Click
here for the PDF version
(updated 09/07)
Equity is the principle by which schools are guaranteed
the resources they need to provide the same educational opportunities
as other schools while meeting the basic educational needs of
their student population. The result of an effective equity policy
would be that every Madison school would be equally desirable
and of the highest quality.
A comprehensive equity policy should include
the following components:
Part 1: Economically Integrated Schools
All children, but especially children from low-income families,
have a better chance of success in economically integrated schools.
A low-income child in a high-poverty school needs more resources
to succeed than he/she would in a low-poverty school; therefore,
not only does an economically integrated school increase the child’s
chances for success, but it is also a more efficient use of District
resources.
Part 2: Need-Based Resource Allocations
Since base allocations represent the basic resources a school
needs, base allocations should be done using the Educational Needs
Index to help insure that schools with above-average concentrations
of poverty get resources that are proportional to their needs.
Supplemental allocations could be used to supplement resources
at low-poverty schools if the base allocations do not cover the
same range of programs offered at other schools.
Part 3: Equal Opportunity Curriculum
Curricular opportunities and choices should be the same at all
schools at the same level. For example, all middle schools should
offer the same opportunities in music and foreign language. Allocations
should be made accordingly so that principals do not have to choose
between support services (i.e. – a social worker) and academic
programs. Furthermore, fractional allocations at smaller schools
make it harder to retain the best teachers – more consideration
should be put into alleviating this problem.
Part 4: Excellent and Accountable School Leadership
Open, accessible and regular principal evaluations should be conducted
involving parents and the school community (this is especially
critical because site-based management gives principals lots of
discretion). School leadership plays a critical role in a how
a school responds to the challenges it faces, but parents from
the most challenged schools have the least capacity to give the
District proactive feedback on an ad hoc basis about the quality
of leadership. The District should more actively reach out to
those parents and create a meaningful forum where they can provide
honest feedback.
Myths/Misinterpretations
of Equity
Myth #1: Small class size is the most important factor
in student success
Reality: The most
important factor in student success is the child’s income
level and the density of poverty at a school. Even SAGE evaluation
data shows that class size is a secondary factor, a way to compensate
when a high density of poverty cannot be avoided. Furthermore,
middle- and upper-income students experience only slight gains,
if any, from smaller class sizes and succeed regardless of the
poverty rate at the school.
Myth #2: A poor child has the same chance for success
at any school, regardless of the density of poverty at that school
Reality: As David
Rusk reports in “Classmates Count!” a poor child at
a school with 20% poverty has a much greater chance for success
than a child at a school with a 70% rate of poverty. An economically
integrated school provides many qualitative and quantitative advantages,
even with the same level of District resources or less than a
poorer school, that make it more likely that a low-income child
will succeed.
Myth #3: Equity will take from the rich to give to the
poor
Reality: That statement
assumes that this is a zero-sum game--that providing what one
group needs to succeed means that another group has to suffer.
Our current practice of creating “SAGE-like” classes
for lower poverty schools was implemented at a time when we could
afford that extra luxury, but it does not produce considerable
educational advantages in low-poverty schools. SAGE, supplemental
allocations and other resources intended for high-poverty schools
should not be compromised because we can longer afford to have
them at low-poverty schools. Furthermore, there are middle- and
upper-income children at high poverty schools who will benefit
from a comprehensive equity policy, just as our neighborhoods
and community will benefit in the long-run by providing a level
playing field for all children. We all win when our children are
given what they need to succeed.
Myth 4: Equity is only an East side issue
Reality: This issue
is relevant to the future of our entire district: what kind of
a school district do we want to become as our city becomes more
diverse and urban? Now is the time to help insure that Madison
does not deteriorate into every other “inner-city”
school district in the country. While the East side has a high
concentration of poverty, a comprehensive equity policy will benefit
high poverty schools all over the district. And again, our whole
community will benefit by providing all children the tools they
need to succeed.
Myth 5: Equity will “dumb
down” the curriculum
Reality: The goal
of equity is to allow each student to reach his/her potential.
Rather than removing programs like TAG, we should raise the expectations
for all students and insure that many more diverse students are
actively recruited into more challenging academic programs.
Tensions
Inherent in Creating Equity:
Will giving the resources needed to students at high poverty schools
result white flight throughout the district? Conversely, should
low poverty schools have the same or more resources than high
poverty schools?
The “same” resources vs. equal opportunity: should
every school receive the same resource allocation per student
or should allocations be weighted based on the needs of each student.
Neighborhood schools vs. income integration at a school: does
keeping existing neighborhood schools—many with high or
low poverty rates—benefit students with the most need when
studies show that low income students perform best where the poverty
rate at their school is below fifty percent?
East
Attendance Area PTO Coalition: The EAAPTOC is
an advocacy organization whose mission is to improve the quality
of education for all students in the East High attendance area.
The group, convened in 2002 by the Northside Planning Council,
originally focused on schools from the Northside, but expanded
in 2005 to include other East High attendance area schools. The
EAAPTOC has been working towards school district equity since
its inception.
Northside Planning Council:
The Northside Planning Council, founded in 1993, is an award-winning
community organization of neighborhood, business and community
organization working to improve the quality of life for all residents
of the Northside community by increasing citizen participation
and voice in issues and decisions affecting the Northside community
through neighborhood organizing and advocacy; and building community
on the Northside by linking community organizations and residents.
For more information, contact
Jim Powell
Northside Planning Council
Lead Facilitor
661-0060, ext. 2
jim@northsideplanningcouncil.org
Julie Spears
Northside Planning
Council
Community Organizer
661-0060, ext. 3
julie@northsideplanningcouncil.org
|
