Report: Missouri Attendance Boundaries Discriminate Against Low-Income Students
As Missouri lawmakers debate open enrollment for a fifth consecutive year, a new report is shedding light on how public school residency restrictions can discriminate against low-income students.
The report, published Wednesday by the nonprofit watchdog group Available to All, finds that Missouri has some of the strictest school residential assignment policies in the nation. District attendance boundaries mirror historic racist housing redlining maps and are limiting student access to high-performing schools, said Tim DeRoche, the organization's founder.
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
'Whenever the government assigns children to public schools, then the government also takes on the role of excluding those children from other public schools — that's where the split starts to get problematic,' DeRoche said. 'In Missouri, there's just very strict assignment-based policies in districts. It's very hard to cross district lines in Missouri as opposed to other states.'
Available to All's report estimated that 94% to 96% of Missouri public school students attend their assigned school, based on their home address. State law has limited exceptions, such as if a student is homeless, parents pay property taxes at another location or a school loses accreditation.
Related
The lack of ability for students to easily transfer schools inside or outside their district encourages wealthy families to buy houses next to high-quality schools, DeRoche said.
'It creates this very strict system where kids, especially low-income kids and low-income kids of color, get locked into struggling or failing schools, and the families have very few options to find another home for them,' he said.
DeRoche said the boundaries on redlining maps that were drawn a century ago to determine who got access to government-insured home mortgages largely correspond to the state's school attendance lines.
'Parts of towns that have high concentrations of people of color or immigrants or working-class folks are excluded' from receiving that sort of housing assistance, DeRoche said. 'We found three examples where the school zone in Missouri overlaps or mirrors the pattern on redlining maps from 80 to 90 years ago.'
One school attendance boundary cited by the report runs north to south through St. Louis. Children living east of the line are assigned to the St. Louis City School District, where roughly 20% of students score proficient or better on state reading and math tests. Children located west of the line are assigned to Clayton School District, where nearly 75% of students are proficient or better on the same exams. The boundary, according to the report, 'mirrors the pattern of the racist redlining map created by the federal government in 1937.'
In the St. Joseph School District, Field Elementary School — located near an area described as a 'choice part of the city' in redlining maps — has significantly higher math and reading proficiency rates than Lindbergh Elementary School, located 2 miles away. The Lindbergh neighborhood was described in redlining maps as 'a poor area and one which lenders avoid,' according to the report.
Related
A 2024 analysis by New America, a left-leaning think tank based in Washington, D.C., found this line is among the 100 most segregating district borders in the nation in terms of poverty rate disparity among school-aged children.
Because of the steep inequality across district boundaries, DeRoche said, it's not uncommon for parents to lie about where they live to give their child an education at a higher-performing school. Schools in Missouri — and across the nation, he said — often investigate students' residences to find families that aren't living within district boundaries.
These inspections are conducted by school officials, teachers or even private investigators hired by the district, according to the Available to All report.
A 2023 investigation by St. Louis Public Radio and Midwest Newsroom found the Hazelwood School District, which enrolls roughly 16,000 students in suburban St. Louis, performed 2,051 residency investigations during the 2022-23 school year. In 2018-19, the district conducted just 148.
Parents can be charged with a misdemeanor for falsifying their children's enrollment records, according to Missouri state law.
State Rep. Brad Pollitt has been trying to expand school choice in Missouri with open enrollment bills for the last five years. He reintroduced his proposal again this year in hopes it will finally make it to the state Senate floor.
Related
HB711, the Public School Open Enrollment Act, would allow any K-12 student to attend a school in a nonresident district, depending on factors including disciplinary and attendance records, the school's student-to-teacher ratio, class sizes and building capacity. Only 3% of a district's students would be allowed to leave each year.
According to reporting from the Missouri Independent, the bill doesn't require school districts to accept students living outside the area, but districts that do would receive extra funding.
DeRoche said Available to All recommends that Missouri require districts to enroll children from outside their boundaries when schools have space available.
'School finance policies should ensure that education dollars can flow across district lines, enabling Missouri families to access the public schools that they feel are the right fit for their children,' the report says.
It also recommends that schools reserve a specific percentage of seats for students who live outside the district.
