Landmark decisions and a landmark dissent--those are what legal experts chose to celebrate at the Broad Street courthouse Friday at a continuing-education colliquium for local attorneys.
A dissent from the Briggs v. Elliott case, according to these experts, "laid the groundwork" for the later Brown v. Board of Education case.
All fascinating stuff to lawyers, but what about the results?
Thanks to the policies of the Charleston County School District Board of Trustees, the majority of CCSD schools remain nearly as segregated as they were 60 years ago. Now it's de facto instead of de jure.
Maybe the legal experts should take up that problem.
Friday, May 20, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
13 comments:
With all due respect, Babbie, aren't your teaching experiences confined to private schools?
With all due respect, to the previous author, private school enrollment in Charleston County took off AFTER 1986 (not 1954). Granted, private school enrollment increased after 1970, but its rise was nowhere near what was needed to put it at current levels. That catalyst came in the 1980's when CCSD won its case against the last challenges to the district's segregationist enrollment policies which used constituent districts as an excuse to exclude cross district transfers and the prospect of court ordered busing designed to achieve racial balance.
As part of its successful defense against change CCSD held up its new magnet schools in order to show examples of whites returning to public schools downtown. It was a sham but the magnet school idea was embraced by CCSD leaders if only to disguise the actual numbers that confirmed white flight was accelerating. If this has changed at all, the high cost of private school tuition in a downward economy and the rise of successful charter schools are responsible, not recent court decisions or school leaders finally getting it right.
Take a look at the magnet and charter schools' demographics. It is a good thing that Garrett is there for African American students.
Certainly James Island Charter, Buist, the Magnet, SOA, Orange Grove and even everyone's baby, Math and Science Charter have provided a means for "white" flight.
Parents of means (black, white, or whoever) have done more to segregate schools in CCSD than any policies otherwise. Wando is autonomous, correct? Perhaps this is a way to allow them to reject downtown students who may wish to "escape" Burke?
And before anyone espouses the mythical nonsense about CCSMS, there is a mere 2.0% SPED at the school (compared with a median of 11- to 12-ish% for the US), and a completely disproportionate 28% GT eligible (around 6-7% are gifted in the US). Although the racial demographics looked promising, they are quickly morphing. The older grades reflect a more fair demographic than the younger grades. Do some research. When only 3 children of 156 students taking EOCs are over-age, obviously the performance levels will be higher.
CCSD is certainly failing the stink test for honesty, transparency and equity, but these pop-up autonomous, magent and charter schools are no less corrupt despite what the apologists think.
Just to add to be fair...what Orange Grove is doing with its impoverished children is very promising.
Anonymous 6:58 PM says, "Certainly James Island Charter, Buist, the Magnet, SOA, Orange Grove and even everyone's baby, Math and Science Charter have provided a means for "white" flight."
Don't confuse the issue. Magnet schools have the means and the will to exclude. Charter school do not. Special education isn't offered at all at Buist or AMHS but it is at all three of the named charter schools where by law there is no admissions exam and the lottery is open to all. Magnet schools have admissions qualifications which must be met before applications or participation in their lotteries are permitted.
If you look at the demographics, JICHS, OGCES and CCSMS are reflect the district's racial and economic composite. No other CCSD schools do that. The district's academic achievement gap separating racial groups also begins to disappear on those charter school campuses.
Those familiar with the system also know that school districts like CCSD also play with the special ed numbers because it translates into more state and Title One money for the district. Charter schools aren't in the habit of applying special ed labels except where appropriate. They have no reason to do that since CCSD funding formulas don't provide the same financial incentives to charter schools on labeling kids as special ed. In other words CCSD keeps the extra money, so why label a borderline student unnecessarily? Why not do what Orange Grove does, work with the individual student until they are able to catch up with their peers? That says a lot about why OGCES has erased the achievement gap. By law Orange Grove School can't just screen out those students so it has to meet the challenge.
Makes us wonder what would be the result if CCSD used this kind of logic district wide. Probably a district that was a lot more successful than it is.
You obviously did not read my comment below the first about Orange Grove, which I consider to be a promising example of a charter school.
James Island's demographics do not reflect their community, hence, they are excluding them. Charleston Math and Science Charter does not accurately reflect their immediate community either. Anyone who believes that any community has 30%gifted population has obviously no clue about giftedness. Greg Mathis has been a joke since it was first developed (though I applaud the attempt to educate students who have not had any success anywhere else. The Montessori charter, please.
Special Needs students are not "labeled". That is your first mistake. They are identified as needing extra accomodations based on learning, medical or psycho-sociological disabilities.. You obviously have a bias against such students.
I applaud any charter school that seeks to educate those who are unsuccessful at community schools. Problem is, people mistake student success at a charter/magnet school as attributable to that school. Statistics will show these students were already successful at their community schools. They have just been placed with others of their type and removed from less successful students.
...and CCSD's magnet schools accept special needs student? And CCSD's magnet schools reflect the district's racial and economic demographics, but charter schools don't? I don't follow you reasoning. CCSD regularly labels ED students as LD. Just ask the teachers who eventually have to straighten out the district's misassigned students.
My point was not that magnet schools reflect either of those attributes we are discussing. I am decidedly, anti-magnet.
My point is that for all of the cheerleading for charters here, some of them are no better than the magnet schools.
And SOA has a higher percentage of Special Needs children than CCSMS (3.9% to 2.0%). The Magnet has 0.0% which is a travesty.
The Montessori Charter in East Cooper (read: rich white people) has a percentage hovering at less than 4%, more than 25% less than it should based on socio-economic and ethnic make-up (there are only 5 persons of color in the entire school).
Ashley River Creative Arts on the other hand has 22% black (and a tragic 1% Hispanic), 14% disabled, and 22% free and reduced lunch.
My point is that other than Mathis and Orange Grove, the other charters are doing nothing more than the magnets are doing while pretending there are no admissions requirements and balanced demographics.
Hey, charters are here to stay and have the full support of the state moving forward, but let's not pretend they are anything more than another vehicle for white/middle class flight.
Interesting discussion.
From what someone at the school said to me, a good percentage of kids at the Charleston Math and Science Charter are those who didn't get in at Buist and the School of the Arts from downtown, James Island and West Ashley.
I don't know where or if your information is correct, but it would be fair to assume that parents interested in giving their children the best possible education would be looking at more than one school.
watch out Babbie
Principals are shifting AGAIN
also didn't we just get rid of an Associate Superintendent? Due to funds?
They are hiring a new one and staff too!!!!!!!\sneaky no mention in post
I thought we were out of funds?
The administration is really doing a number on the board and the public. The district has money for what the super wants but no money for what others might suggest. She and her henchmen are using voodoo accounting to justify gross mismanagement. Teachers have had their wages frozen since 2008 and endured furloughs. Top administrators have added staff and raised their own salaries by as much as 20% during the same period. The addition of administrative furloughs and one time 6% cuts in this context are insulting. Roll back administrative pay to what it was in July 2008. Administrators and non-classroom staff making more than $50,000 a year (in addition to their perks and benefits) should be paid last, if not least.
A lot of those teacher coaches still floating around...especially in schools which have showed little or no gains. At leat 50K a pop. Why is their effectiveness not tied directly to the data of the schools they are supposed to be helping? For starters, who has been in and out of Burke, North Charleston, Morningside, etc?
Post a Comment