The School Segregation Crisis

-->

Earlier this year several organizations decided to launch a massive protest against school segregation in New Jersey.  The hope is that pending litigation will lead to a court case and acceptable remedies.  The threat of legal action has awakened Civil Rights warriors as well as community protectionists. 

According to several reports, New Jersey has some of the nation’s most segregated school districts. In fact, its overall ranking is fourth worse, placing this northern state ahead of many southern states that faced forced integration during the Civil Rights era. The following remarks are a reflection of my thoughts on the subject.

There is a tendency to think of New Jersey as ten big cities (Paterson, Newark, Jersey City, New Brunswick, Atlantic City, Trenton, Edison, Toms River, Camden, Passaic, Clifton, and Elizabeth) several regional centers like Princeton, Bridgewater, Morristown, and Metropark, and then a mass of suburban communities. But perhaps that is the wrong way to consider the Garden State. New Jersey is like one large city, with a population of 9 million, and a seemingly infinite number of different neighborhoods. And if you think of New Jersey in terms of its school districts, it looks like nearly 700 random sized communities (actual number 678) that blot a large canvas.

I am using this imagery to suggest that racial and ethnic segregation in New Jersey and its schools is quite complex.  The history of segregation in these school districts is not tied to the arrival of the current wave of newcomers, but rather the migration and settlement patterns of Italians, Jews, and other ethnic whites in the 19^th century.  The spaces carved out by their inward and outward migration made it possible for African Americans to initially integrate communities, and then allowed for the contestation of school districts.

Attempts to deter black settlement at the beginning of the 20^th century plays a major role for Asian and Latinx settlement in the late 20^th century. In most cases African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latino Americans do not settle in the same communities. Their numbers are restricted and, in many cases, the outward migration of Italians and Jews, in particular, usually creates spaces for just one minority group to take their place.

New Jersey has employed various strategies to address the education of black students as seen in State Supreme Court cases in 1881 and 1944 that favored integration, the development of a racially based training institution in Bordentown in 1886, a constitution that prohibited segregated schools in 1948, and later in the era of Brown v. Board of Education a series of local desegregation decisions fueled by protests and court cases. The state even addressed education issues through fair housing policies and landmark court decisions that attempted to open up the suburbs.  And while all of these effects yielded results, in reality, they all proved to be failures.  Neighborhoods either remained segregated, neighborhood schools remained segregated, or communities re-segregated and re-established limited mobility for racial groups within municipal borders.

The research of the UCLA Civil Rights Project pinpoints the numbers and locations of majority-minority schools throughout the state. Its statistics are hard to fathom when you realize that 59% of New Jersey is white, 18% is Hispanic, 13% black and 8% Asian.  But when you comprehend that the percentage of white children in public schools is less than 50% of the total,  and the percentages of blacks and Latinos and Asians are slightly higher, the consequences of that failure become more evident.

Its 2013 study revealed: “A majority of students at suburban schools in northern and central New Jersey (North and Central Jersey) and in Southern New Jersey (South Jersey) continue to be white, with 51% in North and Central Jersey and 63% in South Jersey. The majority of students in urban schools in North and Central Jersey are black, as was the case 20 years ago, yet the Latino student population is trending toward a shared majority with black students, having experienced an increase from 26% of enrollment to 42%. Urban schools in South Jersey have become majority Latino, from 29% of enrollment in 1989-1990 to 43% in 2010-2011.” 

So, consider that statement and picture South Jersey in your head. Most people would not consider South Jersey to be Latino, or South Jersey to have numerous urban districts. Consider my list of the state’s ten largest cities and then the picture should start to change. Urbanized areas in South Jersey are actually suburbs! And a similar image exists in the other parts of the state.  New Jersey, usually analyzed as highly urbanized, is seen by its residents as very suburban. And when we think of suburbs we tend to think of white residents more than people of color.

