Student assignment policies (SAPs) in K–12 schools can either reproduce or help ameliorate existing inequality. Some districts are trying to maintain voluntarily adopted integration policies despite the Supreme Court’s recent 2007 decision in Parents Involved, which prohibited most race-conscious school choice policies that were effective and popular ways of accomplishing integration. While alternative policies with minimal or no use of race are still permitted, it is unclear whether they will create diverse schools. This research examines the new generation of school choice policies post-Parents Involved to understand how they affect diversity in our multiracial yet increasingly race-neutral era. Analysis of the use of a new generalized, race-conscious SAP in Jefferson County (Kentucky) Public Schools suggests that their plan is largely able to maintain integrated schools, albeit with some increasing racial segregation; economic segregation patterns are mixed. Moreover, the controlled choice policy has lower segregation than simulated, non–integration focused policy alternatives.
BettsJ.RiceL. A.ZauA. C.TangY. E.KoedelC. R. (2006). Does school choice work? Effects on student integration and achievement. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
4.
BohrnstedtG.KitmittoS.OgutB.ShermanD.ChanD. (2015). School composition and the Black–White achievement gap (NCES 2015-018). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
DeBrayE.McDermottK.FrankenbergE.BlankenshipA. (2015). Lessons from a federal grant for school diversity: Tracing a theory of change and implementation of local policies. Educational Policy Analysis Archives. Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1999
7.
DeweyJ. (2011). Democracy and education. Hollywood, FL: Simon and Brown. (Original work published 1916)
8.
DiTomasoN. (2013). The American non-dilemma: Racial inequality without racism. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
9.
FielJ. (2013). Decomposing school resegregation. American Sociological Review, 78(5), 828–848.
10.
FrankenbergE. (2011). Integration after Parents Involved: What does research suggest about available options? In FrankenbergE.DeBrayE. (Eds.), Integrating schools in a changing society: New policies and legal options for a multiracial generation (pp. 53–74). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
11.
FrankenbergE. (2013). The promise of choice: Berkeley’s innovative integration plan. In OrfieldG.FrankenbergE. (Eds.), Educational delusions? Why choice can deepen inequality and how to make schools fair (pp. 69–88). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
12.
FrankenbergE.McDermottK.DeBrayE.BlankenshipA. (2015). The new politics of diversity: Lessons from a federal technical assistance grant. American Educational Research Journal, 52(3), 440–474.
13.
FullerB.ElmoreR. F.OrfieldG. (Eds.). (1996). Who chooses? Who loses? Culture, institutions, and the unequal effects of school choice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
14.
GoldsmithP. R. (2010). Learning apart, living apart: How the racial and ethnic segregation of schools and colleges perpetuates residential segregation. Teachers College Record, 112(6), 1602–1630.
15.
HanushekE.KainJ.RivkinS. (2004). Why public schools lose teachers. Journal of Human Resources, 39(2), 326–354.
HiltonM. R. (2014). Literacy, poverty, and brain development: Toward a new place-based educational intervention. Richmond Journal of Law and Public Interest, 17, 623–660.
18.
Jefferson County (Kentucky) Public Schools. (2013). Envision equity. Louisville, KY: Author.
19.
KahlenbergR. (2011). Socioeconomic school integration: Preliminary lessons from more than 80 districts. In FrankenbergE.DeBrayE. (Eds.), Integrating schools in a changing society (pp. 167–186). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
20.
LaddH. (2008). School policies and the test score gap. In MagnusonK. A.WaldfogelJ. (Eds.), Steady gains and stalled progress: Inequality and the Black-White test score gap (pp. 289–319). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
LareauA. (2014). Schools, housing and the reproduction of inequality. In GoyetteK.LareauA. (Eds.), Choosing homes, choosing schools (pp. 169–206). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
23.
LichterD. T.ParisiDTaquinoM. C. (2015). Toward a new macro-segregation? Decomposing segregation within and between metropolitan cities and suburbs. American Sociological Review, 80(4), 843–873.
24.
LinnR. L.WelnerK. G. (Eds.). (2007). Race-conscious policies for assigning students to schools: Social science research and the Supreme Court cases. Washington, DC: National Academy of Education.
25.
MasseyD. S.DentonN. A. (1988). The dimensions of residential segregation. Social Forces, 67, 281–315.
26.
