SchoolIntegrationinGentrifyingNeighborhoods:EvidencefromNewYorkCity

KfirMordechayandJenniferB.Ayscue

ForewordbyGaryOrfield

March2019

2

Acknowledgments

TheauthorswouldliketothankProfessorGaryOrfieldforhisguidanceandinsightaswedevelopedthisreport,andJayvanBiljouwforhisresearchassistance.WewouldalsoliketothankLaurieRussmanforhereditorialandsupportrole.

3

TableofContentsAcknowledgments...........................................................................................................................2ListofFigures....................................................................................................................................4

ListofTables.....................................................................................................................................4

Foreword............................................................................................................................................5EvidencefromNewYorkCity.....................................................................................................10

ExecutiveSummary.......................................................................................................................10Introduction....................................................................................................................................12

CaseStudy:NewYorkCity..........................................................................................................13

GentrificationandSchools..........................................................................................................14HousingandSchools.....................................................................................................................15

DefiningGentrification.................................................................................................................16

DataandMethods..........................................................................................................................17DataSources.............................................................................................................................................17DataAnalysis............................................................................................................................................17

Findings............................................................................................................................................21NewYorkCity’sShiftingResidentialandDemographicPatterns..............................................21EnrollmentandSegregationinNewYorkCityElementarySchools(TPSandChartersCombined).................................................................................................................................................23EnrollmentandSegregationPatternsbySchoolType..................................................................28

HousingandEducationPolicyResponsestoGentrification..............................................33Housing.......................................................................................................................................................33Schools........................................................................................................................................................35

Conclusion........................................................................................................................................37

References.......................................................................................................................................39

Appendix..........................................................................................................................................45

4

LISTOFFIGURES

Figure1.DistributionofWhiteResidents,NewYorkCity,2000and2016.................................18Figure2.FastestGentrifyingCensusTracts,NewYorkCity,2016....................................................19Figure3.RacialChange,2000to2016............................................................................................................22Figure4.ChangesinEducationalAttainment,2000to2016...............................................................23FigureA-1.ChangesinHouseholdSize,2000to2016............................................................................50FigureA-2.AgeDistributionofChildrenbyRaceinGentrifyingNeighborhoods,2000,2009,2015.................................................................................................................................................................................51FigureA-3.ChangeinMedianHouseholdIncome,2000to2016......................................................51FigureA-4.ChangesinPovertyStatus,2000to2016..............................................................................52FigureA-5.DistributionofWhiteElementarySchoolStudentEnrollmentinGentrifyingNeighborhoods,2016..............................................................................................................................................53FigureA-6.ElementarySchoolsbyDistributionofWhiteStudentEnrollmentinGentrifyingNeighborhoods,2016..............................................................................................................................................53

LISTOFTABLES

Table1.ElementarySchoolEnrollmentinGentrifyingAreas..............................................................24Table2.ElementarySchoolEnrollmentinNon-GentrifyingAreas...................................................25Table3.SegregationConcentrationinGentrifyingAreas......................................................................26Table4.SegregationConcentrationinNon-GentrifyingAreas............................................................27Table5.ElementarySchoolEnrollmentbySchoolTypeinGentrifyingAreas............................29Table6.SegregationConcentrationbySchoolTypeinGentrifyingAreas.....................................30Table7.SegregationConcentrationbySchoolTypeinNon-GentrifyingAreas..........................31TableA-1.PopulationGrowthinGentrifyingTracts,NYC,andBrooklynandQueens............45TableA-3.ExposuretoWhiteElementaryStudentsinNon-GentrifyingAreas..........................45TableA-4.IsolationwithSame-RaceElementaryPeersinGentrifyingAreas.............................46TableA-5.IsolationwithSame-RaceElementaryPeersinNon-GentrifyingAreas...................46TableA-6.ElementaryEnrollmentbySchoolTypeinNon-GentrifyingAreas............................47TableA-7.ExposuretoWhiteElementaryStudentsbySchoolTypeinGentrifyingAreas...48TableA-8.ExposuretoWhiteElementaryStudentsbySchoolTypeinNon-GentrifyingAreas................................................................................................................................................................................48TableA-9.IsolationwithSame-RacePeersbyElementarySchoolTypeinGentrifyingAreas.............................................................................................................................................................................................49TableA-10.IsolationwithSame-RacePeersbyElementarySchoolTypeinNon-GentrifyingAreas................................................................................................................................................................................50

