Examining CPS' Plan to Close, Turn- Around, Or Phase out 17 Schools

Data and Democracy Project: Investing in Neighborhoods Research Paper Series, Paper #3 Examining CPS’ plan to close, turnaround, or phase out 17 schools February 21, 2012 A collaboration of Collaborative for Equity and Justice in Education, College of Education University of Illinois-Chicago and Nathalie P. Voorhees Center for Neighborhood and Community Improvement, College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs University of Illinois-Chicago Pauline Lipman Janet Smith Eric (Rico) Gutstein with assistance from Lisa Dallacqua http://www.uic.edu/educ/ceje/ http://www.uic.edu/cuppa/voorheesctr/ ABOUT THIS SERIES Urban development policy is much more employed in predominantly African locally driven today than in the past and American and Latino neighborhoods to much more reliant on a variety of improve schools, create jobs and build intersecting streams of pubic and private new housing: Renaissance 2010, which resources. As a result, efforts to revitalize aims to ―transform‖ 20 percent of communities are more interrelated, Chicago‘s public schools into new high- interdependent, and potentially conflicting performing but often select or special in practice. In turn, the ability to evaluate enrollment schools; Tax Increment the effects of policies and programs Financing (TIF), a public financing intended to improve communities requires mechanism that is used to attract and information that is more crosscutting and retain new businesses and private interdisciplinary in nature. investment through infrastructure improvement and tax incentives; and the The Data and Democracy Project aims to Plan for Transformation, which is make a contribution to study of education, redeveloping public housing into mixed- economic development, and housing income communities policies in Chicago through an in-depth study of their relationship on the ground. The Data and Democracy Project is developing a more comprehensive and in- The overarching question we aim to depth framework to analyze and interpret answer is: ―How do these three policy changes in community conditions relative agendas intersect when used to revitalize to policy goals and stated beneficiaries. communities, and what kinds of benefits Our intent is to make this data and are produced?‖ Recognizing that the term analysis available to policy makers, ―benefits‖ is relative and often subjective, planners, non-profit agencies, foundations, we are producing new measures that go residents and community leaders, as well beyond the traditional indicators of as other researchers, concerned with neighborhood improvement (e.g., change making sure the development of new in household income), educational schools, housing, and businesses in achievement (e.g., test scores), and communities of color actually benefit –and economic development (e.g., change in not push out – the very families that are property values). Instead, we examine assumed to be the target for these ―benefits‖ from three interrelated improvements. dimensions of social justice: economic redistribution, cultural recognition, and Groundwork for the Data and Democracy political representation. Project began when UIC acquired two databases from the Neighborhood Capital While research on each area of policy housing policy education policy economic exists – much of it produced by UIC development policy Budget Group, a well- researchers including those on this known fiscal watchdog organization in research team – there is a dearth of data Chicago that closed its doors in February that can be used to answer basic 2007 after 18 years of organizing and questions about the interrelationships information dissemination about capital between these different policy arenas. improvements and tax policy. The Chicago provides a fertile site to explore databases contain historical information on these intersecting policies, and to capital improvements for the Chicago specifically look at how race and ethnicity Public Schools and property values and affects and is affected by public and public investments in each of the city‘s private interventions. This is important approximately 173 TIF districts. This data since an array of strategies are being has been updated and shared with university scholars and community neighborhoods that have been the leaders/activists to examine education and recipients of new or modernized the contested nature of the city. This schools more or less satisfied with dialogue with people affected by and these facilities? What additional public acting on housing, community economic services and investments are development, and education issues on the necessary to improve the quality of the ground helped to sharpen our research education received in these schools? questions, which include: • When new schools are constructed, or • What kinds of new schools are being created from existing schools under constructed, where are they being Renaissance 2010, what are the opened, and from which internal and external effects of drawing neighborhoods are students being students from new and dispersed pulled? feeder neighborhoods? • What kinds of schools are being • What are the educational opportunities closed, where are they located, and in new schools, which students do they what was the justification for their serve, and do these represent more closure? Where have students that equitable educational experiences for previously attended these schools African American and Latino students? been placed? • Which schools have received TIF funds • Where are areas of new housing for modernization and school construction, condominium conversion construction? activity, foreclosures, and public • What are the advantages and housing demolition relative to the disadvantages of using TIF funds to placement of new schools, modernized finance school improvements instead schools, and closed schools? of going through the Board of • Where are areas of greatest racial and Education‘s normal capital budgeting ethnic change relative to the procedures? placement of new schools, modernized • How are community residents, schools, and closed schools? students, parents, and school-, • Where are areas of greatest property neighborhood- and city-wide- value change relative to the placement organizations shaping development of new schools, modernized schools, policy through local organizing efforts? and closed schools? What voice do they have in shaping the changes occurring in schools and communities? • Are parents and students in For more information contact Pauline Lipman at plipman@uic.edu, Janet Smith at janets@uic.edu, or Rico Gutstein at gutstein@uic.edu TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. 1 Focus of this report.............................................................................................................. 2 Putting the CPS plan in context ........................................................................................... 5 Neighborhood destabilization ............................................................................................. 9 Disinvestment and destabilization of schools ................................................................... 14 Effectiveness of proposed actions? ................................................................................... 18 Parent and community participation ................................................................................ 25 Bronzeville case studies ..................................................................................................... 29 Crane high school case study ............................................................................................ 42 “All change is not growth, as all movement is not forward.” Ellen Glasgow EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides data that can be used evidence to support the efficacy of the to examine Chicago Public Schools plan, AUSL turnaround strategy or the school announced November 30, 2011, to close, closing strategy, particularly when phase out, turnaround, or co-locate 20 weighed against the destabilizing effects schools. The report focuses on school of replacing all familiar and trusted adults closings, phase outs, and turnarounds. or transferring students to other schools. Neighborhood Conditions: Many of the Community Involvement in Local schools to be closed or turned around are Decision-making: Another consideration in areas with higher than average poverty is what role parents and others in the rates in 2000 and in 2010 and a majority of community get to play in the decision- residents African American. Some making process prior to CPS announcing neighborhoods have seen dramatic plans to close, consolidate, phase out, or increases in housing prices since 2000, turn around a school. Concern about lack resulting in significant demographic of serious consultation has been raised changes. This suggests there may be a repeatedly since Renaissance 2010 was correlation between school closings and announced in 2004, and again every year gentrification. Others are showing signs of the CPS has announced school closings stress from recent extreme swings in the and turnarounds. 2012 is no exception. housing market, foreclosures, and The lack of adequate time for participation, homelessness. Rapid neighborhood location of hearings outside the community change produces neighborhood instability and school, lack of access to information, and population mobility, and this trend is and lack of transparency

Load more