'There's an opportunity for reform,' DeRoche said. 'We don't take a stand on individual bills, but there is a chance [to create] best practices in protecting equal access to public schools.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Opinion: How Much More Positive Head Start Evidence Do We Need to Save It?
The Trump administration's first four months have been rough on U.S. children. They certainly don't deserve the punishment. From polarized and destabilizing politics to a global pandemic, increasing environmental pressures from climate change (and more), this cohort of children is coming of age in a particularly difficult moment. And yet, we have reached what is perhaps a zenith in Trump-era politics of disinvesting in children and families. The administration's response to America's youth crisis has been stunningly consistent: again and again, it has balanced occasional, vague promises to do something constructive to address child care costs or infertility challenges on the one hand with real and stunningly concrete attacks on children's well-being on the other. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter Perhaps the most direct and comprehensive assault on children is coming through the administration's war on Head Start. At $12.3 billion last year, it's the federal government's largest-single investment in early learning, and it serves almost 800,000 children and families per year. Over its 60 years, Head Start has provided high-quality early learning as well as connecting around 40 million children and their families to comprehensive support services like health and dental care, nutrition and housing assistance. During the 2024 campaign, Donald Trump echoed the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 playbook in calling for Head Start's elimination. This was hardly novel: though Head Start has long enjoyed bipartisan support, a subset of conservative researchers, activists and politicians have spent decades attacking the program. While the administration's chaotic first 100 days decimated portions of the federal government supporting health and well-being, its attacks on Head Start have been uniquely unpredictable. In January, as Elon Musk and his underlings at the Department of Government Efficiency hacked away at the federal civil service, Head Start providers across the country reported that they were unable to access their normally scheduled federal payments. This posed a particular challenge for Head Start center directors navigating the tight margins that define the early education market; hundreds of early care and learning centers warned that they were at risk of closure. Related Later in the spring, the administration abruptly pulled funding from regional Head Start centers that offer resources, support and oversight for Head Start providers. Several weeks ago, it appeared that the administration was preparing to act more decisively to abandon U.S. kids and families who depend on Head Start. On April 17, the Associated Press reported on leaked documents indicating that the Trump administration would erase Head Start funding in its forthcoming budget proposal. Once this hit the news, Head Start supporters mobilized to save the program, and the administration reversed course. While it appears that the administration isn't (yet) ready to deliver on this promised assault on children's well-being, it's worth reminding ourselves just what a stunning mistake it would be to reduce this particular investment in U.S. kids and families. Related Head Start has been studied many times, and the results are broadly positive. Research on it — and other early education programs — finds a relatively consistent pattern: Early education programs are reliably good for families and at preparing kids for kindergarten There's some waning of positive academic impacts as kids go through K-12 But the long-term impacts of early ed investments are generally positive. First, Head Start appears to be particularly effective at helping children from historically marginalized communities. Perhaps most importantly in the present political context, early education programs tend to promote better child development outcomes that create cost savings for school budgets. This mostly results from pre-K programs like Head Start reducing the likelihood that children will later require special education services or need to repeat a grade. For instance, economist Tim Bartik notes that studies show possible special education cost-savings of '23 to 86 percent.' Meanwhile, if a child repeats second (or any) grade, the public pays an additional year of per-pupil funding, and it also delays their entry into the workforce. As such, pre-K's ability to lower grade retention and keep students on track for college and career is a particularly efficient return on early education investments. Finally, early education programs like Head Start are a boon for working families because they help parents get back to work sooner after having a child. Most encouraging of all, Head Start appears to create some long-term positive effects. In 2022, researchers at the University of Notre Dame and Texas A&M found that the children of Head Start participants garnered benefits like higher high school graduation and college attainment rates, lower rates of teen pregnancy and reduced rates of interaction with the criminal justice system. For instance, critics often point to the federal Head Start Impact Study, which gathered data on programs in the early 2000s. It largely found that Head Start had positive