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

- Assessing Segregation Under a New Generation of Controlled Choice Policies

Attribution: Frankenberg, Erica
University Affiliation: Pennsylvania State University
Email: euf@psu.edu
Research Question:
To what extent are schools racially and economically diverse under the new generation of controlled choice policies? How does school racial and socioeconomic composition under the new generation of controlled choice policies differ from school com- position under a non–integration focused SAP?
Published: Yes
Journal Name or Institutional Affiliation: American Educational Research Journal
Journal Entry: Vol 54, No. 1s, pp 219s-250s
Year:
Findings:

-The percentage of White students in Jefferson County private schools was lower in recent years when the new policies were implemented, although White students enroll in private schools at a disproportionately higher rate. The share of Latino students in Jefferson Country private schools during this period has also declined while remaining steady for Black students.

– JCPS’s percentage of White students declined, particularly among younger students, but the district retains a large share of White students, a steady share of Black students, and growing Latino enrollment. The percentage of economically disadvantaged students remained constant.

– The exposure of White and Latino students to Black students declined while Black isolation increased. In fact, the typical Black student had a higher percentage of Black students in their school than White students even though White students comprise a much higher percentage of the district’s enrollment.

– The exposure of FRL students to other low-SES students remained constant while the exposure of non-FRL students to these students increased substantially.

– Two trends emerge regarding segregation within JCPS. First, racial segregation has grown, although the picture is mixed and remains low compared to national trends. The percentage of students in minority concentrated schools rose while the exposure of White and Black students became more dissimilar— and segregative—over time. Latino students became more integrated with Whites and segregated from Blacks since 2006–2007. Second, economic segregation appears stable with mixed findings about whether it is increasing. The race/ poverty overlap remains fairly weak.

– Proximity-based plans often result in segregation when neighborhoods are segregated.

– The isolation for Black students is about 1 percentage point lower than proximity-based; differences for White and Latino students are smaller.

– under the controlled choice scenario, Latinos have higher percentages of Black students in their schools. White students have lower isolation but are still highly isolated, and for all three groups, even the ‘‘lower’’ isolation under this scenario still reflects relatively high isolation. White and Latino students are being assigned to schools with very different racial composition, on average, than are Black students.

– In comparison to the different assignments, the isolation of students in the school they enroll in is slightly more segregated than under the actual assignment.

– segregation is less pronounced for the existing controlled choice assignment in comparison to other potential assignment scenarios.

– While schools remain considerably diverse under this new generation of policies and are more diverse than if students were assigned under the simulated alternative scenarios, there is also evidence of growing racial segregation particularly for Black students; evidence is mixed regarding economic segregation but appears stable. JCPS segregation levels remain considerably lower than most large districts

-Black and Latino students are not concentrated in the same schools. Indeed, in JCPS, the burgeoning Latino enrollment has become more similar to White students in their exposure to other-race students, particularly White students, and more segregated from Black students.

-These findings suggest that this new generalized race-conscious policy might help navigate barriers to inequality, albeit perhaps not to the same extent as policies using individual student race/ethnicity.

Scholarship Types: Journal Article Reporting Empirical ResearchKeywords: ChoiceDiversityIntegrationRaceStudent Assignment PoliciesRegions: SouthMethodologies: QuantitativeResearch Designs: Secondary DataAnalysis Methods: Descriptive StatisticsGIS (Geographic Information System) Sampling Frame:Jefferson County Public Schools
Sampling Types: Non-RandomAnalysis Units: SchoolSchool DistrictStudentData Types: Quantitative-Longitudinal
Data Description:

-Data comes from the NCES Common Core of Data. This provides annual school-level information about students’ race/ethnicity and free/reduced lunch status from 2006–2007 to 2012–2013.The researcher supplement with JCPS data from 2013–2014 and 2014–2015. -To answer the second question, the researcher analyzed de-identified student-level data provided by JCPS from kindergarten students’ applications and subsequent enrollment. These applications provide information on the schools parents chose for their children; the data file has been merged with administrative data including selected student personal characteristics.

-Information for each applicant includes: student race, free/reduced lunch status, grade level, diversity code, nearest school, choice preferences (ranked up to eight schools), whether the application was submitted on time, assigned school, and whether the student enrolled.

– The segregation analysis uses three common measures of racial segregation to provide different information about students’ school contexts: concentration, exposure, and multigroup diversity (Theil’s H). Additionally, the researcher examines economic segregation since the new policy includes socioeconomic measures.

-Concentration measures how many students enroll in schools with high (or low) percentages of minority or low-income students.

-The exposure index (or isolation, which is exposure to one’s own group) indicates the school racial composition of the ‘‘typical’’ student of a given race. If schools were perfectly integrated, all students would have the same exposure to each racial group.

-Theil’s H assesses the extent to which smaller units (schools) are less diverse than larger units (districts) and analyzes multiple racial/ethnic groups simultaneously.

– For the second research question, using JCPS student-level data, I simulate two hypothetical assignment scenarios: (a) neighborhood schools and (b) choice-only schools. In the first scenario, the researcher assign a student to their closest school using the ‘‘proximity school’’ variable in the administrative data set. In the second scenario, I assign students to the school listed as their first choice. After assigning students, the researchers calculates segregation measures for students under these hypothetical scenarios and compare to those under the actual assignments. The comparison illustrates how school-level trends would differ using the same group of students and preferences but under different assignment scenarios not prioritizing integration.

Theoretical Framework:
Relevance:
Archives: K-12 Integration, Desegregation, and Segregation Abstracts
Skip to toolbar
  • Log In