguments I’ve seen and continue to see against de Blasio’s proposal have been so devoid of any logical, historical, or empathetic substance (while at the same time often being pretty racist!) that I’ll never again second-guess our decision to decline a placement at a specialized high school for our very high-scoring oldest. Good god.
I feel the same way. I declined admission to one of the specialized HS years ago to attend another high-performing HS in Queens—no regrets. I didn’t push SHSAT on my 2 for the same reason.
THis is the one sure fire way to ruin the best high schools in NYC. We are a country who constantly wants to give and give and sometimes giving is not the answer. The specialized schools will never be the same and the performance of the schools will drop. NYC and public schools need to save our jewel and not give it to more immigrants who are slowly taking away our city.
There is another advantage. If school top 10% is taken into a account, it would incentivize top students to remain in more challenging schools. And that helps integration.
I know a number of kids who essentially lost a year of school value because they were the top kid in their class and the teacher didn’t bring any value for to one kid since they were the outlier.
Doesn’t matter. The conventional wisdom, repeated ad nauseam, has become that “research shows that mixed ability classes improve education for all.” End of story.
Yep – it doesn’t matter as long as it somebody else’s kid.
It is totally worth maintaining a process whose creation was clearly motivated by racism and that has and will exclude blacks and Latinos in perpetuity to guard against any harm being done to these apocryphal individual cases.
Tim – what evidence do you have that the creation of the current process was motivated by racism as opposed to perhaps the desire to keep politicians and the connected out.
I’d love to hear you’re answer on that.
He’s probably referring to the genesis of Hecht-Calandra, which I believe would be fairly characterized as a (successful) attempt to thwart to a growing political movement in NYC to force the “Big Three” to use admissions criteria that would make the student bodies of those schools representative of the city’s overall population. Admittedly, my recollection of this history, including how admissions were handled at these schools prior to Hecht-Calandra, is fuzzy.
“to thwart a growing political movement,” that is.
My impression was that it was to protect an objective measure from political interference. What people don’t seem to get is that there are two things going on:
The specialized schools should be all about academic excellence and be blind to all else.
The K8 system leading up to high school should be all about preparing all our students to that the academic high achievers can then make it to the specialized schools (as well as to prepare everyone to make strong educational options in high school be they the specialized school, a large community school with tons of offerings, a small niche school etc.).
I think that also may be an accurate characterization of the law.
At the risk of exposing myself to ridicule as an inveterate racist, I confess I agree with what you’re saying here.
Hecht-Calandra was passed in response to the superintendent of District 3’s noticing that a lot of his white and none of his black and Latino eighth graders were going to Bronx Science. He wondered whether the test-only admission structure wasn’t a problem. The chancellor agreed that it looked pretty bad and moved to set up a formal investigation. Amid cries of outrage very similar to what we are hearing now—”We’ll leave the city!” “Fix those other kids’ schools!”—Hecht-Calandra was born.
You can read more if you Google “Hecht-Calandra” + “National Review” and “Manhattan Institute”; the two organizations strongly support the legislation and maintaining the status quo.
Thanks for citing the article, Tim. Very interesting.