- Image courtesy of shutterstock.com
Part of TUSD’s desegregation order is that University High School’s student population must resemble the district’s student population more closely. Currently, just over 30 percent of UHS students are Hispanic, compared with over 60 percent of the entire TUSD student population. The school has made a timid expansion of its admissions requirements this year, but more will be needed.
TUSD’s problem is far from unique. According to a New York Times op ed last week, NYC’s eight elite public high schools are only 5 percent African American and 7 percent Hispanic, compared to a 70 percent combined African American and Hispanic student population overall. Bill de Blasio, NYC’s new mayor, who has a great deal of control over what goes on in the city’s schools, is working to broaden the admissions standards. He’s looking to add factors like students’ GPA, state exam scores and attendance to the current admissions test. None of that has happened yet.
The op ed goes on to talk about what Chicago has done to increase the diversity of its selective schools.
Under the policy we developed, 30 percent of students are admitted to Chicago’s highly selective high schools (such as Walter Payton College Prep) based strictly on the traditional criteria of grades and test scores. The remaining seats are allocated to the highest-scoring students from four different socioeconomic tiers, under the premise that students in the poorest parts of the city who score modestly lower on standardized tests have a lot to offer, given the obstacles they’ve had to overcome.
The policy has resulted in a situation similar to where University High is today, percentage-wise. The percentage of minority students at Chicago’s selective schools is about half that of the total student population.
It surprises me that, compared to the specialty schools in NYC and Chicago, TUSD’s UHS is doing reasonably well in terms of ethnic diversity. Obviously not good enough, but comparatively well. Chicago’s example shows ways UHS can get closer to the ethnic mix of the rest of the district by broadening its admissions criteria. TUSD needs to move that process along as quickly as possible.
But it’s not just about broadening the admissions criteria and increasing the number of minority students in the school’s freshman class. A significant chunk of deseg money needs to follow the new group of students to increase their chances of success, especially in the critical first few weeks of school and the entire freshman year. Tutoring, counseling and general support services have to be offered to the new students to help them acclimate to the academic and social world of the school. And some of that deseg money needs to help the school adapt its academic and social world to better serve a more diverse student body. It’s got to be a two way street.
This article appears in Jun 26 – Jul 2, 2014.
Ridiculous. Schools that are deeply based in academics should have admissions based on academics, and nothing else, PERIOD.
Everything does not have to always be equal, as long as everybody has an equal chance. ie: Every middle school child in Tucson, regardless of race, religion, sex, blah blah, has a chance to get accepted into UHS based on grades etc., but it just so happens that only 30% that do get accepted are of X race, then too damn bad.
We finally have some resemblance of a well performing school in this god-awful wasteland of an education system, and they want to screw it up for what? So the class picture looks like a perfect tub of Neapolitan Ice Cream?
Damn whoever decided that our children’s education had to be so intertwined with politics.
What’s the matter Safier? Maybe the Hispanic kids don’t want to go to UHS. if the population was Chinese or Indian TUSD could not hold them back! How much can you expect to do gor these kids. Maybe their parents don’t give a damn.
Just think what problems you will have when all of those Central American kiddies are old enough to go to TUSD. Ohhh that’s right they are supposed to turn themselves in in a year for a hearing. They are long gone my friend.
Just how much social engineering can the Progressive do. How come some groups just don’t need to be told what to do. You have not figured that out yet.
42% hispanic population in Tucson–60% TUSD hispanic population = 30% UHS population. They should be ashamed.
typo “for” these kids..sorry
These students are so incapable that we need to use ‘attendance’ as an academic standard? I’m sorry but while I support greater efforts and money spent to make all schools and students have equal opportunities, I don’t agree to ‘fix’ UHS by just making up some arbitrary criteria that dumps a bunch of unprepared students into the mix. Let’s work harder on helping them in elementary school. It seems the only way students who aren’t academically qualified will succeed at UHS would be to dumb it down to the lowest common denominator. If that happens, may as well just close the school (which is I think what the Hispanic advocates really want anyway).
There are two alternative for Admission to University High School:
1) admission based on the Academic record of the Student, or
2) open enrollment.
In both cases, with the requirement that the Student meets the Academic Standards set by the School beginning with the first semester. If a Student underperforms, for any semester, the Student transfers out of University High School.
