The Whys and Hows of Intentional Diversity: A Cross-Case Study of Six Intentionally Diverse Charter Organizations

• In Event: Intentionally Diverse Charter Schools: Promise and Perils

Abstract

This research paper first maps the national landscape around intentionally diverse charters, examining where they are located as well as the national, state and local policies that facilitate and inhibit their emergence. Next the paper reports findings from a yearlong mixed methods exploratory research study investigating a sample of six (6) intentionally diverse charter organizations (four [4] charter management organizations and two [2] independent charter schools). Twenty-one (21) schools total participated in the study across four states (California, New York, Louisiana, Washington) and Washington D.C.. Researchers conducted elite interviews with five (5) CEOs and founders of five organizations, respectively. Additional interviews (13 total) were conducted with various organization leaders, including one organization vice-president, a director of operations, two (2) directors of recruitment, and a director of professional development. Surveys were also administered to parents, students, teachers and administration, with varying participation across the 21 schools. Survey items aimed to capture stakeholder perceptions of the intentionally diverse model; items also aimed to gauge differences across respondent socioeconomic and racial backgrounds.
This paper will report initial findings, looking specifically at the following research questions:

RQ1: How do charter leaders who operate intentionally diverse charter organizations conceptualize diversity and the value of diversity within their mission and organization?

Interview data analysis and school mission analysis indicates that participant views can be broadly distinguished into two categories, diversity as end and diversity as means. One set of responses conceptualized diversity as a good in itself. For these participants, diversity represents a broadly democratic ideal and is worth pursuing on its own merits. A second group of participants frame diversity as somewhat subordinate to educational practice. These participants conceptualize diversity as a necessary means to promote and attain higher student academic outcomes.

RQ2: What strategies and practices do intentionally diverse charter schools employ in order to attract and retain a diverse student population?

Two participating organizations employed lottery preferences related to income, with one organization using a weighted preference for students with home-address in public housing within a half mile of the school. All of the participating organizations intentionally located in diverse communities in order to attract a more diverse applicant pool. One counterintuitive finding is that none of the participants in the study deliberately market to, nor recruit more affluent and white communities. All of the recruitment is targeted toward low-income families of color.

RQ3: In what ways does the national state and local policy context inhibit or facilitate their efforts?

Most state charter laws related to lottery preferences are ambiguous. California law, for instance, neither expressly proscribes nor explicitly allows an income or free/reduced lunch status preference in the lottery. For many charter organizations, discretion for the use of various lottery preferences is thus left to the charter authorizer. Many states now have laws that require charter school demographics to roughly reflect the demographics of the communities in which they are located. Such laws are problematic for schools that locate in homogenous communities.

Authors

• Priscilla Wohlstetter, Teachers College, Columbia University

• Brandon Buck