initial effects on children's development, but that these effects 'faded out' as kids worked their way into the K–12 education system. But problems with the study's data prompted a field reassessment of its findings in the 2010s, with most researchers concluding that it meaningfully underestimated Head Start's benefits to children. This begs some critical questions about how the public should measure 'success' for Head Start. Begin here: nearly every study of nearly every early education investment shows that these programs are effective at getting kids ready for K–12 schooling. Put simply, pre-K appears to be good at getting kids 'pre'-pared for K(indergarten). Related The trouble is, political rhetoric about early education investments has sometimes presented them as an invulnerable 'inoculation' against all challenges that children may face later in life. This is the wrong way to think about whether early education investments 'work,' because it sets an impossible bar for success. Head Start — or pre-K programs more generally — cannot wholly blunt poverty, poor health or the impacts of low-quality K–12 classrooms. Indeed, even less rosy findings, like those in a recent study of Tennessee's public pre-K program, indicate a positive path forward for public early education investments. Initial studies of the program garnered headlines. While Tennessee pre-K attendees were generally more ready for kindergarten than their peers who did not attend the program, pre-K attendees scored worse on a range of metrics by the end of elementary school. This is concerning! But a more recent analysis of Tennessee's data found that pre-K's benefits were 'most likely to persist until 3rd grade among those students who went on to attend high quality schooling environments and were taught by highly effective teachers.' That is, Tennessee's pre-K programs succeeded at preparing children for kindergarten, and kids who went from those programs into higher-quality elementary classrooms continued to do better. In other words, if Head Start and other pre-K programs are measured as a one-time public investment that will solve all systemic inequities in American schools and society, they will inevitably appear to fail. But if they are measured against their ability to prepare children for elementary schools, it is clear that they are a success. Furthermore, this fairer definition of Head Start's effectiveness would allow policymakers to focus their attention on the necessary work of investing and improving K–12 schools so that they bolster children and families beyond the early years.
Yahoo
19 hours ago
- Yahoo
Naval Academy Reinstates Hundreds of ‘DEI' Books
This article was originally published in The 19th. This story was originally reported by Nadra Nittle and Mariel Padilla of The 19th. When the U.S. Naval Academy stripped 381 books tied to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) from its library, retired Commander William Marks saw more than censorship — he saw a threat to the Navy's future. But last week, after immense public outcry, most of those books returned to Nimitz Library shelves. 'Do you believe it?' asked Marks, a 1996 alum who spearheaded a campaign to maintain student access to the books. 'What great news. We're thrilled.' Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter All the books the academy removed in early April had one thing in common: Officials flagged them for DEI themes. They include Maya Angelou's 'I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,' Harper Lee's 'To Kill a Mockingbird' and Elizabeth Reis' 'Bodies in Doubt: An American History of Intersex.' The purge followed directives from Trump-appointed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has called DEI initiatives 'divisive.' Determined to ensure that students could still read the works, Marks began crowdfunding to replace them on April 5. 'The motto of the Naval Academy is 'from knowledge, seapower,'' said Marks, who served as a Navy commander for 22 years. 'What we mean is without knowledge, education and intellectual growth, we will never become a strong Navy. So this contradiction really struck me, that instead of encouraging knowledge and encouraging discussion, the Pentagon was actually suppressing knowledge and limiting discussion.' About 4,400 students, members of the Brigade of Midshipmen, attend the Naval Academy while on active duty in the U.S. Navy. After graduation, they are required to serve in the Navy or Marine Corps for at least five years. Women represent more than a quarter of the student body, while men make up over 70 percent of midshipmen. Initially, Marks hoped to fundraise $3,810, which he figured would be enough to cover the cost of the books pulled from Nimitz Library. Since Marks lives in Arlington, Texas, he tapped Old Fox Books & Coffeehouse in Annapolis, Maryland, home to the academy, to be his local partner. Donations have far exceeded his goal, topping $70,000. Jinny Amundson, an owner of Old Fox Books, said by the time she got the call from Marks, she had already heard about the books removed and had started compiling a list of them to purchase for the store's inventory. 'For a bookseller, the idea of censoring any kind of books just gives us heart palpitations,' Amundson said. 