An Unusual Idea for Fixing School Segregation

What if the answer lies in changing how college admissions work?

(((Rachel M. Cohen))) May 23, 2018

Many proposals for addressing school segregation seem pretty small, especially when compared to the scale and severity of the problem. Without the power of a court-ordered desegregation mandate, progress can feel extremely far off, if not altogether impossible. Some even believe—understandably though mistakenly—that no meaningful steps can be taken to integrate schools unless housing segregation is resolved.

But a new theory from Thomas Scott-Railton, a recent graduate of Yale Law School, provides reason to believe there are still new ways to think about this issue. Railton’s approach does something that’s all too rare in education-policy debates: He takes what are normally viewed as discrete issue areas—K–12 segregation, college admissions, and the lack of diversity at top universities—and says, what if those can all be addressed together? What if, in fact, it’s impossible to address them apart? Scott-Railton’s proposal, which he published in the Yale Law & Policy Review, is to reduce K–12 segregation by reforming the college-admissions process.

Scott-Railton began thinking about this last fall, after listening to Nikole Hannah-Jones’s reporting on This American Life about school segregation in the St. Louis metropolitan area. The radio broadcast featured wealthy white parents in a St. Louis suburb distressed by the prospect of black students from a neighboring town enrolling in their public schools. The black children’s district had recently lost its accreditation due to poor academic performance. (It was the same district that Michael Brown, who was fatally shot by police in August 2014, had graduated from.) If a Missouri school district loses its accreditation, the state permits any student enrolled to transfer to a nearby accredited one.

Packed at a school-board meeting, white parents one after another spoke out about their fears of this new incoming student population—that they’d bring increased crime, violence, and disease. And, some parents feared how the black students’ test scores might threaten their own children’s academic standing. “Once [they come] in here, will that lower our accreditation?” asked one parent, to thunderous applause.

Many of the white parents’ fears were prejudice, plain and simple. But Scott-Railton knew that the parents were right about one thing: Integrating the school could mean that the school’s rating would drop, and schools with lower ratings tend to pay a penalty in the highly competitive college process. Universities tend to give a leg up to affluent, high test-scoring suburban schools—which then incentivizes wealthier parents to seek out segregation. But what if those incentives could be changed?

And thus Scott-Railton’s idea was born: to take demographics of schools into account in college admissions—giving priority to applicants who attended schools with a certain threshold of low-income students (say, above 40 percent). In other words, admissions officers would look favorably on students who attended an economically integrated school, much as they do those who have had unusual travel experiences or outstanding extracurricular achievements.

In a nutshell, he argues, this idea would drive integration in three ways: It would create an incentive for middle class and wealthy parents to enroll their students in socioeconomically integrated schools, it would create countervailing considerations for white parents considering leaving currently integrated school districts, and it would provide an incentive for private schools to enroll more low-income students. Middle-class students would likely benefit more from Scott-Railton’s idea than low-income students, since his proposal doesn’t inherently change the financial barriers to attending college. But millions more would benefit from the increased K–12 integration, which decades of research show improves public schooling.

It wouldn’t be the first time colleges sought to change applicant behavior by altering admissions incentives. In 2016, deans and admissions officers from more than 50 elite universities signed on to a report—Turning The Tide—a first-of-its-kind effort led by Harvard’s Graduate School of Education to signal that going forward, colleges will work to de-emphasize resume padding and hyper-competitive achievement, and prioritize communal values and work taking care of others. The colleges recognized that they were powerfully positioned to transmit different cultural messages to applicants and their parents.

One strength of Scott-Railton’s proposal is that colleges and universities would not have to sacrifice much to make it work. It would be relatively cost-neutral to implement, and wouldn’t require schools to accept any particular students. As he puts it, the plan operates within higher education’s “existing institutional constraints.” But that also means it would be unlikely to substantially increase campus diversity, at least initially, and for that reason Scott-Railton says his idea should not be seen as an alternative to measures like affirmative action and Pell Grants.

Nevertheless, Lloyd Thacker, executive director of the Education Conservancy and an expert on college admissions, said one of the biggest challenges this kind of proposal faces is just institutional inertia. “A lot of this will come down to courage,” he said. “Universities get bogged down in political constraints, caught up in managing competing interests, and it can sometimes just be easier to do nothing, rather than try something new.”

