Bio
I'm a pedagogy specialist, which means I help university instructors improve their teaching. As the contributing editor for Research, Academia, and E...
 
 
 
 

What’s Hot on BlogHer.com

Recent Comments

Are magnet schools cheating students out of a good education?

  • Share This Post
  • submit
  • 4
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

My son is 3 and a half years old, which means it's long past time for me to be obsessing over his K-12 education. We got lucky with his daycare/preschool; it happened to be the first one we looked at and there was an opening, so we pounced on it. And it's awesome. But increasingly I'm hearing parents talk about moving their kids to a "real" preschool, whatever that means. My kid's learning his letters and colors and some great songs. Does he really need kindergarten prep?

Maybe. A couple years back there was an uproar about cosmopolitan kids whose parents "redshirt" them for kindergarten, holding them back from entering the public school system until they're six years old. And every year we hear of parents camping out to secure their children spots in their schools of choice. Many of these schools are charter schools or magnet schools, and there are frequently fewer seats available than there are parents clamoring for them. Take a look, for example, at students' chances of landing at their (parents') school of choice in Jacksonville, Florida.

But are magnet schools really the unqualified good that gathered throngs of parents seem to suggest they are? I'm not convinced--even though I benefited from magnet schools for much of my public education.

My sojourn through magnet programs began innocently enough, when a first-grade teacher was concerned with my frustration over a simple worksheet. Specialists were called; tests were taken. And suddenly I was enrolled in a class for "gifted" children--which, it ended up, was my largely unquestioned ticket to the highest-quality education available to students in my large urban school district. From 1989 to 1993, I attended one of the best gifted magnet programs in the country. It was at Snoop Dogg's alma mater--because when the program was set up in the 1970s, it was meant to draw more suburban (read: white and Asian American) kids to the inner city. It was about integration. And maybe there was some other social justice thinking at work: with these gifted-identified kids come parents who will push for more resources for their kids and, by extension, the campus.

Indeed, a recent report (PDF) from the Civil Rights Project highlights the origins of magnet programs and schools:

Magnet schools are the largest set of choice-based schools in the nation and today enroll twice as many students as the rapidly growing charter school sector. The intent of magnet schools was to use incentives rather than coercion to create desegregation. Magnet schools, then, represent a compromise between individualism (choosing one’s school) and achieving community goals (diversity). Magnet schools were originally designed to incorporate strong civil rights protections (such as good parent information/outreach, explicit desegregation goals, and free transportation) and most were designed not to have selective admissions processes. This differs from more recent schools of choice that have been designed without these mechanisms. Today, in the aftermath of federal court decisions limiting race-conscious efforts by school districts, magnets comprise a diverse set of schools serving a variety of functions. Many have lost their desegregation mechanisms, which, as we will show, have made a difference in their racial diversity.

However, magnet schools don't necessarily distribute resources equitably, as I first learned when I took mainstream classes and learned again when in my first year of college I returned to my high school to be a teaching assistant and tutor to the school's "lowest-achieving," "at-risk" students. English classes barely had class sets of books--let alone copies the students could take home with them--and the books they did have were packed with uninteresting stories illustrated by cheap watercolor sketches. These kids were being denied interesting, challenging literature because teachers felt they couldn't handle it. Years later, in my first year teaching literature to college students, I saw some of these students, young men from Flint, Michigan who were very bright but also very jaded about school--one admitted to me he hadn't finished reading a book (it was, fittingly, Lord of the Flies) since eighth grade.

So this is what happens, sometimes: school resources are drawn toward magnet programs, while mainstream students and students who should be identified as special needs (but who haven't been because of budget constraints) suffer. Or--arguably worse--the best students are drawn away from a neighborhood school, leaving few resources in their wake. This process of skimming off the "cream of the crop" students has come

  • 4
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
JC 5 pts

When my son was young, I was convinced that our local public school would be fine; that it wasn't the school so much as parent/child involvement and expectations.  While the latter is certainly true, what we found during his elementary years is as a consequence of the mandated testing and NCLB, the main efforts were focused on the kids in the bubble; those who were underachieving and could be brought up to increase the test scores.  No enrichment, arts, school plays; minimal science.  My son was only served after meeting with his principal and matching him with the right teacher (who he ended up having for 4th and 5th grades).

My point is I don't think educators have hit on the right formula yet.  The gifted kids need to be challenged, but do you take them away from the mix?  And I like what Kelly says in her post.  It's important that we also let our kids be kids.  Let them play in the sandbox, paint, explore the world around them.  Let them be bored once in a while.

I think education is a work in progress, but one thing I did take away from my son's elementary experience, if I had the power to change things (which I tried but nothing came of it) I'd add enrichment to the mix and the test scores would have gone up.

http://www.storyrhyme.com/jcsblog

conversemomma 5 pts

I think what you are talking about is the problem of tracking, which not surprisingly came about right around the same time as schools being forced to segregate. When school districts realized they were going to have to "mix" they developed this genius(note my sarcasm) idea of separate but equal in the schools themselves. As an educator in middle school, I see these problems still exist.