'And it's our community. The [midshipmen] think of our shop as a place that they love and one of their sort of unofficial bookstores. We have the mids, the faculty, the administration that come in and think of our space as their own.' Amundson said she understood that the removal of books was an order, which has to be followed within the military. But she found the loophole: Her bookshop could store the titles targeted. It is conveniently located about a block away from the Naval Academy gates. The day before the institution's May 23 graduation, Amundson learned that most of the pulled books were back on the library's shelves. She went to see for herself, took pictures of the books and sent them to many of the authors, who had personally contacted her when the restrictions on the works took effect. Now, just 20 books are being sequestered pending a formal compliance review, according to the Department of Defense. A Navy spokesperson did not provide details to The 19th about those titles. Ultimately, a narrowing of the search terms used to flag books for review resulted in the return of hundreds of books to the Nimitz Library, as the Department of Defense first issued broad guidance about book removals to the military services. 'What struck me was the very arbitrary and even cruel nature of the books that got removed,' Marks said. 'These books were a cross-section of American culture. They were important to the discussion of American history.' In an updated May 9 memo, the Pentagon instructed the military services to use 20 search terms to pinpoint books in their academic libraries that might need to be set aside because of how they engage race or gender. Among those terms were affirmative action; critical race theory; gender-affirming care; transgender people; and diversity, equity and inclusion. People across the political spectrum expressed alarm about the book restrictions, which have been widely opposed, according to Marks. 'We really shouldn't be banning any books,' he said. That includes those with unpopular, or even offensive, ideas like Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf,' which managed to evade the Naval Academy's book purge, he noted. He calls his effort to maintain the midshipmen's access to all books in the Nimitz Library Operation Caged Bird, after the 1969 Angelou memoir that was likely targeted because it describes racial segregation and child abuse. The name Operation Caged Bird also alludes to the feeling of being restrained by censorship. 'I almost felt like I could feel the bars closing in on me in terms of what I can read and can't read,' Marks said. 'That didn't sit right.' Marks' GoFundMe campaign has raised enough money to supply 1,000 books in 2025 and fund a three-year initiative at Old Fox, ensuring midshipmen can access any contested title for free. 'If you're a midshipman and you're writing an essay paper and there's a book you can't find, maybe it's been removed or banned, you can call them, and they'll order it for you, and then you just pick it up free of charge,' Marks said. He's also coordinating with other service academies, anticipating similar battles. At the Navy's three other educational institutions, fewer than 20 books have been flagged as potentially incompatible with the military's mission, as have a few dozen at the Air Force Academy and other Air Force academic institutions. The Army has also been ordered to assess library books at its educational institutions, but a spokesperson from West Point told The 19th that no books have been pulled at this time, as its compliance review is still underway. The return of nearly 400 books to the Naval Academy library coincides with a pending lawsuit accusing Department of Defense-run schools of violating K-12 students' constitutional rights for limiting books and subject matter related to gender, race and sexuality. The American Civil Liberties Union filed E.K. v. Department of Defense Education Activity in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on behalf of 12 students. A hearing will take place June 3. The ACLU seeks a preliminary injunction to give the youth access to materials it argues have been restricted to align with President Donald Trump's executive orders and political agenda. Amundson said she was pleasantly surprised that it took just weeks for the books to be returned to the Naval Academy. 'I believe that what happened and the response that was given in Annapolis — I think that made the administration be much more careful this time around as they're going for these other libraries, the other Department of Defense libraries around the world,' she said. Amundson said using the funds raised from the GoFundMe campaign, the bookstore was able to give away nearly 500 books in the days leading up to the Naval Academy graduation. For weeks, letters of support piled up and people stopped by the bookstore with gratitude, some even driving from hours away to show their support in person. In addition to Operation Caged Bird, Amundson said there were 'powerful arms at work.' There was pushback on the book removals from members of Congress, the Naval Academy's Board of Visitors and the superintendent — who wrote an open letter signed by hundreds of alumni. 'For right now, this was a huge win for us,' Amundson said.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
Amid Calls to Close Ed Dept., Schwinn Promises to Aid ‘Most Struggling Schools'
