Volume 2, Issue 2 Metropolitan Census 2000 Fact Sheets Series June 2002

The 2000 census data for the Detroit metropolitan area confirm what many have Race and Ethnicity in the Tri-County suspected for quite some time – the gap between white and minority populations is Area: Selected wider in the Detroit region’s neighborhoods than anywhere else in the nation. For Communities and example, Livonia is the whitest city (population of 100,000 or more) in the nation School Districts with a reported 96 percent white population. In contrast, Detroit, at 82 percent African American, is the second blackest city in the country.1 In fact, approximately 9 out of every 10 African Americans in the Detroit metropolitan area reside in one of five cities: Detroit, Highland Park, Inkster, Pontiac or Southfield.2 More than half of Detroit’s whites left the city during the 1990s and in the suburbs we see whites and minorities living in separate neighborhoods and communities.3

The Detroit News and WDIV conducted a poll in August 2001 in which they asked individuals throughout the metropolitan area a series of questions including: Do you believe segregation harms blacks? Do you believe segregation harms whites? Sixty- one percent of the respondents stated that African Americans were harmed while 38 percent stated they were not. In contrast, respondents were split 50/50 as to whether whites were harmed by segregation. The poll also indicated that whites were less likely to move into an integrated neighborhood and quicker to leave (fearing decreasing property values and poor schools). African Americans were three times more willing to move into integrated neighborhoods than were whites and were more comfortable staying. However, African Americans were likely to fear discrimination and harassment while living in those neighborhoods.4

Researchers suggest that there is a strong link between population growth and segregation. Regions with rapid population growth tend to integrate quickly whereas slow-growing areas, such as metropolitan Detroit, tend to remain segregated.5 If this is truly the case, then families who reside in segregated communities will be impacted in many ways by the lack of racial diversity. Higher rates of crime and unemployment, lack of jobs and services, little commercial or industrial investment, and poorer health indicators will negatively affect poor neighborhoods. Segregation also plays a more subtle role in determining how individuals move throughout the metropolitan area and the experiences that they encounter while doing so.

Skillman Center for Children Center for Urban Studies Center for Community Research College of Urban, Labor and College of Urban, Labor and Outreach Urban Studies Metropolitan Affairs Metropolitan Affairs Skillman 100 East Palmer 656 West Kirby, 3040 F/AB Center for Detroit, 48202 Detroit, Michigan 48202 Children (313) 872-7166 (313) 577-2208 Resource Urban Center Families Fax (313) 872-7126 Fax (313) 577-1274 Program [email protected] [email protected] www.skillmancenter.culma.wayne.edu www.cus.wayne.edu For example, • Segregation affects what we know and how we think: Nora Bonner never read a book by a white author after her freshman year at Detroit High School for the Fine and Performing Arts. • Segregation affects where Detroiter Ethel Lee Johnson works and how much she is paid. • Segregation influences the restaurants in which Joyce Marshall eats. • Segregation even affects the cable channels that Tanya Shaver watches. 6

Many of the children and youth living throughout the Detroit metropolitan area experience segregation by virtue of living in neighborhoods chosen by their parents/guardians. While adults may have the opportunity to interact with other racial and ethnic groups in the workplace, their children often spend most of their day in schools that are increasingly segregated. In fact, segregation in schools accelerated in the 1990s, a full half-century after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that school segregation was unconstitutional and inherently unequal. Much of what we see in the Detroit metropolitan area mirrors what is occurring nationally. African American and Hispanic students living in central cities and other segregated communities are the racial/ethnic groups most impacted by segregation. The 2000 U.S. Census reports that Hispanics have become the largest minority group in the country with a veritable explosion in the numbers of children entering the education system during the past decade. This trend occurred after the push of the civil rights era so this population has not benefited from desegregation policies. Thus, Hispanics have been more segregated than other minorities, not only by race/ethnicity but by language and poverty as well.

In many ways, we have lost sight of the goal of school desegregation set by Chief Justice Warren in 1954 – not only was desegregation to improve the quality of education, it was meant to be a process that would provide equal opportunity for life-long achievement.7 Based on a study conducted in 1993, Gary Orfield of Harvard University argues that we are seeing the start of an historic reversal in school desegregation with an actual resegregation of African American students, due in part to court decisions that freed school districts from mandatory desegregation.8

In addition to changes mandated by the courts that move schools away from responsibilities for desegregation, public opinion has also shifted from supporting desegregation of neighborhood schools. A 1994 survey reported that although 88 percent of Americans approve of the Brown vs. the Board of Education decision to desegregate schools, 89 percent of whites and 64 percent of blacks polled felt it was better for minority students to attend local schools even if most of the students attending that school were of the same race rather than transferring them to racially balanced schools outside their community.9 In fact, when a school district is released from its obligation to desegregate, it usually sends students back to their neighborhood schools. Oftentimes, community leaders, parents, and educators laud the return to local schools because they believe that desegregation is costly, that it has not accomplished what it was intended to do many years ago, and that it has resulted in few, if any, improvements.10 Also, there is the thought among many that minority children would benefit from staying in their neighborhood schools as opposed to being transferred out of their communities into unfamiliar (and sometimes unwelcoming) schools.11

1 Trowbridge, G. (2002, January 14). What the numbers show: Racial divide widest in U.S. Detroit News. 2 Ibid. 3 French, R. (2002, January 14). New segregation: Races accept divide. Detroit News. (January 14). 4 Upton, J. and Trowbridge, G. (2002). Where we live: Efforts to integrate are ‘just and illusion.” Detroit News. 5 Trowbridge, G. (2002, January 14). The racial divide: Locale links segregated cities. Detroit News. 6 French, R. and Brand-Williams, O. (2002, January 21). Blacks pay harsh price while whites suffer less. Detroit News. 7 Orfield , G. et al.,(1993) The growth of segregation in American schools: Changing patterns of separation and poverty since 1968. National School Boards Association (December). 8 Ibid. 9 USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll, conducted April 22-24, 1994. 10 Neuborne, B. (1995). Brown at forty: Six visions. Teachers College Record, 96(4), 799-805. 11 Weiler, J. (1998). Recent changes in school desegregation. ERIC/CUE Digest Number 133. ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education New York NY. 2 Unfortunately, the reality is that many urban students return to schools that are segregated and inferior. School districts throughout the country have plans for school improvements and upgrades but little funding to follow through on their promises. Sometimes an infusion of money is not enough to meet the challenges facing public schools as many of these neighborhood institutions are situated in communities that are increasingly poverty stricken.12 For example, while only 5 percent of segregated white schools face conditions of poverty among their students (defined as having 50 percent or more of the student population eligible for free or reduced-priced lunch), more than 80 percent of segregated African American and Latino schools do.13 If these increasing patterns of segregation continue, we face the possibility of very serious racial and ethnic polarization reinforced by educational inequalities. A majority of students will be denied access to educational mobility. As a result, the kind of relationships and experiences that prepare people to function in multiracial civic life and workplaces will be greatly restricted. 14

However, there continues to be evidence that desegregation both improves test scores and changes the lives of students. More importantly, there is also evidence that students who attend integrated schools benefit in terms of their likelihood of going to college, their employment outcomes, and their potential to live in integrated settings as adults.15 In addition, recent surveys show that both white and minority students in integrated school districts state that they have learned to study and work together and are highly confident about their ability to work in such settings as adults. Students have learned much about the other group’s background and are comfortable discussing controversial racial issues across racial lines. In other words, students report great confidence about skills many adults are far from confident about.

