The Washington, DC region is great >> and it can be greater.

Posts about Education

Development


If racial inequities didn't exist, DC would look like this...

Across DC, black and Hispanic residents see a lot less socio-economic success than white residents, and many argue that's because the playing field is not level when it comes to opportunities for success. The charts below show what DC would look like if minorities got a fair shake, according to a recent study.


Photo by Ted Eytan on Flickr.

There are big racial disparities in DC

Generally speaking, DC's biggest pockets of black residents are in the east, Hispanic residents are in the north, and white residents are in the west. But according to DC's Urban Institute, white homeowners have more freedom to choose where to live: between 2010-2014, they could afford 67 percent of all homes sold in the District and all homes in Ward 8. Black and Hispanic homebuyers, on the other hand, could only afford 9.2 percent and 29 percent of homes sold, respectively. s

Affordable rentals are also hard to come by for minorities, who the report says spend 30 percent or more of their monthly income on rent—an amount that experts say make a houshold "rent-burdened," and that the report refers to as "cost burdened." East of the Anacostia River, black residents can afford 67 percent of the rentals, but west of Rock Creek Park, only 7 percent of the rentals are affordable.


All images from Urban Institute.

There's a reason things are this way

While the study acknowledges that in recent years, the recession hit minority groups harder than it hit whites, it's rooted in the acknowledgement that the above racial disparities are rooted in trends that have existed for much longer.

Minority groups have been traditionally barred from upward socioeconomic mobility by private actions and public policies for generations. Historically, it has been difficult for blacks to get mortgages, they were limited in who they could buy from, and they faced strict zoning restrictions. They were also prevented from getting better paying jobs, and when the federal government cut funding, poor black communities were usually affected most.

Over time, this has prevented minority communities from sharing in socioeconomic progress as a whole. This has meant a steeper barrier over time—one that the Urban Institute study calls inequitable.

Here's how those inequities play out in terms of wages, and what DC would look like without them:

With housing and childcare in the District being very expensive, many DC families struggle to earn a living wage, but minority families face steep challenges covering costs.

According the Urban Institute, "the living wage for a parent to support a two children should be $38.01/ hour, or $79,000/ year," but a majority of minority families are below that threshold, around $75,000/ year. Only 44 percent of whites are below this threshold.

"East of the Anacostia, four out of five black residents working full time earned less than this living wage," the report says, and 70% of black and Hispanic families working full time make below the living wage. However, with the many service industry jobs that minorities occupy, bridging this gap is difficult.

If DC were more equitable, poverty levels would look like this:

Despite economic growth since the 2008 recession, communities of color have not yet recovered, and are in fact worse off than before the crash. In 2014, there were a recorded 18,000 more unemployed African Americans than in 2007, with a quarter of the black population now living below the poverty line.

On average, the poverty level for black residents is at 26 percent, with Ward 8 being the worst at 30 percent; white poverty in DC, on the other hand, stands at 7.4 percent. The report also shows that white child poverty is virtually zero, while the poverty rate for black children is 38 percent and 22 percent for Hispanic children. If things were more equitable, the report says, "no child would be poor."

Here's what the employment picture would look like:

In DC, black unemployment is 5.5 times that of whites at 19.5 percent, which is above the national average of 16.1 percent. In a city where minority employment reflected white employment, "2,200 more Hispanic residents and 24,000 more black residents would be employed."

The fact that many of DC's fastest growing job sectors require some post secondary education has severe consequences for unemployment, too.

Minority communities also face steep inequities in education, which have far ranging effects on choice of housing, wages, employment, and even general health. Most whites ages 25 and u, have a high school diploma or GED and some level of college education, whereas 31 percent of Hispanics and only 17 percent of blacks don't have a high school diploma or GED.

Further, only half of black and Hispanic communities have some level of education beyond high school. If the education gap didn't exist, according to the study, 50,000 black and Hispanic residents would have at least a GED, and almost 98,000 black residents would have some post secondary education.

Changing all of this would raise the quality of living for everyone

A more racially fair society, the study says, would have substantial economic benefits for everyone. When people earn more they invest and spend more, which would benefit local businesses and education. In fact, they estimate that "DC's economy would have been 65 billion dollars larger in 2012", if many of these inequality gaps were closed.

However, the limit of this data analysis is in showing what, exactly, equality looks like. Citizens and policymakers need to understand how and why this inequality persists today and pursue policy agendas that would actually close these gaps.

What agendas do you think policy makers should pursue to close the racial inequality gap?

Note: Some readers have reported that when viewing this post expanded on the home page, the embedded tool doesn't work. It should work if you are viewing the post on its own page; click here to go there.

Correction: This post previously committed a word, saying "31 percent of Hispanics and only 17 percent of blacks have a high school diploma or GED" when those figures are for the percentage of each population that does not have a diploma or GED.

Education


DC's teachers have a new tool for success. Will it work?

To help teachers improve, DC Public Schools has created a new program that centers on teachers working together to develop better ways to teach their curriculum. The hope is that the program leads to higher-achieving students and happier parents, along with better scores on teacher evaluations, which many new and experienced teachers have struggled with in the past.


Photo by woodleywonderworks on Flickr.

Here's how the new teacher development program will work

The new program, called LEAP (Learning together to advance our practice Learn, Earn, Advance, Prosper), will bring teachers of the same subject together in weekly, 90-minute sessions to discuss and develop better teaching methods based off the curriculum. LEAP leader, usually who are experienced educators, will guide each session, offering more more frequent, targeted feedback.

