New York has some of the most segregated high schools in the country, and schools serving low-income and minority students have the lowest graduation rates. This paper discusses changes in inequality between New York City high schools during a period of neoliberal education reform. Neoliberal education reforms are intended to improve schooling through choice and accountability policies. I find that segregation has increased in the best performing schools during this era of reform, and that race and class maintain a negative impact on graduation rates despite the implementation of neoliberal policies. I argue that these policies not only fail to reduce inequality, but exacerbate and reproduce existing class and race inequalities in schooling.
BalfanzRLegtersN (2004) Locating the Dropout Crisis: Which High Schools Produce the Nation’s Dropouts? Where Are They Located? Who Attends Them?Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Bonilla-SilvaE (2009) Racism with Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in America. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
10.
Booher-JenningsJ (2005) Below the bubble: ‘Educational triage’ and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal42(2): 231–268.
11.
BourdieuP (1973) Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In: BrownR (ed.) Knowledge, Education and Cultural Change. London: Tavistock, 56–69.
12.
BowlesSGintisH (2002) Schooling in capitalist America revisited. Sociology of Education75: 1–18.
CarterL (1984) The sustaining effects study of compensatory and elementary education. Educational Researcher13(7): 4–13.
15.
ChapmanCLairdJIfillNKewal RamaniA (2011) Trends in High School Dropout and Completion Rates in the United States: 1972–2009. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
16.
ClotfelterCTLaddHFVigdorJL (2010) Teacher credentials and student achievement in high school: A cross-subject analysis with student fixed effects. The Journal of Human Resources45(3): 656–681.
17.
ColemanJHofferTKilgoreS (1982) Cognitive outcomes in public and private schools. Sociology of Education55: 65–76.
18.
CondronDRoscignoV (2003) Disparities within: Unequal spending and achievement in an urban school district. Sociology of Education76(1): 18–36.
19.
CreminLA (ed.) (1957) The Republic and the School: Horace Mann on the Education of Free Men. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Darling-HammondL (2000) New standards and old inequalities: School reform and the education of African American students. The Journal of Negro Education69(4): 263–287.
22.
Darling-HammondL (2004) Standards, accountability, and school reform. Teachers College Record106(6): 1047–1085.
23.
DeeTSJacobBA (2007) Do high school exit exams influence educational attainment or labor market performance? In: GamoranA (ed.) Standards-Based Reform and the Poverty Gap: Lessons for No Child Left Behind. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 154–200.
24.
DelpitL (1995) Other People’s Children: Cultural Conflict in the Classroom. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
25.
DiamondJBRandolphASpillaneJP (2004) High-stakes accountability in urban elementary schools: Challenging or reproducing inequality?Teachers College Record106(6): 1145–1176.
26.
FriedmanM (1951) Neo-liberalism and its prospects. Farmand 1 (17February): 89–93.
GirouxHASchmidtM (2004) Closing the achievement gap: A metaphor for children left behind. Journal of Educational Change5: 213–228.
30.
GoldsmithPR (2009) Schools or neighborhoods or both? Race and ethnic segregation and educational attainment. Social Forces87(4): 1913–1942.
31.
GotbaumB (2002) Pushing out At-Risk Students: An Analysis of High School Discharge Figures. New York, NY: Advocates for Children of New York.
32.
HaneyW (2000) The myth of the Texas miracle in education. Education Policy Analysis Archives8(41). Available (consulted 9 May 2016) at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/432
33.
HanushekEAKainJF (1972) On the value of equality of educational opportunity as a guide to public policy. In: MostellerFMoynihanDP (eds) On Equality of Educational Opportunity: Papers Deriving from the Harvard University Faculty Seminar on the Coleman Report. New York, NY: Random House.
34.
HenigJ (1994) Rethinking School Choice: Limits of the Market Metaphor. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
35.
Hill CollinsP (2009) Another Kind of Public Education: Race, Schools, the Media, and Democratic Possibilities. Boston, MA: Simmons College.
36.
HoAD (2008) The problem with ‘proficiency’: Limitations of statistics and policy under No Child Left Behind. Educational Researcher37: 351–360.
37.
JenningsJSohnH (2014) Measure for measure: How proficiency-based accountability systems affect inequality in academic achievement. Sociology of Education87(2): 125–141.
38.
KarstenS (1999) Neoliberal education reform in the Netherlands. Comparative Education35(3): 303–317.
LankfordHLoebSWyckoffJ (2002) Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis24(1): 37–62.
41.
LubienskiC (2005) Public schools in marketized environments: Shifting incentives and unintended consequences of competition-based educational reforms. American Journal of Education111(4): 464–486.
42.
LynchKMoranM (2006) Markets, schools and the convertibility of economic capital: The complex dynamics of class choice. British Journal of Sociology of Education27(2): 221–235.
43.
McNeilLMCoppolaERadiganJVasquez HeiligJ (2008) Avoidable losses: High-stakes accountability and the dropout crisis. Education Policy Analysis Archives16(3): 1–48.
MooreGWSlateJREdmonsonSLCombsJPBustamanteROnwuegbuzieAJ (2010) High school students and their lack of preparedness for college: A statewide study. Education and Urban Society42(7): 817–838.
46.
MurnaneRJ (2013) U.S. high school graduation rates: Patterns and explanations. Journal of Economic Literature51(2): 370–422.
47.
NathansonLCorcoranSBaker-SmithC (2013) High School Choice in New York City: A Report on the School Choices and Placements of Low-Achieving Students. New York, NY: The Research Alliance for New York City Schools.
48.
National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983) A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.
49.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001. 2002. Pub. L. No. 107–110, § 115, Stat. 1425.
50.
OlssenM (2006) Understanding the mechanisms of neoliberal control: Lifelong learning, flexibility and knowledge capitalism. International Journal of Lifelong Education35(3): 213–230.
51.
OrfieldGLosenDWaldJSwansonC (2004) Losing Our Future: How Minority Youth are Being Left Behind by the Graduation Rate Crisis. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
52.
RavitchD (2013) Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America’s Public Schools. Toronto: Knopf.
53.
ReidJMooreJL (2008) College readiness and academic preparation for postsecondary education. Urban Education43(2): 240–261.
54.
Research Alliance for New York City Schools (2014) School-Level Master File 1996–2013 [Data file and code book]. Unpublished data.
Siegel-HawleyG (2014) Race, choice and Richmond schools: New opportunities and challenges for diversity in urban districts. The Urban Review46(5): 507–534.
57.
SingerJWillettJB (2003) Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
58.
StiefelLWiswallMSchwartzAEDebraggioE (2012) Does small high school reform lift irban districts? Evidence from NYC. Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Center on Scaling up Effective Schools, 11 June, Nashville, TN.
59.
VosR (1996) Educational Indicators: What’s to Be Measured. Washington, DC: INDES Working Papers.
60.
WilsonWJ (1996) When Work Disappears. New York, NY: Knopf.