As we review the racial and ethnic data from the 2000 census, there are questions driven by the reported statistics. For example,

• If minority and white populations are content to live separately, how do we address many of the economic and social problems caused by racial polarization?

• How will living in segregated communities impact the futures of children and youth who reside in these neighborhoods?

• How do we reconcile the need to celebrate our cultural heritage while trying to bring diversity to the lives of our children?

• What types of training should teachers undergo before they begin teaching in segregated neighborhood schools?

• Will the Detroit metropolitan area educational system face many of the same language issues faced by cities such as Miami and what can we learn from their experiences?

• How do we support families from diverse backgrounds within a school system with social workers, counselors and other types of services in an era of severe cutbacks in funding?

This report, Race and Ethnicity in the Tri-County Region: Selected Communities and School Districts, focuses on 2000 census data on race and ethnicity. We have included population data by age category for Macomb and Oakland counties, Out-

12 Ibid. 13 Orfield, G., Bachmeier, M.D., James, D.R., & Eitle, T. (1997, September). Deepening segregation in American public schools: A special report from the Harvard Project on School Desegregation. Equity and Excellence in Education, 30(2), 5-24. 14 Ibid. 15 Eaton, S. (1994) The new segregation: Forty years after brown, cities and suburbs face a rising tide of racial isolation. Harvard Education Letter. Vol. X, No. 1. 3 Wayne County and the City of Detroit. In addition, we have highlighted seven cities within the metro area: Hamtramck, Highland Park, Inkster, Mt. Clemens, Pontiac, Southfield, and Warren.

This is the third in the series entitled: From a Child’s Perspective: Detroit Metropolitan Census 2000 Fact Sheets. The Skillman Center for Children and the Center for Urban Studies are working collaboratively to develop and produce this series of child-specific fact sheets based on recent census data released for the tri-county Detroit area comprised of Macomb, Oakland and Wayne counties. In addition to reporting on the individual counties and the region as a whole, we are reporting on several key cities within the metropolitan area. Information will be presented by geographic area and include timeline comparisons so that trends can be readily identified within specific locations. As always, our focus continues to be from the viewpoint of urban children and their families.

We welcome your comments.

Kristine B. Miranne, Ph.D. Kurt Metzger Maps by Jason Booza Skillman Center for Children Center for Urban Studies (313) 872-7166 (313) 577-8996 Fax: (313) 872-7126 Fax: (313) 577-1274 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] www.skillmancenter.culma.wayne.edu www.cus.wayne.edu

SKILLMAN CENTER FOR CHILDREN MISSION STATEMENT

The mission of the Skillman Center for Children is to enhance the economic and social well being of urban children and their families. We do this by informing, influencing, and facilitating the strengthening of policies, best and promising practices, and programs affecting children locally, regionally, nationally, and globally. Our efforts focus on three areas of expertise: economic security for families; family and community support; and child resiliency and competence through safe families and neighborhoods. The Center draws upon a diverse coalition of researchers, educators, service providers, policy makers and community-based colleagues for advice and knowledge as we build the interdisciplinary and community collaborations needed to meet the challenges of our mission.

CENTER FOR URBAN STUDIES MISSION STATEMENT

The mission of ’s Center for Urban Studies is to improve understanding of and provide innovative responses to urban challenges and opportunities. The center pursues its mission by conducting and disseminating research, developing policies and programs, and providing training, capacity-building and technical assistance.

The center participates in defining and influencing local, regional, state and national urban policy. It engages community, government, institutions, and policymakers in collaboration with university faculty and resources to transform knowledge into action.

Committed to serving Detroit and its metropolitan area, the Skillman Center for Children and the Center for Urban Studies are part of the College of Urban, Labor and Metropolitan Affairs and exemplify Wayne State University’s urban research and service mission. 4 RACE/ETHNICITY IN THE COUNTIES AND SELECTED COMMUNITIES

Tables 1 through 4 and Figures 1 through 4 outline minority and white, non-Hispanic populations for Macomb, Oakland, and Out-Wayne counties and for the City of Detroit. It is important to note the shifts in racial/ethnic populations by geographic area and by age category. In particular, the region has experienced large increases in Asian and Hispanic populations, and, while growth in the African American population has slowed overall, the numbers of African Americans outside of Detroit grew faster than in any previous decade. Also of interest are the numbers of individuals who took advantage of the Census Bureau’s offer to identify themselves as being multiracial. Since this is a new category for the 2000 census, there are no comparison data from previous years. We anticipate, however, that this category will grow over the next decade as immigration trends continue and as the rates of intermarriage rise.

Table 1 Minority and White (Non-Hispanic) Population by Age Category, Macomb County, 1980 - 2000 Total Population White, Non-Hispanic Minority Population 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Total 694,600 717,400 788,149 96.5% 95.8% 91.6% 3.5% 4.2% 8.4% Less than 5 yrs 46,651 48,914 51,062 94.4 94.4 86.5 5.6 5.6 13.5 5 to 9 yrs 53,064 48,081 54,125 95.0 94.5 88.1 5.0 5.5 11.9 10 to 14 yrs 64,162 46,144 53,865 96.1 94.2 89.5 3.9 5.8 10.5 15 to 17 yrs 43,582 28,514 30,732 96.5 94.1 90.3 3.5 5.9 9.7

Macomb County, while showing some growth in the minority segment for older children in the 1980s, experienced major growth during the 1990s. The youngest cohort, age less than 5 years, experienced an increase of 87 percent or more for African Americans, Asians and Hispanics. The largest increase in the age 5 to 9 years and age 10 to 14 years cohorts was found among African Americans – 129 and 96 percent respectively. Asians and Hispanics posted gains as well. The cohort, age 15 to 17 years, experienced similar growth (30 to 52 percent) among these three racial/ethnic groups. Finally, white, non-Hispanics grew slightly in all age cohorts except those age less than 5 years.

