Category: Student Posts

Learning Spaces in Magnet Schools

 Introduction

Visit any school for the first time and you will immediately notice the environment that you enter. Believe it or not, a school’s environment can play an important role in the school’s overall perception and in a student’s academic performance. Therefore, it is important that school space be closely examined. In Hartford, Connecticut there are three high achieving interdistrict magnet schools with Science themes. These schools are the Environmental Sciences Magnet School at Mary Hooker (Hooker School), the Greater Hartford Academy of Math and Science (GHAMAS), and the University High School of Science and Engineering (UHSSE), which is partnered with the University of Hartford (UHart). Each of these schools manipulates their space to teach Science in vastly different ways. Thus, producing three distinct learning environments: a lecture learning environment, a social learning environment, and a hands-on learning environment.

Data Collection

We visited each of the three schools and were given a tour of GHAMAS and the Hooker School. During our visits, we took photos of empty classrooms, labs, and social spaces. In addition, we researched each school’s website.

Findings

Table 1, below, provides a summary of the information we gathered about each of the three schools. The names of each of the three schools are listed on the columns across the top of the table, while categories are listed on the rows along the left side of the table. Each of these findings are explained in greater detail throughout our web-essay. While reading our web-essay, pay particular attention to the findings on the category labeled “Types of Learning Environments.” In addition, take notice of how the other categories listed impact the different type of learning environment produced at each school.

School Descriptions

Each of the schools listed in Table 1 are magnet schools. Magnet schools are interdistrict public schools that are organized around specialized themes, which appeal to students’ interests.  Specifically, in Hartford, CT, magnet schools are a part of the Sheff Movement, a larger reform movement to desegregate public schools. In addition, the magnet schools in Hartford,CT are run by one of two school systems, either the Capitol Region Education Council (CREC) or by the Hartford Public School System (HPS). Of the three schools in Table 1, two schools (Hooker School and UHSSE) are run by HPS. The third school, GHAMAS, is run by CREC. Although, the schools are run by different school systems, they are based on one common theme: Science.

The three magnet schools each have a specialized Science theme. GHAMAS and UHSSE both specialize in dual themes: GHAMAS is a Mathematics and Science school and UHSSE is a Science and Engineering school. Hooker School, on the other hand, focuses solely on Environmental Sciences. Another important distinction between the schools is the grade levels that they serve. GHAMAS and UHSSE both serve grades 9-12 while Hooker School serves PreK3-8. With Hooker School serving twice as many grades as the other two schools, it comes as no shock that the estimated total student enrollment at Hooker School is about 600 students, while at GHAMAS and UHSSE the estimated total student enrollment is about 400 students. Yet, another interesting distinction among the schools is their student demographic breakdown. Table 1 includes pie charts that indicate the demographic breakdown of two of the three schools based on data provided by the Smart Choices website. According to this data, the Hooker School and UHSSE are both fairly racially diverse schools. This is most likely due to the fact that they are both magnet schools that are a part of the Sheff Movement.

Age and Location

The Hooker School is housed in the oldest physical structure of the three schools, which was originally built in 1950 and commonly referred to as the Mary Hooker campus. The Hooker School was later renovated to expand its facility in 2009. ¹ (Mary Hooker School 2010 Article) In addition, the Hooker school is surrounded by residential housing units and adjacent to the school there is an outdoor classroom teaching facility. On the other hand, GHAMAS was built completely brand new from the the ground up in 1997 as part of a bigger project known as the Learning Corridor. In fact, the decision to build the Learning Corridor was made by Trinity College’s Board of Trustees to commit $5.9 million from the College’s endowment to launch a bold $175 million neighborhood revitalization plan. ² As a direct result GHAMAS is surrounded by three other magnet schools and located across the street from Trinity College. Similarly, UHSSE was erected from the ground up, in 2004, on the outskirts of the UHart campus. Contrary to GHAMAS, UHSSE is more isolated, and surrounded by woods. To see for yourself, use the live Google map provided below.

Analysis: Differences in Learning Spaces

Interestingly, all of the previously discussed aspects are factors that influence how learning spaces are created and utilized in each of the schools. GHAMAS, Hooker School, and UHSSE contain learning spaces that can be categorized into three types of learning environments: lecture, social, and hands-on. All three schools contain examples of each type of learning environment. However, the physical space provided by these specific schools limits the presence of certain learning environments. Therefore, each school exhibits one of the three learning environments more than the other two.

