Minority Students Denied School Choice by "Desegregation" Exemptions

Minority Students Denied School Choice by “Desegregation” Exemptions

March 19, 2014

Only 23 of 238 school districts in Arkansas declared an exemption from the Public School Choice Act of 2013. The act, which allows students, no matter their resident district, to transfer to the public schools in any district which best suit their needs, provides for exemption as follows:

6-18-1906. Limitations.

(a) If the provisions of this subchapter conflict with a provision of an enforceable desegregation court order or a district’s court-approved desegregation plan regarding the effects of past racial segregation in student assignment, the provisions of the order or plan shall govern.

(b)(1) A school district annually may declare an exemption under this section if the school district is subject to the desegregation order or mandate of a federal court or agency remedying the effects of past racial segregation.

(2) (A) An exemption declared by a board of directors under this subsection is irrevocable for one (1) year from the date the school district notifies the Department of Education of the declaration of exemption. (B) After each year of exemption, the board of directors may elect to participate in public school choice under this section if the school district’s participation does not conflict with the school district’s federal court-ordered desegregation program.

(3) A school district shall notify the department by April 1 if in the next school year the school district intends to: (A) Declare an exemption under this section; or (B) Resume participation after a period of exemption.

As a result, there are districts in Arkansas citing 1954’s Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, and its progeny, among their reasons for exemption. In 2013-14, none of the vast majority of districts technically under similar court orders/mandates chose to exempt (e.g. North Little Rock School District). And none were challenged, by the Courts, or otherwise.

By contrast, parents from many of the exempting districts, primarily African-Americans, came before the State Board of Education, begging for their children to be released from their exempting resident districts, many of which were among the lowest performing in Arkansas (see previous post).

While the State Board claimed the law gave it no authority to override a district’s exemption, it inexplicably heard the appeals, giving the parents false hope. Then, it chose to vote anyway, but denied every parental appeal presented.

How desperate were/are parents in Forrest City, a district dead last in Literacy and twelfth from the bottom in Math, to educate their children? Those who won the lottery are taking advantage of the only public choice available: busing 110 miles every day to KIPP: Delta in Helena-West Helena. Unfortunately, with a swelling open enrollment wait list, KIPP: Delta’s excellent, but inconvenient, lifeline is only available to a precious few.

Here are the exempting districts, linked to their respective justifications, along with their percentage of minority students:

Notice any similarities in the justifications?

Six of the seven school districts in Garland County used identical letters to exempt;
Eight of the remaining 16 used very similar, fill-in-the-blank resolutions, with nearly identical language;
One letter contained identical language from the resolutions;
One was a fill-in-the-blank resolution; and
Two short letters offered no justification whatsoever.

Eight boilerplate resolutions and one letter all fell back on identical language from the landmark ruling of sixty years ago:

“WHEREAS, the federal court or agency include the original directive from the United States Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954), and its progeny, that maintenance of racially dual public schools was unconstitutional and directing that racially segregated schools be dismantled; and the 1969 mandate from the federal department of Health, Education, and Welfare to the same effect;”

The state-controlled Pulaski County Special School District’s state-appointed superintendent’s letter was the shortest, and by offering no justification whatsoever, perhaps the most honest:

Dear Dr. Kimbrell:
Please accept this letter as notification that pursuant to the delegation of authority of the Commissioner, dated May 13, 2013, I have determined that Pulaski County Special School Distict hereby declares an exemption from Act 1227, the Public School Choice Act of 2013, Section 6-18-10-6 (b)(1).
Sincerely,
Dr. Jerry Guess

Unfortunately, with exemption in the hands of the exempting, the question is why?

Why would eight (8) districts which are between 70 and 85% white use federal desegregation orders/mandates to exempt from choice (e.g. Fountain Lake)? It’s either to keep students out, keep students in, or both.

Why would nine (9) districts which are between 66 and 95% minority use federal desegregation orders/mandates to exempt from choice (e.g. Helena-West Helena)? It’s either to keep students in, keep students out, or both.

Why would five (5) districts which are between 43 and 59% minority use federal desegregation orders/mandates to exempt from choice (e.g. Pulaski County Special School District)? It’s either to keep students in, keep students out, or both.

Why would thirteen (13) majority minority districts use federal desegregation orders/mandates to exempt from choice (e.g. Dollarway)? It’s either to keep students in, keep students out, or both.

I can think of only one reason a district would want to keep students out, and it is morally reprehensible and legally indefensible.

Reasons a district would want to keep students in? $6,300 in state foundation funding follows each student to the district of his/her choice. It’s simple. If a district receives a student, it receives his/her money. If a district loses a student, it loses his/her money. Under the guise of “desegregation,” districts believe participating in choice would be a net student loss for the district. That, and if a district’s enrollment falls below 350, it is subject to consolidation (e.g. Stephens).

And why would a district want to do both? They must like their demographics just the way they are, thank you.

Brown v. Board, and its progeny, declared “separate, but equal,” not only mutually exclusive, but unconstitutional. It is unconscionable that the very federal laws, orders and mandates intended to ensure quality education for minority students are now being cited in denying them and others the opportunity to flee failing schools, and enroll in the public schools of another district which best suits his/her needs.

The deadline for districts to declare an exemption for the 2014-15 school year is April 1st. Parents in affected districts should insist that their respective boards and state-appointed superintendents (Pulaski County Special, Helena-West Helena) compete for their students, instead of trapping them. To give voice to parents in exempting districts, please take, share the… Arkansas Learns School Choice Poll.

Higher State Standards Partnership Launches National Common Core Ad Campaign

206 Public Schools Honored With Reward Funds