The research investigated by the district and experts consulted show that the prior “straight numbers” admissions criteria of grade point and test scores was not the best practice for competitive high schools or colleges. Rather, those schools realize that a “bright line” test ignores that fact that there is a GRAY AREA with some kids just above the line who will not thrive and some just below the line who will thrive. Using numbers plus a more searching inquiry to try to determine which are those who truly will thrive is what the Ivy League universities do, as well as other successful competitive high schools. That is how you truly get the best student body possible. I know kids who were above the bright line who were not well suited for success at UHS and kids just below the line who might have done terrific. Does anybody really think that a kid from a privileged background who just barely scraped himself into UHS on grade point and test scores alone and then finds himself totally over his head (and if you think this doesn’t happen, you’re fooling yourself) is so much more worthy than a kid who was just a shade below, but has overcome a lot and shows a drive to succeed?
I am so sick of hearing UHS supporters complain about “lowering standards.” When you search for the best students in that gray area, you are not lowering standards for anyone. And for a candidate for governing board like Mr. Saitta to display such simplistic black and white thinking and lack of nuance is truly disappointing. Our students deserve better.
Ms. Happel: Your post is excessively vague: “….. Using numbers plus a more searching inquiry to try to determine which are those who truly will thrive …..” Pray tell, if you can, what are objective criteria for your “more searching inquire”.
The reality is that we are dealing with a heterogeneous Student population whose Academic Records may not be an accurate measure of their abilities. We have gifted Students, with poor Academic records, that reflect the less that adequate Academic programs at their Elementary and Middle School levels; and, we have gifted Students, with poor Academic records, that reflect a lack of motivation at their Elementary and Middle School levels. Open enrollment, with strict adherence to maintaining the Academic Standards set by the Faculty of UHS, with allow these Students the opportunity to Academically excell!
If you want to make a positive contribution, Ms. Happel, be specific as to your suggestions, and please avoid pejorative, ad homminem comments.
Ad hominem is defined as “marked by or being an attack on an opponent’s character rather than by an answer to the contentions made.” I know nothing of Mr. Saitta’s character and made no comment on it.
However, perhaps I misunderstood his approach to UHS admissions. His open enrollment suggestion is interesting and I’ll leave that to voters to ponder. The other alternative he mentioned is where I directed my comments and that is that there are different aspects of a student’s academic record to evaluate to attempt to predict success. As for specifics, for the first time this year TUSD moved away from the straight grade point/test score admissions criteria. What I refer to is the current policy, which has drawn some criticism as “lowering the bar.” Anyone who is not familiar with the new policy can ask Dr. Hawley.
People who run for public office should not be so thin skinned.
Why not replicate the UHS model elsewhere? Don’t tell me the magic is all locked up at 5th and Swan on the Rincon campus.
Interesting discussion going on here. I’m going to have to write a follow up post when I get a chance.
The question is, will broadening the admission requirements lower the academic standing of the school? The answer, I think, is no, and absolutely. Simultaneously. It needn’t make the experience of the individual student any less rich academically, and it might actually add breadth and depth to the experience. But it may lower the overall academic ranking for UHS because some of the new students may be lower achievers than the current student body. To which I say, great! If students have to struggle to meet the school’s high standards, and are willing to struggle to keep up, isn’t that a good thing for them and for the greater community, even if they don’t do as well in their AP classes or on their standardized tests? The purpose of the school isn’t to make the top 10 on the U.S. News & World Report standings. It’s to provide an excellent education for students who are capable and hard working enough to rise to the challenge. (Within limits), the more the merrier!
I do not think that broadening the admissions and retention policies based solely upon racial and ethnic population numbers (often guided by surname counts, discounting mixed ethnicity, will do anyone any good.
In the alternative, however, I would suggest that dedicating another campus or school with the same standards, support and facilities would be a start. It, possibly, could be more an open enrollment policy, but with strongly announced and enforced retention poicies, a contract with students and parents.
If this succeeds, a model might develop that reaches a little further each step — in bringing our schools out of the mire ofp[andering to parents, ignorant of the needs of other from various cultures, or ignorant of the subjects including respponsible liberty in citizenship the attains to a better education.