Lecture Learning Environment:

A lecture learning environment consists of students taking notes while watching and listening to their teacher explain subject material. Most lecture learning environments include desks and/or tables that are arranged so that the students sit facing the front of the classroom. This setup encourages students to stay focused on where the teacher stands to give their talk, or lecture, on a particular topic. Generally, teachers stand at the front of the classroom near some form of a board. Because of this, we believe that interactive learning is limited in a lecture learning environment.

According to Marrais (1998), there are two types of activities that take place in learning spaces and the type of activity depends on how the space is framed. Marrais classifies one type of activity as quiet inside activity. Quiet inside activity takes place in spaces that are designed for students to do academic work with the students usually facing the front of the classroom toward the teacher. ³ Classroom layout ultimately decides what activities can take place in the classroom. Therefore, space influences learning. In the case of lecture learning environments, any learning that happens, happens through quiet inside activity.

In the Hooker School, the existence of lecture learning spaces may be connected to the larger number of students that are enrolled at the school. Having more students and serving more grade levels, Hooker School might have lecture learning for their students because lecturing may be an easier, and faster way, to get information to all of the students. A more logical reason for why Hooker School may provide lecture learning environments for its students is that every school should have some type of lecturing going on to relay knowledge from teacher to students in an organized fashion.

On the other hand, GHAMAS might provide lecture learning environments due to the fact that they have a dual theme in Math and Science. More often than not, upper level Math classes, such as algebra and calculus, are taught using a whiteboard and dry erase markers. Math classrooms are almost always set up in a lecture environment. The lecture environment is particularly important for Math classrooms because Math is taught by a teacher providing examples of Math problems on the board and then the teacher helping students individually. Lecture learning environments provide the space for a teacher to lecture at the front of the classroom. In addition, lecture learning environments often provide seating in rows, which allows teachers to navigate through the classrooms easily and assist students when needed. Thus, lecture learning environments make teaching Math convenient.

Similarly, recall that UHSSE has a dual theme of Science and Engineering. The lecture learning environments are just as important here as they are at GHAMAS. Many of the science classes at UHSSE, such as Engineering and Physics, are Math based. Just like at GHAMAS, teachers at UHSSE need spaces that they can easily navigate through and teach subject material in a lecture format.

Another important factor in the way space is created at UHSSE is their partnership with UHart. UHart is a post-secondary institution, in which lectures are the primary format of relaying information from teacher to students. UHSSE’s partnership with UHart is to help prepare UHSSE students for college. Thus, we believe that UHSSE is the school that prevails in having mostly lecture learning environments throughout the entire school building.

Social Learning Environment:

Since all schools have some form of lecture learning environments, they must also have some form of social learning environments that allow students to participate in interactive learning and socializing activities. Donovan and Bransford (2005) state that “Every community, including classrooms and schools, operates with a set of norms, a culture—explicit or implicit—that influences interactions among individuals. This culture, in turn, mediates learning.” ⁴ Thus, in every school there are social service spaces, such as the cafeteria, to help promote a sense of community and interaction among students. In most schools, however, a space devoted to learning while socializing is frowned upon unless it is being used during one particular part of the day for the students to take a break and talk amongst themselves. With that said, each of the three schools contains a cafeteria. But, one shocking discovery in each of the schools was the presence of social learning environments, social spaces that were being used to promote interactive learning.

At UHSSE, there is a colorful and inviting cafeteria on the first floor. Unlike the other two schools, UHSSE’s cafeteria space occupies the majority of the first floor and is the first space seen when entering the front doors of the building. Having a big social space that is isolated away from the classrooms suggests that UHSSE promotes quiet classroom learning environments and expects loud noise and interaction to stay out of, and away from, the classrooms.

In addition, on each of UHSSE’s two other floors, there is one common area in the middle of the building. The common areas have comfy tables and chairs near the students lockers. We feel that this area encourages socializing while providing a common space that students can gather in to do work.It could also be argued that the Hooker School discourages social learning environments.

Although the Hooker School building has only one floor, the building occupies an entire city block. After its renovation, the cafeteria space was built in the very back of the school. Similar to UHSSE, the cafeteria may be placed in the back of the school to keep noise away from the classroom spaces. However, the Hooker School encourages learning in the cafeteria. This is done through their composting program, in which all of the students are asked to separate their food waste into various colored trash cans. By participating in composting, the students learn the importance of waste and how composting can be used to help the environment. Although the Hooker School may encourage more social interaction than UHSSE, we believe that it does not prevail in containing social environments.

