cause and effect

Six unintended consequences that could result from the District 15 middle school admissions plan

PHOTO: Christina Veiga/Chalkbeat
Students start the school day at M.S. 442 in District 15. The school lost federal Title I funding after the number of needy students enrolled there declined, an issue that more schools in the district could face now that an integration plan is in place.

Families in Brooklyn’s District 15 are preparing for big changes to middle school admissions — but there could be ripple effects that go beyond a recently approved enrollment overhaul.

In an effort to integrate schools across neighborhoods such as Sunset Park and Park Slope, selective criteria such as report card grades and test scores will no longer count toward admissions decisions. Instead, the district will use a lottery that gives needy students priority.

Schools are delicate organisms, though, and changes in one area can have cascading effects on students, teachers, and how schools organize themselves. Here are a few potential consequences to look out for in District 15.

A reduction in test pressure

District 15 has been an epicenter of the city’s opt-out energy: 13 percent of students there chose not to take state tests in 2017. But the use of fourth-grade test scores in admissions decisions may have worked as a bulwark against an even higher opt-out tide. Some parents who are antsy about standardized testing likely made their children sit for tests anyway, thinking their results could help them get into middle school (though many local middle schools accepted students without scores). Now that test scores definitely won’t count towards middle school admissions, there’s little incentive for parents skeptical about testing to make their children take the exams — especially as the state has also softened proposed penalties for schools where a high percentage of students opt out.

Dialing down test pressure could have other effects. Some research has found that attaching high-stakes to tests can lead to gaming of the system, like a greater focus on material that will appear on state tests or putting more effective teachers in tested grades. So reducing the stakes could yield scores that are a better indicator of how much students are really learning. Less emphasis on test scores could also allow teachers to spend time on topics and skills that won’t be tested and make schools more welcoming for students who struggle under test pressure.

Already, at least one parent who had opted out of the city’s public schools entirely is considering making a return because of the admissions changes in District 15.

Juliette Adams lives in Boerum Hill, and her son is in fifth grade at Brooklyn Friends, a private school. She said she was turned off by the schools in her neighborhood partly because of the competitive middle-school admissions process, which makes students “feel like they’re taking these tests and that determines their future.”

She’s considering entering the lottery for middle school for a variety of reasons: to expand her son’s options, because she believes in diversity, and because she’s hopeful that removing tests from the equation lowers the pressure on students.

“I would want to support that and I think a lottery would be a win-win for him,” she said. “He wouldn’t have to go through the stress of applying and being rejected.”

High school admissions changes backfire

While the city is touting the changes in District 15, Mayor Bill de Blasio is also lobbying to change how students are admitted to specialized high schools, which are also deeply segregated. A small number of middle schools, including in District 15, feed an outsized share of students into the elite high schools. District 15’s integration push could have an unintended impact on de Blasio’s plan.

The mayor’s proposal to replace the specialized high schools entrance exam — and instead admit the top 7 percent of students in every city middle school — is based on a presumption that middle schools remain segregated.

But the hope in District 15 is that all middle schools will have many white and middle-class students — meaning that it’s plausible those students could make up the bulk of the top students, given that they tend to earn higher test scores. If they are truly distributed across the district, more affluent students could end up benefiting from the changes, and poor students and students of color could see a pathway to elite high schools blocked.

Of course, the hope is also that more diverse schools will help all students excel, but many factors out of schools’ control could work against that reality.

Any potential impacts are still purely theoretical: Changing admissions to specialized high schools requires the state legislature to act, which hasn’t happened yet. Even if they do, de Blasio’s plan would take years to fully phase-in.

Lazar Treschan, who has studied the city’s specialized high schools closely for the Community Service Society of New York — an advocacy organization for low-income residents — said there is some precedence for how things could play out. He noted that when Texas moved to a similar system that offered college admission to top high school students, some white families moved into neighborhoods where they thought their child would have a better shot at making the top rankings. But he said that’s no reason not to move forward in District 15.

“Let’s deal with the middle school problem and worry later if this messes up our plan” for high schools, he said.

Still, this potential wrinkle is a reminder of how complicated the city’s school system is.

“These things are all connected, and you can’t move one without another,” Treschan said.

