Star report Hank Stephenson’s article paints a bleak picture: Despite evidence that the Tucson Unified School District engaged in egregious segregative practices for Mexican-Americans, TUSD’s response to the special master’s annual report “argues … that it should be released from court supervision with respect to the Mexican-American students’ case because the district didn’t operate a segregated ‘dual school system’ for Latinos, as it did for African-American students.”
Although this was the original court decision, TUSD entered into a contract that included addressing equity for Mexican-American students when the court approved the district’s desegregation plans.
To be granted unitary status, TUSD must demonstrate good-faith efforts to comply with the provisions detailed in the Unitary Status Plan. The special master’s annual report evaluates the extent to which the district attempted to address each provision. There are recommendations that the district be granted unitary status in many provisions, but notable exceptions include integration in magnet schools; dropout and retention of English Language Learners (ELLs); dual language; and racial diversity in the teaching staff. Although the report details why TUSD failed to meet these provisions, our state education policies have created some of the very issues TUSD is charged with addressing.
Magnet school integration
Integration has historically been elusive: early white flight into private schools after Brown v. Board of Education has evolved to present-day “choice” into charter schools and the use of open-enrollment policies across school districts. Integration in Arizona is particularly tenuous given that the state has the fastest growth of charter schools in the U.S. due to legislation supporting charter schools since 1994.
Since 1996, there has been a decline of almost 20,000 white students in TUSD. The district has since closed over 20 schools. When this is considered along with TUSD’s demographics that went from a majority-white to a majority-Latino district, it underscores the ways integration in TUSD magnet schools has been extraordinarily difficult to achieve.
Dropout and retention
of ELLs; dual language
The SEI model used in Arizona expressly requires the segregation of ELLs. Despite widespread support for HB2435 which would provide flexibility aligned with scientific evidence, Arizona Senate President Steve Yarbrough has proved instrumental in ensuring Arizona ELLs are not provided with equitable access to education. The entire state is in crisis and will remain so until the policies that support accessible and equitable education for ELLs are enacted. And what about dual language? When ELLs are allowed early access to dual language, dual language programs will thrive; they are a natural integrative context.
Racial diversity
in the teaching staff
We are on the heels of the historic RedForEd movement that took a stand against low teacher pay and woeful student funding. To hold TUSD accountable for increasing teacher diversity and retention (are we really shocked that attrition is high?) without consideration of the appalling conditions for teachers throughout the state puts the district in a no-win situation. Add to that the fact that Gov. Doug Ducey has penalized TUSD residents with a higher property tax — which may not be collected, resulting in a deficit of $16 million or more for TUSD — the state has added even more obstacles to attract families and teachers.
By claiming that Latino families were not part of the original court decision, TUSD would no longer have to demonstrate to the court that they were addressing both integration in magnet schools (i.e., attracting more white families) and issues with dropout and retention of ELLs. While TUSD’s response was a misstep, our state education policies are complicit in the resegregation that is a result of the destabilization of public schools, de-professionalization of teaching and inequity for ELLs.