We believe that the third school, GHAMAS, prevails in having the most social environments throughout the school building. On each of its two floors, there are areas outside the teachers’ offices that have tables and chairs arranged into groups. This setup provides students with a space to work together on assignments, as well as, to have immediate access to their teachers. In addition, GHAMAS provides a larger social space at the end of its floors that allow students to gather in a more relaxed setting. This space is where students go in between classes to do work. Overall, GHAMAS’ space is constructed in a way that produces and promotes social learning environments for its students.

Hands-on Learning Environment:

A hands-on learning environment is produced as a result of an instructional technique where students play with and manipulate classroom materials to help develop an understanding of the concepts.⁵  A hands-on learning environment is set up to fully immerse the student into the subject and is great for student-discovery learning. In addition, this type of environment is extremely unique, distinct, and specific in every case, and more so follows a constructivist view on education.

Constructivists firmly believe that people construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world, through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences.⁶ Generally this leads to the encouragement towards students to become active agents in their educational trajectory, and question their true understanding of the concepts being taught. By questioning themselves and their strategies, students in the constructivist classroom ideally become “expert learners.”⁷ As a matter of fact, constructivism actively sparks a distinctive curiosity about how things work in the world collectively. Under this form of learning, students do not reinvent the wheel, but rather, attempt to understand how it turns, and how it functions through being engaged and applying their existing knowledge and real-world experience.⁸

In GHAMAS there exist hands-on learning environments primarily in the laboratory space provided in the school. The lab spaces are utilized, by the school, as a tool to teach the core science courses, such as biology, chemistry, physics, and biochemistry. The same type of hands-on learning environment is also present in UHSSE, in the laboratory spaces provided by the school. This type of environment is most beneficial when teaching any science related topics, because it does a great deal in combining both theory and practice in a safe controlled environment. Although a hands-on learning environment is present in both GHAMAS and UHSSE, we believe that it is more prevalent and manifested in the Hooker School.

Remember we previously mentioned the Mary Hooker school underwent massive structural changes in 2009. In fact the space was renovated to include a butterfly vivarium, an aquatics laboratory, a greenhouse, and an interactive Science theater. These drastic renovations were essential to progressing the schools vision to reduce the amount of energy used by the school and to help the environment.⁹  This new state-of-the-art building and campus provides many different ecosystems and labs, which allow students to work side-by-side with a resident marine scientist and an entomologist.¹⁰  This school is like no other in Hartford and anyone who walks into their building can clearly see this. As soon as you walk into the school you are greeted by an aquatics laboratory and eco-pond waterfall–holding over six-thousand gallons of water, in aquariums and terrariums.¹¹

The physical space at the Mary Hooker school has been manipulated to incorporate these environmental science specific learning features. Located at the front of the school, behind the eco-pond, is the vivarium– a 1500 foot, two story greenhouse. The vivarium serves as a place where students would experience the forms, colors and smells of a diverse tropical ecosystem.¹² The space literally serves to expose the students to real life experiences to better understand the overall concepts being taught. The same goes for the aquatic lab and eco-pond, the space is actively being used to bring Science to life.

Conclusion

All three schools, GHAMAS, Hooker School, and UHSSE, are magnet schools that have created different learning environments for their students. Each school promotes learning Sciences differently depending on how they have shaped their spaces. From our research, we have conclude that overall UHSSE is most successful in providing lecture learning environments, while Hooker School prevails in building a strong hands-on learning environment, and GHAMAS prevails in producing social learning environments. It’s imperative to mention that these three schools are only three examples of how learning can be influenced by the space in which it occurs. Most certainly, all schools organize their learning spaces differently and in actuality manifest learning in different ways.

Further Research Suggestions

Our study, due to time restraints, simply acknowledges, but does not examine, that a school’s overall perception and student performance levels are affected by differences in learning environments. Therefore, further research is needed to determine exactly how the school’s space impacts a school’s perception, as well as, how a school’s space influences student achievement. Another facet of research that can be further developed through our web-essay is what type of students are schools trying to attract by manipulating their space? Essentially asking how do schools’ learning spaces affect who applies to which school?

About the Authors

Jorell ‘Joey’ Diaz is currently a senior at Trinity College majoring in Educational Studies with a self-developed concentration of Latin@s in Urban Education. He currently holds the community service chair for La Voz Latina (Trinity College’s Latin@ student union) and is an active member of Shondaa (Trinity College’s step team). He is also proud brother of Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, Incorporated. He aspires to someday work in the medical field in his hometown of the South Bronx. He is also a member of Trinity Posse 7 (New York).

