The Advocate Editors examine the redistricting process
Facing a projected population of almost 41,000 students for the 2015-2016 school year, the FCPS Board of Education has determined it must open two new elementary schools and a high school to reduce overcrowding at existing schools. The Board invited community members of each school zone or neighborhood in the county to a series of 22 “listening sessions” to allow members of the community to share their opinions and desires for the new boundaries and make changes in their school community. The district developed a first draft to show at the first meeting, and allowed parents, teachers, and administrators to advocate for major or minor changes.
The redistricting committee is putting their focus on allowing students to attend their “neighborhood school,” or the school that is closest to a place of residence. The zones unite neighborhoods and give boundaries, preventing confusion and supporting stability.
Besides allowing students to learn in a school closest to home, FCPS is attempting to provide equity for all students in all schools.
Despite the Board’s supposed good intentions, the 22 community meetings are ineffective and unnecessary, created to provide a façade of community involvement.
“[FCPS’s] primary responsibility is to provide every child a high-quality learning experience at every one of our schools and programs for every one of our students regardless of socioeconomic status, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation,” a PowerPoint slide displayed at each meeting read. Indeed, the school board is pushing for a better educational “experience,” hiring more qualified teachers and creating new and diverse programs for students.
Frequently, scores on state and nationally-normed tests are used to measure the success of schools and the students they serve. Some schools in low-income, low-achievement areas are perpetually low-performing. One solution being considered is called racial and socioeconomic equity. In order to raise test scores in low-performing schools, higher-performing students will be districted to schools, even if it isn’t their neighborhood.
What the Rezoning Committee is essentially doing is similar to a process called “Racial Gerrymandering,” or manipulating the boundaries of legislative district lines to represent a racial voting group in a certain way. Racial Gerrymandering is illegal and unconstitutional.
“Student socio-economic status will be a primary consideration in the assignment of neighborhoods to schools so as to balance the economic diversity of students in every school,” a handout called Guiding Principles for Student School Assignment said. This flies directly in the face of the earlier stated guideline of neighborhood schools. Furthermore, thousands of dollars per year will be spent to bus students out of their neighborhood zone, putting additional strain on the district’s budget.
All of this isn’t to say that racial and economic equity is a bad thing. A 2010 study by the University of Wisconsin concluded that equity in the classroom can lead to improved verbal communication skills and cultural literacy for students.
If the district is manipulating zone boundaries in order to diversify low-performing schools, then the neighborhood school initiative is rendered invalid. The district will increase diversity at any monetary or convenience cost, and the boundaries they set will insure equity. However, how is equity defined? Are the 22 community meetings deciding the boundaries and the promise of neighborhood schooling irrelevant, unproductive, and unnecessary?