Table 2 Minority and White (Non-Hispanic) Population by Age Category, Oakland County, 1980 - 2000 Total Population White, Non-Hispanic Minority Population 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Total 1,011,793 1,083,592 1,194,156 92.2% 88.4% 81.4% 7.8% 11.6% 18.6% Less than 5 yrs 67,489 78,224 80,367 88.4 85.6 76.0 11.6 14.4 24.0 5 to 9 yrs 75,580 75,088 86,326 88.1 85.5 76.9 11.9 14.5 23.1 10 to 14 yrs 88,087 71,220 85,498 90.2 84.2 78.1 9.8 15.8 21.9 15 to 17 yrs 58,754 43,526 48,569 91.8 83.6 78.7 8.2 16.4 21.3

Oakland County experienced major growth in the minority segment of older children (age 10 to 17 years) during the 1980s while the younger cohorts (age less than 10 years) grew in the 1990s. The less than 5 years group was led by increases in Asian population (86 percent) followed by Hispanics (54 percent) and African Americans (35 percent). While African Americans led the increase in the 5 to 9 years cohort (65 percent), Asians took the lead in the age 10 to 14 years group (54 percent). In both cases, all three groups experienced significant gains. White, non-Hispanics increased slightly in all age categories except for those age less than 5 years, while the number of Native Americans dropped in all age categories.

5 Table 3 Minority and White (Non-Hispanic) Population by Age Category, Out-Wayne County, 1980 - 2000

Total Population White, Non-Hispanic Minority Population 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Total 1,134,552 1,083,713 1,109,892 90.9% 89.8% 83.7% 9.1% 10.2% 16.3% Less than 5 yrs 76,436 77,742 76,368 87.5 86.9 76.2 12.5 13.1 23.8 5 to 9 yrs 83,322 74,548 81,728 87.7 87.5 77.7 12.3 12.5 22.3 10 to 14 yrs 94,431 72,135 79,121 89.1 86.7 80.1 10.9 13.3 19.9 15 to 17 yrs 66,802 43,897 44,754 90.4 86.0 81.5 9.6 14.0 18.5

Out-Wayne County, while reporting some growth in the minority youth during the 1980s, experienced its major growth during the 1990s. The growth in the minority age less than five years cohort exceeded all other age groups. Similar racial/ethnic trends occurred in the cohorts age 5 to 9 years and 10 to 14 years. Overall growth in these age categories, however, was increasingly less than that of the cohort age less than 5 years. Though growth patterns across the age groups varied by race/ethnicity, overall growth was led by Asians and Hispanics, with African Americans close behind.

Out-Wayne also reported a large number of multi-racial youth in 2000. Although we cannot identify the racial mix in any detail, we can assume, based on immigration patterns, geographic locations, and newly released ancestry data, that a large segment of this population is represented by Arab Americans, Chaldeans, and others from the Middle East.

Table 4 Minority and White (Non-Hispanic) Population by Age Category, City of Detroit, 1980 - 2000

Total Population White, Non-Hispanic Minority Population 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Total 1,203,339 1,027,974 951,270 33.4% 20.7% 10.5% 66.6% 79.3% 89.5% Less than 5 yrs 94,962 93,109 76,232 24.0 15.4 6.0 76.0 84.6 94.0 5 to 9 yrs 104,152 79,646 93,882 19.9 14.6 5.2 80.1 85.4 94.8 10 to 14 yrs 102,733 78,865 83,361 20.6 12.5 5.5 79.4 87.5 94.5 15 to 17 yrs 62,771 50,695 42,234 23.5 11.4 5.9 76.5 88.6 94.1

Detroit’s loss of 7.5 percent of its population was the lowest recorded since 1950. Although the numbers of whites, African Americans and Native Americans fell, the losses were countered by gains in Asian (15 percent) and Hispanic (66 percent) populations. The City of Detroit experienced its major growth in the minority segment for older children (10 to 17 years of age) during the 1980s, while the young cohorts experienced their major growth in the 1990s. The cohort less than 5 years of age decreased in number for all groups but Hispanics – Hispanic growth in this age cohort was an impressive 65 percent. While the African American cohort 5 to 9 years of age grew by 26 percent, it was Hispanic youth that led the group with an increase of 72 percent. Within the same age cohort, Asians grew by 8 percent while Native Americans declined in number by 5 percent.

Hispanics also led growth in the 10 to 14 years of age category (52 percent) followed by Asians (21 percent) and African Americans (10 percent). Once again, Native Americans experienced a decrease. Although the 15 to 17 years of age cohort showed little change over the past decade, there was a great deal of variation among the racial/ethnic groups. African Americans and Native Americans both lost population while Asians and Hispanics reported population increases.

6 Figure 1 Figure 2 Percent Minority Population by Age Category for Percent Minority Population by Age Category for Macomb County, 1980- 2000 Oakland County, 1980- 2000 100 1980 1980 100 1990 90 1990 90 2000 2000 80 80 70 70

60 60

50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0 Total Less than 5 5 to 9 yrs 10 to 14 yrs 15 to 17 yrs Total Less than 5 5 to 9 yrs 10 to 14 yrs 15 to 17 yrs

Figure 3 Figure 4 Percent Minority Population by Age Category for Percent Minority Population by Age Category for the Out-Wayne County, 1980- 2000 City of Detroit, 1980 – 2000

1980 1980 100 100 1990 1990 90 2000 90 2000

80 80

70 70

60 60

50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0 Total Less than 5 5 to 9 yrs 10 to 14 yrs 15 to 17 yrs Total Less than 5 5 to 9 yrs 10 to 14 yrs 15 to 17 yrs

7 Tables 5 through 11 and Figures 5 through 11 present data for seven profiled cities while also detailing racial/ethnic population shifts between 1980 and 2000. Even while the general population may have declined, the population of children and youth grew in all of the profiled cities. In some communities, such as Southfield, the increase was quite dramatic. At the same time, we see shifts between which of the racial/ethnic groups led population growth. Map 1 (at the end of this report) also reflects the minority population of each of the cities.

