The way students are assigned in the Seattle School district has been a hotly contested debate for decades. Unlike many districts, Seattle currently has what is called an "open enrollment" policy. That is, parents at every grade level have a choice in what school their child attends no matter where it is in the district. Some like it, some don't.
Some have hired attorneys to argue that the way the school district assigns students to schools has, at times, been discriminatory in using race as a factor. It is a battle that has been waged all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, with the high court ruling in 2007 that the race-based plan the district was using was unconstitutional.
Critics have argued the present system equates to what has been termed a "possessive investment in power." Those with money can afford to send their child to whatever school they choose, can hire lawyers to fight issues like race-based assignments, can afford to travel to the school themselves for after school activities, parent teacher conferences, etc. Those without may have limited resources to participate in after school activities or to support their children in those endeavors, cannot afford the lawyers to argue issues of equity and equality and may not be able to take time off work for parent teacher conferences or to participate in parent/teacher/student organizations.

The district, which has been working on this plan for more than two years, argues the new assignment plan, based on attendance zones, will better serve parents and students by placing them in schools nearer their homes. In a perfect world, that might be the case. It certainly will allow the opportunity for greater parental involvement. Social capital is absolutely key to a child's success. It will also save considerable money in transportation costs at a time when all of our resources are limited.
But it would still seem to raise issues of equity. Part of the reason Seattle Schools adopted the current open enrollment policy in the 1970s was to address the ability of poorer students and students of color to obtain the same educational opportunities as the district's wealthier students. Now, more than thirty years later, studies show that South Seattle schools are still made up of nearly two-thirds of students who qualify for a free lunch compared to only a fourth of those who attend schools in the north end. Dropout rates at South Seattle high schools double and sometimes triple high schools in the north end. How is the new attendance plan going to address these issues - or is it?
I have a lot of questions about the new plan, but not a lot of answers. A website dedicated to the new plan has a clickable link for frequently asked questions. Unfortunately, every section within it says: "This section will contain a list of frequently asked questions related to the new student assignment plan. We are currently updating this list and will post it very soon. Please check back soon and thank you for your patience."
I guess we'll have to wait for thecommunity hearings to get some answers. The school board is scheduled to vote on the boundary maps included in the plan in mid-November.
An update. I was contacted by the Seattle School District this afternoon and was assured the "frequently asked questions" website now has answers to those questions frequently asked.
I checked it out and it does - though questions remain as to how the new assignment plan will address equity issues based on Seattle's North/South achievement gap.
The first hearing on the plan is Tuesday, October 6th.
Thanks Cynthia - I've been searching for news analysis of this plan and I'm not turning up much. I very much enjoyed your article.
I too am very concerned that while the new assignment plan may look good on paper (and save a lot of money in transportation) it will worsen educational disparities between economic and racial groups.
Encouraging parents to invest in their local school would be a great idea....if we lived in a perfect world of racially and economically diverse neighborhoods, with a strong mix of parents with balanced resources of time and money. But we don't. There aren't many parents in my neighborhood that can get significantly involved in supporting our local school and the school struggles as a result.
So what happens to schools five or ten years from now under this plan? By increasing the likelihood of kids attending their local school, the diversity of economics and race we have achieved in our schools to date (and I know that is limited) will be exchanged for schools only as wealthy and diverse as the neighborhoods that house them. So won't the rich schools get richer, the poor schools stay poor, racial divisions in our schools become as pronounced as they are in our City, and the educational disparities between north and south - and even between different areas within neighborhoods - be cemented?
I agree there is a huge question of equity at stake here - and it's a pivotal moment in the development of our City. I hope the major media outlets bring this issue to the public soon and investigate what it will mean to ALL of us.
Thanks,