Affirmative action is illegal in the state of Arizona, therefore, I don’t believe that TUSD can legally change the admission standards at UHS to favor one race over another. It seems wrong, and a sort of affirmative action, to tailor the admissions process to favor one race over another.
There are new code words now, such as “broadening” admissions standards, but it is just an attempt to fly under the radar and help a certain racial group while disadvantaging another.
I wouldn’t agree that it is imperative that UHS have more hispanics, or any other minority. The fact that there are fewer of certain types of minorities at UHS doesn’t automatically mean that there are these massive societal ills that must be addressed at all costs. There are likely cultural and other issues behind differences in hispanic success rates getting into UHS on a level playing field.
A level playing field really means that everybody has an equal chance, regardless of their racial background.
It should be realized that “broadening” admissions standards is another way of saying we’re going to make it easier for some races and harder for others. Asians and Indians would be especially disadvantaged if affirmative action comes back at UHS, sorry, there are just always winners and losers. The best thing for society is to make the process as fair and colorblind as possible.
Asian democrats in California broke with hispanic colleagues who, bizarrely, wanted them to disadvantage their childrens’ academic options to serve the Latino community. Some research has shown that asian students face discrimination more than other minority groups, yet do quite well in academics despite this.
The hardest working and most able students should be able to get into the school of their choice. It’s not psychologically healthy, IMO, to tell some students that they are getting favoritism to get into UHS based on their race, and to tell some other students that despite their hardwork, they aren’t needed as fulfilling racial quotas trumps handwork and achievement.
Students who are academically competitive know about UHS and have something to shoot for, it is amazingly oppressive and abysmal to basically tell some of them that racial factors will be used an admission requirements will be ‘broadened’. This just breads resentment. If there are 30% Latinos at UHS now based on merit, then there is a pretty diversified group of classmates right there to begin with. No need to make Latinos who got in feel like they don’t belong there as well.
I think that it is important for the author of the article to recognize that you can’t say anymore, “we need to do more to fix racial percentages in this prestigious school”, without offering a clear reason why, really this is just pushing an ideological viewpoint that many are increasingly starting to question.
Probably a good idea that people question policies, it is a free society.
I know this was the idea for many decades, but there are fundamental questions that aren’t answered, and nobody knows why this is supposed to be important. Certainly, poor whites are disadvantaged, but efforts to base affirmative action on income haven’t gotten traction. Sadly, I think that liberals who are in charge of the education system fear poor whites, (perhaps stereotyping them as tea partiers and Christian fundamentalists), and want to help those they think will be most likely to vote for them in the future, such as Latinos and blacks.
Society needs to move beyond this type of thinking.
Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor recently talked about how important it was that more Latinos get affirmative action, but its kind of a transparent plea as she’s aiming to help her own race first and foremost.
In the end, affirmative action policies make us all more race conscious, and I don’t think that’s a good thing.
I did unusually well on the UHS entrance exam, but didn’t get in, (I was told by a parent volunteer at the middle school (Vail) where I took it years ago), I went to the University of Arizona and got practically straight A’s, but for years, decades I guess!, harbored an intense hatred of UHS as the parent volunteer told my mom, (who must have been volunteering as well), that if there wasn’t affirmative action I would have gotten in there. We didn’t know, or maybe I didn’t know what affirmative action was.
I had such an intense hatred of UHS that I couldn’t drive down 5th St in that area for years. Don’t get me wrong, I love the Tucson community and working and volunteering here, but my experience with UHS and affirmative action really engendered a lot of hatred for a long time. I’ve gotten over it, but don’t think that the affirmative action system works as it does cause a lot of needless friction. AP classes can be taught anywhere, maybe there should be two UHS schools. This would mean more hispanic students, even though the absolute percentages might not change.
I think I would be more effective in terms of giving back to the Tucson community if I got into UHS, if you love academics and Tucson, you definitely want that experience. You don’t want to come away with the impression that your community cheated you, or doesn’t value your contributions as much as somebody else based on race.
Bilbo, you believe you were kept out of UHS because of affirmative action, which may or may not be true, I don’t know. You say it filled you with “intense hatred of UHS.”
Have you ever considered what it might feel like to be a member of a minority group which is discriminated against regularly and seeing yourself, your friends and your family passed over for opportunities all of you might have had if you were white? You might feel “intense hatred” of any number of things because of it.
