Exam School Admissions: Surprise ending for the Task Force

Group painstakingly hammers out a proposal — only to learn that shadowy forces won’t allow it

By Alain Jehlen
The Exam School Admissions Task Force’s four-month slog to reach consensus on how to invite students to Boston’s exam schools seemed to end in a fiery crash yesterday after the group almost got there on Monday night, but were then told that their plan had been vetoed by an anonymous power or powers.

If the group didn’t turn around and make a different recommendation, “there may well be an impact on the district that none of us want to see,” declared Task Force Co-chair Michael Contompasis, a former Latin School headmaster and BPS Superintendent.

He refused to be more specific, but several Task Force members said he might mean the powers-that-be would make exam school admissions revert to the pre-pandemic formula, in which few low-income, Black, or Brown students were admitted to Boston Latin School, and hardly any English learners or students with disabilities were admitted.

The big question: Who?

Who are these mysterious powers? Contompasis and Co-chair Tanisha Sullivan, President of the NAACP Boston Branch, resisted repeated attempts by Task Force members to find out.

Task Force member Matt Cregor seemed to think the opposition came from elected officials. Cregor, formerly with Lawyers for Civil Rights, was a leader along with Sullivan in the long campaign to increase race, ethnic, and class diversity at the Boston exam schools.

“To the extent that there are
local elected officials who are weighing in here, doing it in quiet, shame on them!” he
said.

“That disgusts me.”

An effort to level the playing field

The agreement that was vetoed was to divide the city into eight “tiers” of census tracts that have roughly similar socio-economic advantages and give each tier the same number of exam school seats. Top-ranked students in each tier would be invited to exam schools.

That way, a child whose parents work two minimum wage jobs to put food on the table won’t have to compete with a child whose parents can afford tutoring and a private school that features rampant grade inflation.

The Task Force considered reserving 20 percent of the seats for a citywide competition. Contompasis was in favor of that, saying the top 20 percent citywide “reflects students who may have played by the rules, and recognizes their overall achievement.”

Sullivan opposed the top 20 percent set-aside, and Monday night, the Task Force finally decided against it.

“We’ve received a lot of feedback”

But at the start of the Tuesday meeting, Sullivan announced, “We’ve received a lot of feedback” on the proposal adopted the night before.

She indicated the 20 percent citywide set-aside had to be included in the Task Force recommendation for it to be acceptable. “I want to be clear about this 20 percent conversation. It is political,” Sullivan said.

“I’m not comfortable just doing 20 percent, knowing that 20 percent is really about high income, one neighborhood, in a certain racial demographic,” she added, insisting she’d only agree to it if there was some kind of mitigation for the most disadvantaged students.

Contompasis proposed a boost to the rankings of students who are either homeless, in the custody of the Department of Children and Families, or living in public housing. Under the Task Force proposal, that group of students form their own separate tier. Boosting their rankings would give them a better shot at getting into the citywide top 20 percent.

Sullivan accepted that proposal.

“Heavy lifting”

Latin School Head Rachel Skerritt pointed out that BPS simulations have shown the citywide 20 percent set-aside would not make a huge difference in the overall make-up of the exam schools, because 80 percent would still be given out by socio-economic tiers.

“The 80 percent is doing the heavy lifting,” said Task Force member Samuel Acevedo, who co-chairs the BPS Opportunity and Achievement Gap Task Force. “We have to give the 20 percent to be allowed to do the 80.”

Data source: Report to the Exam School Admissions Task Force June 28, 2021

A “mammoth achievement”

Most Task Force members agreed that the proposal, even with the 20 percent set-aside, would be, in Acevedo’s words, “a mammoth achievement.”

But the idea that the Task Force was “allowed” to make some proposals and not allowed to make others, by an anonymous controller or controllers, outraged many Task Force members.

Some who supported the 20 percent set-aside on Monday night objected angrily on Tuesday to the Task Force decision being overturned.

In the end, Task Force members agreed to let the co-chairs present the proposal, including the 20 percent citywide competition, “on behalf” of the Task Force. But there was no actual vote and several said they wanted to be on the record in opposition.

Here are excerpts from possibly the most amazing Boston Public Schools meeting in years. The video recording is posted here.

—

Simon Chernow, 2021 Boston Latin Academy graduate:
We were listening to the public, taking in their opinions, having public testimony and talking for 60-plus hours to come to a decision. I’m confused as to where this anonymous backlash came from in the past 24 hours. All of a sudden there’s these ghosts that are speaking and have this power.

Tanya Freeman-Wisdom, John D. O’Bryant School Head:
We’ve talked about race, we’ve talked about equity, we’ve talked about White supremacy. We’ve talked about a lot of things here. For us at this point to be told that this has to go this way — It’s a problem for me. … How do we sit as a Task Force fighting for students, and we give into that?

Roxann Tung, education researcher and parent of a BPS graduate:
If I bow to political pressure now, what does that saying about my voice and power as an advocate and an activist moving forward? What does it say about how I model for my daughter? No.

Acacia Aguirre, John D. O’Bryant School parent:
I could have been open to an 80/20, but the fact that somehow it is imposed on us — we have not been told why it has to be. I think there’s a good reason why you’re doing it, but it really bothers me.

Katherine Grassa, Curley K-8 School Principal:
I’m very uncomfortable with this decision [but] I’m trying to think about what’s the best decision for the kids. If this doesn’t pass at School Committee and we revert back to an old plan, it’s bad for our kids.

Zoe Nagasawa, Boston Latin School graduate, 2021:
I respect that this is going to be the recommendation and I do think it will be a step forward, but for the record, I do want to be opposed.

Zena Lum, Boston Latin Academy parent:
I just want it on the record that we had consensus and consensus was taken away from us.