And this is where the data does not reveal the whole story.  In essence, the state has white suburbs and suburbs of color. The UCLA Civil Rights Project also indicates that school enrollment trends in the Garden State over the past two decades signal increasing racial isolation for students of color, particularly Latino students. In fact, it notes that “Current segregation patterns demonstrate that a greater number of schools in Jersey are now much more concentrated minority schools compared to 20 years ago, with 26% of black students and 13% of Latino students in the state attending apartheid schools (those with 99-100% enrollment of students of color). The proportion of these highly segregated schools in the Garden State increased by two-thirds between 1989 and 2010, from 4.8% to 8%.”

New Jersey’s minority populations are not solely residing in the ten big cities, but instead are living in what are referred to as inner and close outer suburbs and towns.  Their numbers continue to increase in the same places and often spillover into neighboring communities.  As a result, the “segregational” practices in contemporary school districts, as the research reveals, are little more than negotiations the departing power structures and the newly emerging ones.  This is a deal between power brokers including municipal leaders, investors and realtors. Education is merely a consequence of systems of social and community control.

This points to a fear of people of color throughout the state. The historical arguments suggest that brown people lower real estate values, create population density, attract crime, and increase municipal expenses. An investment must be protected and this leads to various strategies. However, the old arguments are no longer valid. People of color are paying large sums to live in various New Jersey communities with low crime statistics but with high taxes. And, despite that, they are still being deprived of quality schools (and integrated ones).

In many locations, the older ethnic groups remain in control of schools long after they cease to be the majority in that municipality. Conversely in other towns that remain white or white ethnic, students of color far exceed their statistical population in the schools. And in other municipalities, whites or ethnic whites use various techniques to keep families of color out of their towns and out of their schools.

Let me offer some examples to suggest why change is needed in how we view our communities and our schools.

According to Public SchoolReview.com, New Jersey’s public schools have a diversity score of 0.69, which is higher than the national average of 0.52. The most diverse town is North Brunswick (0.76) and the most diverse county is Middlesex (0.74).  However, this diversity signals the fact that many schools are becoming non-white. And when whites have the financial means, many are fleeing once desirable locations or simply sending their children to private schools.

Englewood is the classic example. A city of 27,000, it is 45% white, 32% black, 8% Asian, and 27% Latino. Its high school, despite five decades of legislation and court battles, remains more than 90% minority, and it has a lower graduation rate than the state’s average. Englewood reveals what is noticeable in countless other locations. Neighboring Teaneck has witnessed the creation of an alternative school, a charter school and a Yeshiva to ensure that its high school will remain fixed as a majority-minority school (67%) in a predominately white municipality. Montclair, which has a comparable diversity (nearly 4% Asian with a black population of 30% and about 7% Latino), is heading in a similar direction despite nearly a century of integration activism.

East Orange (HS-90% minority), West Orange (HS-80% minority), Bloomfield (HS-74% minority), Cedar Grove, Little Falls and Glen Ridge surround Montclair. Each has had its own battles over school segregation. And none of the results are satisfactory. The racial tipping point appears to be the key to whether a school ranks well, but this statistic tells little about the fate of individual students in a district.  For example, let’s consider three communities, Cedar Grove, Glen Ridge, and Little Falls, (that are near Montclair for racial diversity and degrees of school integration). Cedar Grove is 89% white, slightly more than 2% black, 6% Asian, and nearly 6% Latino. Glen Ridge is 86% white, 5% black, 4% Asian and 5% Latino. Little Falls is 86% white, less than 5% Black, Asian and Native American combined, but is nearly 10% Latino.

Little Falls is in Passaic County. Its elementary and middle schools are overwhelmingly 70% Latino. However, Little Falls students attend Passaic Valley Regional High School, which is only 38% minority.  Its graduation rate is higher than the state average, but student scores on standardized tests are lower than the state average. Cedar Grove's high school is 13% Hispanic but has a higher graduation rate than the state average. Glen Ridge high school, with 20% minorities, is a wealthier district but of similar size. It has some of the state’s best test scores and a slightly higher graduation rate than Cedar Grove.