 

 

 

PLACE HOLDER TEXT

Pauline Lake is currently a senior at Trinity College with a dual major in Computer Science and Educational Studies. She is currently a teacher and front desk worker at Trinity College’s Trinfo.Cafe. Her career goal is to become a Computer Science/technology teacher one day. She is also a member of Trinity Posse 1 (Chicago).

 

 

.

Learn More

We encourage you to read more about each of the schools we visited. Start by clicking the links (in blue) that we have provided to each of the schools’ websites. We also encourage you to refer to our footnotes below to help further your intended research.

This home-buying simulation is designed to help readers discover how wealth and housing affects schooling opportunity. Readers will randomly choose a demographic of a Hartford family and will navigate the home-buying and school selection process, based on this demographic, using numerous online resources. The objective of this simulation is to help readers  discover the relationship between housing policy and educational policy in the city of Hartford and in the United States.

Demographics: What does your family look like?

Each family currently lives in Hartford and would like to move to the suburbs. Each family has one child in third grade and might have another child in the future. That being said, a two-bedroom house is necessary but a three-bedroom house is ideal. (Readers: it is also important to note the other demographic factors of each family other than just income). Renting an apartment is also an option for families if they cannot afford a house.

1) Family A has an annual gross income of $40,000 and has $5,000 saved for down payment. Family does not own a car and has no monthly debt payments.

2) Family B has an annual gross income of $80,000 and has $10,000 saved for down payment. Family does not own a car and has $200 monthly debt payments.

3) Family C has an annual gross income of $120,000 and has $20,000 saved for down payment. Family owns a car and has no monthly debt payments.

As a reader, randomly choose a demographic profile. Once you have done this, you must navigate the remaining aspects of the simulation fitting this demographic and noting your results in the Home Buyers Notepad, found at the bottom of this post. (Note: please do not click “submit” until all of your information is entered).

Mortgages: What can you afford?

In order to get the home-buying process started, find the current rate for a 30-year fixed mortgage (pictured to the right). Jot down the current rate in the Home Buyer’s Notepad, found at the bottom of this post.

 

Now, utilize the internet mortgage affordability calculator (pictured to the left) to estimate purchase prices of homes that you can afford. By entering your mortgage and income information, this calculator will give you an idea of what you can afford to pay for a home. It gives you both the “minimum house price” and the “maximum house price”; for the purpose of this simulation, you may shop for any home that falls in this range.

While a house is ideal, the family will settle for an apartment. In order to calculate monthly rent affordability, calculate 33% of monthly gross income. Note your monthly rent affordability at the bottom of the post.

House Hunting: What are your options?

According to your affordable price range for buying and renting, start looking for houses in Hartford and the surrounding suburbs. You may use the internet or newspaper listings in order to find residences in suburban towns, keeping in mind that the space must accommodate two parents plus one child (and possibly another on the way). Also, keep in mind that both parents hold jobs in the city of Hartford. That being said, it would not be advisable to move too far outside the city of Hartford if one does not have a car. Internet listings on craigslist and zillow.com are great places to start, while other online resources are useful as well. It is important to note the address of the town, including street name and town name. Note 3 home or apartment listings in the Home Buyer’s Notepad at the bottom of the post.

The School Search

Once you have determined 3 homes or apartments that you can afford, it is time to find out which schools your child will attend. By utilizing the Smart Choices website, you can see listings of schools that are available to your family, both district and inter-district. You can also access information about each school, such as racial balance, test goal, and test gain. Once you enter the address of your potential home, note the “quality” of education that your child would receive if you lived in that particular district. Any other information online that you can find about schools in your district will be helpful as well. Note this information in the Home Buyer’s Notepad, below.

Reflections: What did you learn?

Once you have completed your search, explore what other readers have discovered through this simulation through this Google Spreadsheet. Look for patterns and trends in the data. Also, it may be helpful to read what the author discovered in her simulation in order to connect housing options to school opportunities.

In order to understand the reasoning behind this simulation process, please read the “How It Was Made” post.

 

Below, please note the information that you are asked to record throughout the simulation. Do not click submit until all of the questions are answered.