5

FOREWORDNewYorkandotherleadingcitiesareconfrontinganimportantchoiceabouttheirfuture,asanumberofcommunitiesareinthemidstofstarkracialandeconomicchanges.ForgenerationsafterWorldWarII,centralcitieswerecontinuouslylosingmiddle-classandprofessionalresidentstothesuburbs.Thiswasaccompaniedbyadramaticdeclineinthewhitepopulation,followedbythelossofmanymiddle-classfamiliesofcolor.Althoughsomeneighborhoodsremainedelite,muchofthecentralcitiesbecameplacesofalmostcompletelynon-whiteandpoorresidents.Childrenofcolorusuallyattendedschoolsthatweredoublysegregatedbyraceandpoverty.Now,asgentrification1spreadsintomanycityneighborhoodsinresponsetothecostofsuburbanhousingandanincreasingattractionofcitylife,thecityconfrontssomeverydifferentpossibilitiesandquestionsaboutwhatitshoulddo.ThisreportbytwoyoungCivilRightsProjectresearchers,KfirModechayandJenniferAyscue,documentsthetrends,reportshowmuchdiversityisoccurring,andconsidersthewaysinwhichthesechangescouldleadtointegrationinanextremelysegregatedcity.Fiveyearsago,theCivilRightsProjectpublishedastudyofschoolsegregationinNewYorkstate,includingadetailedlookatNewYorkCity.TheProjecthasbeencloselymonitoringschoolsegregationanddesegregationacrosstheUnitedStatessinceitwasfounded23yearsagoandthe2014report,NewYorkState’sExtremeSchoolSegregation:Inequality,InactionandaDamagedFuture,waspartofaseriesonEastCoastracialpatterns.Thesameyear,wealsopublishedanationalstudyofsegregationonthe60thanniversaryofBrownv.BoardofEducation,andfoundthatNewYorkStatehadthehighestlevelofsegregationforblackstudentsinthecountryandthesecondhighestlevelofsegregationforLatinostudents.NewYorkCitywastheepicenterofthestate’sschoolsegregation,anditsrecentlycreatedcharterschoolswereevenmoresegregatedthanthepublicschools.Thereportsummarizedahalf-centuryofresearchshowingthatthedoublesegregation(byraceandpoverty)ofstudentsofcolorwasrelatedtomanykindsofinequality.Researchshowsthatintegratededucationofferssignificantbenefitsforstudents,notonlyineducationalachievementbutalsointermsofgraduation,successincollege,andlatersuccessinworkingandlivinginintegratedcommunities.NewYorkCityisveryunusualamongthenation’slargecitiesinneverhavinganysustaineddesegregationorderorplanforschooldesegregation.SinceIbegantostudytheseissuesfourdecadesago,NewYorkhasbeenacenterofextremesegregation,usuallytogetherwithIllinoisandMichiganforblackstudents,andCaliforniaandTexasforLatinos.NewYorkstatehasbeensubstantiallymoresegregatedthananyoftheSouthernstates,whichallexperienceddesegregationinthecivilrightserathatstillmakesadifference,evenafterdesegregationplanswereterminated.SincetheNewYorkCityDepartmentofEducationis 1Ireallydonotliketheterm“gentrification,”sinceitisaBritishtermandwedon’thavegroupsthatarecalledgentry,anditimpliesakindofelitismthoughitisofteniscreatedbyyoungmiddle-classpeopletryingtofindorcreateaplacetheycanlive,oftenwithalotof“sweatequity,”housingimprovementsthattheydothemselves.Sometimestheyarepeoplewholovethecity.Weneedabetterword,especiallyforthefirstphase.

6

byfarthelargestschooldistrictinthecountry,thissegregationhasaffectedmillionsofNewYorkersoverthedecades.The2014reportreceivedagreatdealofattention,withscoresofarticlespublishedacrossthestate.Moreimportantly,ittriggeredseriousdiscussionandsomeactionbystudentandcommunitygroups,civilrightsadvocates,theschooldistrict,citycouncil,andthemayor.Therehasbeensignificantstudentorganizingfordesegregationasmorestudentsarerecognizingthattheirlivesandtheircommunitiesareatstake.ThisFebruary,thecity’shigh-poweredSchoolDiversityAdvisoryCouncilfiledanimpressivereport,MakingtheGrade:ThePathtoRealIntegrationandEquityforNYCPublicSchoolStudents,inwhichitmadeseriousproposalsforprogress.Forthefirsttimesincethecivilrightsera,thisissueisonthecity’sagenda.Iamveryencouragedbythesedevelopmentsandconvincedthatthoughthescopeoftheproblemsishuge,therearemanywaysinwhichrealprogresscouldbemade.SinceNewYorkhasneverexperiencedacitywidecourtorderfordesegregationorevenatrialonthecity’shistoricviolations,thefocusondesegregationhasraisedmanynewissuesforvariouscommunities.Incitieswithoutahistoryofdesegregation,whererightstosuperiorschoolsareoftenseenaspartofwhatyoubuywhenyoupurchaseahome,theideaofracialchangeintheschoolsoftentriggersfearandresistance.Inspiteofahalfcenturyofresearchthatshowsallchildrenbenefitacademicallyandsociallyfromschoolintegration,peoplewhohavenotexperiencedintegrationtendtoseeschoolsasazero-sumgamewheretheirchildrenlosewhenothersgain.Infact,intermsoftestscores,schoolintegrationisapositivesumgame.Childrenofcolorgain,andmiddleclasswhiteandAsianstudentsstayconstant,whileallchildrenbenefitintermsofpreparationforlivingandworkinginadiversesociety.Themechanismforthisnetgaincomesfromthefactthattheachievementofmiddle-classstudentsismuchmorecloselylinkedtofamilybackgroundandpreparationwithasmallerschooleffect,whileforchildrenofcolorfromlessfavorablecircumstancestheschoolhasamuchlargerimpactontheirlifeoutcomes.Nonetheless,withoutleadership,peopleoftenactonfears.Allofourgreatcitiesareshapedbystreamsofpeoplemovinginandmovingoutofvariousneighborhoods.TheaverageAmericanmoveseleventimesinhisorherlifetime,andyoungerpeopleinthefamily-formationstagemovemorefrequently--soneighborhoodsandschoolsareconstantlychangingandmustregularlyreplacethosewhoareleaving.Peoplewithresourceshave,ofcourse,manymorechoicesthanpeoplewithout,particularlyinacountrywithamuchsmallersectorofsubsidizedhousingthanmostcomparablenations.Whitepeoplefinditeasierbothtomovewherevertheywantandtoobtainmortgagefinancing,whilefamiliesofcoloroftenfacediscriminationandhavefewercontactsandlessequityinexistinghousing.Gentrificationis,however,changingsomeoftheserealities.Inhigh-costareastoday,evenpeoplewithverygoodjobsoftencannotfindthekindofhousingtheywantatapricetheycanafford.Thissituationstimulateswavesofgentrification,wherepeoplewhocannotsecurehousinginregularmiddle-classsuburbancommunitiesdecidetopurchaseandrehaboldhousinginlowerincomecityneighborhoods.

