Diversity in Education
Diversity in Education
  • Overview
  • K-12 Integration, Desegregation, and Segregation Archive
  • K-16 STEM Archive
  • Browse
    • By Method of Analysis
    • By Unit of Analysis
    • By Data Type
    • By Journal Name or Institutional Affiliation
    • By Keyword
    • By Methodology
    • By Region
    • By Research
    • By Scholarship
    • By Sample Type
  • Help
  • Contact Us

Filter

  • Sort by

  • Filtered Search Term

  • Archive

  • Keywords

  • Research Designs

  • Analysis Methods

  • Researchers

2010 - After Seattle: Social Science Research and Narrowly Tailored School Desegregation Plans

Attribution: Armor, David J., & Duck, Stephanie
Researchers: David J. ArmorStephanie Duck
University Affiliation: George Mason University
Email: darmor@gmu.edu
Research Question:
Offer a social science rationale for Justice Kennedy's view about narrow tailoring issues and suggesting several approaches to desegregation plans that may meet narrow tailoring requirement.
Published: 1
Journal Name or Institutional Affiliation: Teacher College Record
Journal Entry: Vol. 112, No. 6, pp. 1705-1728
Year: 2010
Findings:
  • The current design of most mandatory desegregation plans does not fit within the current Court’s view ( especially Justice Kennedy’s) of narrowly tailored plans.
  • Several ways in which school boards and other policy makers can promote school desegregation include: considering race when drawing attendance zones, building new schools, closing schools, and locating magnet schools in strategic areas.
  • Magnet schools might meet narrow tailoring requirements if race is only one of several factors considered during the application and administration process.
  • The existence of a modest average desegregation benefit in race relations does not guarantee that all desegregated students will experience that benefit. Although the average of students in desegregated schools is 2 points higher than their average in segregated schools, there is considerably overlap when it comes to individual students. One can see that many segregated Black students are outperforming desegregated Black students.
  • Average benefits are not the same as individual benefits. From the standpoint of narrow tailoring, showing that desegregated students have better educational and social outcomes than segregated students on average does not mean that all, or even a large fraction, will benefit from a desegregated school. This creates a narrow tailoring problem for policies that classify all students by race and then assign them to desegregated schools, because such a process assumes that all students thus classified and assigned will benefit from the desegregated school.
  • The modest impact of desegregation on educational and social outcomes appears to erect serious barriers to school boards that wish to pursue system wide racial balance policies.
Keywords: Academic AchievementChoiceDesegregationParents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1Racial CompositionSES CompositionRegions: NationalMethodologies: MixedAnalysis Methods: Content Analysis Sampling Frame:Students at North Carolina Districts
Sampling Types: NonrandomAnalysis Units: SchoolStudentData Types: Mixed-Longitudinal
Data Description:
  • Data from a larger North Carolina data set.
  • A cohort consisting of about 4,050 Black students from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg district who began third grade between 2000-2001 and completed eight grade in 2005-2006.
  • Uses sophisticated longitudinal regression models.
Theoretical Framework:
Relevance:
Archives: K-12 Integration, Desegregation, and Segregation Abstracts
Skip to toolbar
  • Log In