 

Families in Hartford and surrounding suburbs of the Greater Hartford area are given many options when it comes to where they send their kids to schools. Students no longer necessarily attend their neighborhood or town public school but have an option to attend schools such as magnet schools. In a recent report on school choice, magnet schools are shown to have higher student achievement and racial integration. The author of this report, the Sheff Movement, imply that magnet schools that meet integration all have higher test scores on the CMT and the CAPT in comparison to the students in Hartford who attend Hartford public district schools. In this study, we focus on clarifying this implication; while many magnet schools that meet integration are high scoring, this is not the case for every single one. In our investigation, we found three schools where a lower percentage of students scored at or above the test goals in comparison to the Connecticut average and meet integration. Instead of elaborating on all three of the magnet schools that meet integration but have lower test scores, we will be focusing on one: Public Safety Academy.

How Magnet Schools came to be

Before we go into the specific magnet schools, it is important to understand what exactly magnet schools are and how they became popular in the Greater Hartford area. Magnet schools are schools with a specialized theme that are still run as public schools. To enroll, students must apply and be selected through a random lottery process. In Connecticut, magnet schools gained popularity after the Sheff v. O’Neill (1996) court decision. This court case called for equal educational opportunity for children in Hartford, which would happen through desegregation of the schools. As a result of this case, magnet schools were and still are encouraged to be built by Sheff advocates because they are thought to provide quality, integrated environments (Dougherty, 2012). In their opinion, learning happens best when students of different socioeconomic backgrounds, and different racial backgrounds, are together in a classroom (Eaton, 2007). Students not only from Hartford but also the Greater Hartford area can apply to go to magnet schools and be put into their lottery, thus creating a more integrated environment in the schools. Additionally, students either can attend Hartford Host Magnet Schools that are run by the city of Hartford, or Capitol Region Education Council Magnet Schools (CREC) that are run by a council. For more information on Sheff history, we compiled a timeline for our readers to have a better understanding.

The Sheff Movement Report

The Sheff Movement Report has brought us to our topic of study. On October 19th, 2012, the Sheff Movement released a report of the percentage of Hartford resident students attending local and choice programs by grade that scored at or above goal on the Connecticut Mastery Tests (CMT) and Connecticut Academic Performance Tests (CAPT).  Goal-level and Proficiency-level are determined by the Connecticut Department of Education. The CMT is administered to Grades 3-8, and students are assessed in reading, mathematics, writing, and science (Grade 5 and 8 only). The CAPT assesses the same subject areas in Grade 10; students who fail to pass may retake the test in Grade 11 and 12 to graduate from a Connecticut public high school. Both tests are meant to measure progress among students as well as assess criteria for curricula decided upon by Connecticut educators (Connecticut State Department of Education, 2012). More descriptive information about these tests can be found at the Bureau of Student Assessment site, sponsored by the Connecticut Department of Education.

In the report, the Sheff Movement states that the data on test scores “show striking achievement results for Hartford children attending racially and economically integrated regional magnet schools” (Sheff Movement, 2012). The claim implies that Hartford students attending any magnet school, whether a CREC Magnet School or Hartford Host Magnet School have a higher percentage of students scoring at or above the test goals. As we read the report, we were skeptical of the complete accuracy of their claim across all magnet schools. Do all magnet schools that meet integration all have promising test scores? While we found that many did, three did not: International Magnet School for Global Citizenship, Hartford Magnet Trinity College Academy and Public Safety Academy. At International Magnet School for Global Citizenship, only 50% of the students are at or above the test goal and 27.5% of the student body is white (Trinity College, 2012; Connecticut State Department of Education, 2010). At Hartford Magnet Trinity College Academy, 57% of the students score at or above the test goal, and 28.3% of the study body is white (Trinity College, 2012; Connecticut State Department of Education, 2010). We chose to focus on Public Safety Academy, because the school has the highest percentage of white students, 35.2% but only 41% of their students met the test goal, meaning that they had the lowest percentage of students at or above the test goal out of these three schools (Connecticut State Department of Education, 2010; Trinity College, 2012).

Investigating

To determine whether all magnet schools that meet integration have higher test scores, we did research on both Hartford and CREC Magnet Schools. We first used SmartChoices, a website created by The Cities, Suburbs, and Schools Project at Trinity College that allows parents in the greater Hartford to sort through schools by racial balance, test goal/gain, and address. Feel free to follow our steps using the SmartChoices link above! We use Public Safety Academy as our example school.