Table 5 Minority and White (Non-Hispanic) by Age Category for Hamtramck, 1980 – 2000

Total Population White, Non-Hispanic Minority Population 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Total 21,300 18,372 22,976 82.2% 83.6% 60.4% 17.8% 16.4% 39.6% Less than 5 yrs 1,425 1,474 1,799 76.1 74.8 45.1 23.9 25.2 54.9 5 to 9 yrs 1,282 1,162 1,854 74.6 78.6 48.7 25.4 21.4 51.3 10 to 14 yrs 1,300 1,028 1,735 76.7 77.2 52.6 23.3 22.8 47.4 15 to 17 yrs 726 633 988 75.1 75.0 54.8 24.9 25.0 45.2

Hamtramck experienced its first growth in five decades (25 percent), due primarily to a large influx of immigrants moving into the city during the past decade. The Asian population increased by 991 percent during this same time frame. Significantly, 11.7 percent of the population reported that they were multiracial. This is thought to reflect the growing Middle Eastern and Muslim populations who denoted the “other” category for race/ethnicity in addition to indicating a specific race designation. The number of whites and Native Americans, however, dropped during this same time period.

Table 6 Minority and White (Non-Hispanic) by Age Category for Highland Park, 1980 – 2000

Total Population White, Non-Hispanic Minority Population 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Total 27,909 20,121 16,746 14.2% 6.4% 4.0% 85.8% 93.6% 96.0% Less than 5 yrs 2,166 1,753 1,282 5.4 1.9 1.0 94.6 98.1 99.0 5 to 9 yrs 2,364 1,401 1,602 3.6 1.9 1.7 96.4 98.1 98.3 10 to 14 yrs 2,456 1,543 1,321 3.9 1.0 0.5 96.1 99.0 99.5 15 to 17 yrs 1,605 998 662 4.8 1.2 1.2 95.2 98.8 98.8

Highland Park reported a substantial population loss (16.8 percent), a trend that has been ongoing for the past five decades. All racial and ethnic groups, with the exception of Native Americans, experienced population decline. Whites reflected the largest population decline (– 47) percent and now represent only 4 percent of the city’s population.

8 Table 7 Minority and White (Non-Hispanic) by Age Category for Inkster, 1980 – 2000

Total Population White, Non-Hispanic Minority Population 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Total 35,190 30,772 30,115 42.0% 36.1% 24.5% 58.0% 63.9% 75.5% Less than 5 yrs 2,860 2,495 2,423 35.3 30.3 16.1 64.7 69.7 83.9 5 to 9 yrs 3,066 2,360 2,798 33.0 28.6 15.5 67.0 71.4 84.5 10 to 14 yrs 3,231 2,463 2,517 30.6 25.9 15.3 69.4 74.1 84.7 15 to 17 yrs 2,274 1,569 1,248 33.6 24.0 20.6 66.4 76.0 79.4

Inkster’s population declined by 2.1 percent, primarily among its white and Native American groups. The Asian population, however, increased by 410 percent followed by a 45 percent increase in the Hispanic population and 6 percent by African Americans.

Table 8 Minority and White (Non-Hispanic) by Age Category for Mt. Clemens, 1980 – 2000

Total Population White, Non-Hispanic Minority Population 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Total 18,806 18,405 17,312 80.0% 80.3% 74.5% 20.0% 19.7% 25.5% Less than 5 yrs 1,408 1,312 1,110 77.8 77.0 64.6 22.2 23.0 35.4 5 to 9 yrs 1,307 1,072 1,074 71.4 74.9 62.1 28.6 25.1 37.9 10 to 14 yrs 1,363 1,047 962 72.0 71.8 60.7 28.0 28.2 39.3 15 to 17 yrs 985 654 591 70.6 69.9 67.5 29.4 30.1 32.5

While the city’s total population declined during the 1990s, we saw an increase in the population age less than 18 years. Hispanics reported a 21 percent increase, the highest rate of growth among racial and ethnic groups. Asian population grew by 16 percent and African Americans grew by 4 percent. Multiple race responses were recorded for 2.3 percent of all residents. The only group to show substantial losses was white, non-Hispanics.

Table 9 Minority and White (Non-Hispanic) by Age Category for Pontiac, 1980 – 2000

Total Population White, Non-Hispanic Minority Population 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Total 76,715 71,166 66,337 55.1% 48.1% 34.5% 44.9% 51.9% 65.5% Less than 5 yrs 7,458 7,146 5,900 49.7 41.7 23.4 50.3 58.3 76.6 5 to 9 yrs 7,287 5,627 6,269 42.8 39.3 21.5 57.2 60.7 78.5 10 to 14 yrs 6,850 5,437 5,406 42.7 35.2 21.8 57.3 64.8 78.2 15 to 17 yrs 4,143 3,497 2,745 44.6 32.7 23.8 55.4 67.3 76.2

Pontiac’s total population declined over the decade by 6.8 percent but, as with other communities, minority groups flourished. Asians led the increase, up 74 percent, followed by Hispanics with a 48 percent growth rate. The African American population, the largest minority group in Pontiac, grew by only 6 percent.

9 Table 10 Minority and White (Non-Hispanic) by Age Category for Southfield, 1980 – 2000

Total Population White, Non-Hispanic Minority Population 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Total 75,568 75,728 78,296 88.3% 66.7% 38.3% 11.7% 33.3% 61.7% Less than 5 yrs 3,712 4,435 4,358 79.7 62.6 27.8 20.3 37.4 72.2 5 to 9 yrs 3,995 4,179 4,683 79.9 55.7 26.6 20.1 44.3 73.4 10 to 14 yrs 5,067 4,033 4,847 83.4 50.4 26.4 16.6 49.6 73.6 15 to 17 yrs 3,762 2,633 2,988 87.9 49.3 27.5 12.1 50.7 72.5

Southfield, which grew by only 3.4 percent over the decade, did experience the greatest racial shift of all the communities in Southeast Michigan. While 20,000 whites left the city, representing a 41 percent decline, an equivalent number of African Americans moved into the city (93 percent increase). The Asian population increased by 38 percent, while both Hispanic and Native American populations declined in number.

Table 11 Minority and White (Non-Hispanic) by Age Category for Warren, 1980 – 2000

Total Population White, Non-Hispanic Minority Population 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Total 161,134 144,864 138,247 97.5% 96.4% 90.4% 2.5% 3.6% 9.6% Less than 5 yrs 8,640 9,006 8,784 95.4 95.7 83.1 4.6 4.3 16.9 5 to 9 yrs 10,150 8,503 9,023 96.1 95.2 85.6 3.9 4.8 14.4 10 to 14 yrs 14,489 7,785 8,862 97.3 94.7 87.9 2.7 5.3 12.1 15 to 17 yrs 11,492 5,032 5,054 98.1 95.1 89.0 1.9 4.9 11.0

While Warren’s population dropped by 4.6 percent over the decade (a decrease of 11 percent for white, non-Hispanics), the city’s minority population grew significantly. African Americans increased their numbers by almost 3,000 or 256 percent while Asians grew by 126 percent. The Hispanic population only increased by 18 percent while Native Americans declined by 29 percent.