I’m not talking about a single instance of missed opportunity, or only your own personal problems in that area. If you feel that your parents were denied opportunities which would have been theirs if the playing field were level and that lack of opportunity for them meant economic and personal pain for them and a lower quality of life for you, and you see the same lack of opportunities carried forward to you and other members of your generation, wouldn’t you feel a generalized “intense hatred” toward that inequity? Might you even feel it would take a few extra opportunities for you to reach anything near equal opportunity in society given the indignities and lack of opportunity you and others in your group have suffered?
>>>Bilbo, you believe you were kept out of UHS because of affirmative action, which may or may not be true, I don’t know. You say it filled you with “intense hatred of UHS.”>>You say it filled you with “intense hatred of UHS.”>>Have you ever considered what it might feel like to be a member of a minority group which is discriminated against regularly and seeing yourself, your friends and your family passed over for opportunities all of you might have had if you were white? You might feel “intense hatred” of any number of things because of it.>>Might you even feel it would take a few extra opportunities for you to reach anything near equal opportunity in society given the indignities and lack of opportunity you and others in your group have suffered?>>If you feel that your parents were denied opportunities which would have been theirs if the playing field were level and that lack of opportunity for them meant economic and personal pain for them and a lower quality of life for you, and you see the same lack of opportunities carried forward to you and other members of your generation, wouldn’t you feel a generalized “intense hatred” toward that inequity?<<< I think that most mature people who have succeeded in life, would say that the biggest determinant is your will to succeed, your dedication. I don’t think that racism explains the majority of racial disparities, there are a lot of other factors as well. Asians are discriminated against, at least in terms of studies of academics, and yet do exceedingly well. The paradigm that racism is the roof of all evil might not be applicable to most folk’s situation, and as the US becomes more multiracial, it makes less sense to try to give benefits to those of a certain race. I understand the altruism angle, no doubt, I want to help disadvantaged and disenfranchised people, like the homeless, but I think that changing how students are treated in academics is unjust and creates more problems and is in the end a poor man’s solution for education disparities. More grass root programs are needed. If you help a homeless teen graduate, awesome, no matter the race, you are helping somebody, but using racial quotas in education hurts some while helping others, it’s not a victimless action per se.
Bilbo, I wasn’t talking about altruism. I was talking about empathy, the willingness to try and put yourself in another person’s shoes. Anger about being treated unfairly is a doorway to understanding how others might feel if they are treated unfairly, not just on occasion but in a systemic way.
The computer hacked off part my post, I would respectfully add that I mentored a minority college student, the guy is bright and will do quite well! I think that race is much less of an issue these days, something like 88% of millennials feel that affirmative action is unfair, and minorities themselves might well do better without racial quotas and all the disruption and misperceptions that it can cause.
I don’t harbor any grudges towards UHS today, it might well have not been affirmative action, but that is what I was told back then, and it probably was a disservice to me in the long run to start thinking about that issue. TUSD probably needs two UHS-es!
Maybe if I was alive during the 1960’s and saw desegregation I’d be of a different mindset, there is definitely a generational divide.
I have a great deal of empathy for people who find themselves in unfortunate circumstances. But my ‘anger’ at UHS was immature, the adult mind is able to view one’s emotions from a distance, similar to the effects of meditation, psychologically, anger is *not* a mature coping mechanism.
The mature approach is evaluating the reasons for one’s circumstances and using mature coping mechanisms such as humor and altruism to navigate life’s bumps. I can have empathy for a person’s misfortune, certainly, but the ultimate reason for that person’s misfortune is often multifactorial and the observer and the person might disagree on this point. I would feel empathy for any minority that did not get into his/her school of choice regardless of the reason, but I do not empathize with another person’s anger per se, but with their situation.
I’m not going to go into supporting one side or the other on this. I do have an opinion, but my opinion isn’t all that important right now. What I really want to say is how exciting and encouraged I am to see so many people actively discussing this issue. No matter which side of the argument you lean towards, you have to admit that it is encouraging to see people at least TRYING to figure out the best way to solve this issue. There may never be a “perfect” solution, but the amount of discussion I am seeing makes me very confident that things are going to be a lot better in the very near future because people care enough to at least discuss this — even when they disagree.