Although regional equity scholars have demonstrated how cross-jurisdictional collaboration on transportation, housing, and employment can promote opportunity for low-income families, few have paid serious attention to the potential of regional educational policy to improve opportunity for children. This study seeks to address this gap by examining inter-district “collaboratives” or cooperative agreements between school districts within a metropolitan area. These collaborative arrangements address two inter-related demographic shifts: the rising level of segregation in public schools and the shift from within district segregation to between-district segregation. This article examines three regional collaboratives (Rochester, NY, Omaha, NE, and Minneapolis, MN) that involve varying degrees of cooperation, funding, and legal force. Drawing on 60 in-depth interviews across the three sites, this analysis considers how each program’s design features interact with local political dynamics to shape the degree to which these collaboratives are able to achieve policy goals.
BasoloV.HastingsD. (2003). Obstacles to regional housing solutions: A comparison of four metropolitan areas. Journal of Urban Affairs, 25, 449-472.
3.
BischoffK. (2008). School district fragmentation and racial residential segregation: How do boundaries matter?Urban Affairs Review, 44, 182-217.
4.
BischoffK. (2011). Negotiating disparate social contexts: Evidence from an interdistrict school desegregation program (Doctoral dissertation). Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.
5.
BogdanR.BiklenS. K. (2006). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
ClotfelterC. T. (2001). Are Whites still fleeing? Racial patterns and enrollment shifts in urban public schools, 1987-1996. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20, 199-221.
8.
ClotfelterC. T. (2004). After Brown: The rise and retreat of school desegregation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9.
CrainR. L. (1992). Finding niches: Desegregated students sixteen years later. New York, NY: Columbia University Institute for Urban and Minority Education.
Eaton. (2007). The children in Room E4: American education on trial. Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.
12.
EricsonJ.SilvermanD. (2001). Challenge and opportunity: The impact of charter schools on school districts. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
13.
Executive Office of Education. (2013). METCO report to the Massachusetts State Legislature. Boston: Executive Office of Education of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
14.
FinniganK. S.ScarbroughJ. B. (2013). Defining (and denying) diversity through interdistrict choice. Journal of School Choice, 7, 142-162.
15.
FinniganK. S.StewartT. J. (2009). Interdistrict choice as a policy solution: Examining Rochester’s urban-suburban interdistrict transfer program (USITP). Prepared for School Choice and School Improvement Conference of the National Center on School Choice, Vanderbilt University, Peabody College, Nashville, TN.
16.
FosterK. A.BarnesW. R. (2012). Reframing regional governance for research and practice. Urban Affairs Review, 48, 272-283.
17.
FrankenbergE.Siegel-HawleyG.WangJ. (2011). Choice without equity: Charter school segregation. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 19(1). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/779/878
18.
GriffithJ. (2005). Regionalism reconsidered. Journal of Law & Politics, 21, 505-559.
19.
HeinrichL. W. (1969). A descriptive study of a cooperative urban-suburban pupil transfer program (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.
20.
HolmeJ. J.DiemS. L.MansfieldK. C. (2011). Regional coalitions and educational policy: Lessons from the Nebraska Learning Community Agreement. In FrankenbergE.DeBrayE. (Eds.), Integrating schools in a changing society: New policies and legal options for a multiracial generation (pp. 151-166). Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
21.
HolmeJ. J.FinniganK. S. (2013). School diversity, school district fragmentation, and metropolitan policy. Teachers College Record, 115(11), 1-29.
22.
Institute on Race and Poverty. (2007). The choice is ours: Expanding educational opportunity for all Twin Cities children. Minneapolis, MN: Author.
23.
KrausN. (2008). Concentrated poverty and urban school reform: “The Choice is Yours” in Minneapolis. Equity & Excellence in Education, 41, 262-274.
24.
Learning Community of Douglas and Sarpy Counties. (2012, December). Annual report to the state legislature. Omaha, NE: Author.
Omaha Public Schools. (2012). Omaha Public Schools 2012-2013 historical overview and budget. Omaha, NE: Author.
33.
OrfieldG.KucseraJ.Siegel-HawleyG. (2012, September). E pluribus . . . separation: Deepening double segregation for more students. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles.
34.
OrfieldM. (2002). American metropolitics: The new suburban reality. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
35.
OrfieldM.LuceT. F.Jr. (2010). Region: Planning the future of the Twin Cities. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
36.
PastorM.Jr.BennerC.MatsuokaM. (2009). This could be the start of something big: How social movements for regional equity are reshaping metropolitan America. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
37.
PattonM. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
38.
powellj. a. (2000). Addressing regional dilemmas for minority communities. In KatzB. (Ed.), Reflections on regionalism (pp. 218-248). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
39.
ProvoJ. (2009). Risk-averse regionalism: The cautionary tale of Portland, Oregon, and affordable housing. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 28, 368-381.
40.
ReynoldsL. (2003). Intergovernmental cooperation, metropolitan equity, and the new regionalism. Washington Law Review, 78, 93-160.
41.
RuryJ. L.SaatciogluA. (2011). Suburban advantage: Opportunity hoarding and secondary attainment in the postwar metropolitan North. American Journal of Education, 117, 307-342.
42.
RyanJ. E. (1999). Schools, race, and money. Yale Law Journal, 109, 249-316.
43.
Schott Foundation for Public Education. (2012). The urgency of now: The Schott 50 state report on public education and black males. Cambridge, MA: Author.
VogelR. K.HarriganJ. J. (2007). Political change in the metropolis (8th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education.
46.
WeirM. (2000). Coalition building for regionalism. In KatzB. (Ed.), Reflections on regionalism (pp. 127-153). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
47.
WeirM.RongerudeJ.AnsellC. K. (2009). Collaboration is not enough: Virtuous cycles of reform in transportation policy. Urban Affairs Review, 44, 455-489.
48.
WellsA. S.BaldridgeB. J.DuranJ.GrzesikowskiC.LoftonR.RodaA.. . . WhiteT. (2009, November). Boundary crossing for diversity, equity and achievement: Interdistrict school desegregation and educational opportunity. Cambridge, MA: Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice at Harvard Law School.
49.
YinR. K. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