7

Gentrificationis,ofcourse,amixedforce—creatinghousingupgradesatnocosttothecityasnewcomersupdateoldhousingstock,raisingtaxrevenueasvaluesrise.Ontheotherhand,thisprocesscutsthesupplyoflowercosthousingatatimeofextremeeconomicinequality,creatingahousingcrisis,forcingmanyfamiliestobedisplacedandsomefamiliesintohomelessness.Fromtheperspectiveofcivilrightsandurbanplanning,ofcourse,thegoalistoharnessthepotentialbenefitsofthesechangingflowsandtodoeverythingfeasibletolimitthedamage.Iflong-termresidentsofgentrifyingneighborhoodsaretobeabletoremainintheircommunity,therewillhavetobeastrongandearlytargetingofhousingassistanceinthesecommunities,ratherthanonlyintheconcentratedpovertyneighborhoodswheremosthousingassistanceflowsinspiteoftheirweakattachmentstojobmarketsandlackofgoodschools.Inmostgentrifyingcommunitiesthereisneitherahousingplantoallowolderresidentstoparticipateinthebiggains,oraschoolplantoattractthenewcomersandtheirresourcesintolocalpublicschools.Thecreationofmoreintegratedschoolsthatattractsubstantialmiddle-classenrollmentisoneoftherealpossibilitiesofgentrification--butitisseldomrealized.Generally,ingentrifyingcommunities,schoolswithfewerresources,badreputationsandlow-testscoresarelongoccupiedbypoorchildrenofcolor,sothatmiddle-classnewcomersdonotconsiderthemviableschoolingoptionsfortheirchildren.Instead,theysearchforschoolsofchoiceorprivateoptions,ortheymovetoanotherareawhentheirchildrenreachschoolage.ManynewcomersinNYCneighborhoodsareyoungprofessionalshopingtopreparetheirchildrentocompeteforadmissionstoselectiveprivatecolleges,sotheyseekschoolswitharecordofdoingthat,typicallymiddle-class,largelywhiteandAsianschoolswithchildrenfromsimilarfamilies.Itistheclassiccollectiveactionproblem.Everyonepursuingindividuallywhattheythinkistheirshort-terminterestmakesimpossiblethecreationofinstitutionsthatwouldgreatlystrengthenthelong-terminterestofthecommunity,includingloweringthecostsandincreasingtheconvenienceofstronglocalschooling.Iflow-incomeenrollmentdropssharplybecauselong-timeresidentscannolongeraffordtolivethere,andnewcomersdonotenroll,thelocalschoolwillbethreatenedbylowenrollments.Andschoolstaff,inadditiontothecommunity,alsowouldgainfromfosteringadifferentoutcome.Mosturbandistrictshavenosignificantpoliciestoattractmiddle-classprofessionals(whiteandpeopleofcolor)totheirneighborhoodschools,ortodealwithracerelationsintheschools.Mosturbanschoolstakeapassiveattitude,servingwhoevershowsup.Fewpayseriousattentiontothechangingdemographicsofneighborhoodsthatarebecomingwhiterandmoreaffluent,andmuchmoredemandingaboutschoolquality.Allthesethings,however,canbecomemajorassetsfortheschoolandthedistrict.Ihavebeeninvolvedinthedevelopmentofdesegregationplansinvariouscities,andhaveraisedchildreninpublicschoolsinthreegentrifyingorgentrifiedneighborhoodsinWashington,D.C.,Chicago,andCambridge,MA.TheD.C.school,whoseintegrationIhelpedorganizemorethanfourdecadesago,isnowanexcellentanddiverseschool(andattendedbysomeofmygrandchildren).ThereareanumberofsimilarlysuccessfulschoolsinpartsofWashingtonandothercities.Somecitiesarenowpursuingconsciousplanstoaddresshowtoattractnewfamiliestothepublicschoolswhilealsoservingexistingstudents.

8

DallasandSanAntonio,forexample,aresuccessfullyexperimentingwiththeinnovationofexistingschoolsandcreationofnewschoolsingentrifyingcommunities,wherealmostallthestudentsinthelocalschoolarestudentsofcolortransportedfromotherareasbecausetheresidentshadpreviouslyabandonedtheschooldistrict.Theseexamplesshowthatwhenlastingdiversityisaccomplished,itcanbeaverypositiveexperiencefortheschoolsandbringneighborhoodstogether.

Myexperienceisrelevanttothisissueinanotherway.Ihavetaughtinsixgreatuniversities,includingHarvard,PrincetonandtheUniversityofCalifornia,andworkedcloselywithstudentsfrommanybackgrounds.Thetruthisthatparentswhotrytoprotecttheirchildreninlargelywhiteschoolswithverylittlesocialandeconomicdiversityareactuallyhurtingthem.Thegreatuniversitiesareintentionallydiverse,andstudentswithdiversebackgroundsarebetterpreparedforthosecampusesandaddtothem.Ihavefoundsuchstudentstobeinvaluableinconductingresearchbecausetheyhaveamuchmoresophisticatedcomprehensionofoursocietyandtheabilitytounderstandandrelatetotheperspectivesofothers.Thestudentswhohavebeenmost“protected”areoftenthemostclueless.

