A pair of cases before the US Supreme Court this week may yield a whole new interpretation of Brown v. Board of Education, as parents in two states have sued to put an end to racial preference in school assignments.
Coverage of the arguments and justices’ comments can be found in this morning’s Commercial Appeal, Tennessean, and the WSJ.
It seems that the real disparity is not a question of race, but of socioeconomics. The socioeconomic issue is masked to some degree by the fact that African-American and Hispanic students are overrepresented in the lower socioeconomic bracket, leading many to still consider race as the primary issue.
The Tennessean says;
Since the end of desegregation, the [Metro Nashville] district is home not only to more single-race schools, but also to more schools with a high poverty rate. And with a high poverty rate comes inequality, Smrekar said.
Race, class linked
Schools with high poverty rates also tend to have a disproportionate number of teachers teaching outside their field, according to Smrekar’s research. There’s also a higher percentage of inexperienced teachers and a higher rate of teacher turnover.
Typically, more experienced teachers opt for schools with more affluent student populations, experts said.
Students in the lower socioeconomic group are termed “at-risk” in edu-speak. One answer to the problem of teacher quality in schools with high “at-risk” populations is to offer an economic incentive for the best teachers to teach there. I realize that there is tremendous resistance from the teachers’ unions (not just in Tennessee, but all over the US) to any form of differentiated compensation, but if we are to ask some to do a significantly more difficult task in a less enjoyable work environment, there has to be some reason for the best in the profession to choose those schools.
The most obvious incentive from the private sector would be compensation.
No, public schools don’t follow the “run it like a business” model very well, since businesses do have the choice of rejecting raw material that isn’t up to their quality standards. A business has the right to set the fee for its product or service based upon the cost to produce or provide it, where public schools do not. But in terms of personnel performance, there are lessons to be taken from the private sector.
It is my observation that the “socio” part of socioeconomic is probably the greater challenge. Certainly, students from low-income families may have fewer resources (encyclopedias, computers, even nutrition) at home, but much has been done to address that disparity through schools, public libraries, and public assistance. It’s the child whose parent(s) may be absent in the evenings, drunk or on drugs, or who just doesn’t care that faces the greater challenge.
And yes, a superior teacher can make a difference even in the child whose home life is abysmal.
We’re lucky in Oak Ridge… our elementary school with the greatest number of at-risk students is also the one with the lowest teacher turnover, and a staff that I would hold up against any other, in any school system. We’re also fortunate in that, as a relatively small city, our demographics are pretty evenly distributed — not perfectly, but much more so than in most places.
I would tend to agree that school assignment based on race should end. At the same time, I would argue that it’s in all of our best interests to find a way to address the “socio” disparity as quickly and effectively as possible… if we do not, it will not only be self-perpetuating, but will snowball out of control.