10 Figure 5 Figure 6 Percent Minority Population by Age Category for Percent Minority Population by Age Category for Hamtramck, 1980 – 2000 Highland Park, 1980-2000

1980 100 1980 100 1990 1990 90 2000 90 2000

80 80

70 70

60 60

50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0 Total Less than 5 5 to 9 yrs 10 to 14 yrs 15 to 17 yrs Total Less than 5 5 to 9 yrs 10 to 14 yrs 15 to 17 yrs

Figure 7 Figure 8 Percent Minority Population by Age Category for Percent Minority Population by Age Category for Inkster, 1980-2000 Mt. Clemens, 1980-2000

1980 1980 100 100 1990 1990 2000 90 90 2000

80 80

70 70

60 60

50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0 Total Less than 5 5 to 9 yrs 10 to 14 yrs 15 to 17 yrs Total Less than 5 5 to 9 yrs 10 to 14 yrs 15 to 17 yrs

11 Figure 9 Figure 10 Percent Minority Population by Age Category for Percent Minority Population by Age Category for Pontiac, 1980-2000 Southfield, 1980-2000

1980 1980 100 100 1990 1990 90 2000 90 2000

80 80

70 70

60 60

50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0 Total Less than 5 5 to 9 yrs 10 to 14 yrs 15 to 17 yrs Total Less than 5 5 to 9 yrs 10 to 14 yrs 15 to 17 yrs

Figure 11 Percent Minority Population by Age Category for Warren, 1980-2000

1980 100 1990 90 2000

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 Total Less than 5 5 to 9 yrs 10 to 14 yrs 15 to 17 yrs

12 RACE/ETHNICITY IN THE SCHOOLS

While there is considerable debate as to the benefits of desegregation, there is little doubt that segregated schools are unequal in easily measurable ways. As noted earlier in this report, segregated minority schools are overwhelmingly likely to have to contend with the educational impacts of concentrated poverty — a legacy of unequal education, income, and the continuing patterns of housing discrimination — while segregated white schools are almost always middle class.

Approximately 70 percent of students in the metropolitan area attend schools where nearly all the students are similar to them - either 90 percent white or 90 percent minority.16 At issue is the wide disparity between resources and expectations and the lost opportunities for children and youth who, as adults, will need to succeed in a multicultural world. Schools in our communities have long been segregated, a reality made worse by white flight into the suburbs and away from Detroit. That has isolated many students whose parents cannot afford to move to better school districts.

There is also a strong correlation between the percent of low-income students in a school and that school’s average test scores. Minority students in segregated schools, no matter how able they may be as individuals, usually face a much lower level of competition and average preparation by other students. Educational problems are exacerbated when students do not see school as a path to prosperity: they do not do the necessary work, care less about class, and often drop out before completing their high school degree requirements. Without a basic education, these individuals will never earn the income to further themselves or to assist their own children in attaining educational goals that lead to a better life.17

The dramatic shifts and changes throughout metropolitan area school districts bring many questions to the forefront regarding how best to educate our children, how to involve parents and families more in their children’s education, and how to better link schools with community institutions. Such questions include:

• How do we begin to understand the myriad of educational experiences of our children that encompass their rich cultural diversity?

• What impact do family characteristics and home environments have on a child’s academic experiences?

• We speak of parental involvement, but what does that really mean? How do we provide different opportunities for parents and families to participate in their children’s school life?

• English proficiency is more than just comprehending the language – how do we begin to understand this issue so that we face the differences between racial and ethnic groups and better address educational participation, progress, and achievement?

• Test scores for many metropolitan area schools are consistently lower than the state average. Developing reading skills at an early age is critical for future academic success. How do we ensure that all children are proficient in basic skills during the early stages of their academic careers?

16 Upton, J. (2002, January 21). Segregated schools hurt students’ bid for success. Detroit News. 17 Orfield, G., Bachmeier, M.D., James, D.R., & Eitle, T. (1997, September). Deepening segregation in American public schools: A special report from the Harvard Project on School Desegregation. Equity and Excellence in Education, 30(2), 5-24.

13 Tables 12 through 14 record minority enrollment patterns for Macomb, Oakland, and Out-Wayne Intermediate School Districts (ISDs). The African American population increased most among minority groups in Macomb and Out-Wayne, while Asians recorded a slightly larger increase in Oakland. Both Asians and Hispanics had large gains across all districts. The increase for the white population trailed total growth in all three ISDs.

Table 15 details minority enrollment for the Detroit Public Schools. The percentage drop in the enrollment in Detroit Public Schools over the past decade is a reflection of the city’s population loss during the same time frame. Yet, while seeing a decline in both white and African American student enrollment, the district experienced significant growth in Hispanic enrollment and a somewhat smaller increase for Asians. Figure 13 further illustrates the dramatic shift in minority enrollment for Detroit while also reporting changes throughout the tri-county ISDs. See Map 2 (at the end of this report) for minority population by school district.

Table 12 Minority Enrollment for Macomb County ISD, 1991/92 – 2000/01 School Year 1991-92 2000-01 1991 - 2001 Change Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total 111,445 127,000 15,555 14.0 White 105,459 94.6 115,950 91.3 10,491 9.9 Minority 5,986 5.4 11,050 8.7 5,064 84.6 African American 2,481 2.2 5,893 4.6 3,412 137.5 Native American 1,040 0.9 1,022 0.8 -18 -1.7 Asian & PI 1,726 1.5 2,801 2.2 1,075 62.3 Hispanic 739 0.7 1,334 1.1 595 80.5

Table 13 Minority Enrollment for Oakland County ISD, 1991/92 – 2000/01 School Year 1991-92 2000-01 1991 - 2001 Change Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total 168,110 192,069 23,959 14.3 White 142,573 84.8 149,435 77.8 6,862 4.8 Minority 25,537 15.2 42,634 22.2 17,097 66.9 African American 17,216 10.2 29,393 15.3 12,177 70.7 Native American 1,168 0.7 967 0.5 -201 -17.2 Asian & PI 4,659 2.8 8,261 4.3 3,602 77.3 Hispanic 2,494 1.5 4,013 2.1 1,519 60.9

Table 14 Minority Enrollment for Out-Wayne County ISD, 1991/92 – 2000/01 School Year 1991-92 2000-01 1991 - 2001 Change Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total 165,000 195,775 30,775 18.7 White 145,339 88.1 147,153 75.2 1,814 1.2 Minority 19,661 11.9 48,622 24.8 28,961 147.3 African American 14,676 8.9 39,187 20.0 24,511 167.0 Native American 916 0.6 1,261 0.6 345 37.7 Asian & PI 1,977 1.2 3,708 1.9 1,731 87.6 Hispanic 2,092 1.3 4,466 2.3 2,374 113.5

