Key Principles of ESEA Reauthorization

The National Coalition on School Diversity (2010), Key Principles of ESEA Reauthorization, http://www.prrac.org/pdf/ESEA-Civil-Rights-Statement-3-22-10.pdf

Overview:

The article presents reasons why racial isolation and segregation, which has become pervasive more than 50 years after Brown vs. Board of Education, should be addressed and remedied with the reauthorization of ESEA.  The article presents three problems occurring in our education system that are resulting in a lack of equity for all children and in continued re-segregation of schools.  For each problem a solution is presented in the form of a suggestion for the reauthorization of ESEA.

Summary of Problems:

Students are forced to attend segregated schools with high levels of poverty

Resources are not equitably distributed and Title I dollars should not be used to replace these inequitable resources

Schools and districts are not complying with Title I regulations

Summary of Solutions:

Using Title I to: Strengthen the “right-to-transfer” provision; Provide low-income families with the resources necessary to transfer, if they so desire; Create consequences for reinforcing segregation and high concentrations of poverty; Create rewards for promoting integration

Changing Title I to: Restore “comparability measures.”  Title I schools and non-Title I schools within a district must compare teacher salaries to ensure equity and must ensure that Title I schools receive more than 90% equity with non-Title I schools, as is now the standard

Create sanctions that can be enforced against states that do not strictly comply with Title I

Create an administrative or judicial process to enforce ESEA rights 

Important Quotes:

“…the reauthorization process must take account of the fact that race and class still matter deeply in the education schoolchildren receive, and efforts to address the impact of concentrated poverty and racial isolation in schools can and should be of paramount importance.”

“Attending a high-poverty, racially isolated school is a leading predictor of academic failure. Concentrated poverty has an “independent” negative impact on educational outcomes, regardless of race or whether a particular student is poor. Children of color, however, disproportionately confront this problem, as they attend schools with the highest levels of concentrated poverty.”

“…students remain trapped in the very situation Title I was designed to help ameliorate. Even worse, Title I’s funding formulas provide incentives for school districts to maintain high poverty levels and no incentive to deconcentrate poverty or to foster voluntary transfer or assignment policies with surrounding districts. Indeed, Title I makes it financially beneficial for school districts to maintain the status quo.”

“Title I originally required strict levels of financial and resource equity between Title I and non-Title I schools within a school district. Subsequent revisions to Title I intentionally made these provisions meaningless.”

Applicability:

The article is applicable on the district, state and federal level.  These changes will be most powerful, however, if there is broad support from teachers that speak up about and advocate for their students regarding racial isolation and high concentrations of poverty.  If we still believe in the tenets of Brown, greater legislative attention must be paid to making that dream a reality.

Socioeconomic School Integration

Kahlenberg, Richard (2001), Socioeconomic School Integration, PRRAC Newsletter, http://www.prrac.org/newsletters/sepoct2001.pdf

Overview:

Kahlenberg argues that as re-segregation continues as the result of court decisions that are becoming increasingly hostile to the premise of Brown vs. Board of Ed, class-based integration as a proxy for race.  Kahlenberg suggests that poverty is concentrated as a result of racial discrimination in the housing market and that racial integration will thus be a byproduct of integration that focuses on the economic status of families.  He asserts that class integrations will result in having middle-class families as the majority in every school, and that there is no better predictor of school success than having middle-class families as advocates for a school.  Kahlenberg offers ten specific reasons why socioeconomic integration “matters.”

10 reasons why socioeconomic integration matters

1. Adequate financial base
2. Orderly environment 
3. Stable student teacher population 
4. Solid principal and well qualified teachers 
5. Meaty curriculum and high expectations 
6. Active parental involvement 
7. Motivated peers that value achievement and encourage classmates 
8. High achieving peers that share knowledge 
9. Well connected classmates 
10. The one type of school that has been successfully replicated is the school with MAJORITY middle-class families (integrated, but must be MAJORITY middle-class)

He then suggests three specific advantages that socioeconomic integration has over race integration:

1. Brown vs. Board of Ed has run its legal course…districts being released from responsibility and focus on race being ruled unconstitutional in some districts 
2. Qualities that drive school success have more to do with class than race (ex. racially segregated schools are in high-poverty neighborhoods and thus under-resourced) 
3. Focus on class is more politically savvy and will get more people on board

Kahlenberg offers his suggestions for how to make socioeconomic integration a reality: He believes that continuing to offer more and better quality school choice programs (as opposed to busing) will continue to be beneficial.; He believes the emphasis on selling such a program should be placed on its ability to raise student achievement; He believes that offering educational incentives to middle-class families will be essential as a motivating factor for change.

