On February 4, 2016, The Initiative on Cities held a panel discussion that brought together Boston Public Schools (BPS) and Boston University community members to discuss the newest BPS Assignment Plan that was rolled out in 2014. This new plan reorganized Boston schools into tiers and normalized the distribution of “quality” schools across all tiers. It is still based on a lottery system designed by MIT Ph.D. candidate Peng Shi and is meant to increase the opportunity for choice for BPS families.
Moderated by Dean Hardin Coleman of the BU School of Education, panelists included:
- Kimberly Rice – Assistant Superintendent of Operations, Boston Public Schools
- James Racanelli – Director of Operations Management, Boston Public Schools
- Nancy Hill – Professor of Education, Harvard Graduate School of Education
- Kelley Fong – PhD candidate in Sociology & Social Policy, Harvard University
The main topic of discussion revolved around equity and recognizing that most parents in the BPS system seem to prioritize choice over school quality, partly due to families and policymakers across Boston defining the many different ways of quality. Does quality mean high test scores, a playground, a library, class size, distance from home, or the presence of a school nurse? Assistant Superintendent Rice explained that for Boston parents, “[school] choice is emotional,” which influenced the decision to change the BPS Assignment Plan to create more choice and equity for BPS students and their families. “The change in student assignment has 0% to do with improving the schools,” continued Rice. “Both parents and the BPS administration don’t want the system to define the quality of schools our kids have access to.”
Another theme was equality and the racial and ethnic makeup of public schools in Boston. Dean Coleman asked the panelists to consider the historical implications of school choice in the city. “Literature says that integration drives school improvement,” said Coleman, “but we’re in a city that makes integration almost impossible, based on the racial and ethnic makeup of BPS students. How do we tackle this?” Harvard professor Nancy Hill stressed the importance of understanding Boston’s most vulnerable populations and creating strong networks to keep those families from getting lost in the shuffle. “It goes back to inequalities in school choice,” said Harvard Ph.D. candidate Kelley Fong. “The racial history of Boston and the current population of BPS challenges us to think about these policies as we experience them.” James Racanelli from BPS echoed their concerns. “As we refine what we mean by equitable access to schools, we can better serve those at-risk populations—immigrant families, non-native English speakers, low-income families, etc.”
The initial assessment of the 2014 Boston Public Schools Assignment Plan was positive as BPS worked to provide more choices and resources to parents and children in Boston. All panelists agreed that more time and analysis will be required to fully understand the impact of the new plan and determine future steps for increasing the options available to Boston families as they navigate the BPS system.