Youngprofessionalsmovingintocityneighborhoodsmayhaveconsiderableresourcesandexpertise,andwantaparticularkindofschoolingopportunityfortheirchildren.Theyoftenlikediversecommunitiesbuthaveverynegativeviewsofthepublic-schoolsystems,andwillnotsendtheirchildtoaschoolwherealmosteveryoneisnonwhiteandpoor.Theywould,however,loveexcellentanddiversepublicschoolsintheircommunities,whicharealsofarmoreconvenientandfree.Itistheclassicproblemofthecommons.Almosteveryonewouldlikelastingdiversity,withexcellentintegratedpublicschoolsandstrongcommunitysupport--butalmosteveryoneisoperatinginawaythatwillproducefarlessfavorableoutcomes.Weneedtoprovidethevisionandleadershiptocreateabetteroutcome.

Tochangetheoutcomesafewthingsareneeded:1)thedesiretocreateintegratedschoolsthatservebothnewcomerandexistingstudents;2)neighborhoodorganizingtogainresidentsupport;3)schoolstaffworkingwithparentsandlocalorganizationstopublicizethepositivefeaturesoftheschoolandwelcomeallparents;4)communityeventstorecruitenoughnewcomerparentstobegintochangetheimageoftheschool;5)addressinglocalneeds,suchascoordinatingwithafter-schooldaycare;and6)tappinglocaltalentandbusinessestoincreasetheschool’sresources.Oncesignificantintegrationbegins,atleastintheearlygrades,theprocesswilldevelopamomentumofitsown.Outsidetheschools,therewillbetheneedforastrategicfocusonhousingsubsidiestosupportlong-termresidentsofthearea.Intransitionsofthissort,manyraceandclassissuesarise.Therefore,supportfromtheschooldistrict,collegesorcommunityorganizationstofacilitatecommunicationandhelptraintheschoolstaffandinterestedparentsinintergroupskillscouldbeinvaluable.Changesofthissortaredemandingbutpromising,andtendtocreatefriendshipsandwarmbondsacrosspreviouslinesofseparation.

Thisreportisnotabouttheoverallintegrationissues,onlyaboutthewaysinwhichthecitycouldusetheopportunitiesandsolvesomeoftheproblemscreatedbyverysubstantialgentrification.ThisreportshowsthatgentrificationisspreadingacrossmanyNewYork

9

Cityneighborhoods,especiallyinBrooklynandQueens,andthatthenumberandpercentofwhitesarerisingsubstantiallyintheselocations.Fromaschoolperspective,thisraisesbothchallengesandopportunitiesforthepublicschoolsandcharters,bothofwhichare,onaverage,showingasmallincreaseintheirshareofwhitestudents,butlaggingfarbehindthepopulationchanges.Gentrificationisforcingoutmanynonwhitefamiliesasthecostsrisemorerapidlythantheycanafford.Eithertheschoolsfigureouthowtoattractthenewcomersortheyloseenrollment--andcommunitiesmaylosetheirschools.Forthefirsttimeingenerations,anumberofneighborhoodswherewhitesleftlongagonowhavethepossibilityofintegratedschools,iftheycanattractthenewcomersandholdfamiliesofcolor,achallengeforhousingpolicyaswellasschoolinitiatives.Withtherightpolicies,NewYorkcouldseeaconsiderableexpansionofintegratedneighborhoodswithintegratedschools.Thecitycouldalsoattractsomeofthemanymiddleclassandprofessionalfamiliesofcolorwhonowliveinsuburbia.Otherwise,thecitycouldseeshipspassinginthenightasonegroupmovesinandtheothersfacepressureovertimetomoveaway.Thisreportsuggestsabetterwayforward.InpresentinganilluminatingcasestudyofNewYorkCity,itprovidescompellingfindingsregardingthecity'sshiftingdemographics,residential,andschoolenrollmentpatterns.Italsooffersconstructiveideasforusingtheopportunitiesintroducedbygentrificationtocreatestableanddiverseneighborhoods,withsharedopportunitiesforgoodhousingandexcellentdesegregatedschools.GaryOrfield

10

SchoolIntegrationinGentrifyingNeighborhoods:EvidencefromNewYorkCity

ExecutiveSummary

IngentrifyingareasofNewYorkCity,thisresearchfindsthatasmallbutgrowingsegmentofmiddle-class,mostlyWhitefamiliesischoosingtoenrolltheirchildrenintheirneighborhoodpublicelementaryschools,thusincreasingthediversityinthoseschools.Becauseresidentialandschoolsegregationacrossthenationhavetraditionallyhadasymbioticrelationshipwhereanincreaseinoneleadstoanincreaseintheother,thedemographicphenomenonassociatedwithgentrificationwhereneighborhoodsbecomemorediversehasthepotentialtoalleviatepersistentschoolsegregation,amajorcauseofeducationalinequity.OuranalysisofneighborhoodsandschoolenrollmentpatternsinNewYorkCityfindsthatinthemostrapidlygentrifyingareas,racialsegregationinelementaryschoolshasdeclinedmodestly,moresointraditionalpublicschools(TPS)thanincharters.Thefindingsfromthisstudyarepromisingsincediverseschoolshavesignificantadvantages,notonlyforlearningbutalsoforpreparingallgroupstoliveandworksuccessfullyinanincreasinglydiversesociety.However,inspiteofthesechanges,ahighlevelofracialsegregationremainsinNewYorkCityschoolsandmuchmoreprogressisstillneeded.Severalmajorfindingsemerge:

● Inthecity’smostrapidlygentrifyingcensusareas,theWhitepopulationhasincreasedalmostthreefold,from11%in2000toover30%in2016.Amongtheschool-agedpopulation(5-17yearsold),theWhiteshareincreasedfrom10%to29%duringthesametimeperiodwhiletheshareofBlackandLatinoschool-agedchildrendeclinedfrom87%to64%.