However, magnet schools in the city of New York do seem to thrive. Kids have the option of applying anywhere, to schools geared around things that interest them. Yet, these schools should not happen until the secondary years when natural divergence of talents and desires arise.

I think the idea you touch upon here is disparity. Could you imagine how the playing field would change if ever single school district around the country had the same quality of teachers, books, supplies, and pedagogy? We would have a revolution. It won't happen. It is too "socialist" of an idea for the terrified american looking for communist red around every corner. (this is me laughing at myself)

I'm floored at the over-acheiving parents who compete to put their kids in ivy leauge preparatory pre-schools. But, then I just laugh at the irony of it. All the right research talks about the idea of play. Kids brains develop best when they can imagine, and manipulate, and navigate the tea-parties, and backyard sand-lots.

My little guy is heading to pre-school next year. It will be in a basement of a local church. He'll wear his daddy's backways shirt as a smock, and learn that pulling pigtails won't get him what he wants. He'll draw pictures and at night we will re-sing his newly learned songs.

He may not be getting groomed to take over the world, but I'm quite okay with that.

Peace,

Kelly (conversemomma)

Check me out here http://www.ordinaryartblog.com

mburtis 5 pts

Interesting. I'm a product of these schools as well. I was placed in a gifted magnet elementary school in the fifth grade and then accepted into my county's magnet high school for science and technology for high school. The GT magnet programs were pretty much old hat in my county (Fairfax, VA) by the time I entered. The HS was a different matter. It was only a few years old and was very controversial. i believe at the time, students at my school were benefitting from 2 or 3 times the per capita dollar resources as students in regular high schools. That said, the school also received a lot of donations and sponsorships from local high technology businesses.

I have a hard time reflecting on my HS experience very easily. It's an uncomfortable topic for me. On the one hand, I know that I received a truly excellent education with access to amazing teachers and resources. I feel quite fortunate to have had that opportunity. 

On the other hand, I've never been wholly comfortable with the inherent elitism that the school respresented. Most minorities were very under-represented and there was a definite socio-economic "fingerprint" to the school body.

On a third hand, the school was also pretty damaging to me, as well. It was in it's infancy and the faculty and administration still hadn't quite figured out how to handle such high-peforming (often highly sensitive) students. Suicide attempts were very high even if drug and alcohol use was very low. Students often seemed detached and depressed. We were all definitely over-scheduled and over-worked. In short, high school wasn't a very happy place for me (but, I guess, that's true for a lot of people regardless of what school they attended -- chalk it up to hormones and teenage angst). 

On a fourth hand, I'm quite certain that my school provided a real service to my region -- and continues to do so. At a time in this country when science, technology, and engineering are woefully ignored in many high schools, my HS was turning out very bright, very creative students who, I believe, are making enormous contributions to society. I honestly believe a student graduating from this school has the potential to help solve some of our nation's (and our planet's) biggest challenges. 

I hesitate to say this because some of my best friends and the finest people I know are public school teachers, but, quite frankly, my school was necessary because the regular schools weren't teaching to excellence -- they were teaching to a lowest-common denominator, and that doesn't serve anyone well. 

The idea of pulling the lowest achieving students out, instead, isn't one I would be opposed to at all, if our public schools could do a much better job of lifting up everyone who remained. I'm not sure we'll ever be at that place in this country. The public schools system seems to be broken by beureacracy and lack of innovative thinking at the highes levels of leadership. There are lots of amazing teachers and leaders in the trenches, but a transformation of this kind of a system requires holistic, systemic change -- and real top-level leadership.

(Another aspect of this is that I think the merit-based systems for recruiting and rewarding magnet-worthy school students value a very traditional kind of merit. I'm sure there were, and are, lots of amazing, talented, bright students who weren't accepted to my school and who were probably not served very well by their "base" high schools. That truly makes me sad.) 

Have you watched The Wire? It's an excellent series, and one season of it focuses on inner-city schools in Baltimore in which a program like what you describe is tested. It's fascinating (and an amazing series, in general).

Thanks for the post--it's great food for thought. 

Norma156 5 pts

Absolutely fascinating column. Well researched. Well written. Kudos to you.

I'm not an expert on education...although I certainly have a higher level of expertise after reading this marvelous column. But I do have twins, now twenty-one, and confronted many of the same problems you're facing.

After sending them to the neighborhood public school, presumably one of the best in the city, it became clear their education was meager and uninspiring. We finally sent them to a Jesuit prep school for high school where they did well and had a wonderful time.

However, because of our state's affirmative action programs, kids here (Texas) must be in the top ten percent of their class to attend our crown jewel university, UTAustin. So despite 3.8 GPAs and 1300 SATs (the old scoring) they had to go to San Antonio for a year before transferring to UT Austin. In the meantime, many of the top ten percent of public high school kids flunked out or were stuck in remedial education programs...also using up scarce state resources.

We had a good outcome. But my point to you is look beyond just elementary and high school to where you'd like to see your children go to school. Then position them for getting in.

Our choice was to pull them out of Jesuit and send them to a public school where I've no doubt they would have graduated in the top ten percent. We didn't do it and there were consequences.

Congratulations on a fascinating column.