Using topics from the weekly curriculum, teachers and leaders will break things down, focusing on specific areas of teaching methodology, to determine how best to structure the lesson for student learning. For example, leaders may suggest a new way to present a piece of literature or teach fractions, also called a "key action step", that teachers are encouraged to use in the classroom.

In order to assess a teacher's development, program leaders will do 1530-minute observations, focusing on these key action steps.


Image from DCPS.

With small, specific areas of development being the focus, teachers won't be overwhelmed and leaders will have something concrete to evaluate. These observations are also meant to be informal, instructional, and non-punitive—they're more about objective strategies for effective teaching, not subjective criticisms of the teacher.

DCPS' teacher evaluation system has had problems, which LEAP should help with

While LEAP's primary focus is on collaborative teacher development, it also hopes to fill gaps in DCPS's current evaluation initiative, called IMPACT (not an acronym), which has been highly criticized for rating teachers but not adequately addressing development.

Introduced in 2009, IMPACT evaluates a teacher's instructional expertise, incentivizing the highest performing teachers and pushing out consistently low performing teachers. IMPACT uses three criteria: student achievement data, the Teaching and Learning Framework (both a scoring rubric used to guide teachers and a set of criteria that defines effective teaching), and commitment to the community. Evaluations, now carried out only by principals, are unannounced and last 15 30 minutes.

At the end of the year After each evaluation, teachers receive a score marking them as highly effective, effective, developing, minimally effective, or ineffective. Teachers can be evaluated up to three five times per school year depending on the scores they receive. Highly effective teachers can earn bonuses up to $25,000 $20,000, minimally effective teachers get a chance to improve, and ineffective teachers are dismissed.


Image from DCPS.

IMPACT is not without problems, however, and early on, many teachers complained the evaluations were two rigid and formulaic. Critics pointed out that getting a "highly effective" rating could be as simple as strictly following the IMPACT guidelines. Others felt the guidelines were not transparent enough and overly punitive, simply evaluating teachers without giving them much feedback.

DCPS has made changes to IMPACT that sought to fix early problems. Evaluations are now 15 30 minutes and done by principals only, and teachers are given time that isn't subject to evaluation so they can try new teaching methods. The evaluation also includes student surveys about teacher effectiveness.

It should be noted that IMPACT also succeeded in increasing the instructional skills of highly effective teachers and saw student gains in math and reading.

A step in the right direction

LEAP is not perfect either, and will undoubtedly take some tweaking. One concern is that the 90-minute LEAP sessions will cut into the 225 minutes of weekly planning, not leaving teachers with enough time for lesson planning.

Another concern is that like IMPACT observations, the unannounced LEAP observations will make it difficult for leaders to observe teachers implementing the key action steps learned during the sessions. So, even though LEAP observations are not as high-stakes as IMPACT evaluations, they still do not mesh perfectly with the organic nature of teaching.

As IMPACT continues to evolve and LEAP goes through its growing pains, many kinks will likely be ironed out. But it should be helpful for teachers to have a powerful new tool at their disposal. Seeing as teaching is a skill that develops over many years, this program should encourage weaker, less experienced teachers to develop and grow in the profession.

The hope with LEAP is that it will take away some of the stress and pressure of evaluations under IMPACT. Under a program that specifically targets teaching skill and mastery development, teachers should be able to develop the tools and confidence they need to increase their IMPACT scores.

Over the course of the next year, I suspect these programs will continue to grow and set an example for other school districts.

Correction: After we published this post, we learned that it had a handful of errors. Each has been corrected above.

Housing


Can we develop communities for the people who already live in them?

Income inequality, gentrification, and neighborhoods changing in a short period of time—put them all together and the question is "who is left behind?" How can change happen in a city without displacing people?


Photo by Tony Hisgett on Flickr.

On October 3rd, HBO aired Class Divide, a documentary that provided a look into gentrification's effects on one neighborhood in New York City. The film examines the massive changes in the Chelsea neighborhood in Manhattan, spurred by the development of the High Line public park, looked at through the eyes of teens in West Chelsea. On one side of 10th Avenue, there are disadvantaged teens who live in the Chelsea-Elliot housing project, and on the other side, wealthy teens who attend the Avenues: The World School, a private school that costs more than $40,000 per year.

Last week, we attended a sneak peak that was followed by a panel discussion on how the larger issues in the film are also affecting the DC region. The participants were Class Divide director Marc Levin, 11th Street Bridge Park project director Scott Kratz, and Oramenta F. Newsome, the Vice President of the DC chapter of the Local Initiatives Support Corporation. Hyisheem Shabazz Calier, who participated in the documentary, also spoke about his experiences living in the Chelsea-Elliot housing project and experiences since leaving to attend college and pursue entrepreneurship. The panel was moderated by Urban Institute president Sarah Rosen Wartell.

After the first half hour of the documentary played, the panelists discussed gentrification, income and racial inequality, and the unintended consequences that come when planning large public projects like the Manhattan's High Line.

We (Joanne and Andrew) attended the event and later watched the full documentary. We discussed our thoughts in a chat format.

Andrew Ausel (AA): I thought the documentary was a good segue into a discussion on DC. Particularly because what New York is experiencing is kind of like mega-gentrification. And while what DC is experiencing is challenging, it's nothing near the extent to which West Chelsea residents are experiencing it.

Joanne Pierce (JP): You make a good point, that New York City shows us this mega-gentrification but DC could easily be a mega-gentrifier in its own way if we're not watching out for it. Oramenta made a great point about that, which is that developers are "finding" neighborhoods and finding these beautiful pre-World War II buildings they want to turn into luxury condos. These neighborhoods have been here for such a long time, and yet developers come in and seem to just swallow them whole with their shiny new buildings or luxury things.

AA: Absolutely. Neighborhoods with rich cultural and architectural features are attractive to developers and the residents treat them almost like ornaments that add to their property values. Exhibit AÖ the High Line in Manhattan.


The High Line in Manhattan. Photo by David Berkowitz on Flickr.

AA: An equivalent DC example would be Capitol Hill, Union Station, or any of the numerous historical landmarks that have been flipped. Look at the NoMa area as an example: the neighborhood runs just adjacent to the Uline Arena, which is set to become the fifth flagship REI. But look just north of Florida Ave., opposite of the Red Line to NoMa, and development isn't really happening there, primarily because it is outside of the Business Improvement District. I think more work needs to be done to bridge that gap.


Uline Arena. Photo by Ted Eytan on Flickr.

JP: One of the things I liked was how the High Line was used in this documentary. It was one of the three central structures, along with the Chelsea-Elliot Housing Projects and the Avenues school. Have you been to the High Line before?

AA: I have not, have you?

JP: I have, and I loved it. It's overwhelming in scale and sensory input.


The brick building in the middle of the frame is the Chelsea-Elliot housing projects and the building at the right of the frame is Avenues: The World School. Photo by Doug Kerr on Flickr.

JP: Scott brought up unintended consequences. I hadn't considered the High Line to be one of those, because it's so beautiful and it's brought so much joy to what was a desolate, unwanted piece of transit history. But we see in the documentary that it also created this real estate boom and I don't think I considered that the High Line had negative consequences because I had no idea there were housing projects nearby. So that brings up questions of privilege and how we can be really unaware of the circumstances that lead to social and income inequality, and how our desire for nice things and amenities has possibly made people complicit in gentrification, even when we don't live in the areas being gentrified.

AA: It really is a new development, and something that I think we have to start assuming will happen as we try and address urban blight. In generations prior, I don't think the desire for urban living was there, so we never asked "what happens when we fix this place up?" Now, as we fix it up, there is a demand and a market and its being filled by people who aren't from the community.

I think the real gap in understanding then comes from the "invading" ignorance to what was there before. The residents who purchase these $15 million condos don't necessarily appreciate all the different culture that was there before. Oramenta made a good point when she said that we do live in a free market, and those are the rules of the game.

JP: She said, "we have to remember that in our society, the [income] bar keeps moving."

AA: But what [Marc Levin] does such a good job of in his documentary is observing the issue from the perspective of the kids. Kids who don't necessarily want to be viewed as the rich white kids but want to be looked at as humans.

JP: What is wealth today may not be wealth ten years from now and what's striking about that idea is that people at the bottom won't necessarily get wealthier just because these areas like NoMa are becoming popular and revitalized. Looking through the eyes of the kids and without explicitly stating it, he showed that children aren't different from each other in their fears and uncertainties just because of their socioeconomic status.

AA: And he reflected on that during the panel when he said that this generation is truly unique in that they recognize the forces of free trade and the globalization of the economy and they are figuring out, where do they fit in? They are much more reflective and aware and you see this in the film.

JP: Even though the documentary doesn't really go into globalization, it's a huge concern.

AA: We have to answer anew, how exactly do we develop communities for the people in the community? Scott Kratz was particularly helpful in coming up with strategies for that.

JP: He was, and I appreciated how focused he was on the collaborative side of the 11th Street Bridge project. He was very clear that he wanted to understand, first of all, did residents even want something like that? It's a question that I don't think gets brought up enough.


The 11th Street Bridge. Photo by Ted Eytan on Flickr.

AA: Right. It was a much more communicative version of community organizing that represented bottom-up development instead of a planning commission or a developing company telling the people how the plan would look. It was truly encouraging and part of me honestly felt weird feeling optimistic when thinking about this issue. It was almost like I wanted them to dive more into the problem of gentrification so I could understand the issue, while what Scott really did was reject the challenges of community unity and figured out how to make it work. It really sounded like the community was the approval body for a lot of the design. And it made me realize something very important for any effort like this. It made me realize that communities have to have a unified vision and sort of be very homogenous.

JP: I looked up some information on the 11th Street Bridge project and the website says there are 76,000 residents within a two mile radius of the bridge. The kind of collaboration required to get as many of those voices heard seems stunning. I think the documentary brought up an interesting point about homogeneity by class, and not race: that the residents of the Chelsea-Elliot Housing Projects aren't excluded because of race, but because of class.

AA: It's definitely a good point and may make for a good lesson learned from the film, that communities are only as equipped to fight the forces of development as they are unified and empowered to fight it.

JP: What do you think about Ornamenta's point about race, that it's always present but in many cases what neighborhoods want to preserve is history and that is sometimes African-American history. Her example was Anacostia, which she says has only been an African-American community for two or three generations.


Anacostia. Photo by Axel Drainville on Flickr.

