High school choice policies attempt to improve the educational outcomes of poor and minority students by allowing access to high school beyond neighborhood boundaries. These policies assume that given a choice, families will be able to select a school that supports their child's learning and promotes educational attainment. However, research on the effects of public school choice programs on the academic achievement of disadvantaged students is mixed, suggesting that families do not necessarily respond to these programs in ways that policymakers intend.
Purpose
The purpose of this article is to identify how family and neighborhood contexts interact with public school choice policies to shape the educational opportunities of inner-city students. Specifically, we ask: What criteria are used to choose schools? What are the implications of these school choice decisions for students’ future educational and occupational opportunities?
Research Design
We use data from interviews and fieldwork conducted with 118 low-income African American youth ages 15–24 who attended Baltimore City Public Schools at some point during their high school career. Research on school choice tends to rely on data from parents, and we offer a unique contribution by asking youth themselves about their experiences with school choice.
Conclusions
Although school choice policies assume that parents will guide youths’ decision about where to go to high school, the majority of youth in our sample were the primary decision makers in the high school choice process. Additionally, these youth made these choices under considerable constraints imposed by the district policy and by their family, peers, and academic background. As a result, the youth often selected a school within a very limited choice set and chose schools that did not necessarily maximize their educational opportunity. Our results demonstrate that school choice policies must take into account the social context in which educational decisions are made in order to maximize chances for students’ individual academic achievement and to decrease inequality by race and social class.
AngristJ. D., DynarskiS. M., KaneT. J., PathakP. A., & WaltersC. R. (2010). Inputs and impacts in charter schools: KIPP Lynn. American Economic Review, 100(2), 239–243.
3.
BaileyM., & DynarskiS. (2011). Inequality and college entry and completion. In DuncanG. J. & MurnaneR. J. (Eds.), Whither opportunity? Rising inequality, schools, and children's life chances (pp. 117–132). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
4.
BaumH. (2010). Brown in Baltimore: School desegregation and the limits of liberalism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
5.
BealH. K. O., & HendryP. M. (2012). The ironies of school choice: Empowering parents and reconceptualizing public education. American Journal of Education, 118(4), 521–550.
6.
BellC. (2009). Geography in parental choice. American Journal of Education, 115(4), 493–521.
7.
BifulcoR., CobbC. D., & BellC. (2009). Can interdistrict choice boost student achievement? The case of Connecticut's interdistrict magnet school program. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 323–345.
8.
BriggsX. N. D. S. (2005). More pluribus, less unum? The changing geography of race and opportunity. In BriggsX. N. D. S & WilsonW. J. (Eds.), The geography of opportunity: race and housing choice in metropolitan America (pp. 17–44). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
9.
BriggsX. N. D. S., FerrymanK. S., PopkinS. J., & RendónM. (2008). Why did the Moving To Opportunity experiment not get young people into better schools?Housing Policy Debate, 19(1), 53–91.
10.
BurgessS., & BriggsA. (2010). School assignment, school choice and social mobility. Economics of Education Review, 29(4), 639–649.
11.
BurtonL. (2007). Childhood adultification in economically disadvantaged families: A conceptual model. Family Relations, 56(4), 329–345.
12.
ChaseN. D., DemingM. P., & WellsM. C. (1998). Parentification, parental alcoholism, and academic status among young adults. American Journal of Family Therapy, 26(2), 105–114.
Clampet-LundquistS. (2011). Teens, mental health, and Moving to Opportunity. In BirchE., NewburgerH., & WachterS (Eds.), Neighborhood and life chances: How place matters in modern America (pp. 204–220). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
15.
Clampet-LundquistS., EdinK., KlingJ. R., & DuncanG. J. (2011). Moving teenagers out of high-risk neighborhoods: How girls fare better than boys. American Journal of Sociology, 116(4), 1154–1189.
CreswellJ. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
CullenJ. B., JacobB. A., & LevittS. D. (2005). The impact of school choice on student outcomes: An analysis of the Chicago Public Schools. Journal of Public Economics, 89(5), 729–760.
19.
DeLucaS., & RosenblattP. (2010). Does moving to better neighborhoods lead to better schooling opportunities? Parental school choice in an experimental housing voucher program. Teachers College Record, 112(5), 7–8.
20.
DodsonL., & DickertJ. (2004). Girls' family labor in low income households: A decade of qualitative research. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(2), 318–332.
21.
EllenI. G., & HornK. M. (2012). Do federal assisted households have access to high performing schools?Washington, DC: Poverty & Race Research Action Council (PRRAC). Retrieved from http://www.prrac.org/pdf/PRRACHousingLocation&Schools.pdf
FrankenbergE., & DeBrayE. H. (Eds.). (2011). Integrating schools in a changing society: New policies and legal options for a multiracial generation. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
24.
GoldhaberD. D. (1999). School choice: An examination of the empirical evidence on achievement, parental decision making, and equity. Educational Researcher, 28(9), 16–25.
25.
HollandM., & DeLucaS. D. (2013, April). College or careers? Postsecondary institutions and trade schools in the transition to adulthood among low income African American youth. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
26.
JurkovicG. J. (1997). Lost childhoods: The plight of the parentified child. New York, NY: Brunner/Mazel.
