Brown and Choice: Helpful or Hurtful? An Analysis of the Charter Movement's Place in Segregation Trends Following the End of Court Ordered Desegregation Plans

Abstract

Following Brown v. Board of Education, highly segregated school districts were placed under court ordered desegregation plans. Many white families resistant to integration chose to leave public schools during this time, opting for private school, or moving from the district all-together. Since 1991, school districts have been released from this court ordered oversight with increased haste, and there is substantial evidence that districts have re-segregated following this release. At the same time, the charter school movement, which offers choice within a public framework, has developed a substantial presence. In this paper, we analyzed how the charter movement interacts with court orders and their trends towards segregation following release. We began to probe at questions such as: Did charters allow families to opt out of public school and limit integration while under order? Or do charter schools allow for positive choice, allowing parents to avoid neighborhood schools that are re-segregating? We started our analysis with a goal to update Sean Reardon’s work on the re- segregation of districts following release. He, like others, found that they do in fact re- segregate. We paired this foundation with research on school choice, and specifically charter school choice. Many find that charter schools are more segregated than the traditional public schools that students leave. Other research finds that white families are more likely to opt into charters if they reside in more integrated school districts – evidence of “white flight.” On the other hand, many have found school choice ‘liberates’ students from failing and/or hyper-segregated neighborhoods. In theory, charter schools are supposed to comply with desegregation orders, but research indicates that this oversight is slim and ineffectual. We aim to expand the discussion by merging these two topics, court ordered desegregation plans and charter schools, and evaluating how the presence of charter schools alters the trends in segregation seen in these districts. To do this, we used a interrupted time series model based on the design used in Reardon’s research. We found that as expected, white-black segregation increases following release, and that this trend is accelerated in districts that have higher black enrollment, and districts that achieved higher levels of integration under their desegregation plan. Our school choice conclusions were slightly more equivocal. Increased charter enrollment was associated with higher levels of segregation. Districts operating a charter prior to dismissal re-segregated faster than those that did not, which challenged our hypothesis that charter schools mitigated integration achieved under order. Finally, charter school enrollment increased following release, indicating that it is possible families are using choice to opt out of re-segregating schools. Based on our results, we call for continuing oversight of these districts, even in the form of non-binding monitoring, and a transparent and complete source of data on the status of orders. Furthermore, based on prior research on the topic and our results that charter schools are associated with higher segregation and that families may be increasing charter enrollment following release, we call for firm and standardized civil right standards from the federal government as they grant money to the states for charter growth. At the state level, where the power to operate schools lies, systems of controlled and educated choice should be implemented in order to challenge hyper-segregation in charter schools and help parents make informed and positive choices.