AA: I think that's true. To observe the inverse, Alexandria, which is a predominately white city, does a lot to preserve its history and highlight the positive aspects of their colonial culture. You don't see a whole lot of African-American festivals in Alexandria and that's for a reason. So much of human history is tied up in race, likely because so much of human identity is tied up in race. Which raises the question, is the only force that prevents equitable development economic?

JP: Alexandria has a lot of African-American history and there should be more opportunities to emphasize it. But we also have to talk about which Alexandria we are referring to. Old Town, the West suburbs (Seminary Hill), or Fairfax County and the immediate Route 1 corridor, which is probably more Hispanic and African-American.

AA: Very true. But that is arguably a more recent development. I think the important point here is that Americans in general feel a sense of community that is strongest with those who look most like them. That is true in DC, Alexandria, and NYC, among others. We need to be actively figuring out ways to compensate for this and foster communities of understanding and, really, pluralism.

JP: I read that immigrant communities aren't actually that mobile. They find an area they like and tend to stick to it. I think it can be trickier than that. Maybe on a more general scale, people do want to be homogeneous but there are some aspects of racial identity that may make that difficult. Anecdotally, I think younger Asian-Americans, for example, yo-yo between wanting to hang out with an Asian community and conversely don't think that's the most important or relevant. It does help if your "community" is all over the Northern Virginia and DC area, though. East Asian-Americans do have that.

AA: True. I think the documentary was revealing in the way the high-rise condo community treated the minorities who lived in their building. [One of the documentary participants] reflected that he often gets looks like he doesn't live there. But the interesting thing is that often times the white kids who lived on the top floors of these places didn't want to fall into that stigma. They wanted to understand. The challenge becomes how do we fight stigmas then.

JP: This is a pretty old question. We've had cultural and racial stigmas for a very long time. Gentrification seems to exacerbate that, in that you sometimes see the developers coming in and they're all well-educated, relatively wealthy people. They are proposing a dream that in some cases, means pushing other people out. As Scott said, it's "cultural displacement." The stigma behind that can be race or socioeconomic status, and what Scott and other community-focused organizers seem to focus on is bolstering the voices of people who would be marginalized or ignored by the planning community. Using their well-educated, relatively wealthy status for good and not evil, I suppose.

AA: It is a very old question, but the truth is that communities don't do the hard work to answer it and find ways to live together effectively in the face of the prospect of gentrification. There is a blind allegiance to the ideology that promotes quick development. But you are right in that the 11th Street Bridge Park team took the time to lead that discussion and really bolstered the voices of those that would have been washed out.

JP: I think Oramenta spoke about that as well. She said that there's a difference between diversity you see on The Mall and diversity in her neighborhood, whether it's due to income or race. She said there are people who can go home to a comfortable place, and she wants to create more opportunities to see others and be like, "I could live there." To me, that seems to also focus on preserving a neighborhood but also encouraging growth in a more organic way. Leading new people in by showing them what the neighborhood already has to offer, and how it's going to be progressive about its growth, but not doing it through only having shiny luxury goods and condos.

AA: I also thought that a big issue that was presented by the panel was the idea of renter empowerment. What were your thoughts on the strategies presented like community land trusts and homebuyers clubs?

JP: They mentioned TOPA, which is the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act. It allows renters to have first opportunity to buy their rental properties before a landlord can sell the building. I think TOPA is great but it also requires extensive education and understanding of DC housing processes and that's one area where the homebuyers clubs can really step in. They can provide that education. A lot of times, what shuts people out of the process, whether it's democracy or planning their neighborhood, is that it's overwhelming.

AA: Sure, and the challenges can seem larger and influenced by so many more things than one community can prevent. I think dispelling that narrative and empowering low-income residents to protect their homes through effective policies is an important lesson I took from the panel. Luckily for D.C. it sounds like they have a lot of good laws in place to protect the tenant

JP: We've seen through examples like the Wah Luck House [in Chinatown] that sometimes these fights take many years. I hope in the future that it won't be so hard.

AA: I'm hopeful. The panel actually really helped with that!

JP: It presents a good blueprint for that kind of collaboration to take place. It'll be interesting to see how the 11th Street Bridge project moves forward.

AA: Indeed. I think it's in a very preliminary stage which may mean I should temper my excitement just a little. Regardless, it sounds like they're doing everything right.

Education


What do parents want? A good school, not too far, and some other kids that look like them

Rich or poor, black or white, a family's decision of where to enroll their child in school is one of the most important, gut-wrenching, and revealing choices they can make. In DC, parents can choose from over 200 charter and district schools. By analyzing that data for a recent study, we were able to shed some light on what drives parents' choices.


Images from the study.

What we analyzed

As in other cities, any DC student in kindergarten through grade 12 has a right to attend a neighborhood public school based on his or her home address. But students can also enter a lottery for an open spot at any neighborhood school or public charter school in the city.

In 2014, DC moved from separate lotteries for each school to a common system, MySchoolDC, where applicants rank up to 12 schools. A random lottery process chooses which students get the spots at any school which has more applicants than spaces.

In a recent study for Mathematica Policy Research we had the opportunity to analyze over 20,000 rank-ordered lists that parents submitted in 2014, the first year of the unified lottery. We combined these lists with data describing characteristics of the students and their families, the schools themselves, and information on household and school neighborhoods, including crime and demographics.