Methodology

1. We used Trinity’s address (300 Summit St), clicked show all schools, and clicked only interdistrict schools, because that is what magnet schools fall under. SmartChoices generates a list of schools and displays columns of School, Address, District, Grades, More Info, Racial Balance, Test Goal, and Test Gain. We know that there is a total of 36 magnet schools in the Greater Hartford Region. What we looked for is which magnet schools meet integration and have lower test scores. 

2. We sorted by Test Goal to see which schools were below the CT average in the Test Goal column.
3. After this, we focused on the schools that were below the CT average, and also appeared racially balanced. According to Sheff,  schools meeting the integration standard currently have at least 25% white enrollment or more (Sheff Movement, 2008). We found that International Magnet School for Global Citizenship, Hartford Magnet Trinity College Academy and Public Safety Academy all have lower test scores but meet integration by Sheff’s definition. Many magnet schools were missing either their racial balance, their test goal, or both; therefore, there could be more magnet schools that meet integration and have low test scores.
4. Once we did this, we narrowed down to focusing on Public Safety Academy, a magnet school run by CREC that consists of grades 6-12. According to SmartChoices, in 2012, 41% of students at Public Safety Academy were at or above the Connecticut test goal, and there was a -4 test gain across grades in 2011 to 2012, meaning that test gain declined 4 percentage points over the past year. In Connecticut, the percentage of students at or above test goal is 65% for the CMT and 50% for the CAPT (Trinity College, 2012). This is shown in the graph below: the dotted line represents the CT average of both the CMT and CAPT together.
5. Once we chose to focus on Public Safety Academy, we then used the Connecticut Department of Education website to find more detailed data on test scores and racial balance.

We took this method because we could look at the racial balance more clearly and also look at the performance of students on the Connecticut standardized tests.

Findings

On the Strategic School Report, we found the table below, showing the racial composition for this school. We graphed the numbers to a pie chart for a clearer visual representation. Look at the actual data and numbers on the table, and use the pie chart to help see the racial balance at Public Safety Academy. The diversity represented shows a meeting of the Sheff integration standards.

Looking at test data from Data Interaction, we were able to find details about their test scores. The integration standard was met as shown above. The test scores are less than promising at Public Safety Academy. The percentages of students meeting the goal on the Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT) fall consistently below state percentages as shown in the three graphs below for grades 6-8 at the Public Safety Academy. The percentages for students meeting state goals in writing are at least 20% lower at Public Safety Academy than for schools across the state. Look at the graphs for Grade 6, 7, and 8 below. Percentages meeting goal drop dramatically from 6th to 7th grade and further drop for 8th graders. While reading percentages improve throughout grades 6-8, the scores still fall under state percentages. Writing improves in Grades 6 and 8 with a drop in Grade 7, but consistently lies under 50%. Science at the Grade 8 level is less than half of the state percentage of students meeting goal. Scores for every subject in each grade level fall below state standards (CMT Data Interaction, 2012).

Conclusion

With the information from SmartChoices and the Strategic School Profile Reports, we found that the Sheff Movement Report is not telling the whole story; while many magnet schools that meet integration have higher test scores, some do not. While Public Safety Academy, International Magnet School for Global Citizenship and Hartford Magnet Trinity College Academy meet integration by Sheff Movement’s definition, they do not show the same achievement patterns the Sheff Movement Report shows. The students at all three schools have significantly lower test scores than all Connecticut students and other magnet schools, whether run by CREC or Hartford.

Not all magnet schools that reach integration by Sheff’s definition are high performing. In looking at overall trends as well as focusing on Public Safety Academy, we have attempted to take a broader look at the claims made by the recent Sheff report. Racial integration is a step towards equal education. However, racial integration does not ensure better student achievement or performance. We know that Public Safety Academy is a magnet school where racial integration is not breeding academic success.

Implications: Where do we go from here?

While integration is an important aspect of quality education, it is not a guarantee of higher academic achievement. Looking at Sheff’s goal to integrate city and suburban schools as a starting point, more policies need to be made to close the achievement gap. More understanding needs to happen by looking into the shortcomings of some magnets. Looking at specific student data and some long-term studies on improvements, further improvements could be made outside of the integration aspect in education. Our study was limited in the amount of data available on SmartChoices. Looking at more Strategic School Profiles, a stronger conclusion about schools meeting racial integration with low test scores could be derived. To further this study, an analysis of student grades before and after enrollment to a magnet, or to a specific magnet to note schools that are producing higher scores as well as maintaining racial integration. By looking at data over time at schools and who is applying as well as the student data before and after, we could attempt to explain why racial integration isn’t enough.