Charter Schools Segregated (Just Like Public Schools)

Flickr/<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/araswami/" target="_blank"> Swami Stream</a> (<a href="http://creativecommons.org/" target="_blank">Creative Commons</a>)

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Charter schools suffer more from de facto segregation than their chronically segregated public school counterparts, claims a study (pdf) from the UCLA Civil Rights Project. The San Francisco Chronicle took the story and ran with it, even trekking across the bridge to the Achieve Academy in Oakland, a charter school with a student population that is 90 percent Latino. 

What the SF critics have failed to point out is that, though segregation is “alive and well” in other districts, the Bay Area actually has the most segregated schools in the state. The other thing they neglected to mention? Achieve Academy is in Fruitvale, one of the most thoroughly Latino neighborhoods in Oakland. I would challenge anyone to find me a public school in Fruitvale that didn’t have the exact same student profile. More to the point, that’s what draws many charters to neighborhoods like Fruitvale in the first place–minority students under-served by failing public schools.  That doesn’t make de facto segregation right, but it does make the Chronicle piece sloppy–unless they attend Berkeley High, Bay Area students are virtually guaranteed  to go to a school where  80 percent of the student body is of the same ethnicity. Even San Francisco’s magnet high school, Lowell, is more than 52 percent Chinese, and 70 percent Asian. The difference between 70 and 85 and 90 percent as homogeneous as canned milk is not impressive to me.

By contrast, charters in the Bay Area are merely just as segregated as their California counterparts. Which would probably make them less segregated than Bay Area public schools.  So what’s the big deal? It seems, belatedly, that the media’s attitude towards charter schools has started to shift. To wit: the recent New Yorker profile of Secretary of Ed Arne Duncan, which spent valuable real estate debating the merits of the movement. Is the blush off the rose? Are unlucky states like California growing bitter watching the Race to the Top money slip them by? Are charters just the next in an eye-grabbing list of controversial topics newspapers have gripped in a desperate attempt to stay afloat, or should we really be worried about a weakened and battered Brown v. Board actually getting weaker? Too bad, SF Chron. I thought we were finally going to see some enterprise reporting. Nice you went over to Oakland though–good for you. 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate