March 7th, 2019
McAuliffeVsNYC-01With all the discussion of “disparate impact” I don’t understand why Sandoval Decision doesn’t apply.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_v._Sandoval
Category: law
-
McCauliffe 2018 Case: MOTION for Preliminary Injunction
The judge’s motion denying a preliminary injunction which attempted to block scheduled changes to the Discovery program.
You can find most case documents here https://shsatsunset.org/christa-mcauliffe-intermediate-school-pto-inc-et-al-v-de-blasio-et-al/
The 40-page document also contains lots of findings of fact that should be a useful legal overview. Christa_McAuliffe_Intermediate_v_De_Blasio_et_al__nysdce-18-11657__0066.0
Here are some notes…
As a preliminary matter, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to show that the balance of hardships tips decidedly in their favor. The PTO, which represents parents at a school no longer eligible for participation in the Discovery program because it has an ENI of less than 60%, arguably suffers the most hardship from the new changes. But I.S. 187 students may still compete for 87% of the specialized school seats this year—those seats reserved for the students who score highest on the SHSAT. The expansion of the Discovery program will lead to there being a slightly higher cut-off score for admission based purely on test scores, but this slight change is not a significant hardship.
Wong’s daughter attends a school with an ENI above 60%, see Kieser Decl. Ex. 1, so the program changes do not change whether she is eligible for Discovery. Further, if Wong’s daughter is Discovery eligible—it is unclear from the record whether she is—then any hardship from the increased cut-off must be considered in tandem with the fact that she has a higher chance of admission through Discovery this year.
Page 25On discrimination…
Plaintiffs argue that the Discovery program changes, though facially neutral, discriminate against Asian-Americans because the changes disproportionately hurt Asian-Americans and, critical here, Defendants intended the changes to do so. The Court finds that Plaintiffs are not likely to succeed in showing discriminatory intent and the program changes are thus likely subject to rational basis review. As a consequence, Plaintiffs are not likely to succeed on their equal protection claim
Page 28Mayor de Blasio and Chancellor Carranza’s statements concerning the Discovery program do not constitute evidence of their intent to discriminate against Asian-Americans.
The only statement that either made that could be construed to concern Asian-Americans specifically was Chancellor Carranza’s statement that he does not “buy into the narrative that any one ethnic group owns admission to these schools.” Plan to Diversify Elite NYC Schools, FOX 5 (June 5, 2018).21
Plaintiffs claim that this statement wrongly and offensively proposes that Asian Americans believe that they own admission to the specialized schools.
Context suggests otherwise.Chancellor Carranza was responding to the question, “Are you pitting minority against
Page 29minority ?” Id. In context, Chancellor Carranza’s response is best understood as a rebuke of what he saw as the idea suggested by the interviewer—that minority ethnic groups must compete with each other for their right to specialized school seats.Rational basis review standard…
The Discovery program changes would likely be upheld under rational basis review. Indeed, Plaintiffs do not dispute this. The expansion of the program is rationally related to a legitimate government interest in helping more economically disadvantaged students receive a high-quality education. And the only substantial change to the definition of “disadvantaged,” the new minimum-ENI requirement, is rationally related to the government’s interest in prioritizing Discovery eligibility for students it deems to be the most in need.
The government is within its right under rational basis review to determine that limiting the Discovery program to students at schools with a student body that is relatively lower income furthers the purpose of the Act, to provide “disadvantaged students of demonstrated high potential” an opportunity to attend the specialized schools.
Page 32Narrow tailoring…
The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the benefits that flow from racial diversity in higher education as a compelling government interest.
It has described such benefits to include the promotion of “cross-racial understanding,” “break[ing] down racial stereotypes,” “enab[
ling ] [students] to better understand persons of different races,” “promo[tion] [of] learning outcomes,” “better prepar[ing] students for an increasingly diverse workforce and society,” and “better prepar[ing] them as professionals.” Grutter, 539 U.S. at 330.If these benefits flow from increasing racial diversity in universities, the Court sees no logical reason why increasing racial diversity in high schools would not benefit students to the same extent. Indeed, an argument could be made that increased racial diversity is more beneficial at the high school
level, when students are younger. This is especially true for the social effects of racial diversity. High school students generally spend more time in class and have smaller class sizes than university students, amplifying the extent to which they interact with each other.Their freedom to move and attend the classes of their choice is also significantly curtailed compared to university students, limiting their ability to self-segregate. Defendants submit multiple studies that purport to show the positive social and educational effects of racial diversity in secondary education. See Defs.’ Mem. at 20–21.
