Dissecting Educational Disparities: A Tale of Two American Schools

Five miles away, a world apart: One city, two schools, and the story of educational opportunity in modern America.

I found this book to be rather intriguing as Ryan presents an argument outlining his perception of the U.S. education system’s failure to promote/achieve desegregation and how it sustains the divide between city and suburban schools. Specifically, how past education reform policies and laws have created the current state while at the same time preventing any meaningful reform. To support his argument Ryan presents a case study comparing two high schools that are only five miles apart geographically but “a world apart” in the quality of their principals, teachers, facilities and learning opportunities.

Thomas Jefferson High School is located in the city of Richmond Va. Freeman High School is located in a nearby suburb in Henrico County. Jefferson has a student body that is predominately made up of minority students that are low-income (Ryan, 2010, p. 2). Freeman’s student body is the mirror opposite with predominately white middle class students (p. 2).

“Freeman students typically perform better than the state average” (p. 2). While not a failing school based on these tests as approximately 90% of the students score at the proficient level in reading and math (p. 2). Ryan points out that the 90% passage rate is below the statewide average indicating state tests scores do not accurately reflect the academic success levels at Jefferson. Furthermore, Ryan adds, “Fewer than half of the eligible Jefferson students take the SAT, for example, compared to the two-thirds of students at Freeman” (p. 2). Drop-out rates are lower and college attendance are higher at Freeman compared to Jefferson. Ryan cites these additional academic indicators to paint a clearer picture of the achievement gap between these two schools, supporting his argument that although these schools are within a ten minute drive of one another they are in fact a world apart.
Ryan opens his argument of how these two schools arrived at such different places by offering his interpretation of what he names the Nixon Compromise.

“It might seem odd to identify President Nixon as the (accidental) architect of modern education law and policy, but the label fits”, states Ryan (p. 4). He positions Nixon’s televised speech in 1972 addressing school desegregation as a pivotal turn on the road leading to the current state of U.S. education policy and law. Ryan argues that as Nixon denounced the possibility of busing being the answer to achieving desegregation or racial balance, he presented a compromise that called for the improvement in quality of city schools while protecting the independence of suburban schools (p. 5). He asserts that every major attempt at reforming schools since this compromise has reflected its mantra, “Save the cities, but spare the suburbs” (p.

5).
Having identified a starting point for how the system has arrived at its current destination, “Indeed, to a large extent, providing some type of aid to the urban students while maintaining the sanctity of suburban schools is the defining feature of modern education law and policy in the United States” (p. 6). Ryan allocates the majority his book to exploring this feature as it developed over the past several decades influenced by court decisions and attempts to implement educational policy reforms that would end segregation and improve the quality education for all students. Ryan presents his views on reforms such as school choice, standards and testing, and the NCLB clarifying how each reform attempt has guarded the line drawn in the sand separating city and suburban schools preserving the physical, financial and political independence of middle class white suburban schools. He supports his journey through the past, stating that the past offers a revealing of the future if nothing is done to alter the path of the current educational roadmap. As the past has provided evidence “that schools separated by race, ethnicity and class will not offer equal educational opportunities” (p. 13). Furthermore, “the past also indicates that high poverty urban schools rarely provide a genuinely adequate education” (p. 13).
Ryan maintains that as school finance litigation progressed the desegregation of students transformed into the desegregation of dollars. Increased attention was given to the disparities in resources (funding) resulting in the conclusion that, “we should concentrate on desegregating the money” (p. 121). Ryan ties the shift in focus to the forthcoming speech by Nixon proposing to “let suburban and urban students remain where they are but provide more resources to urban schools” (p. 122). Ryan concedes that although school finance reform has not been very effective, it has resulted in an increased focus and conversation regarding performance expectations for schools.
Building on the idea of increased performance expectations, Ryan addresses the standards and testing movement in education. He suggests that as we strive for increased performance and accountability in our schools, inner city schools are being pushed farther into the land of simply learning the basics and intensive test preparation while suburban schools exceed the basics increasing the achievement gap (p. 260). Ryan asserts that this turn in educational policy does not meet the modest goals of the Nixon Compromise and therefore, “we have compromised the compromise” (p. 261).
Ryan begins to draw the book to its conclusion by assessing the likely future of the education system in the United States including several recommendations on how to change the course of the future. He speculates that change is on the horizon but will not be influenced so much by the courts and legislation (as in the past) “but from demographics” (p.275). As the racial and ethnic diversity increases in the suburbs coupled with the increased return of higher income families to the city, Ryan believes that these demographic changes will produce new thinking and revisions to the current politics of education. To support and encourage these changes, Ryan advocates for amplified universal school choice in cities and poorer suburbs. Opening the door expanded choice not just within districts but between districts as well. Opening the school doors for Jefferson students to attend Freeman and Freeman students to choose Jefferson. He argues for an integration policy that focuses on socio-economic status rather than race or ethnicity. Ryan points to research that concludes academic achievement is impacted more by the socio-economic status of classmates than race. “The single best solution to this crisis is greater socio-economic and racial diversity within each district and school” (p. 278).
As I reflect on the book I see strengths and weaknesses. Ryan’s presentation of past reform attempts was well organized and detailed. He provided a clear link between the events or decisions and the resulting impact on the education system. This historical journey laid the foundation for anticipating the future if no revisions are made but also a glimpse into what it could be if states, districts and schools are responsive to the changing demographics in the country by supporting increased socio-economic and racial integration. His arguments and possible solutions are worth pondering in hopes of achieving a truly equitable education system in the U.S.
Ryan thoroughly addresses the dividing line between city and suburban schools but fails to address the stronghold behind the line. Why is this line so deeply ingrained in our perception of quality education? How has this line survived the many attempts at change? It would seem that it became a part of the grammar of schooling to some degree defining how schools should look. He blames middle-class white parents for the continued presence of the line. Ryan ineffectively explains how this line has remained a wall protecting the ability of middle-class whites to escape the suburban schools. Ryan speaks of the intensity with which middle-class white parents hold on to their autonomous suburban schools but then offers a response that entails these same committed parents releasing their stronghold in an effort to increase integration. If this value or belief is so ingrained in these parents I simply cannot see them releasing their grip as easily as Ryan seems to suggest. He is purporting to ask these parents to freely risk the quality of their child’s education so that others may potentially benefit. This seems to run counter to the prevailing notion that most parents strive to provide the best for their children. It reminds me of the graphic shared in class that demonstrated equity with the boys on the boxes trying to watch the baseball game. Ryan is asking parents to take away a box from their children potentially diminishing their educational opportunities in order to give the box to another child to potentially increase their educational opportunities. He is suggesting educational reform policy that in essence equates to education redistribution to “level the academic playing field”.
Ryan’s book definitely contributes some very important insights into how past reform efforts have influenced the current state of education policy supporting the dividing line rather than promoting integration. It also highlights that there are no easy solutions to the issues facing our schools and students. Perhaps with time as the general population changes becoming more diverse and people become more accepting and supportive of genuine integration the dividing line drawn in the sand will begin to fade and eventually disappear.