Important Quotations:

“The era of court-ordered racial de- segregation is coming to an end. But to give up on racial and economic integration altogether, pouring greater and greater resources into making separate but equal a little more equitable, is to concede almost all of the problem. Greater public school choice is in our future. The question is whether progressives can harness the choice movement to help overcome the massive inequalities inherent in a system that educates poor and middle-class children separately.”

“If integration matters, the new emphasis should be on socioeconomic status. Except where a district is rooting out the vestiges of discrimination, in which case the use of race is appropriate, even constitutionally required, leading with socioeconomic integration offers advantages.”

“…from a legal standpoint, Brown vs. Board of Education has largely run its course.”

Mapping a Route Toward Differentiated Instruction

Tomlinson, Carol Ann. “Mapping a Route Toward Differentiated Instruction.” Educational Leadership. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Retrieved from: http://www.learner.org/workshops/socialstudies/pdf/session5/5.MappingARoute.pdf

Summary:

Carol Ann Tomlinson is a leader in the movement towards differentiated instruction and in this article she points out how many people may think they're differentiating, but they're not doing it effectively. She starts by describing two different classrooms. One classroom is very traditional, while the other appears to be very engaging and differentiated. Both are covering the same unit. Tomlinson then analyzes the two classrooms and there are clear flaws with both of them. The first classroom is very clear, but no differentiation is used, while the second class may be engaging but has no focus or direction. A mixture of the two is necessary for success and she offers an alternative approach by showcasing a third class and detailing how improvements in differentiation are made.

Quotes:

"Is it reasonable to expect all 2nd graders to learn the same thing, in the same ways, over the same time span?"

"We have to know where we want to end up before we start out—and plan to get there. That is, we must have solid curriculum and instruction in place before we differentiate them. That’s harder than it seems."

"Successful teaching requires two elements: student understanding and student engagement. In other words, students must really understand, or make sense of, what they have studied. They should also feel engaged in or “hooked by” the ways that they have learned. The latter can greatly enhance the former and can help young people realize that learning is satisfying."

"...differentiated instruction must dignify each learner with learning that is “whole,” important, and meaning making. The core of what the students learn remains relatively steady. How the student learns—including degree of difficulty, working arrangements, modes of expression,

and sorts of scaffolding—may vary considerably."

Two, Four, Six, Eight, Let's All Differentiate

Bravmann, Stephanie. (2004). Two, Four, Six, Eight, Let's All Differentiate
Differential Education: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. Retrieved from: http://www.newhorizons.org/strategies/differentiated/bravmann.htm

Summary:

The article goes through a brief history of where differential education began, how it's being used today, and where it should be going to be effective in the future. Dr. Virgil Ward first coined the phrase "differential education" in an effort to better serve gifted students by beginning their instruction based on what they already know. It has since been seen as applicable to all students. Now that it's been popularized, there has been some confusion. It does not mean giving the same assignment to all students and simply making the questions harder. Providing enrichment activities for those who finish early is not differential education either. In order to truly use differential education teachers need to make changes in the areas of pacing and sophistication, depth, complexity, and personalization.

"Some write and speak about "differentiated curriculum" and others about "differentiated instruction." Few focus unambiguously on the necessary combination of the two in order to create differential education."

"Learning activities must allow for student choice at levels of complexity that are most appropriate; in other words, assignments must be tiered to take into account different ways to meet the same goal."

"Differentiation itself is based on three beliefs: Everyone learns differently; Quality is more important than quantity (e.g. significance trumps coverage); "One-size-fits-all" curriculum and instruction presumes that content is more important than students"

"Differential education is a philosophy that is focused on the confluence of student and content. It is not a strategy that teachers can learn "to do" in classes and workshops and then immediately implement in their schools."