● Inthesesamerapidlygentrifyingareas,theshareofWhiteandAsianelementary

schoolenrollmentalsoincreasedbetween2001and2015,risingfrom5.7%to10.4%.

● Whileclosetofour-fifthsofalltheelementaryschoolsingentrifyingneighborhoods

hadlessthan5%Whiteenrollmentin2015,nearlyoneoutof10schoolshadmorethan25%Whiteenrollment.

● Between2000and2015,thesharesofintenselysegregated(90-100%non-White)

andhypersegregated(99-100%non-White)elementaryschoolsdeclinedin

11

gentrifyingareasofNewYorkCity,whilethesharesofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedelementaryschoolsincreasedinnon-gentrifyingareas.

● TheshareofWhitestudentsincreasedinbothelementarycharterschoolsand

elementaryTPSbetween2000and2015ingentrifyingareas;however,alargershareofWhitestudentsattendedTPSthancharterschoolsin2015(8.1%and2.0%,respectively).

● BothelementarycharterschoolsandelementaryTPSingentrifyingareas

experiencedadecreaseintheshareofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedschoolsbetween2000and2015.However,theoverwhelmingmajorityofcharterschoolsremainedintenselysegregatedorhypersegregatedin2015.

● In2015,nineoutof10elementarycharterschoolsingentrifyingareaswere

intenselysegregated,andatthemostextremelevelofsegregation—hypersegregation—threeoutoffourchartersremainedhypersegregated,enrolling99-100%non-Whitestudents.In2015,79.5%ofelementaryTPSwereintenselysegregated,butatthemostextremelevelofsegregation,asubstantiallysmallershareofTPS(28.2%)washypersegregated.

Neighborhoodsundergoingmassiveurban-coreredevelopmentandmetropolitangrowthhaveaparticularlyripeopportunitytoharnesstheupsidesofcommunitychangeandalleviatethestarkracialandeconomicisolationthatissopervasiveinurbancentersacrosstheUnitedStates.However,housingmarketpressuresassociatedwithgentrificationalsohavethepotentialtoforcelongtime,low-incomeresidentsandresidentsofcolortomoveoutofgentrifyingneighborhoods,thusleadingtotheresegregationofcommunitiesandschools.Inordertocreatestableanddiverseneighborhoodsandschools,policyresponsesthatlinkhousingandschoolsareessential(seeMordechay&Ayscue,2018,fordetaileddiscussion).Althoughgreaterhousingproductionandpreservationisnecessaryincommunitiesstrugglingtooffsetmarketpressures,inorderfortheoutcomeofgentrificationtobeasharedopportunitytofacilitategreaterdesegregation,effortsatmeaningfulandsustainableschoolintegrationmustoccuralongsideneighborhoodchanges.Lefttoitsowndevices,gentrificationisunlikelytodeliveronthatpromise.

12

IntroductionGentrificationinournation’surbancentershassurgedoverthepastcoupleofdecades,andasaresult,renewedinterestincitylivinghasmounted,particularlyamongmillennialsandhighlyeducatedworkers.Oneanalysisofthecountry’s50largestcitiesfoundthatnearlyoneinfiveneighborhoodswithlowerincomesandhomevalueshaveexperiencedgentrificationsince2000.Inseveralcities,includingPortland,Seattle,andWashington,DC,overhalfoftheneighborhoodshavegentrified(Maciag,2015).Historically,manyoftoday'sgentrifyingneighborhoodshadpreviouslybeensegregatedbybothraceandclass,weakeningkeyinstitutions,especiallythelocalpublicschools.TheseschoolshavetraditionallyservedprimarilylowerincomeBlackandLatino2communities,andtheyhaveoftenhadtooperateoninferiorresources,includingfewerinstructionalmaterials,lesstechnology,lowerqualityfacilities,lessqualifiedteachers,andlessadvancedcurricula(Darling-Hammond,2007;Hanushek&Rivkin,2010;Lewis&Manno,2011;Mickelson,2003).Incitiesacrossthecountry,effortstorevitalizeneighborhoodsareoftenhamperedbyperceptionsofunderperformingschools.Accordingtothisnarrative,aviciouscycleoccursinwhichcitiesareunabletosustaintheirhousingstockandrelatedtaxbases,asituationthatsubsequentlyunderminesschools,whichdependonmunicipalresources(Patterson&Silverman,2013).Today,gentrificationcreatesauniqueopportunitytorevitalizeurbanneighborhoodsanddiminishsegregationofracesandclasses,rebalancingtheinequitabledivisionofresourcesthatisubiquitoustopublicschoolsacrosstheUnitedStates.ThisbriefisanextensionofourrecentstudyofWashington,DC’smostrapidlygentrifyingneighborhoodsandtheirschools(Mordechay&Ayscue,2017),wherewefoundthatwhileracialschoolsegregationstubbornlypersistsinthenation'scapital,ithasdeclinedmodestly.ThecurrentstudyisanexaminationofthemostrapidlygentrifyingneighborhoodsofNewYorkCity(NYC)andtheimpactofgentrificationonracialdiversityinthecity’spublicschools.

2 Consistent with the last U.S. Census this report uses the ethnic category Hispanic or Latino as interchangeable terms.

13

CaseStudy:NewYorkCityInmanyrespects,NYCissimilartootherlargeAmericancitiesinthatithasexperiencedbroadchangesinitsdemographicstructureinrecentdecades.AsincitiessuchasLosAngeles,Chicago,andHouston,theroleofimmigrationinshapingthepopulationhasbeenacentralreality.Furthermore,policyeffortstorevitalizeNYC,aswellasothermajorAmericancities,havebeenunderwaysincethe1980s(Barton,2016).Oneimportantdifferenceis,however,thesizeofthepopulationofNYC.CurrentdemographicestimatesputthepopulationofNYCatslightlymorethaneightmillionresidents(8,239,803),whichiswellabovethatofLosAngelesandChicagocombined,thesecondandthirdlargestcities.ThestatureofthegreatermetropolitanareaofNewYorkasoneoftheworld’smostpopulousurbanizedareasgoesbacktoatleastthe1920s.Thecityconsistsoffiveboroughs,eachofwhichisaseparatecountyintheStateofNewYork.Itis,byallestimations,aglobalmega-city.AsthelargestcityinAmerica,NYCoperatesthelargestpublic-schooldistrictinthecountry.Itisalsooneofthemostsegregatedschoolsystemsinthenation(Kucsera&Orfield,2014).TheSupremeCourt’sunanimousdecisioninthelandmarkBrownv.BoardofEducationcasewasintendedtoeliminatedejureschoolsegregation.Schoolsystemsundertookdesegregationeffortsthatpeakedinthe1980s,andsincethen,schoolsacrossthenationhavebeendefactoresegregating.NYCisnoexception.Effortsovermanyyearstoreduceschoolsegregationhavehadlittlelastingeffect(Fessenden,2012).Inresponsetothepersistenceofsegregationinitsschools,in2017theNYCDOEreleasedaplantopromoteschooldiversity.Theplan,EquityandExcellenceforAll,wasafirststep,layingoutanapproachtoaddressracialandsocioeconomicsegregationinthecity’sschools.Concurrently,metropolitanNewYork,withitsstarklysegregatedneighborhoods,isexperiencingamassivedemographictransformation.ThemetroareaisbeingrapidlyreshapedasBlacks,Latinos,Asians,andimmigrantsareleavingthecityandsurgingintothesuburbs(Frey,2018).NYC’sBlackpopulationdeclineisnotable,asthecityhasseenalossofover100,000Blackresidentsbetween2000and2010(Frey,2011).OnlyDetroitandChicagohaveexperiencedlargerdeclines.Thecity’ssuburbanringsareexperiencingsomeofthelargestabsolutegainsinLatinoresidents.OnlytheRiverside-SanBernardinometroareainSouthernCaliforniahasseenagreaterLatinosuburbanization(Frey,2011;Mordechay,2014).WhileNYC’sWhitepopulationhasdeclinedfrom43%ofthetotalin1990toapproximately33%in2010,theWhitepopulationhasincreasedsince2010buthasdeclinedintheNewYorksuburbs.Meanwhile,since1990,thecity’sdemographicstructurehasbecomeyounger,moreeducated,andmorelikelytobemadeupofnon-familyhouseholds(Beenetal.,2017).Thistransformationhasbeenparticularlyacuteinthecity’sgentrifyingneighborhoods.Infact,acrossNewYorkCity,aquarterof

14

neighborhoodsunderwentgentrification3between1990and2014(Beenetal.,2015).TheshareofNewYorkersidentifyingasAsiangrewby4.3percentagepointsbetween2000and2016,from9.7%to14.0%,asdidthecity’sLatinopopulation,increasingbyover2percentagepoints,from27.0%to29.2%.Meanwhile,thecity’sBlackandWhitesharesbothdeclinedbetween2000and2016,by2.5percentagepointsand3.2percentagepoints,respectively.Thesedemographicchanges,however,arenotrepresentativeofthedramaticracialshiftsfoundacrossmanyofthecity’sgentrifyingneighborhoods.InForteGreenandBrooklynHeights,theAsianpopulationdoubledbetween2000and2016,whiletheWhiteshareincreasedfrom31%to45%.InnearbyBedford-Stuyvesant,duringthesametimeperiod,theWhitepopulationgrewbyafactorof10,whiletheBlacksharedeclinedfromthree-fourthsofthetotal,tojustoverhalf(Beenetal.,2017).In2017-18,theNYCDOEenrolled1,135,334students,including113,528studentsincharterschools.Thecity’senrollmentwas16.1%Asian,26.0%Black,40.5%Hispanic,and15%White;13.5%ofstudentswereEnglishlanguagelearners,and74%werelowincome(NewYorkCityDepartmentofEducation,2018).Thisdemographictransformation,whichhasbeenparticularlydrasticinthecity’sgentrifyingcommunities,raisesquestionsaboutthepossibilityofsomeofthecity’slong-segregatedschoolsbecomingmorediverseassomeofthecity’slong-segregatedneighborhoodsarebecomingmorediverse.Therefore,thisstudyfocusesonthefollowingquestions:1.TowhatextentareelementaryschoolsinNYC’sgentrifyingareasbecomingmoreraciallydiverse,andhowdoestheracialdiversityofelementaryschoolsinNYC’sgentrifyingareascomparetothatofelementaryschoolsinthecity’snon-gentrifyingareas?2.Howdothestudentbodiesinelementarycharterschoolscomparetothoseofelementarytraditionalpublicschoolsingentrifyingandnon-gentrifyingareasofNYC?

GentrificationandSchoolsIngentrifyingareasofNYCandagrowingnumberofothercitiesacrosstheUnitedStates,thereisevidencetosuggestthatasmallbutgrowingshareofmiddle-classandWhitefamiliesischoosingtoenrolltheirchildrenintheirneighborhoodpublicschools(Mordechay&Ayscue,forthcoming;Freidus,2016;Posey-Maddox,2013;Stillman,2012).Becauseresidentialandschoolsegregationacrossthenationhavetraditionallyhadareciprocalrelationshipwhereanincreaseinoneleadstoanincreaseintheother,thedemographicphenomenonassociatedwithgentrificationwhereneighborhoodsbecomemorediversehasthepotentialtoalleviatepersistentschoolsegregation,amajorcauseofeducationalinequityintheUnitedStates.