This allowed us to estimate the importance parents place on different school attributes, including commuting distance, transit access, test score proficiency rates, programmatic offerings, the school's racial-ethnic composition, the percentage of disadvantaged students, school neighborhood characteristics, and a variety of other factors.


MySchoolDC.org.

DC is a city of liberal values and unconscious biases, of racial diversity and racial tension, of rich and poor, newly arrived and long-time residents. Parents' individual decisions add up to collective social outcomes, patterns of racial and class composition, that have lasting effects on the social fabric of DC.

Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote a moving piece in the New York Times capturing these themes as they played out in her gentrifying neighborhood in Brooklyn. The same issues come into stark relief in DC.

What parents value when choosing schools

The analysis suggests that parents do prefer schools close to home, but (not surprisingly) they are willing to tolerate a longer commute to a school with higher test scores.

The preference for academic performance was quite strong: if two schools were identical in every way except for their "tier" rating, parents would travel an average of seven miles for a school in the highest category over one with the lowest.

Academic performance was not the only factor. We also found that parents choose schools based on the race and income of students, but did not weight that as strongly.

Parents tend to rank schools higher if there are more students in the same racial or ethnic group as their own children. But the strength of this "own-group" preference differs by grade level, the applicant's race/ethnicity, and the percentage of a school's students in the child's own group.

If the own-group percentage is low, parents show a strong preference against a school. But as the percentage rises, the relationship weakens and even becomes negative, suggesting a taste for diversity.

In short, parents on average seem to want their children to not be in the vast minority at their school, but as long as there are some students of similar racial or ethnic backgrounds, this stops being a priority. (More detailed results are available in the technical paper here).

The analysis found that typical middle school parents would be willing to send their children over two miles farther just to get from a school where 10% of students share the child's race/ethnicity to one with 20%. But if choosing between schools with 40% or 50% of the same race/ethnicity, they would only be wiling to travel a half mile more to school.

Does choice affect segregation?

One fierce debate in education is about whether school choice—the policy allowing families to select a school besides the local one—worsens segregation. Some people may opt out of higher-poverty schools or those with high numbers of racial and ethnic minorities. Does this entrench segregation? Or is the segregation already there in residential living patterns?

We compared the current levels of racial and income segregation in DC to alternative scenarios where everyone got his or her first choice (which would unrealistically require some schools to be far, far larger) and where everyone went to his or her neighborhood school (though in reality, not everyone would attend that school in the absence of choice; some families would move or choose private schools).

It turns out that the existing policy results in less segregation by race for middle schools than if every student simply attended the in-boundary neighborhood school.

What if everyone could attend their most preferred school (ignoring any space limitations)? This would not increase racial segregation. Rather, the analysis showed nearly the same amount of racial segregation as the current policy or perhaps slightly lower.

We repeated this exercise, but removed the lowest-performing schools as school choice options to simulate a policy that directs more students toward high-performing schools. In this case, we found again that racial segregation would not increase under these circumstances, but fall further, to a value of 68 on a scale where 100 is the most segregated and 0 is the least

In addition to racial segregation, we looked at segregation of students by income level (low-income versus non-low-income). using the same type of metric, this time with students who are certified as low-income versus all other students. The overall segregation level by income was only 41 under the current policy, but interestingly, that level is even greater than it would have been if students had simply attended their neighborhood schools.

However, we found that if everyone could attend their most preferred schools, it would result in segregation by income roughly equivalent to a policy of no school choice (32 points, just one point lower than with neighborhood schools).

These findings for race and income segregation looked slightly different for families applying to elementary and high school, where the context is different in terms of both the applicants and the diversity of schools they are applying to. For example, white and Hispanic families' own-race preference was stronger among applicants to elementary schools, as emphasized in a recent Slate article, than applicants to middle and high schools.

Nevertheless, choice policies that expand seats at popular schools were predicted to reduce segregation by both race and income in elementary schools. For high schools, neighborhood school assignment was predicted to lower both types of segregation compared to the current policy (school choice with a lottery for oversubscribed schools).

Again, choice with no cap on the number of accepted applicants and removal of the lowest-performing schools always results in the lowest indices of both race and income segregation (this assumes it would be possible to increase capacity at individual campuses).

What is consistent between all levels of school is that policies which let all students into their first choice (the two blue bars in the graphs above) led to the lowest segregation. For high schools, putting everyone into the neighborhood school (purple bar) also lowered segregation compared to the current policy.

Parents in DC are not race-blind, nor do they ignore the socio-economic status of their children's potential peers. But they also are sensitive to distance and indicators of academic quality. There are also numerous unmeasured determinants of choice.

Based on the data we have available, though, we don't see evidence that the worst fears of choice opponents are true. That is, we don't see evidence that school choice by itself worsens the level of school segregation produced by residential patterns.

However, we also don't see choice as a very powerful mechanism for voluntary desegregation. There remains much work to be done to understand the impacts of choice on equity and access to quality schooling for the most disadvantaged. We also need to better understand how disadvantaged families access information about school options.

The model in this study, however, provides a promising tool for leveraging data to predict the effects of policy changes on sorting of students across schools throughout the city.

Education


Gentrification isn't the only reason DC's test scores are rising

Student performance in the nation's capital has increased so dramatically that it has attracted significant attention and prompted many to ask whether gentrification, rather than an improvement in school quality, is behind the higher scores. Demographic change explains some of the increases in test scores, but by no means all of them.


Photo by US Department of Education on Flickr.

We drew this conclusion after analyzing data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), known as the "nation's report card," which tests representative samples of fourth- and eighth-grade students in mathematics and reading every two years.

NAEP scores reflect not just school quality, but also the characteristics of the students taking the test. For example, the difference in scores between Massachusetts and Mississippi reflects both the impact of the state's schools and differences in state poverty rates and other demographics. Likewise, changes in NAEP performance over time can result from changes in both school quality and student demographics.

DC's school demographics have changed substantially since 2005. The NAEP data show that the proportion of white and Hispanic students in DC has roughly doubled, while the proportion of black students has declined. The question is whether DC's sizable improvement is the result of changing demographics, as some commentators claim, or improving quality.

Changing demographics are only part of changing test scores

Our analysis indicates that, based on the relationships between demographics and NAEP scores in 2005, demographic changes predict a score increase of four to six points between 2005 and 2013 (the data needed to perform this analysis on the 2015 results are not yet available).

But the actual score increases have generally far outpaced the gains predicted by demographic change alone. For example, in fourth-grade math, demographics predicted a four-point increase, but scores increased 17 points.

The figure below shows predicted and actual score increases for all four tests for DC schools overall (including charters) and the traditional school district (DC Public Schools). Only in eighth-grade reading scores at DC Public Schools do demographic shifts explain more than half of the score increase.


Graph from the Urban Institute.

To be sure, our analysis does not account for all potentially important demographic factors. In particular, we do not include any measures of family income. Though researchers often use eligibility for free or reduced-price lunch as a proxy for determining income level, changes to who is eligible make this measure unreliable. With the eighth-grade scores, we did attempt to use parents' education as a proxy for socioeconomic status, but our results did not appreciably change: changes in demographics still did not account for changes in academic performance.

The bottom line is that gentrification alone cannot explain why student scores improved in Washington, DC, a conclusion that echoes previous analyses using publicly available data. DC education saw many changes over this period, including reform-oriented chancellors, mayoral control, and a rapidly expanding charter sector, but we cannot identify which policy changes, if any, produced these results.

And despite the large gains, DC NAEP scores still reveal substantial achievement gaps—for example, the gap between average scores for black and white students was 56 points in 2015; the gap between Hispanics and whites was 49 points.

In other words, much work remains to be done.

Here's how we drew our conclusions

Our analysis of student-level NAEP data from DC, including students from charter and traditional public schools, compares the increase in scores from 2005 to 2013 with the increase that might have been expected based on shifts in demographic factors including race/ethnicity, gender, age, and language spoken at home. The methodology is similar to the one used in a new online tool showing state NAEP performance (the tool excludes DC because it is not a state).

We used restricted-use, student-level data from NCES to generate these results. (That means that researchers have to get special permission to access files that have scores on a kid-by-kid (but de-identified) basis, whereas most people would have to use data that averaged for entire states and cities (by subject and year).

We measured the relationship between DC student scores in 2005 and the student factors of gender, race and ethnicity, age, and frequency of English spoken at home. We then predicted what each student's score in 2013 would have been if the relationships between demographics and scores were the same in 2013 as they were in 2005. We then compared the average predicted score of the 2013 test-takers (relative to the 2005 average score) to the actual 2013 score (also relative to the 2005 average score).

We tried model variants that included special education status, limited English proficiency status, and eligibility for free- and reduced-price lunch. Including these variables tended to lower the predicted score change (indicating that an even larger portion of the score changes came from non-demographic changes). However, because these variable are also subject to district and school-level definitions (direct certification/community eligibility may have increased the numbers of FRPL-eligible students, for example), we chose not to include these variables in our prediction, and focused only on demographic changes.

Crossposted from the Urban Wire.

Education


Schools are still segregated in Maryland, and state legislators want that to change

Studies have shown that while our country is becoming more ethnically diverse, our schools have become more segregated. In fact, studies by the Civil Rights Project have found that Maryland to be among the most-segregated state in the country for black students. A bill hoping to change that just passed through the Maryland state legislature.


Photo by US Department of Education on Flickr.

Segregation is still a problem in our schools

I am an elementary school teacher in Prince George's County. In our school of over 700 students, nearly 90 percent of whom qualify for free and reduced meals. We have fewer than ten white non-Hispanic children, and most of our students speak Spanish as their first language.

It's not that we do not have white or middle class children in our neighborhood. But at present, the majority of these families are choosing private schools, charter schools, magnet programs or homeschooling. They do anything to avoid sending their kids to the predominantly low-income local public school.

Looking at Prince George's County on the whole, nine out of 10 black students attend a school where at least 90 percent of students are minorities. Nearly four out of 10 black students attend what the Civil Rights Project report called "apartheid schools," where more than 99% of the school is African American; nearly all of the 400 "apartheid schools" are in Prince George's County or Baltimore City.

As early as the 1960s, we have understood that the two greatest predictors of student academic success are the socioeconomic status of the student's family, and the socioeconomic status of the student's peers. That is to say that low-income children who attend mixed income schools will achieve at higher rates.

With a state as segregated as ours, it is no wonder that Maryland's achievement gap is also one of the greatest in the country. According to our 2013 NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) scores, the gap in average math scores between black and white fourth-graders in Maryland was the fifth-worst in the nation, and in reading the gap was the ninth-worst.

A new program called EDCo wants to confront these issues

Senator Bill Ferguson, a democrat from Baltimore City, proposed legislation to create the Maryland Education Development Collaborative (EDCo). The collaborative would make recommendations to the state Board of Education, the General Assembly, and local school systems about how to make schools more diverse in terms of socioeconomics and demographics.

The EDCo bill has now moved through the Maryland state legislature. If signed by the Governor, the new educational entity will be a big step to addressing the greatest civil rights issue and roadblock to educational equity in our state: socioeconomic segregation.

While equitable education is elusive, there's plenty of reason to think it's not impossible. The challenge is collecting, analyzing and sharing best policies and practices across schools, districts and regions.

In 1998 the Maryland Legislature founded TEDCo (Technology Development Corporation) to foster innovation and entrepreneurship communities across the state. In under two decades, the organization has created thousands of jobs and impacted hundreds of companies through granting and mentoring programs. The goal with EDCo is to bring the same level of growth and innovation to the field of education by connecting universities, research institutions, venture capitalists, and school districts. Hopefully, this would mean turning research into policy and practice.

For example, last year Governor Hogan launched the P-TECH (Pathways in Technology Early College High School) partnership with IBM. EDCo could assess the impact of this collaboration and work to disseminate progress.

Another way that EDCo could help is by developing a model to make magnet programs more inclusive and economically integrated. While magnet programs were designed to diversify schools by drawing students from across boundary lines, the current system in Prince George's County favors families who are actively engaged in their children's education by requiring parents to apply. That leaves the neediest children isolated in their increasingly segregated schools.

EDCo would seek to break down these barriers to comprehensive integration by supporting programs that attract a broad demographic clientele, and developing lottery systems that do not discriminate against poor, under-resourced children. Rather than relying on a competitive application or lottery, magnet programs would instead use strong marketing and weighted lotteries to build demographically diverse school populations across the state.

Teachers need an organization that considers broad policy changes

Public school systems aren't in a great position to push for change because teachers, principals, and superintendents are consumed with making sure they're educating kids every day. There's little time or energy to zoom out and think about policy.

An entity like EDCo, on the other hand, can provide perspective, make connections, and help us evolve towards a better future, where all children of all colors and classes learn together in high quality schools that would make any parent proud.

Education


Eliot-Hine, a DC middle school, is falling apart

Katelyn Hollmon, a student at Eliot-Hine Middle School, cried when she testified before the DC Council last year, saying she and her classmates shouldn't have to attend a school that reminds them of the homeless shelter where several of her friends live. "Just because we're kids doesn't mean we don't have rights... It is not enough to believe in us. You must invest in us also," read her testimony.


All photos by Heather Schoell.

We often look at investments in education in terms of expenditures per student and academic program. But there's another key piece of the puzzle: the poor condition of our school facilities.

Over the last decade, Capitol Hill's Eliot-Hine Middle School has struggled. Enrollment and test scores have declined, but so has the building itself. Film blocks its windows, preventing natural light and fresh air from entering classrooms, and making it difficult to open them in case of an emergency. The heating system is full of dust and dander, and makes the classrooms so unbearably hot that the school has to turn on its air conditioning as soon as the heating system goes on in the fall. And that leads to another problem: Noise from the A/C units makes it too loud for teachers and students to communicate.

According to the District, many of these problems don't exist. In 2008, as a part of the "school blitz" associated with the merger of Eliot Middle School and Hine Junior High School, Eliot-Hine was allocated $8 million for new windows and additional work was done throughout the building. According to DGS data used by the DC Council to prioritize capital spending in the Fiscal Year 2016 budget, the condition of Eliot-Hine was rated "good," the same rating as neighboring Stuart-Hobson MS, which recently completed a $40 million renovation.

Last spring, after proposals to further delay the modernization of Eliot-Hine came forward, the community stepped up. Social media was filled with photos of restrooms with trash bags covering urinals, broken doors, and mold. Local ANCs wrote letters and the community spoke out at District Council hearings. Despite these efforts, the Eliot-Hine modernization was, again, delayed, this time to FY2019 and FY2020 (meaning construction will end on August 31, 2020).

However, the Mayor heard residents and the District took immediate action. Last spring, restrooms got repairs and ceilings and radiators were painted, among other repairs.

Still, many underlying conditions persist and other promised improvements—science labs, new furniture, and new technology in classrooms—have yet to be completed.

"Eliot-Hine is old and falling apart," Malia, a 4th grade student who attends one of Eliot-Hine's feeder elementary schools told the DC Council Education Committee last year. "Half the toilets don't work. I don't like using the bathrooms there; they are too disgusting to use."

Underlying problems are resurfacing. Ceilings are again damaged and mold is returning. The heating and A/C systems continue spread years of accumulated mold, dander, and dust. Rodents continue to infest the building.

And it's not like the community isn't aware, nor is the problem that it doesn't care. Over Spring Break, a group of parents, with the support of the Capitol Hill Community Foundation, organized the Eliot-Hine Extreme Bathroom Makeover, where they cleaned, painted, and put up mirrors in two restrooms.

Just last week, Eliot-Hine asked the community for help with preparing the facility to host Watkins Elementary next school year while its building is torn down and replaced.

