The article “Research conducted by Civil Rights Project fights for diversity and equality in schools” (Jan. 14) fails to address an underlying and obvious flaw in this research: The problem of racial isolation lies within the composition of urban communities, not within the schools that serve those communities. Further, it is the legal and political structure ““ not public charter schools ““ that restricts access to a high-quality public education.
Enrollment laws and student assignment policies contribute to segregation. It would be more worthwhile for the Civil Rights Project to explore why these regulations either disallow or limit a family’s ability to access educational opportunities outside their immediate geographic boundaries. Enrollment policies and laws often prevent the few that can.
Consequently, families are trapped in areas where failing schools are their only option. Public charter schools are exempt from the student assignment laws and therefore tend to attract parents that are bound by these policies and shut out from high-performing schools in affluent areas.
People go to school near where they live. Working families that live in areas where schools are failing often find it inconvenient or impossible to travel to schools far outside of their neighborhood.
If schools, such as KIPP and Aspire, are able to close the achievement gap and produce students who are outscoring their affluent peers in wealthier neighborhoods, how can anyone argue with their success? Maybe some of the affluent students need to come on over to South Central or East Los Angeles. That would give us some diversity.
After all, public charter schools accept all applicants, without regard to their ZIP code or prior achievement. The question is: Why should the good schools only exist in their neighborhoods? Segregation in public schools is not a charter versus traditional school issue. It is a bigger issue. Segregation is prevalent in housing, employment and education.
Public charter schools often operate in underserved communities that are disproportionately impacted by low-performing schools and achievement gaps. These schools provide the resources that were sought out in the segregation era: strong teachers, high expectations and standards, and high performances school-wide.
Often, public charter schools are the only option for a high-performing school in a sea of failing schools. Parents flock to these schools, and more than 420,000 students are hoping for an additional seat in a public charter school. How can we tell them they don’t deserve this option?
Disproportionate allocation of resources and funding must be adjusted. Students have a right to receive equitable resources and opportunities.
Schools that are performing well should be replicated, and best practices should be shared. Those that are failing our students should be closed.
Gregory McGinity
UCLA alumnus and managing director of policy of The Broad Foundation