3 Defined as rapid rent growth in low-income neighborhoods.

15

Overthepastseveraldecades,therehasbeensubstantialgentrificationoflow-incomeneighborhoodsinmanyofournation’surbanareas.Theseneighborhoodstypicallyexperiencelargeincreasesinhouseholdincome,inhousingprices,andofteninWhiteresidents.Someacademicslaudtherevitalizationofpreviouslydecayedneighborhoods,pointingoutincreasesinneighborhoodamenitiesandcapital.Opponentsofgentrificationhavebeencriticalofthedisplacementoflow-income,oftenminorityhouseholds.Historically,gentrificationhasbeentiedtopatternsofresidentialsegregation,namelythe“flight”ofWhiteandmiddle-classfamilies(Logan,Oakley,&Stowell,2008),mostoftenresultinginerodingtaxbasesofcitiesandinner-ringsuburbs,leavingthemwithfewerresourcesandgreaterchallenges.Theout-migrationhasbeenassociatedwiththemovementofmiddle-classfamiliesoutofcityschools,whichisfrequentlycitedasacontributingforcebehindthesocialandeconomicisolationoflow-incomeurbanneighborhoods(Kahlenberg,2001;Wilson,1987).Forthedecadesthatprecededthepost-warsuburbanexpansion,theabandonmentofinner-cityschoolswasareflexiveresponseofparentswiththefinancialcapitaltomove,somuchsothatitwasassumedthatuponhavingchildren,familieswithfinancialmeanswouldmovetothesuburbs,orifpossible,sendtheirchildrentoprivateschools.Inthecontextofgentrification,wherethereisanincreaseinWhiteandaffluentresidentsintheinnercityasopposedtoadecreaseasinthepast,therearegoodreasonstoexaminethedemographicpatternsofchangeintheschoolswithinthesegentrifyingneighborhoods.Sincegentrifyingneighborhoodshavetheresidentialdiversitynecessaryforschooldiversity,weexplorewhetherornotthepotentialeducationalandsocialbenefitsthatcouldcomefromgreaterraceandclassdiversityinschoolsarebeingrealizedinsomeofthenation’sfastestgentrifyingareas(Mordechay&Ayscue,2017).Historically,gentrifiershaveoftenbeenchildlessyoungprofessionals,artists,andgayandlesbiancouples,andthosewhodohavechildrenhavetendedtopayforprivateschoolorexerciseschoolchoicewhenavailableinurbandistricts(Pearman&Swain,2017).Studieshaveobservedthatgentrifiershavetendedtoputtheirchildrenintoselectcharterorpublicschoolswithothergentrifyingfamilies,resultinginlittlechangetootherschoolsinthearea(Frankenberg,Taylor,&Mann,2018;Kimelberg&Billingham,2012).However,ifgentrifiersenrolltheirchildreninpublicschools,itispossiblethathistoricallysegregatedschoolscouldbecomemoredesegregatedandbegintoaccruethebenefitsassociatedwithdesegregation.

HousingandSchoolsTherelationshipbetweenschoolsandhousing,oftenreferredtoas“theschool-housingnexus,”iscomplexandlikelybidirectional.Forexample,itiswidelybelievedthatlocalpublicschoolsareakeydeterminantofhousingprices(Kane,Staiger,&Riegg,2006).

16

Thereisalsoincreasingevidencethathousingpricesriseandfallwithtestscores(Black&Machin,2011).Schoolchoicepoliciescomplicatethisrelationship,andalthoughtherelationshipbetweenschoolchoiceandgentrificationremainslittleunderstood,onerecentstudyfoundgentrificationtobeassociatedwithgreaterschoolchoice(Pearman&Swain,2017).Therefore,investigatingschoolsegregationandenrollmentpatternswithingentrifyingneighborhoodsoffersanopportunitynotonlytounderstandschoolenrollmenttrends,butalsotoconsiderhowschoolenrollmentsinturncouldshaperesidentialpatternsinthefuture.Whiledemographictrendsillustratedthroughoutthispaperdepictchangesinneighborhoodresidentialpatterns,schoolenrollmentpatternscanprovidekeyinsightsintowhetherornotincominggentrifierswillremaininthesespacesuponthearrivalofchildrenandinvestinkeyinstitutions,oriftheywilldowhatgentrifiersofthepasthavedone—move.

DefiningGentrificationTechnicaldefinitionsofgentrificationvarywidely.RuthGlass,asociologist,isoftencreditedwithcoiningthetermin1964todescribechangessheencounteredinformerlyworking-classneighborhoodsinLondon.Sinceenteringthemainstreamlexicon,theword“gentrification”hasbeenappliedbroadlyandinterchangeablytodescribearangeofneighborhoodchanges,includingrisingincomesandeducationallevels,shiftingracialdemographics,increasesincommercialactivity,anddisplacementoflong-termresidents.Generallyspeaking,onewidelyuseddefinitionisofferedbyTheEncyclopediaofHousing,definingthephenomenonas“theprocessbywhichcentralurbanneighborhoodsthathaveundergonedisinvestmentsandeconomicdeclineexperienceareversal,reinvestment,andthein-migrationofarelativelywell-off,middle-anduppermiddle-classpopulation”(Smith,1998,p.198).Formanyotherscholars,however,gentrificationreferstomorethanjusteconomicanddemographicchange.Somehavesuggestedthatconceptualizinggentrificationmustincludethedirectandindirectdisplacementoflowerincomehouseholdswithhigherincomehouseholds(Kennedy&Leonard,2001;Wyly&Hammel,2005).Whileresidentialturnoveringentrifyingneighborhoodsisfiercelydebated(Zuketal.,2018;Freeman,2005;McKinnish,Walsh,&White,2010),forourpurposes,weconceptualizegentrificationasaprocessthatinvolvesthein-migrationofhigher-SESWhiteresidents,mostoftenresultinginincreasesovertimeinmedianhouseholdincome,highereducationalattainmentofresidents,andthereductionofpoverty.GiventheoverrepresentationofminoritiesamongtheurbanpoorandtheoverrepresentationofWhitesamonggentrifiers,itisreasonabletopresumethatgentrificationentailsthemovementofpredominantlyWhitegentrifiersintopredominantlyBlackandLatinoinner-citycommunities.Indeed,morerecentstudieshavesuggestedthatgentrificationisassociatedwiththedisproportionateinfluxofWhitecollege