DC can have safe, smart, and healthy schools for all students

The most disappointing part of the story of Eliot-Hine is that billions of our tax dollars have been spent and countless students still attend inadequate facilities. Across the District there are more than 20 schools that have not been renovated, and others, like Eliot-Hine, that fail to provide even the basics for our students. Last summer, the DC Auditor released a report stating that the District's school modernization program lacks accountability, transparency, and basic financial management.

In short, we have failed our students and our taxpayers.

While we can rehash the poor decisions of the past, it is more important that as we move forward we make our first priority that all school facilities (1) comply with applicable safety codes, (2) have adequate heating, air conditioning, acoustics, lighting, ventilation, and meet other basic needs, and (3) meet basic academic programming requirements. Furthermore, decisions about where our District's school modernization dollars are spent must be made in partnership with the community and our decision-makers must be held accountable.

Moving forward at Eliot-Hine

In late March, Mayor Bowser announced her plan to pump an extra $220 million into school modernization over the next two years as part of a $1.2 billion plan. The Mayor announced that her office will be using more realistic cost estimates and that 98 of the District's 112 schools will be modernized by 2022. This is progress, but it still leaves crucial community involvement and transparency out of the planning process.

On March 1st, DCPS and DGS convened a School Improvement Team (SIT) for Eliot-Hine (of which I am a member). Our government agencies came to the first meeting of the SIT with a proposal for a 480 student facility that incorporates space for Eliot-Hine's Radio/TV course, expanded music programming, and various other amenities at a price tag of approximately $30 million. While nearly everyone in the community would be pleased with this outcome, this process fails to address the problems with school facilities planning.

Since reaching an enrollment of 348 students during 2011-2012, Eliot-Hine's enrollment has plummeted to a projected 188 students for 2016-17. Given the continued growth of our District's public charter sector, as well as enrollment projections provided to the Maury ES SIT, as that feeder of Eliot-Hine prepares for an expansion, that state "students in 4th and 5th grade will continue to utilize the lottery to access PCS and DCPS alternatives rather than continue to Elliot-Hine MS," it is unclear how Eliot-Hine will return to these old enrollment figures. Even if Eliot-Hine meets these projected enrollment numbers, it will mean that there is still a great deal of under-utilized space within the facility.

Planning cannot happen in a vacuum. Rather, we must engage the community, per the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Student Assignment, to "secure input into the studies on school capacity, utilization and attendance zones." I believe we must also determine if there are additional amenities that the broader community can use. At Eliot-Hine, this could mean lending the second gymnasium to neighborhood elementary schools that lack a full-sized gym or for school-wide performances; a new 9th grade academy for Eastern High School, which is nearing its building capacity; a partnership with the DC Youth Orchestra, Challenger Center for Space Science Education or another organization that serves students from across the District; or co-locating with a charter school. The possibilities are endless and should be discussed.

The fact that the Mayor and Council seem to be much more focused on the school modernization capital budget is a positive sign, but major concerns about out-year projects remain. A number of questions remain, especially in terms of community input. The process should begin with community input and the District's leaders should develop plans that include specifics for each school and the broader community of schools. Only then should architects develop a budget that will fulfill those plans and meet all relevant educational specifications. Without comprehensive community planning on the front end, the District's school modernization budget will continue to be largely a shot in the dark. We can and must do better for our students.

If you want to get involved in the school modernization process, you can testify before the District Council at the DC Public School and Department of General Services FY2017 Budget hearings on April 14 and April 22 respectively.

Roads


Kids can be traffic engineers, too. Check out the video.

Last week at the National Building Museum, hundreds of local kids learned how to design streets. In the video below, check out what Fairfax-based civil engineer and STEM skills advocate Fionnuala Quinn taught them, and see if you can spot how they're working on challenges that are unique to DC, Maryland, and Virginia.

It's fascinating to see young heads nod with understanding at this year's Discover Engineering Family Day as Quinn explains how a complete street serves all users: people on foot and on bikes, drivers, transit riders, and people in wheelchairs.

An intersection of two streets with four car lanes in each direction forms the center of Quinn's display, to which she gradually adds components including traffic signals (for cars and pedestrians), crosswalks, sidewalks, bus stops, and bicycle facilities (including a bike counter and Capital Bikeshare station).

Quinn then alters her street by adding grass medians to show how land can be re-purposed, pointing out how the arrangement cuts the number of travel lanes and the possibility of head-on crashes while giving rainwater a place to soak in. She also closes off a street, transforming it into a space for food trucks and community events.


Engineering educator Fionnuala Quinn helps kids make street design choices at the National Building Museum's Discover Engineering Family Day on Feb. 28, 2016. Photo by the author.

Quinn makes everything in her mini-streets out of common household materials to show kids how easy it is to create their own designs.


Kids get their hands on The Bureau of Good Roads demonstration station at Discover Engineering Family Day. Photo by the author.

To help ordinary people of all ages who don't have engineering degrees and planning backgrounds engage in civic discussions around streets and multi-modal mobility, Quinn recently started an organization called The Bureau of Good Roads. Among its offerings are hands-on workshops, camps, walking and bicycling field tours, as well as design guidance and advice.

Support Us
DC Maryland Virginia Arlington Alexandria Montgomery Prince George's Fairfax Charles Prince William Loudoun Howard Anne Arundel Frederick Tysons Corner Baltimore Falls Church Fairfax City
CC BY-NC