McDermottK.DeBrayE.FrankenbergE. (2012). How does Parents Involved in Community Schools matter? Legal and political influence in education politics and policy. Teachers College Record, 114, 1–39.
27.
McDermottK.FrankenbergE.DiemS. (2015). The “post-racial” politics of race: Student assignment policy in three urban school districts. Educational Policy, 29(3), 504–544.
28.
McDermottK. A.Fung-MorleyA. (2015). The politics of removing boundaries: Student assignment in the Boston Public Schools. Paper presented at the AERA Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL.
29.
MickelsonR. A. (2015). The cumulative disadvantages of first- and second-generation segregation for middle school achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 52, 657–692.
30.
MickelsonR. A.NkomoM. (2012). Integrated schooling, life course outcomes, and social cohesion in multiethnic democratic societies. Review of Research in Education, 36(1), 197–238.
31.
OrfieldG. (2013). Choice and civil rights: Forgetting history, facing consequences. In OrfieldG.FrankenbergE. (Eds.), Educational delusions? Why choice can deepen inequality and how to make schools fair (pp. 3–35). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
32.
OrfieldG.FrankenbergE. (2014). Increasingly segregated and unequal schools as courts reverse policy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(6), 718–734.
33.
OrfieldG.FrankenbergE. (2013). Educational delusions? Why choice can deepen inequality and how to make it fair. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
34.
OrfieldG.KucseraJ.Siegel-HawleyG. (2012). E pluribus . . . separation: Deepening double segregation for more students. Los Angeles, CA: The Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles.
35.
PageS. E. (2007). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
36.
Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, 551 U.S. 701 (2007).
37.
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. 91–115). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
38.
ReardonS.GrewallE.KalogridesD.GreenbergE. (2012). Brown fades: The end of court-ordered desegregation and the resegregation of American schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 31(4), 876–904.
39.
ReardonS. F.RhodesL. (2011). The effects of socioeconomic school integration policies on racial school desegregation. In FrankenbergE.DeBrayE. (Eds.), Integrating schools in a changing society (pp. 187–207). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
40.
ReardonS. F.YunJ. T.KurlaenderM. (2006). Implications of income-based school assignment policies for racial school segregation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28(1), 49–75.
41.
RichardsM.StroubK.HeiligJ.VolonninoM. (2012). Achieving diversity in the Parents Involved era: Evidence for geographic integration plans in metropolitan school districts. Berkeley Journal of African-American Law and Policy, 14, 65–95.
42.
RodaA.WellsA. S. (2013). School choice policies and racial segregation: Where White parents’ good intentions, anxiety, and privilege collide. American Journal of Education, 119(2), 261–293.
43.
RowleyK.McNeillS. (2015). The reciprocal relationship associated with school & residential diversity: A new test of perpetuation theory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
44.
SaatciogluA. (2010). Disentangling school- and student-level effects of desegregation and resegregation in the dropout problem in urban high schools: Evidence from the Cleveland Municipal School District: 1977–1998. Teachers College Record, 112(5), 1291–1442.
Siegel-HawleyG. (2013). City lines, county lines, color lines: The relationship between school and housing segregation in four southern metro areas. Teachers College Record, 115(6), 1–45.
StearnsE. (2010). Long-term correlates of high school racial composition: Perpetuation theory reexamined. Teachers College Record, 112(6), 1654–1678.
50.
StiglitzJ. E. (2012). The price of inequality: How today’s divided society endangers our future. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Co.
51.
StroubK. J.RichardsM. P. (2013). From resegregation to reintegration: Trends in the racial/ethnic segregation of metropolitan public schools, 1993–2009. American Educational Research Journal, 50, 432–465.
52.
U.S. Departments of Education and Justice. (2011). Guidance on the voluntary use of race to achieve diversity and avoid racial isolation in elementary and secondary schools. Washington, DC: Author.
VigdorJ.LudwigJ. (2008). Segregation and the test score gap. In MagnusonK.WaldfogelJ. (Eds.), Steady gains and stalled progress: Inequality and the Black-White test score gap (pp. 181–211). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
55.
WellsA. S.CrainR. L. (1994). Perpetuation theory and the long-term effects of school desegregation. Review of Educational Research, 6, 531–555.
56.
WellsA. S.HolmeJ. J.RevillaA. T.AtandaK. (2009). Both sides now: The story of school desegregation’s graduates. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