14 Table 15 Minority Enrollment for Detroit Public Schools, 1991/92 – 2000/01

School Year 1991-92 2000-01 1991 - 2001 Change Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

District Totals Total 160,996 149,348 -11,648 -7.2 White 12,083 7.5 5,465 3.7 -6,618 -54.8 Minority 148,913 92.5 143,883 96.3 -5,030 -3.4 African American 143,092 88.9 135,354 90.6 -7,738 -5.4 Native American 627 0.4 338 0.2 -289 -46.1 Asian & PI 1,317 0.8 1,437 1.0 120 9.1 Hispanic 3,877 2.4 6,754 4.5 2,877 74.2

K-5 Total 68,804 68,454 -350 -0.5 White 6,398 9.3 2,636 3.9 -3,762 -58.8 Minority 62,406 90.7 65,818 96.1 3,412 5.5 African American 59,700 86.8 61,390 89.7 1,690 2.8 Native American 254 0.4 167 0.2 -87 -34.3 Asian & PI 642 0.9 609 0.9 -33 -5.1 Hispanic 1,810 2.6 3,652 5.3 1,842 101.8

6-8 Total 38,409 32,704 -5,705 -14.9 White 2,660 6.9 1,217 3.7 -1,443 -54.2 Minority 35,749 93.1 31,487 96.3 -4,262 -11.9 African American 34,438 89.7 29,707 90.8 -4,731 -13.7 Native American 191 0.5 58 0.2 -133 -69.6 Asian & PI 265 0.7 354 1.1 89 33.6 Hispanic 855 2.2 1,368 4.2 513 60.0

9-12 Total 40,823 34,294 -6,529 -16.0 White 2,006 4.9 1,127 3.3 -879 -43.8 Minority 38,817 95.1 33,167 96.7 -5,650 -14.6 African American 37,539 92.0 31,578 92.1 -5,961 -15.9 Native American 134 0.3 89 0.3 -45 -33.6 Asian & PI 269 0.7 333 1.0 64 23.8 Hispanic 875 2.1 1,167 3.4 292 33.4

15 Figure 12 Student Enrollment Change by Race/Ethnicity, 1991/92 – 2000/01

200

Total 150 white

Minority 100 African American

Native American 50

Asian & PI

0 Hispanic

-50

-100 Macomb Oakland Out-Wayne Detroit

16 Table 16 Minority Enrollment for Hamtramck Community School District, 1991/92 – 2000/01

School Year 1991-92 2000-01 1991 - 2001 Change Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent District Totals Total 2,596 3,670 1,074 41.4 White 1,988 76.6 2,896 78.9 908 45.7 Minority 608 23.4 774 21.1 166 27.3 African American 550 21.2 646 17.6 96 17.5 Native American 2 0.1 13 0.4 11 550.0 Asian & PI 21 0.8 102 2.8 81 385.7 Hispanic 35 1.3 13 0.4 -22 -62.9

K-5 Total 1,091 1,545 454 41.6 White 838 76.8 1,192 77.2 354 42.2 Minority 253 23.2 353 22.8 100 39.5 African American 232 21.3 294 19.0 62 26.7 Native American 1 0.1 5 0.3 4 400.0 Asian & PI 8 0.7 49 3.2 41 512.5 Hispanic 12 1.1 5 0.3 -7 -58.3

6-8 Total 619 833 214 34.6 White 455 73.5 658 79.0 203 44.6 Minority 164 26.5 175 21.0 11 6.7 African American 149 24.1 159 19.1 10 6.7 Native American 0 0.0 2 0.2 2 NC Asian & PI 5 0.8 10 1.2 5 100.0 Hispanic 10 1.6 4 0.5 -6 -60.0

9-12 Total 653 979 326 49.9 White 516 79.0 803 82.0 287 55.6 Minority 137 21.0 176 18.0 39 28.5 African American 124 19.0 133 13.6 9 7.3 Native American 1 0.2 3 0.3 2 200.0 Asian & PI 5 0.8 38 3.9 33 660.0 Hispanic 7 1.1 2 0.2 -5 -71.4

Over the past decade, immigration brought a 25 percent increase to Hamtramck’s population and a 41 percent increase within all three grade levels throughout the school district. While the public schools experienced growth in their minority enrollment in grades K through 5 (primarily African American and Asian), the majority of the growth came from shifts in the district’s white population. It is important to note, however, that many immigrant groups are represented by this category including Bosnians, Croatians, Serbs, Yemenis and many more. Thus, the schools face cultural, diversity, and language challenges not usually found in a racial category entitled “white.”

17 Table 17 Minority Enrollment for Highland Park Community School District, 1991/92 – 2000/01

School Year 1991-92 2000-01 1991 - 2001 Change Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent District Totals Total 3,694 3,150 -544 -14.7 White 18 0.5 5 0.2 -13 -72.2 Minority 3,676 99.5 3,145 99.8 -531 -14.4 African American 3,675 99.5 3,129 99.3 -546 -14.9 Native American 0 0.0 15 0.5 15 NC Asian & PI 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hispanic 1 0.0 1 0.0 0 0.0

K-5 Total 1,441 1,441 0 0.0 White 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Minority 1,441 100.0 1,441 100.0 0 0.0 African American 1,441 100.0 1,429 99.2 -12 -0.8 Native American 0 0.0 11 0.8 11 NC Asian & PI 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hispanic 0 0.0 1 0.1 1 NC

6-8 Total 869 695 -174 -20.0 White 7 0.8 2 0.3 -5 -71.4 Minority 862 99.2 693 99.7 -169 -19.6 African American 862 99.2 692 99.6 -170 -19.7 Native American 0 0.0 1 0.1 1 NC Asian & PI 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hispanic 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

9-12 Total 1,122 671 -451 -40.2 White 9 0.8 3 0.4 -6 -66.7 Minority 1,113 99.2 668 99.6 -445 -40.0 African American 1,112 99.1 665 99.1 -447 -40.2 Native American 0 0.0 3 0.4 3 NC Asian & PI 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hispanic 1 0.1 0 0.0 -1 -100.0

Enrollment trends in the Highland Park schools follow that of the city’s population – slow, but steady losses during each year of the past decade. The district, with over 90 percent African American enrollment, lost 15 percent of its students during this time. While grades K through 5 did not see changes in their enrollment numbers, the number of students in grades 6 through 8 declined 20 percent while grades 9 through 12 lost 40 percent of their students.