Page 36 -
Challengers of Affirmative Action Have a New Target: New York City’s Elite High Schools
This week, the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative, libertarian-leaning law firm that has a history of challenging affirmative action policies, filed the first lawsuit against his admissions reform proposal, which he announced this summer.
But the suit does not take on the part of Mr. de Blasio’s proposal that has provoked the most controversy: a plan that would entirely eliminate the exam that is currently the sole means of admission into the city’s elite specialized high schools. The mayor wants to replace the test with a system that guarantees seats to top performers at each of the city’s middle schools, which would guarantee that the schools accept many more black and Hispanic students.
Instead, Pacific Legal is taking aim at the first, and more modest, phase of Mr. de Blasio’s proposal: the expansion of a program known as Discovery.https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/14/nyregion/affirmative-action-lawsuit-nyc-high-schools.html
-
NAACP 2012 Case: New York City Specialized High School Complaint
In school districts across the nation, talented African Americans and other students of color are denied a fair opportunity to gain access to the life-changing educational experiences provided by specialized schools for high-achieving students and gifted/talented education programs. As a result, elite public schools and programs, which provide key pathways to college and then to leadership locally, regionally, and nationally, are among the most segregated.
In too many school districts, these racial disparities result in large part from admissions policies that rely too heavily or even exclusively on standardized tests, even though the three leading organizations in the area of educational test measurement—the American Psychological Association, the American Educational Research Association, and the National Council on Measurement in Education—have concluded that a high-stakes decision with a major impact on a student’s educational opportunities, such as admission to a specialized or gifted/talented program, should not turn on the results of a single test. There is also a marked failure to provide African Americans and Latinos with opportunities to learn the material or otherwise prepare to meet the admissions standards used to determine whether students will be placed in these specialized programs.
https://www.naacpldf.org/case-issue/new-york-city-specialized-high-school-complaint/
-
Parents Mull Suit Over City Plan to Boost Diversity at Elite Schools
Vito LaBella, president of the Christa McAuliffe Parent Teacher Organization, said that if parents decide to forge ahead, the federal suit would challenge this set-aside plan. “It’s discriminatory,” he said. “I do believe our children would no longer be allowed to partake in Discovery.”
Currently the small Discovery program is available to disadvantaged applicants citywide. The mayor says he can make this change because the 1971 law on admissions at these high schools allows for a Discovery program of some sort.
[…]
I.S. 87 Christa McAuliffe, a highly selective public school in the Borough Park neighborhood, has been a strong feeder to specialized high schools. With roughly 900 students, about 36% of its eighth-graders headed to Stuyvesant High School, 20% to Brooklyn Technical High School, and 20% to Staten Island Technical High School, according to city data for the 2016-17 school year.
That year, 67% of the school’s students were Asian, 26% were white, 6% were Hispanic and 1% were black.