But if colleges could work up the will to try it, another benefit of this idea would be that it seems to be on solid footing legally. In the wake of Supreme Court decisions that have challenged both K–12 desegregation plans and university-level affirmative-action policies, advocates for diversity have been wary of pursuing new strategies. Scott-Railton took that into account in crafting his proposal, which recommends that admissions boosts come primarily from taking the poverty level of a school—not its racial makeup—into account, and for this reason it is more likely to withstand any kind of constitutional challenge.

“My sense of his plan is that it probably threads the needle pretty effectively,” said Sam Erman, a law professor at the University of Southern California who has studied integration and affirmative action. “There are some ambiguities in the legal doctrine, but it’s hard to see how you would launch a successful attack on this idea.”

Fear that the Supreme Court would eliminate race-based affirmative action has led other scholars to propose a college-admissions focus on school or neighborhood demographics. For instance, in her 2014 book Place Not Race, law professor Sheryll Cashin proposed substituting race-based affirmative action with a geographically-based system that took segregation into account. Scott-Railton’s idea builds upon this sort of notion by focusing more explicitly on using admissions to transform the makeup of K–12 institutions.

As Erman told me, without some kind of new experiment, integration advocates shouldn’t expect much to improve. “Most of what we’ve seen implemented are ideas that nibble at the margins, that make relatively small adjustments to things that the court has already approved,” he said, noting that unless the court swings left, it’s reasonable to expect the legal constraints to narrow even more.

“This is a very smart and strategic way of dealing with what has been the overwhelming obstacle to school integration, which is white and middle-class resistance,” said Rick Kahlenberg, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation and a longtime scholar of segregation. Kahlenberg said he likes the idea not only because it creates incentives for hyper-competitive affluent families, but also because it creates a way for universities to have more students who arrive with experience navigating diverse environments. “Elite universities need more bridge-builders,” he said. “I think this is a win-win.”

While the idea remains in its infancy, some other researchers have launched efforts to develop it further. Ilona Arnold-Berkovits, an education researcher at Rutgers who also began thinking more deeply about these issues after listening to the same This American Life episode which inspired Scott-Railton, launched a website, schoolbonuspoints.org, to begin mobilizing other policy experts, researchers, and funders around this idea of voluntary incentives.

There may be room for additional development. Scott-Railton’s idea could offer a real bulwark against white flight, but it is ultimately focused on integrated schools more than the truly disadvantaged schools. If an incentive-based policy like this were to be truly successful, leaders would need to coordinate it with efforts that directly address schools where racial and economic segregation are far worse. A strategy that preserves integration in schools that are 40 percent low-income may have no impact at all in a school that’s 90 percent low-income.

Perhaps one of the strongest merits of Scott-Railton’s idea is that it advances a new way of thinking about some very old problems, and encourages thinking about two issues—K–12 integration and diversity in higher education—together, rather than apart.

“In reality, for students, it’s a seamless web,” said Kahlenberg. “One impacts the other, and it’s not really until this proposal that we’ve seen those two worlds come together.”

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154142)

we are going to be in a shooting civil war within 10 years

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154160)

hopefully it the upcoming civil war we will reach a final solution

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154178)

Just do come up with an idea involving massive manipulatin of many massive complex systems and organizations to solve a narrow "problem" and expect it will just turn out exactly as expected...

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154180)

tl;dr this shit won't work

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154409)

the so-called problem is not that deserving kids don't get admitted, it's that some feel less deserving kids should get admitted. that's shorthand for we need more minorities. hard to imagine this 'solution' bringing in more minorities. not hard to imagine this solution bringing in more poor whites. that won't accomplish anything worthwhile.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154430)

IF YOU KEEP DOING THIS KIND OF SHIT YOU WILL BE GENOCIDED AGAIN. I TELL YOU THIS BECAUSE I DONT WANT YOU GENOCIDED. YOU ARE NOT THINKING LONG TERM HERE. STOP IT WITH THIS SHIT.

SINCERELY,

EVERY SINGLE NON-BLACK NON-JEW IN AMERICA

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154276)

Scott-Railton began thinking about this last fall, after listening to Nikole Hannah-Jones’s reporting on This American Life

Scott-Railton began thinking about this last fall, after listening to Nikole Hannah-Jones’s reporting on This American Life

Scott-Railton began thinking about this last fall, after listening to Nikole Hannah-Jones’s reporting on This American Life

Scott-Railton began thinking about this last fall, after listening to Nikole Hannah-Jones’s reporting on This American Life

Scott-Railton began thinking about this last fall, after listening to Nikole Hannah-Jones’s reporting on This American Life

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154296)

Dental plan! "Lisa needs braces."

Dental plan! "Lisa needs braces."

Dental plan! "Lisa needs braces."