27.
KaoG., & ThompsonJ. (2003). Racial and ethnic stratification in educational achievement and attainment. Annual Review of Sociology, 29(1), 417–442.
28.
Lacireno-PaquetN., & BrantleyC. (2008). Who chooses schools and why? The characteristics and motivations of families who actively choose schools. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center.
29.
LareauA. (2014). Schools, housing, and the reproduction of inequality. In LareauA. & GoyetteK. (Eds.), Choosing homes, choosing schools (pp. 169–206). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
30.
LauenL. L. (2007). Contextual explanations of school choice. Sociology of Education, 80(3), 179–209.
31.
LeeV. E., CroningerR. G., & SmithJ. B. (1994). Parental choice of schools and social stratification in education: The paradox of Detroit. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 16(4), 434–457.
32.
LevinH. M. (1991). The economics of educational choice. Economics of Education Review, 10(2), 137–158.
33.
LevinH. R. (2009). An economic perspective on school choice. In BerendsM., SpringerM. G., BallouD., & WalbergH. J. (Eds.), Handbook of research on school choice (pp. 19–34). New York, NY: Routledge.
34.
LoebS., ValantJ., & KasmanM. (2011). Increasing choice in the market for schools: Recent reforms and their effects on student achievement. National Tax Journal, 64(1), 141–164.
35.
LubienskiC., GulosinoC., & WeitzelP. (2009). School choice and competitive incentives: Mapping the distribution of educational opportunities across local education markets. American Journal of Education, 115(4), 601–647.
36.
MacIverM., & DaytonE. (2008). Let a thousand flowers bloom: High school reform in Baltimore, 1997–2008. Unpublished manuscript, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39.
NeildR. C. (2005). Parent management of school choice in a large urban district. Urban Education, 40(3), 270–297.
40.
OrfieldG., & LeeC. (2005). Why segregation matters: Poverty and educational inequality. Cambridge, MA: Civil Rights Project, Harvard University.
41.
OrrL., FeinsJ., JacobR., BeecroftE., SanbonmatsuL., KatzL. F., … KlingJ. R. (2003). Moving to Opportunity: Interim impacts evaluation. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research.
42.
ReardonS. F. (2011). The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor: New evidence and possible explanations. In DuncanG. J. & MurnaneR. J. (Eds.), Whither opportunity? Rising inequality, schools, and children's life chances (pp. 91–116). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
43.
RenzulliL. A. (2005). Organizational environments and the emergence of charter schools in the United States. Sociology of Education, 78(1), 1–26.
44.
RhodesA., & DeLucaS. D. (2014). Residential mobility and school choice among poor families. In LareauA. & GoyetteK. (Eds.), Choosing homes, choosing schools (pp. 137–166). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
45.
RumbergerR., & PalardyG. (2005). Does segregation still matter? The impact of student composition on academic achievement in high school. Teachers College Record, 107(9), 1999–2045.
46.
SanbonmatsuL., LudwigJ., KatzL. F, GennetianL. A., DuncanG. J., KesslerR.C., … LindauS. T. (2011). Moving to Opportunity for Fair Housing Demonstration Program: Final impacts evaluation. Washington, DC: US Department of Housing & Urban Development, PD&R.
47.
SaporitoS., & SohoniD. (2006). Coloring outside the lines: Racial segregation in public schools and their attendance boundaries. Sociology of Education, 79(2), 81–105.
48.
SchneiderM., & BuckleyJ. (2002). What do parents want from schools? Evidence from the Internet. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 133–144.
49.
SchneiderM., TeskeP., MarshallM., & RochC. (1998). Shopping for schools: In the land of the blind, the one-eyed parent may be enough. American Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 769–793.
50.
SmerdonB., & CohenJ. (2009). Evaluation findings from high school reform efforts in Baltimore. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 14(3), 238–255.
51.
SmithA. G. (1995). Public school choice and open enrollment: Implications for education, desegregation and equity. Journal of Law and Education, 24(2), 147–194.
52.
SteelL., & LevineR. (1994). Educational innovations in multiracial contexts: The growth of magnet schools in American education. Report by the American Institutes for Research in the Behavioral Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
53.
TeskeP., & SchneiderM. (2001). What research can tell policymakers about school choice. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20(4), 609–631.
54.
WellsA. S., & CrainR. L. (1999). Stepping over the color line: African-American students in White suburban schools. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
55.
WitteJ. F. (2001). The market approach to education: An analysis of America's first voucher program. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
56.
WitteJ. F., WeimerD., ShoberA., & SchlomerP. (2007). The performance of charter schools in Wisconsin. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26(3), 557–573.
57.
CondliffeB. F., WarkentienS., & DeLucaS. D. (2013, August). Shaken up? Understanding how family instability can harm or help children. Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, New York, NY.
58.
DeLucaS., & RosenblattP. (2010). Does moving to better neighborhoods lead to better schooling opportunities? Parental school choice in an experimental housing voucher program. Teachers College Record, 112(5), 7–8.
59.
GasperJ., DeLucaS., & EstacionA. (2010). Coming and going: Explaining the effects of residential and school mobility on adolescent delinquency. Social Science Research, 39(3), 459–476.