Teaneck High School with 67% minority enrollment is able to achieve a graduation rate of 92 percent. With a minority enrollment of 50% Montclair’s high school is able to achieve better scores and a higher graduation rate than all of its surrounding communities except for Glen Ridge.  Teaneck and Montclair have the same graduation rates and both are seen as fairly liberal communities that have been in the forefront of the integrated school movement. Are their results the product of managed integration, degrees of affluence or the determination of minority parents?

Let’s look further away from northern Essex County. Dover was an all-white mining town and a port on the Morris Canal.  This working to middle class community witnessed a population shift in the 1990s. Currently it has 18,000 plus residents, with a racial breakdown of 66.5% white, 6.1% black and less than 4% Asian and Native American combined. However, Dover is a Hispanic town, with 69.4% of all residents being Hispanic. Its school district is 88% minority and its graduation rate, proficiency in math and language arts, and other test scores are much lower than the state average. Even Dover’s student to teacher ratio is higher than the state average.

Edgewater was an all-white manufacturing town, with few homes and apartments that has turned into a wealthy residential community. Currently with a population of 12,000 people, its racial diversity is 46% white, 34% Asian, 13% Hispanic, and less than 4% black.  The K-6 school district is 71% Asian.  Edgewater’s older students are bused to Leonia, which is 40.5% Asian, 38% white, and 16% Hispanic. This school district is 69% Asian, and its high school minority percentage is 66%.  The high school graduation rate is higher than the state average and comparable to Glen Ridge, Montclair, and Teaneck.

Cliffside Park, population 24,000, abuts and overlooks Edgewater.  According to the Census the borough is 70% white, 3% black, and nearly 14% Asian.  Yet, Hispanics, account for 28% of the population.  Cliffside Park’s high school serves a student body of nearly 1,200 students. However, 67% of the student population is Hispanic with a graduation rate comparable to Dover.  African American and Asians combine for 4% of the total number of students. Like Dover’s high school, Cliffside Park’s, ranks in the bottom 50% of New Jersey high schools.

My examples reveal that once minorities appear in towns, their percentages in the schools far exceed their actual percentages. Race makes a difference and it is hurting the students. For many New Jersey students, the first times that they actually experience racial diversity is when they attend college. 

Yet, consider the other side of the coin. In several communities, like Montclair, Teaneck and Leonia, the graduation rates are exceptionally high despite the absence of white students. It demonstrates that minority children can succeed in majority-minority schools. However, in these cases the communities had significant degree of wealth.  Similar but higher graduation results were achieved in Parsippany High School, which is 50% minority largely Asian, Princeton High School which is 39% minority largely Asian, Cherry Hill East, which is 36% minority largely Asian, and Cherry Hill West, which is 39% minority largely Black and Hispanic.

Results were not achieved in working and middle-class towns with large percentages of Latino students, or towns with significant black middle-class populations including Ewing, West Orange, and South Orange-Maplewood. Clearly there are specific types of patterns developing in New Jersey's towns. 

Foremost, depending on location, numerous residents, usually white citizens, are abandoning the public schools when racial statistics turn. And then in other cases, especially when Latinx students are involved, language arts scores decline and Latinx students become the majority of the school population. Ultimately, some degree of racial stability is needed to preserve the integrity and success of New Jersey's public schools. However, currently, there are more exceptions that defy the notion that all students are receiving a sound educational experience.  

In their 2013 study, Greg Flaxman, John Kuscera, Gary Orfield, Jennifer Ayscue and Genevieve Siegel Hawley wrote:” School segregation in the state today results from residential patterns of urbanization and suburbanization in the state, where minority students largely inhabit urban areas while white students make up the vast majority of suburban students. As New Jersey school district boundaries correspond with their municipalities, distinctly different racial compositions exist for schools in the suburbs versus urban cities. Housing policy that supports integrated communities, both racially and socioeconomically, can ameliorate this underlying cause of school segregation in the state.”

I contend that housing settlement patterns play a large role in residential segregation. However, residential segregation may or may not play a major role in school segregation.  School segregation, however, does play a role in student success and advancement.  A formula needs to address existing school districts, financial disparities, and student needs. Until this happens, New Jersey’s promise for its students will not be met.