-
A10427: An act to amend the education law, in relation to admission to the specialized high schools in the city of New York
10427--A I N A S S E M B L Y April 20, 2018 ___________ Introduced by M. of A. BARRON, BLAKE, DAVILA, MONTESANO, PERRY, SIMON, STECK, PICHARDO, COOK, HOOPER, TAYLOR, RIVERA, PRETLOW, DE LA ROSA, TITUS, DICKENS, WRIGHT, VANEL, BICHOTTE, JOYNER, SOLAGES, ARROYO, WOERNER, THIELE, FERNANDEZ, ERRIGO, ESPINAL, WEPRIN, MOSLEY, GOTTFRIED -- read once and referred to the Committee on Education -- committee discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee AN ACT to amend the education law, in relation to admission to the specialized high schools in the city of New York THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Paragraph (b) of subdivision 1 of section 2590-h of the education law, as amended by chapter 345 of the laws of 2009, is amended to read as follows: (b) all specialized [senior] high schools. The [special] SPECIALIZED high schools shall include the [present] schools known as[:] The Bronx High School of Science, Stuyvesant High School, Brooklyn Technical High School, Fiorello H. LaGuardia High School of Music [and the Arts in the borough of Manhattan] & ART AND PERFORMING ARTS, and such [further] ADDITIONAL schools [which the city board may designate] AS MAY BE DESIGNATED BY THE CHANCELLOR from time to time. The [special] SPECIALIZED HIGH schools shall be permitted to maintain a discovery program in accordance with the law in effect on the date preceding the effective date of this section; PROVIDED THAT THE REQUIREMENT THAT A STUDENT WHO IS CONSIDERED FOR THE DISCOVERY PROGRAM ATTEND AND PASS A PREPARATORY PROGRAM ADMINISTERED BY THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOL, DEMON- STRATING THEREBY HIS OR HER ABILITY TO SUCCESSFULLY COPE WITH THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAM, SHALL REFER TO A PROGRAM THAT CAN TAKE PLACE DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR OR THE SUMMER; admissions to the [special] SPECIALIZED HIGH schools shall be conducted in accordance with [the law in effect on the date preceding the effective date of this] section TWENTY-FIVE HUNDRED NINETY-H-L OF THIS ARTICLE; EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets [ ] is old law to be omitted. LBD00247-04-8A. 10427--A 2 S 2. Paragraph (b) of subdivision 1 of section 2590-h of the education law, as amended by chapter 720 of the laws of 1996, is amended to read as follows: (b) all specialized [senior] high schools. The [special] SPECIALIZED high schools shall include the [present] schools known as[:] The Bronx High School of Science, Stuyvesant High School, Brooklyn Technical High School, Fiorello H. LaGuardia High School of Music [and the Arts in the borough of Manhattan] & ART AND PERFORMING ARTS, and such [further] ADDITIONAL schools [which the city board may designate] AS MAY BE DESIGNATED BY THE CHANCELLOR from time to time. The [special] SPECIALIZED HIGH schools shall be permitted to maintain a discovery program in accordance with the law in effect on the date preceding the effective date of this section; PROVIDED THAT THE REQUIREMENT THAT A STUDENT WHO IS CONSIDERED FOR THE DISCOVERY PROGRAM ATTEND AND PASS A PREPARATORY PROGRAM ADMINISTERED BY THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOL, DEMON- STRATING THEREBY HIS OR HER ABILITY TO SUCCESSFULLY COPE WITH THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAM, SHALL REFER TO A PROGRAM THAT CAN TAKE PLACE DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR OR THE SUMMER; admissions to the [special] SPECIALIZED HIGH schools shall be conducted in accordance with [the law in effect on the date preceding the effective date of this] section TWENTY-FIVE HUNDRED NINETY-H-1 OF THIS ARTICLE; S 3. The education law is amended by adding a new section 2590-h-1 to read as follows: S 2590-H-1. ADMISSIONS TO THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS. 1. ADMISSIONS TO THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION, PROVIDED THAT STUDENTS MAY ALSO BE ADMITTED TO THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS FOR THE TWO THOUSAND NINETEEN--TWO THOUSAND TWENTY AND THE TWO THOUSAND TWENTY--TWO THOUSAND TWENTY-ONE SCHOOL YEARS PURSUANT TO THE DISCOVERY PROGRAM AS SET FORTH IN SECTION TWENTY-FIVE HUNDRED NINETY-H OF THIS ARTICLE. 