Local involvement can make a huge difference. My daughter’s first public school was one in a magnet TAG (talented and gifted) system whose charter required that at least 20% of the school be children from the surrounding areas, which were always poor, minority neighborhoods. The remaining slots went to district-wide kids who had to test at a TAG level to gain entry. The parents of the TAG kids were strongly encouraged to participate in tutoring and other services for the disadvantaged kids.
I am a solid conservative and I was very impressed with the results of this model. The disadvantaged kids were surrounded by kids who were motivated and engaged and were supported by parents who assisted them in ways their own parents could not. Our kids, mostly white and Asian, were exposed to kids they normally would never encounter, engendering an understanding and respect they might not otherwise have had. Keeping the underperforming group small allowed the larger performance-based culture to have strong influence. The community kids’ scores and grades reflected the positive effect of that influence and my daughter also received a quality education (that was superior, in my opinion, to that of the affluent district my children are now in). I have never seen this model in place anywhere else.
Obviously, most urban kids go to schools that reflect their neighborhoods, which is the biggest challenge most teachers face. Vouchers seem to offer the best answer in those situations.
