TY - JOUR
T1 - The “Post-Racial” Politics of Race
T2 - Changing Student Assignment Policy in Three School Districts
AU - McDermott, Kathryn A.
AU - Frankenberg, Erica
AU - Diem, Sarah
N1 - Funding Information:
The shift toward race-neutrality in federal court opinions culminated in the U.S. Supreme Court’s combined ruling in and . In this decision, four Justices agreed with the plaintiffs’ argument that any use of a student’s race as a criterion for assigning him or her to a particular school violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. A fifth Justice, Anthony Kennedy, wrote in a concurring opinion that although Seattle and Jefferson County had not demonstrated that their uses of race in these particular instances were narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest, it was possible that a better-designed race-conscious policy might pass muster. Following this decision, some school districts quickly implemented student assignment policies that did not have diversity as a goal, while others attempted to redesign their policies to produce diversity in ways that would not run afoul of the courts. The U.S. Department of Education’s Technical Assistance for Student Assignment Policies (TASAP) grant program funded efforts in this direction in 11 school districts ().
Funding Information:
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The Boston research was funded in part by the Spencer Foundation, Grant 201100130, “Diversity, Politics, and Educational Opportunity.” The Wake County and Jefferson County research was funded by the University of Missouri System through the project “Suburbanization & the Politics of Diversity: Local Policymaking in a Post-Desegregation Era.”
Funding Information:
In response to family concerns about stability and predictability, the district decided to notify parents of their children’s school assignments (including planned reassignments) for the next 3 years. This effort to enhance predictability seems to have provoked 3 years’ worth of pushback and to have heightened opposition to the diversity policy. The 2009 school board election produced new members who had run on a platform of overturning the diversity program. Their campaigns were funded by the right-wing John Locke Society, a group that also supported Tea Party protests, through the Wake Schools Community Alliance (). Although arguments against the diversity policy included typical Tea Party goals such as lowering taxes and reducing the scope of government, more common themes were those deriding “forced busing” and questioning its relationship to student achievement. Each of the four seats contested in 2009 was won by an advocate of eliminating the diversity policy. These four new members combined with incumbent Ron Margiotta to form a majority of the nine-member board opposed to the policy. Despite the low voter turnout that at least calls into question the notion that a majority of the district’s population was against the diversity policy, the board seized the momentum of the election by swiftly signalling their intention to end the policy in favor of providing parents more stability and choice. Board meetings became contentious, as teachers and bus drivers walked out of a December school board meeting (). In mid-February 2010, Superintendent Del Burns announced his plans to resign effective June 30, proclaiming, “it is clear to me that I can not in good conscience continue to serve as superintendent” (). The school board subsequently voted to fire him in March, angry over his comments that the district was heading toward economically segregated schools. On March 23, 2010, capping a tumultuous series of school board meetings, the Wake County School Board voted 5-4 to alter the district’s student assignment policy.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2014
PY - 2015/5/6
Y1 - 2015/5/6
N2 - Many school districts have recently revised, or tried to revise, their policies for assigning students to schools, because the legal and political status of racial and other kinds of diversity is uncertain, and the districts are facing fiscal austerity. This article presents case studies of politics and student assignment policy in three large school districts: Boston, Massachusetts; Wake County (Raleigh), North Carolina; and Jefferson County (Louisville), Kentucky. In all three districts, there has been pressure to change student-assignment policies in ways that respond to the priorities of White and middle-class populations, with the potential to worsen the options available to students of color. Our case studies reinforce the criticisms of race-neutral politics and policy that have been made by Eduardo Bonilla-Silva and others. Race-neutral politics during fiscal retrenchment tends to reframe privilege as common sense and to obscure some students’ structural disadvantages.
AB - Many school districts have recently revised, or tried to revise, their policies for assigning students to schools, because the legal and political status of racial and other kinds of diversity is uncertain, and the districts are facing fiscal austerity. This article presents case studies of politics and student assignment policy in three large school districts: Boston, Massachusetts; Wake County (Raleigh), North Carolina; and Jefferson County (Louisville), Kentucky. In all three districts, there has been pressure to change student-assignment policies in ways that respond to the priorities of White and middle-class populations, with the potential to worsen the options available to students of color. Our case studies reinforce the criticisms of race-neutral politics and policy that have been made by Eduardo Bonilla-Silva and others. Race-neutral politics during fiscal retrenchment tends to reframe privilege as common sense and to obscure some students’ structural disadvantages.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84930385098&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84930385098&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0895904813510775
DO - 10.1177/0895904813510775
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84930385098
VL - 29
SP - 504
EP - 554
JO - Educational Policy
JF - Educational Policy
SN - 0895-9048
IS - 3
ER -