2. FOR THE ADMISSIONS PROCESS CONDUCTED DURING THE TWO THOUSAND EIGH- TEEN--TWO THOUSAND NINETEEN SCHOOL YEAR TO DETERMINE ADMISSIONS TO THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS FOR THE TWO THOUSAND NINETEEN--TWO THOUSAND TWENTY SCHOOL YEAR, STUDENTS WHO MEET THE CRITERIA SET FORTH IN THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL BE OFFERED ADMISSION TO THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: (A) STUDENTS ATTENDING PUBLIC SCHOOLS LOCATED IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK WHO ARE IN THE TOP THREE PERCENT OF THEIR EIGHTH GRADE CLASS, AS CALCU- LATED BASED ON MULTIPLE MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION FIVE OF THIS SECTION, AND WHO ACHIEVE A COMPOSITE SCORE ABOVE OR AT THE CUT-OFF COMPOSITE SCORE FOR THE SCHOOL SUCH STUDENTS HAVE COMMITTED THEMSELVES TO ATTEND, PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION FIVE OF THIS SECTION, PROVIDED THAT SUCH STUDENTS SHALL ALSO RANK IN THE TOP QUARTER OF PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS IN THE EIGHTH GRADE CITYWIDE BASED ON SUCH MULTIPLE MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT, AND PROVIDED FURTHER THAT OPENINGS SHALL BE RESERVED FOR SUCH STUDENTS AT EACH SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOL AS SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISION SEVEN OF THIS SECTION; (B) STUDENTS IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK WHO TAKE A COMPETITIVE, OBJECTIVE AND SCHOLASTIC ACHIEVEMENT EXAMINATION IN THE EIGHTH GRADE AND ACHIEVE A SCORE ABOVE OR AT THE CUT-OFF SCORE FOR THE OPENINGS THAT REMAIN IN THE SCHOOL FOR WHICH SUCH STUDENTS HAVE TAKEN THE EXAMINATION; AND (C) STUDENTS IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK WHO TAKE A COMPETITIVE, OBJECTIVE AND SCHOLASTIC EXAMINATION IN THE NINTH GRADE AND ACHIEVE A SCORE ABOVE OR AT THE CUT-OFF SCORE FOR THE OPENINGS THAT REMAIN IN THE SCHOOL FOR WHICH SUCH STUDENTS HAVE TAKEN THE EXAMINATION. A. 10427--A 3 3. FOR THE ADMISSIONS PROCESS CONDUCTED DURING THE TWO THOUSAND NINE- TEEN--TWO THOUSAND TWENTY SCHOOL YEAR TO DETERMINE ADMISSIONS TO THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS FOR THE TWO THOUSAND TWENTY--TWO THOUSAND TWEN- TY-ONE SCHOOL YEAR, STUDENTS WHO MEET THE CRITERIA SET FORTH IN THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL BE OFFERED ADMISSION TO THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: (A) STUDENTS ATTENDING PUBLIC SCHOOLS LOCATED IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK WHO ARE IN THE TOP FIVE PERCENT OF THEIR EIGHTH GRADE CLASS, AS CALCU- LATED BASED ON MULTIPLE MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION FIVE OF THIS SECTION, AND WHO ACHIEVE A COMPOSITE SCORE ABOVE OR AT THE CUT-OFF COMPOSITE SCORE FOR THE SCHOOL SUCH STUDENTS HAVE COMMITTED THEMSELVES TO ATTEND PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION FIVE OF THIS SECTION, PROVIDED THAT SUCH STUDENTS SHALL ALSO RANK IN THE TOP QUARTER OF PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS IN THE EIGHTH GRADE CITYWIDE BASED ON SUCH MULTIPLE MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT, AND PROVIDED FURTHER THAT OPENINGS SHALL BE RESERVED FOR SUCH STUDENTS AT EACH SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOL AS SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISION SEVEN OF THIS SECTION; (B) STUDENTS IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK WHO TAKE A COMPETITIVE, OBJECTIVE AND SCHOLASTIC ACHIEVEMENT EXAMINATION IN THE EIGHTH GRADE AND ACHIEVE A SCORE ABOVE OR AT THE CUT-OFF SCORE FOR THE OPENINGS THAT REMAIN IN THE SCHOOL FOR WHICH SUCH STUDENTS HAVE TAKEN THE EXAMINATION; AND (C) STUDENTS IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK WHO TAKE A COMPETITIVE, OBJECTIVE AND SCHOLASTIC EXAMINATION IN THE NINTH GRADE AND ACHIEVE A SCORE ABOVE OR AT THE CUT-OFF SCORE FOR THE OPENINGS THAT REMAIN IN THE SCHOOL FOR WHICH SUCH STUDENTS HAVE TAKEN THE EXAMINATION. 