18 Table 18 Minority Enrollment for Inkster Community School District, 1991/92 – 2000/01

School Year 1991-92 2000-01 1991 - 2001 Change Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent District Totals Total 2,136 1,815 -321 -15.0 White 46 2.2 35 1.9 -11 -23.9 Minority 2,090 97.8 1,780 98.1 -310 -14.8 African American 2,088 97.8 1,780 98.1 -308 -14.8 Native American 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Asian & PI 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hispanic 2 0.1 0 0.0 -2 -100.0

K-5 Total 901 889 -12 -1.3 White 27 3.0 28 3.1 1 3.7 Minority 874 97.0 861 96.9 -13 -1.5 African American 873 96.9 861 96.9 -12 -1.4 Native American 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Asian & PI 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hispanic 1 0.1 0 0.0 -1 -100.0

6-8 Total 452 386 -66 -14.6 White 8 1.8 4 1.0 -4 -50.0 Minority 444 98.2 382 99.0 -62 -14.0 African American 443 98.0 382 99.0 -61 -13.8 Native American 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Asian & PI 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hispanic 1 0.2 0 0.0 -1 -100.0

9-12 Total 583 358 -225 -38.6 White 8 1.4 3 0.8 -5 -62.5 Minority 575 98.6 355 99.2 -220 -38.3 African American 575 98.6 355 99.2 -220 -38.3 Native American 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Asian & PI 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hispanic 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.0

During the late 1990s, the Inkster School District hired Edison Schools, a private education firm, to manage their schools. Over this past decade, the public school system lost 15 percent of its students. As is the case with Highland Park, the vast majority of Inkster students are African American and this is where population decline occurred. With each subsequent grade the rate of, student enrollment decline increased. Grades K through 5 lost 1.3 percent of their students, grades 6 through 8 lost 15 percent and grades 9 through 12 reported 39 percent decrease.

19 Table 19 Minority Enrollment for Mt. Clemens Community School District, 1991/92 – 2000/01

School Year 1991-92 2000-01 1991 - 2001 Change Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent District Totals Total 3,163 3,252 89 2.8 White 2,019 63.8 1,721 52.9 -298 -14.8 Minority 1,144 36.2 1,531 47.1 387 33.8 African American 1,021 32.3 1,394 42.9 373 36.5 Native American 6 0.2 28 0.9 22 366.7 Asian & PI 36 1.1 40 1.2 4 11.1 Hispanic 81 2.6 69 2.1 -12 -14.8

K-5 Total 1,383 1,569 186 13.4 White 891 64.4 809 51.6 -82 -9.2 Minority 492 35.6 760 48.4 268 54.5 African American 440 31.8 705 44.9 265 60.2 Native American 1 0.1 9 0.6 8 800.0 Asian & PI 24 1.7 18 1.1 -6 -25.0 Hispanic 27 2.0 28 1.8 1 3.7

6-8 Total 696 627 -69 -9.9 White 438 62.9 340 54.2 -98 -22.4 Minority 258 37.1 287 45.8 29 11.2 African American 223 32.0 258 41.1 35 15.7 Native American 0 0.0 9 1.4 9 NC Asian & PI 4 0.6 7 1.1 3 75.0 Hispanic 31 4.5 13 2.1 -18 -58.1

9-12 Total 827 778 -49 -5.9 White 534 64.6 433 55.7 -101 -18.9 Minority 293 35.4 345 44.3 52 17.7 African American 264 31.9 306 39.3 42 15.9 Native American 4 0.5 9 1.2 5 125.0 Asian & PI 6 0.7 10 1.3 4 66.7 Hispanic 19 2.3 20 2.6 1 5.3

In Mt. Clemens, minority population growth was spread across all three grade levels. The minority population grew by 34 percent (predominantly African American students) while its white student enrollment dropped by 15 percent during the same decade.

20 Table 20 Minority Enrollment for Pontiac Community School District, 1991/92 – 2000/01

School Year 1991-92 2000-01 1991 - 2001 Change Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent District Totals Total 13,382 12,243 -1,139 -8.5 White 4,548 34.0 2,305 18.8 -2,243 -49.3 Minority 8,834 66.0 9,938 81.2 1,104 12.5 African American 7,129 53.3 7,785 63.6 656 9.2 Native American 126 0.9 77 0.6 -49 -38.9 Asian & PI 289 2.2 554 4.5 265 91.7 Hispanic 1,290 9.6 1,522 12.4 232 18.0

K-5 Total 6,041 5,281 -760 -12.6 White 2,295 38.0 1,064 20.1 -1,231 -53.6 Minority 3,746 62.0 4,217 79.9 471 12.6 African American 2,981 49.3 3,196 60.5 215 7.2 Native American 58 1.0 35 0.7 -23 -39.7 Asian & PI 144 2.4 235 4.4 91 63.2 Hispanic 563 9.3 751 14.2 188 33.4

6-8 Total 2,917 2,914 -3 -0.1 White 953 32.7 534 18.3 -419 -44.0 Minority 1,964 67.3 2,380 81.7 416 21.2 African American 1,607 55.1 1,891 64.9 284 17.7 Native American 19 0.7 19 0.7 0 0.0 Asian & PI 42 1.4 145 5.0 103 245.2 Hispanic 296 10.1 325 11.2 29 9.8

9-12 Total 3,359 2,962 -397 -11.8 White 924 27.5 491 16.6 -433 -46.9 Minority 2,435 72.5 2,471 83.4 36 1.5 African American 2,006 59.7 2,006 67.7 0 0.0 Native American 38 1.1 19 0.6 -19 -50.0 Asian & PI 72 2.1 130 4.4 58 80.6 Hispanic 319 9.5 316 10.7 -3 -0.9

Over the past ten years, the Pontiac School District lost 49 percent of its white student population, or 2,243 students. The majority, 60 percent, were children in grades K through 5. Minority population gains, however, made up for half of this loss when 1,204 students (an increase of 13 percent) entered the school district. African-Americans recorded their largest growth in grades K through 5 and 6 through 8. Hispanics added 188 students to their K through grade 5 enrollment, reflecting a 33 percent increase. Asians showed healthy gains in all three grade levels and, in fact, were the only minority to add high school students to the district.