Despite strong opposition to her nomination from some conservative groups, Penny Schwinn faced relatively light questioning from senators Thursday as she seeks to become second in charge of the U.S. Department of Education. Though Democrats probed where she stands on President Donald Trump's plan to shutter the department, the former Tennessee education commissioner appeared to answer questions to their satisfaction. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter Democratic Sen. Maggie Hasan of New Hampshire homed in on the administration's move to end grants to train and hire K-12 school mental health professionals — part of a 2022 law that passed with bipartisan support. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter 'Do you think that what the department did helps or hurts the communities that were counting on the funding that they were promised?' she asked. 'If confirmed, do you commit to reigning in the chaos and operational failures that we are seeing at the department?' Schwinn said the department will open a new competition for those grants and promised to 'have an efficient, effective and outcomes-oriented department.' Related She voiced support for Trump's ultimate goal to eliminate the department and repeatedly said states and local communities are in the best position to make decisions about education. As a charter school founder who served in the Delaware and Texas education agencies before leading Tennessee's for four years, Schwinn has a reputation for working across the aisle. She pushed for reading reforms and using pandemic relief funds to implement a statewide tutoring program. A vote on her confirmation is expected in the coming days. 'What we need to do is ensure that we've created a system that is going to drive outcomes,' she told GOP Sen. Jim Banks of Indiana. 'That is not going to happen from the federal government, whether there's a Department of Education or not.' At the same time, Schwinn implied that there is a role for the department in ensuring states intervene in their lowest-performing schools. 'There must be a commitment to ensuring that our most struggling schools improve because our students deserve that,' she said. A 2024 report from the Government Accountability Office found that less than half of states are meeting those requirements under the Every Student Succeeds Act. Schwinn's tenure in Tennessee, for example, included overseeing a state turnaround effort known as the Achievement School District. Considering it a failure, the state legislature recently shut it down and will try another approach. 'There's real tension there,' Thomas Toch, director of FutureEd, a think tank at Georgetown University, told The 74. 'Will the Trump administration make a meaningful commitment to school improvement? Or will [Education Secretary Linda] McMahon and her team dodge that responsibility in the name of local control?' Some observers have called Schwinn a smart pick for her focus on improving reading achievement and her attempts to avoid some of the more divisive culture war debates of the post-pandemic era. But to others she has a troubled track record that includes contracts with vendors that gave the appearance of a conflict of interest. On Wednesday, The 74 reported that after Trump nominated her, she registered a new business in Florida with a longtime colleague. While the venture was ultimately dissolved, Schwinn's sister replaced her as a manager a few weeks before the nominee submitted her financial disclosure documents. Related Some parent groups have vehemently opposed her nomination, viewing her as more left-leaning than most Trump nominees. 'It amazes me that President Trump would consider Penny Schwinn conservative,' said Tiffany Boyd, a homeschool advocate who opposed Schwinn's plan to conduct well-being checks on students during the pandemic. Schwinn nixed the idea after strong backlash. Boyd also cited a teacher recruitment effort that focused, in part, on attracting more teachers of color — efforts that the department now says push 'illegal diversity, equity and inclusion.' But none of that surfaced during the hearing. Even Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, who has vowed to fight the 'left's indoctrination of students,' opted to skip direct questions to Schwinn and said he would submit them in writing. The committee interviewed Schwinn as part of a panel, along with Kimberly Richey, Trump's choice to lead the Office for Civil Rights, and two Department of Labor nominees. In that format, the senators focused on issues most important to them — for example, Chairman Bill Cassidy emphasized better serving students with dyslexia. 'As the Department of Education streamlines educational funding, how can we ensure that resources are there to identify and address an issue, specifically speaking of dyslexia?' he asked. Schwinn touted Tennessee's move to include 'characteristics of dyslexia' as a disability category in its state education funding formula and ramp up screening of students' early reading skills. The federal government, she said, could do a better job of guiding states on this issue and sharing lessons from states that have posted the greatest gains in literacy, like Mississippi and Louisiana. Related Some advocates are eager to have an educator who prioritized reading instruction at the department. 'We love her track record of improving student outcomes in Tennessee and talking a bit more technically about literacy and the science of reading — which we think having leadership on the federal level around is going to be key,' said Keri Rodrigues, president of the National Parents Foundation. But she stressed that it was federally funded research, now at risk under the Trump administration, that informed those improvements. 'The research and the funding for all these 'state miracles,' ' she said, 'come from regional and federal efforts — which I think a lot of folks are forgetting.'