4. FOR THE ADMISSIONS PROCESS CONDUCTED DURING THE TWO THOUSAND TWEN- TY--TWO THOUSAND TWENTY-ONE SCHOOL YEAR AND SUBSEQUENT SCHOOL YEARS TO DETERMINE ADMISSIONS TO THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS FOR THE TWO THOU- SAND TWENTY-ONE--TWO THOUSAND TWENTY-TWO SCHOOL YEAR AND SUBSEQUENT SCHOOL YEARS, STUDENTS WHO MEET THE CRITERIA SET FORTH IN THIS SUBDIVI- SION SHALL BE OFFERED ADMISSION TO THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: (A) STUDENTS ATTENDING PUBLIC SCHOOLS LOCATED IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK WHO ARE IN THE TOP FIVE TO SEVEN PERCENT OF THEIR EIGHTH GRADE CLASS, SUCH PERCENTAGE TO BE DETERMINED TO ALLOW OPENINGS TO REMAIN FOR ADMIS- SION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (B) OF THIS SUBDIVISION AND AS CALCULATED BASED ON MULTIPLE MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT, DETERMINED AS SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISION FIVE OF THIS SECTION, AND WHO ACHIEVE A COMPOSITE SCORE ABOVE OR AT THE CUT-OFF COMPOSITE SCORE FOR THE SCHOOL SUCH STUDENTS HAVE COMMITTED THEMSELVES TO ATTEND, DETERMINED AS SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISION FIVE OF THIS SECTION, PROVIDED THAT SUCH STUDENTS SHALL ALSO RANK 犀利士 IN THE TOP QUARTER OF PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS IN THE EIGHTH GRADE CITYWIDE BASED ON SUCH MULTIPLE MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT, AND PROVIDED FURTHER THAT OPENINGS SHALL BE RESERVED FOR SUCH STUDENTS AT EACH SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOL AS SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISION SEVEN OF THIS SECTION; AND (B) STUDENTS IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK WHO HAVE A MINIMUM GRADE POINT AVERAGE OF 3.7, PROVIDED SUCH STUDENTS SHALL BE ADMITTED BY A RANDOM SELECTION PROCESS FOR THE OPENINGS THAT REMAIN IN EACH SCHOOL. 5. THE CHANCELLOR SHALL DETERMINE THE MULTIPLE MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AS REFERENCED IN THIS SECTION, AND THE WEIGHT OF EACH SUCH MEASURE, PROVIDED THAT SUCH MEASURES SHALL INCLUDE ACADEMIC COURSE GRADES AND STANDARDIZED TEST SCORES. A DESCRIPTION OF SUCH MEASURES AND THE WEIGHT ACCORDED TO EACH SHALL BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE, INCLUDING ON THE WEBSITE OF THE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT. A STUDENT WHO IS EVALUATED BASED ON SUCH MEASURES FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL BE A. 10427--A 4 ASSIGNED A COMPOSITE SCORE BASED ON SUCH WEIGHTED MEASURES. OFFERS OF ADMISSION TO THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (A) OF SUBDIVISIONS TWO THROUGH FOUR OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE DETERMINED BY ARRANGING THE COMPOSITE SCORES OF ALL STUDENTS WHO ARE ASSIGNED SUCH SCORES AND WHO THEN COMMIT THEMSELVES TO ATTEND A PARTICULAR SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOL IN DESCENDING ORDER FROM THE HIGHEST SCORE AND COUNTING DOWN TO THE CUT-OFF COMPOSITE SCORE, WHICH SHALL BE THE COMPOSITE SCORE OF THE LAST STUDENT WHO RECEIVES AN OFFER OF ADMISSION TO SUCH SCHOOL BASED ON THE NUMBER OF OPENINGS AVAILABLE IN SUCH SCHOOL PURSUANT TO SUCH PARAGRAPH. 6. OFFERS OF ADMISSION TO THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPHS (B) AND (C) OF SUBDIVISIONS TWO AND THREE OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE DETERMINED BY ARRANGING THE SCORES OF ALL THE CANDIDATES WHO TOOK THE COMPETITIVE, OBJECTIVE AND SCHOLASTIC EXAMINATION AND WHO THEN COMMIT THEMSELVES TO ATTEND A PARTICULAR SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOL IN DESCENDING ORDER FROM THE HIGHEST SCORE AND COUNTING DOWN TO THE CUT-OFF SCORE, WHICH SHALL BE THE SCORE OF THE LAST CANDIDATE WHO RECEIVES AN OFFER OF ADMISSION TO SUCH SCHOOL BASED ON THE NUMBER OF OPENINGS AVAIL- ABLE IN SUCH SCHOOL. 7. THE NUMBER OF OPENINGS RESERVED AT EACH SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOL FOR STUDENTS WHO MEET THE CRITERIA SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH (A) OF SUBDIVI- SIONS TWO THROUGH FOUR OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE DETERMINED BY MULTIPLY- ING: (A) THE TOTAL NUMBER OF NINTH GRADE AVAILABLE OPENINGS AT SUCH SCHOOL; BY (B) THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO MEET THE CRITERIA SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH (A) OF SUBDIVISIONS TWO THROUGH FOUR OF THIS SECTION DIVIDED BY THE AGGREGATE NUMBER OF NINTH GRADE AVAILABLE OPENINGS IN ALL THE SPECIALIZED HIGH SCHOOLS. 8. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION TO THE CONTRARY, ADMISSION TO THE FIORELLO H. LAGUARDIA HIGH SCHOOL OF MUSIC & ART AND PERFORMING ARTS, AND OTHER SCHOOLS OF THE ARTS THAT MAY BE ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION TWENTY-FIVE HUNDRED NINETY-H OF THIS ARTICLE, SHALL BE DETER- MINED BY A STUDENT'S DEMONSTRATED ABILITIES IN MUSIC OR THE ARTS AS WELL AS SUCH STUDENT'S SCHOLASTIC ACHIEVEMENT. S 4. This act shall take effect immediately; provided, however, that the amendments to paragraph (b) of subdivision 1 of section 2590-h of the education law made by section one of this act shall be subject to the expiration and reversion of such section pursuant to subdivision 12 of section 17 of chapter 345 of the laws of 2009, as amended when upon such date the provisions of section two of this act shall take effect. -
Questions of Bias Are Raised About a Teachers’ Exam in New York
The earlier test that Judge Wood ruled was discriminatory, the Liberal Arts and Sciences Test, was used until 2004. She said that because the minority candidates were failing that test in greater numbers, the burden was on public officials to prove the test served a valid purpose. In similar rulings, judges around the country have thrown out written exams for firefighters and police officers, ruling they were not relevant to the tasks they would perform.
-
Charges of Bias in Admission Test Policy at Eight Elite Public High Schools
A coalition of educational and civil rights groups filed a federal complaint on Thursday saying that black and Hispanic students were disproportionately excluded from New York City’s most selective high schools because of a single-test admittance policy they say is racially discriminatory.
The complaint, filed with the United States Education Department, seeks to have the policy found in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and to change admissions procedures “to something that is nondiscriminatory and fair to all students,” said Damon T. Hewitt, a lawyer with the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, one of the groups that filed the complaint.
At issue is the Specialized High School Admissions Test, which is the sole criterion for admission to eight specialized schools that, even in the view of city officials, have been troubled by racial demographics that are out of balance.
-
Brooklyn: Action Filed Over School Admissions
The first legal challenge against Hecht-Calandra was launched in 1974. Only 3 years after the law was passed. Since then there’s been a number of legal actions.
Here’s one from 2007.
A public-interest law firm in Washington filed a class-action lawsuit against the New York City Education Department yesterday, charging that a program created to increase the number of black and Hispanic students in the city’s elite specialized high schools violates the Constitution by excluding whites and Asians. The law firm, the Center for Individual Rights, filed the suit in Federal District Court in Brooklyn on behalf of three Chinese-American parents whose children were denied admission to the Specialized High School Institute, which prepares students for the test determining admission to schools like Stuyvesant and the Bronx High School of Science.
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/nyregion/20mbrfs-admissions.html
SHSI focused on city schools in which students from low-income households, most of whom were Black and Latinx, were overrepresented. Accepted students completed an 18-month academic development program, preparing them for one single exam: the Specialized High School Admissions Test.
-
Legislature Retains Admission Tests for City’s Four Specialized High Schools
Archive of the original NYTimes news article from 1971
Without debate, the Senate and the Assembly gave final legislative approval today to a bill designed to limit the New York City Board of Education’s power to alter the city’s four specialized high schools.