Increased scrutiny of what happens inside schools

Under the old admissions process, some schools that admitted students with stronger academic skills gained positive reputations — with little scrutiny of what happens once students get in the door. Are schools that have served students who are mostly on track, or even advanced, prepared to help students who need to catch up? Will students who are academically prepared be challenged in schools that have historically admitted few students in that position?

School leaders in the district say the answer is a resounding yes.

“It’s a bit of a myth that any school has any one type of student,” said Lenore DiLeo Berner, the principal of M.S. 51. The school bills itself as a gifted and talented program, but DiLeo Berner said teachers “have been trained to teach all kinds of students, all kinds of learners.”

“Bring it on,” she said.

But serving a range of learners can be difficult to do well, and city data suggests that some local schools are more effective than others in propelling forward students. Plus, research shows that if skills gaps are too large, students on both ends of the academic spectrum do not benefit when they are taught together. Other research shows that struggling students can have a negative impact on their peers.

Sorting students into classes based on their existing academic achievement, a practice known as “tracking,” can negate the benefits of otherwise integrated schools because students of color are more likely to get stuck in lower-level classes, while white students take advanced and honors courses in greater numbers.

In Montgomery County, Maryland, a recent effort to make gifted programs more diverse came with a commitment to creating accelerated classes in individual schools, in part to placate families whose children would have been admitted to the special programs under the old system.

City officials say they won’t let that happen in District 15. Parents and educators who worked on the integration plan asked that no tracking take place within any new programs.

District Superintendent Anita Skop said separating students by ability level would “go against” the vision of “meaningfully” integrating schools.

“We believe all our students have the potential to succeed academically with the right supports,” she said in an emailed statement. “I’m going to be closely monitoring the diversity plan as it goes into effect and working with all our principals to expand opportunity to accelerated work for all students.”

And more pressure for schools to sell themselves

The previous admissions system required a hefty investment of time and effort from school leaders, who interviewed, tested, and auditioned a crush of applicants. That will no longer be the case in District 15. But the new admissions system doesn’t necessarily free up time for teachers and administrators.

Parents will still be free to apply to the schools of their choice, which means district leaders will have to devote effort towards recruiting a diverse applicant pool. They’ll have to figure out why certain families aren’t already considering their schools and help break down those barriers — whether they are transportation concerns or questions about the programs offered. Without an intense focus on these issues, the push for integration could fall flat.

And advocates say that even if schools succeed, they will need to pay extra attention to making sure all students are treated fairly and that their cultures are respected so that families will want to stay.

“I think that if the schools don’t do any kind of active recruitment and also don’t pay attention to changing demographics in the school and what that will mean, then it won’t necessarily be as successful as people are hoping,” said Michele Greenberg, a District 15 parent who is working on diversity and outreach efforts in local elementary schools.

Plus a potential budget squeeze

If the integration plan succeeds, it could shut schools out of federal Title I funding — a pot of money that gets funneled to schools where many students are needy.

To qualify for Title I in Brooklyn, at least 60 percent of a school’s students must come from low-income families. The funding is all or nothing: either a school qualifies for the budget boost or gets nothing.

In District 15, the goal is for each school to serve a share of needy students that falls in line with the local average of 52 percent. The loss of Title I could put schools in a serious bind as they continue to serve many students who may have extra needs, but parents are often unable to make up for the funding gap through PTA fundraising, or by paying out of their own pockets for services such as afterschool programming.

Parents, educators, and community members who developed the District 15 integration plan asked the city to consider new ways to disperse Title I money, and to create a stopgap for schools that fall below the threshold. Last year, four middle schools in the district benefited from Title I.

But since the funding comes with federal strings attached, it may be difficult to change how Title I gets handed out. Plus, the pot of money has already been stretched thin as more New York City schools qualify for Title I, but less money is poured into the program.

Parents fed up with the system leave?

The selective admissions system was created in the early 2000s, the same time as brownstone Brooklyn embarked on a process of rapid gentrification. The rise of selective schools offered middle-class families a clear pathway to stay in the city for the notoriously challenging middle school years.

While the district remains a desirable place to live, and more of its neighborhoods are continuing to gentrify, there is no guarantee that families will remain committed to sending their children to local schools. In San Francisco, another district schools Chancellor Richard Carranza has run, many affluent families move to the suburbs rather than enter into a school system where admissions is fully lottery driven.