21 Table 21 Minority Enrollment for Southfield Community School District, 1991/92 – 2000/01 School Year 1991-92 2000-01 1991 - 2001 Change Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent District Totals Total 8,601 9,380 779 9.1 White 3,517 40.9 1,405 15.0 -2,112 -60.1 Minority 5,084 59.1 7,975 85.0 2,891 56.9 African American 4,881 56.7 7,772 82.9 2,891 59.2 Native American 8 0.1 15 0.2 7 87.5 Asian & PI 158 1.8 135 1.4 -23 -14.6 Hispanic 37 0.4 53 0.6 16 43.2

K-5 Total 3,312 3,468 156 4.7 White 1,524 46.0 538 15.5 -986 -64.7 Minority 1,788 54.0 2,930 84.5 1,142 63.9 African American 1,703 51.4 2,831 81.6 1,128 66.2 Native American 2 0.1 11 0.3 9 450.0 Asian & PI 65 2.0 70 2.0 5 7.7 Hispanic 18 0.5 18 0.5 0 0.0

6-8 Total 1,944 2,316 372 19.1 White 698 35.9 325 14.0 -373 -53.4 Minority 1,246 64.1 1,991 86.0 745 59.8 African American 1,206 62.0 1,954 84.4 748 62.0 Native American 1 0.1 3 0.1 2 200.0 Asian & PI 33 1.7 25 1.1 -8 -24.2 Hispanic 6 0.3 9 0.4 3 50.0

9-12 Total 2,634 2,854 220 8.4 White 1,007 38.2 434 15.2 -573 -56.9 Minority 1,627 61.8 2,420 84.8 793 48.7 African American 1,568 59.5 2,361 82.7 793 50.6 Native American 3 0.1 1 0.0 -2 -66.7 Asian & PI 45 1.7 33 1.2 -12 -26.7 Hispanic 11 0.4 25 0.9 14 127.3

Enrollment in Southfield public schools was a reflection of the changes in minority populations occurring citywide. White students left the district throughout the decade resulting in a drop of 2,112 students, or a 60 percent decline. The African American student population grew by 2,891, or by 59 percent. Other racial/minority groups recorded little change.

22 Table 22 Minority Enrollment for Warren Community School District, 1991/92 – 2000/01

School Year 1991-92 2000-01 1991 - 2001 Change Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent District Totals Total 13,804 14,522 718 5.2 White 13,177 95.5 13,574 93.5 397 3.0 Minority 627 4.5 948 6.5 321 51.2 African American 137 1.0 372 2.6 235 171.5 Native American 14 0.1 8 0.1 -6 -42.9 Asian & PI 422 3.1 473 3.3 51 12.1 Hispanic 54 0.4 95 0.7 41 75.9

K-5 Total 5,379 5,509 130 2.4 White 5,184 96.4 5,157 93.5 -27 -0.5 Minority 195 3.6 352 6.5 157 80.5 African American 54 1.0 121 2.2 67 124.1 Native American 4 0.1 2 0.0 -2 -50.0 Asian & PI 114 2.1 196 3.6 82 71.9 Hispanic 23 0.4 33 0.6 10 43.5

6-8 Total 3,013 3,448 435 14.4 White 2,859 94.9 3,224 93.5 365 12.8 Minority 154 5.1 224 6.5 70 45.5 African American 39 1.3 108 3.1 69 176.9 Native American 0 0.0 2 0.1 2 NC Asian & PI 103 3.4 93 2.7 -10 -9.7 Hispanic 12 0.4 21 0.6 9 75.0

9-12 Total 4,357 4,429 72 1.7 White 4,121 94.6 4,129 93.2 8 0.2 Minority 236 5.4 300 6.8 64 27.1 African American 35 0.8 115 2.6 80 228.6 Native American 8 0.2 4 0.1 -4 -50.0 Asian & PI 178 4.1 146 3.3 -32 -18.0 Hispanic 15 0.3 35 0.8 20 133.3

Warren schools recorded similar numerical growth in the number of students for both whites and minorities: up 397 and 321 students, respectively. The difference is that this reflected a 3 percent increase for white students and a 51 percent increase for minorities. African American and Hispanic enrollment increases were spread throughout all three grade levels. Asian enrollment grew in grades K through 5 but dropped in the older grades.

23 Figure 13 Figure 14 Percent Minority Enrollment by Grade for Percent Minority Enrollment by Grade for Hamtramck Community School District, Highland Park Community School District, 1991/92 and 2000/01 1991/92 and 2000/01

1991-92 100 2000-01 1991-92 100 90 2000-01

90 80 80 70 70 60 60 50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0 Total K-5 6-8 9-12 Total K-5 6-8 9-12

Figure 15 Figure 16 Percent Minority Enrollment by Grade for Percent Minority Enrollment by Grade for Inkster Community School District, Mt. Clemens Community School District, 1991/92 and 2000/01 1991/92 and 2000/01

1991-92 1991-92

2000-01 2000-01 100 100

90 90

80 80

70 70

60 60

50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0 Total K-5 6-8 9-12 Total K-5 6-8 9-12

24 Figure 17 Figure 18 Percent Minority Enrollment by Grade for Percent Minority Enrollment by Grade for Pontiac Community School District, Southfield Community School District, 1991/92 and 2000/01 1991/92 and 2000/01

100 1991-92

2000-01 90 100 1991-92 80 90 2000-01

80 70

70 60

60 50

50 40 40 30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0 Total K-5 6-8 9-12 Total K-5 6-8 9-12

Figure 19 Percent Minority Enrollment by Grade for Warren Community School District, 1991/92 and 2000/01 1991-92

2000-01 100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 Total K-5 6-8 9-12

25 Map 1 Change in Minority Population by Community, 1990 to 2000

Pontiac

Mt. Clemens

Warren

Southfield

Highland Park

Detroit HamtramckHamtramck

InksterInkster

Percent Change 200% to 644 % 100 % to 199 % 3% to 99% -15 % to -3 %

Wayne State University/CUS/jcb May 2002

26 Map 2 Minority Population by School District, 2000/2001 School Year

Pontiac

Mt. Clemens

Warren Consolidated

Southfield

Highland Park Detroit Hamtramck

Inkster Inkster

Percent Minority 75% to 99% 50% to 74.9% 25% to 49.9% 2% to 24.9%

Wayne State University/CUS/jcb May 2002

27 Do you want to know more about kids and their families in ?

Current and upcoming issues of the 2001/2002 census fact sheet series: • Residential Patterns, Age Distributions, and Changing Family Structure • Children and Their Neighborhoods • Race/Ethnicity by Selected Communities and School Districts • Income Profile by Selected Communities and the Tri-County Area (July) • Portrait of Four Communities: Brightmoor, St. Jean, State Fair/Nolan & Vernor (September) Available in PDF on these websites: www.skillmancenter.culma.wayne.edu and www.cus.wayne.edu

NON-PROFIT ORG. U.S. POSTAGE PAID DETROIT, MI Skillman Center for Children PERMIT NO. 3844 College of Urban, Labor and Metropolitan Affairs 100 East Palmer, Room 123 Detroit, Michigan 48202