Suburban schools have long believed they were different from everyone else, and in many respects they were right. Usually schools would point to test score differences to show how their school system is outperforming the state average.
Now suburban schools can point to a more ignominious measure of over-achievement – the rate of growth of economically disadvantaged students.
From 1995 to 2011, Michigan’s economically disadvantaged student population (as measured by federal Free and Reduced Lunch Eligibility, FRLE) grew 55%. In 1995, about one of three Michigan students qualified. In 2011, almost one of two did.
In this same time period, the same student population has skyrocketed in the suburbs. School districts in Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills, Troy, Rochester, East Grand Rapids, Novi, and Troy, Michigan have each grown above or near 300%. In my Grosse Pointe Public School Community, our FRLE population has grown a staggering 675%.
The suburbs have simply not been immune from the economic ravages of Michigan’s “Lost Decade.” To think otherwise if folly. And it would be equally foolhardy to conclude this change has not influenced their student population and how both the students and schools are judged as we continue to rely on standardized tests as the sole measure of our success and failure.
The relationship between economic demographics and standardized tests are undeniable. No reasonable person would argue that lower economic status causes lower test scores, but the correlation is striking. The presentation embedded here provides strong visual data of this correlation for the Grosse Pointe Public School System and many similar suburban districts.
The ramifications are significant, so long as e continue to place such stock in the validity of standardized tests. The state of Michigan uses these tests as the basis for their ranking system, known as the Top to Bottom list. As we see the correlation between economic status and test score based measures, these lists do little more than rank the economic levels of communities.
Standardized tests have their place and some can legitimately inform improvement strategies, but others have serious flaws. I’ve provided my perspective on this issue in what I have called my Moneyball approach to public school measurement and accountability systems in articles here and here.
Suburban communities should inform themselves regarding this issue. In my community, we must also go a layer deeper into the data provided in the materials below regarding the significance of these demographic changes from school to school – a topic for another day.