District 15 will retain neighborhood admissions for elementary schools, giving affluent families a long runway to get invested in the city’s schools. But uncertainty about middle schools could tilt some families away from choosing to reside or remain in the city. If the admissions changes are perceived as working against their children, that possibility could increase.

“I don’t think it’s fair they’re going from zero to 60 on this plan,” one mother of a fifth-grader told the Wall Street Journal. “It’s completely untried, untested, and our kids are the ones they’ll work out the kinks on.”

Parents might also be more likely to consider citywide middle schools such as Mark Twain, a competitive school in Coney Island that bills itself as offering a gifted program, or even local charter schools like Success Academy, which would require parents to opt-in early since the network doesn’t accept students past fourth grade. Success recently opened a middle school nearby and has so far attracted a decent number of white families.

IPS School Board Race 2018

Indiana teachers union spends big on Indianapolis Public Schools in election

PHOTO: Dylan Peers McCoy/Chalkbeat
IPS board candidate signs

The political arm of Indiana’s largest teachers union is spending big on the Indianapolis Public Schools board. The group donated $68,400 to three candidates vying for seats on the board this November, according to pre-election campaign finance disclosures released Friday.

The three candidates — Susan Collins, Michele Lorbieski, and Taria Slack — have all expressed criticism of the current board and the leadership of Superintendent Lewis Ferebee. Although that criticism touches on many issues, one particular bone of contention is the district’s embrace of innovation schools, independent campuses that are run by charter or nonprofit operators but remain under the district’s umbrella. Teachers at those schools are employed by the school operators, so they cannot join the union.

The trio was also endorsed by the IPS Community Coalition, a local group that has received funding from a national teachers union.

It’s not unusual for teachers unions to spend on school board elections. In 2016, the union contributed $15,000 to an unsuccessful at-large candidate for the Indianapolis Public Schools board. But $68,400 dwarfs that contribution. Those disclosures do not capture the full spending on the election. The three candidates endorsed by Stand for Children Indiana — Mary Ann Sullivan, Dorene Rodríguez Hoops, and Evan Hawkins — are likely getting significant unreported benefits.

Stand for Children, which supports innovation schools, typically sends mailers and hires campaign workers to support the candidates it endorses. But it is not required to disclose all of its political activity because it is an independent expenditure committee, also known as a 501(c)(4), for the tax code section that covers it. The group did not immediately respond to a request for information on how much it is spending on this race.

The candidates’ fundraising varied widely in the reporting period, which covered the period from April 14 to Oct. 12, with Taria Slack bringing in $28,950 and Joanna Krumel raising $200. In recent years, candidates have been raising significantly more money than had been common. But one recent candidate managed to win on a shoestring: Elizabeth Gore won an at-large seat in 2016 after raising about $1,200.

Read more: See candidates’ answers to a Chalkbeat survey

One part of Stand for Children’s spending became visible this year when it gave directly to tax campaigns. The group contributed $188,842 to the campaign for two tax referendums to raise money for Indianapolis Public Schools. That includes a $100,000 donation that was announced in August and about $88,842 worth of in-kind contributions such as mailers. The group has a team of campaign workers who have been going door-to-door for months.

The district is seeking to persuade voters to support two tax increases. One would raise $220 million for operating funds, such as teacher salaries, over eight years. A second measure would raise $52 million for building improvements. Donations from Stand for Children largely power the Vote Yes for IPS campaign, which raised a total of $201,717. The Indiana teachers union also contributed $5,000.

Here are the details on how much each candidate has raised and some of the notable contributions:

At large

Incumbent Mary Ann Sullivan, a former Democrat state lawmaker, raised $7,054. Her largest contribution came from the Indy Chamber Business Advocacy Committee, which donated $4,670. She also received $1,000 from Steel House, a metal warehouse run by businessman Reid Litwack. She also received several donations of $250 or less.

Retired Indianapolis Public Schools teacher Susan Collins, who is one of the candidates supported by the union, raised $16,422. The Indiana Political Action Committee for Education contributed $15,000. She also received several donations of $200 or less.