Dental plan! "Lisa needs braces."

Dental plan! "Lisa needs braces."

Dental plan! "Lisa needs braces."

Many of the white parents’ fears were prejudice, plain and simple. But Scott-Railton knew that the parents were right about one thing: Integrating the school could mean that the school’s rating would drop

Prejudice, plain and simple. Integrating the school could mean that the school’s rating would drop

Prejudice, plain and simple. Integrating the school could mean that the school’s rating would drop

Prejudice, plain and simple. Integrating the school could mean that the school’s rating would drop

Prejudice, plain and simple. Integrating the school could mean that the school’s rating would drop

Prejudice, plain and simple. Integrating the school could mean that the school’s rating would drop

Prejudice, plain and simple. Integrating the school could mean that the school’s rating would drop

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154313)

Good kids make good school, not vice versa. Data is in on that and it is clear.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154331)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_and_Deliver

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Debaters

also, we need wealthy black numbers. that's what would really help determine the potential

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36158363)

What about smaller shithole "cities" like Hartford or Bridgeport or Yonkers or Newark? How does it benefit anyone to spread those blacks into more middle-class and affluent suburbs?

I've always thought that was a play by local dems to control state senates.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154404)

We must do anything possible to protect our White children from the rabid niglets.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154364)

i really can't imagine normal white people would ever allow this, even if they were liberals

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154442)

LOL at this shameless plug for seamless.com right in the middle of the article

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154447)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154474)

I don’t care what color you are, and whether you go to a poor inner city ghetto school or a rich suburban district, if you commit violence in school your ass goes to juvie, not school. School is for learning.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154535)

Do "top universities" actually have a diversity issue?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154597)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36154637)

WHY???

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36155030)

Never heard of this. I always thought more competitive schools put the avg student at a disadvantage.

Of course, these rich schools do provide more opportunity but that's beside the point.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36155540)

It seems way more than fair to give preference to the kid who succeeded in a non-coddled environment, despite the fact UMC parents want Aiden to get every advantage possible.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36156737)

But the reality is you know that UMC kids in UMC are given a lot more advantages.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36157002)

-the initial premise is that "desegregation" is the absolute and ultimate goal, and that this goal must be pursued at all costs. this premise is never justified; it is simply presumed.

-now, to achieve this goal, the article concedes that merely mashing different student populations together tends to degrade school quality the school undergoing desegregation. this, in turn, causes the evil racist white people to run away in terror. but even though they are evil and racist, the article wants the opposite of that; it wants the evil racist white kids to stay.

-but why would they stay if their schools are going to shit? well, what if college admissions were juiced so that - in exchange for attending a ghettoizing school - they get a boost?

this is just backwards in so many ways. how about we DON'T nuke schools and cause them to become shitheaps via desegregation? but that's not even presented as an option here. additionally, kids from shitty schools already get a boost from most university adcoms, meaning that this proposal is already being implemented to some extent. just how far should it go?

also, the general problem that the public school population is running out of white kids, and chasing more of them away will merely accelerate the process.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36156820)

This is about giving an ENORMOUS boost (200-300+ SAT points) to people who go to shitty schools

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36156833)

1. This is not at all a bad idea; in fact, it is a very good idea for merit based equality. It is similar in concept to the Texas plan of admitting students based on a top 10% class rank regardless of school. The net result of this is discussed in 2 below.

2. The unintended consequence of this would be poor Asians and whites will get a bump, not URMs, and it would be at the cost of UMC whites and UMC URMs which is why everyone is freaking out. This is especially so because, unlike the Texas plan, admissions would not be exclusively based on class rank so SAT/ACT would still factor in. That is, a 95% URM school would not automatically get 10% in like at UT guaranteeing some URMs.

3. There is no lack of diversity at top universities. That is laughable.

4. If you add poverty as an admissions factor, this helps poor whites (who are often rural and conservative) and poor Asians at the expense of the

establishment interests of UMC and diversity including wealthy URMs.

5. Few would game the system and send their kids to shit poor schools and no one would welcome urban poors in wealthy schools because of it.

TLDR: Impliment the plan and it is the most Trumpian/conservative deform in elite college admissions ever AND it preserves de facto segregated public schools. Exactly the opposite of what the author thinks would happen.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36156800)

This is just a proposal being floated by a law student, not some law on Trump's desk. Don't be an idiot and fight the hypothetical.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36157051)

Twitter: @rmc031

Email: rmc031@gmail.com

Phone: 202-681-6194

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3989957&forum_id=2#36196260)