Ceramics studio owner and Indianapolis Public Schools parent Joanna Krumel raised $200. Her largest contribution, $100, came from James W. Hill.

District 3

Marian University Executive Director of Facilities and Procurement and Indianapolis Public Schools parent Evan Hawkins raised $22,037. His largest contributions from individuals were from businessmen Allan Hubbard, who donated $5,000, and Litwack, who donated $2,500. The Indy Chamber Business Advocacy Committee contributed $4,670 and web design valued at $330. He also received several donations of $1,000 or less. His donors included IPS board member Venita Moore, retiring IPS board member Kelly Bentley’s campaign, and the CEO of The Mind Trust, Brandon Brown.

Frost Brown Todd trial attorney and Indianapolis Public Schools parent Michele Lorbieski, who is one of the candidates supported by the union, raised $27,345. The Indiana Political Action Committee for Education contributed $24,900. She also received several contributions of $250 or less.

Pike Township schools Director of Information Services Sherry Shelton raised $1,763, primarily from money she contributed. David Green contributed $116.

District 5

Incumbent Dorene Rodríguez Hoops, an Indianapolis Public Schools parent, raised $16,006. Her largest contributors include Hubbard, who donated $5,000; the Indy Chamber Business Advocacy Committee, which gave $4,670 and web design valued at $330; and the MIBOR PAC, which contributed $1,000. She also received several contributions of $500 or less, including from Bentley.

Federal employee and Indianapolis Public Schools parent Taria Slack, who is one of the candidates supported by the union, raised $28,950. The Indiana Political Action Committee for Education contributed $28,500.

Innovation zone

Two more Denver schools win additional freedom from district rules

PHOTO: J. Zubrzycki/Chalkbeat
Alex Magaña, then principal at Grant Beacon Middle School, greeted students as they moved between classes in 2015.

Two more Denver schools this week won more flexibility in how they spend their money and time. The schools will create a new “innovation zone,” bringing the district’s number of quasi-autonomous zones to three.

The Denver school board on Thursday unanimously approved the schools’ application to operate more independently from district rules, starting in January.

The new zone will include Grant Beacon Middle School in south Denver and Kepner Beacon Middle School in southwest Denver. The two schools are high-performing by the district’s standards and follow a model that allows students to learn at their own pace.

With just two schools, the zone will be the district’s smallest, though Beacon leaders have signaled their intent to compete to open a third school in the growing Stapleton neighborhood, where the district has said it will need more capacity. The district’s other two innovation zones have four and five schools each.

Schools in zones are still district schools, but they can opt out of paying for certain district services and instead spend that money on things that meet their specific needs, such as additional teachers or aides. Zones can also form nonprofit organizations with their own boards of directors that provide academic and operational oversight, and help raise extra dollars to support the schools.

The new zone, called the Beacon Schools Network Innovation Zone, will have a five-member board of directors that includes one current parent, two former parents, and two community members whose professional work is related to education.

The zone will also have a teacher council and a parent council that will provide feedback to its board but whose members won’t be able to vote on decisions.

Some Denver school board members questioned the makeup of the zone’s board.

“I’m wondering about what kinds of steps you’re going to take to ensure there is a greater representation of people who live and reside in southwest Denver,” where Kepner Beacon is located, asked school board member Angela Cobián, who represents the region. She also asked about a greater representation of current parents on the board.

Alex Magaña, who serves as executive principal over the Beacon schools and will lead the new zone, said he expects the board to expand to seven members within a year. He also said the parent council will play a key role even if its members can’t vote.

“The parent council is a strong influence,” he said. “If the parent council is not happy, that’s going to be impacting both of the schools. I don’t want to undersell that.”

Other Denver school board members questioned the zone’s finances and how dependent it would be on fundraising. A district summary of the zone’s application notes that the zone’s budget relies on $1.68 million in foundation revenue over the next 5½ years.

Magaña said the zone would eventually seek to expand to four schools, which would make it more financially stable. As for philanthropic dollars, he said the zone would work to ensure any loss of revenue doesn’t hurt the schools’ unique programs or enrichment.

“I can’t emphasize enough that it won’t impact the schools,” he said.

Ultimately, Denver school board members said they have confidence in the Beacon model and look forward to seeing what its leaders do with their increased autonomy.