17

graduatesintoaneighborhood(McKinnishetal.,2010;Ellen&O’Regan,2011),spurringracialtransitionintheprocess.Whilethedefinitionsofgentrificationhavebeendebatedforatleast50years(Zuketal.,2018),inthisstudythein-migrationofhigher-SESWhiteresidentsisusedasaproxyfordeterminingwhichneighborhoodsinthecityaremostrapidlygentrifying(seeSmith,1998).

DataandMethodsDataSourcesThisreportdrawsprimarilyondatafromtwosources:theU.S.CensusBureau/AmericanCommunitySurvey(ACS)andtheNationalCenterforEducationStatistics(NCES).Demographicdatafortheyear2000wasobtainedfromthe2000decennialcensus.Demographicdatafortheyear2016wasobtainedfromthe2016(5-yearfile)ACS.Whilethedecennialcensusprovidesa“snapshot”oftheU.S.populationonceevery10years(e.g.,1990,2000,2010),theACSisdesignedtoprovidecommunitieswithreliableandtimelydemographic,social,economic,andhousingdataeachyear.However,becausetheannualsamplesizeoftheACSismuchsmallerthanthesamplesizeofthedecennialcensuslongform,thedatafromfiveyearsoftheACSmustbecombinedtoprovidereliableestimates.Therefore,forconvenience,theremainderofthisreportreferstothe2012–2016ACSstatisticsas2016estimates.StudentdemographicdatawasobtainedfromNCES.Inaddition,weutilizeddatafromNCES(2014-2015)andusedGeographicInformationSystems(GIS)toshowdifferentpatternsofspatialvariationofschools.DataAnalysisTodeterminewhichindividualcensustractsexperiencedthemostdramaticincreaseinWhiteresidentsbetween2000and2016,wecalculatedthepercentagepointchangeinWhiteresidentsfrom2000to2016.ThemapsinFigure1descriptivelyillustratethegrowthoftheWhitepopulationduringthistimeperiod.

18

Figure 1. Distribution of White Residents, New York City, 2000 and 2016

Toidentifythefastestgentrifyingneighborhoods,weusedcensustractsasastatisticalproxytodefineneighborhoods.Atypicalcensustracthasabout4,000residents,andasageneralrule,conformstowhatpeopletypicallythinkofasaneighborhood(Fry&Taylor,2012).InNYC,therewere2,219censustractsin2000and2,169in2016,withpopulationsgenerallyrangingfrom3,000-4,000.AlthoughtheCensusBureauupdatesthesegeographicunitsperiodically,itattemptstokeepchangestoaminimum.Ofthoseunitswithaminimumof2,000residentsin2016,weselectedthetop25censustractswiththelargestpercentagepointincreaseinWhiteresidentsbetween2000and2016.Althoughracialchangeasaprerequisiteforgentrificationiswidelydebatedinthegentrificationliterature

19

(seeFreeman,2005),raceisintheforefrontofourstudybecauseofourinterestinunderstandingpatternsofracialsegregationandracialchangeingentrifyingurbanneighborhoodsandschools.Forconvenience,wewillbereferringtothese25censustractsasthe“fastest”or“mostrapidly”gentrifyingcensustracts(Figure2). Figure 2. Fastest Gentrifying Census Tracts, New York City, 2016

Next,wemappedthedistrict’s2015–2016schooladdresses(i.e.,latitudeandlongitude),overlaidthemwithcensustracts,andidentified109elementaryschoolsthatfallwithinahalf-mileradiusfromthecenterofeachofthe25mostgentrifyingcensustracts.Wedefinedelementaryschoolsasthosethathavegradeoneenrollment.Becausecensustractsandschoolzoneboundariesarenotequivalent,weincludedschoolsthatfallwithina0.5mileofthegentrifyingcensustract.WhiletheaverageNYCelementary-agedchildhas13.9schoolswithinaone-mileradiusofwheretheylive(Blaggetal.,2018),weuseda0.5-milebufferbecauseelementaryschoolstendtodrawfromtheimmediatesurroundingareas(Bayer,Ferreira,&McMillan,2007).Itshouldbenotedthoughthatstudentsmaybeassignedtoschoolsoutsideof0.5mileofthetract.

20

Toanalyzeschoolsegregationtrends,weusedtwomeasuresofsegregation:concentrationandexposure/isolation.Tomeasureconcentration,wecalculatedthepercentofschoolsthataremajorityminority(enrolling50-100%non-Whitestudents),intenselysegregated(enrolling90-100%non-Whitestudents),andhypersegregated(enrolling99-100%non-Whitestudents).Exposureandisolationaremeasuresofthepotentialcontactbetweengroupsofstudents.Exposurereferstothedegreeofpotentialcontactbetweenstudentsofoneracialgroupandanotherracialgroup;isolationreferstothedegreeofpotentialcontactbetweenstudentsofonegroupandothermembersofthesamegroup(Massey&Denton,1988).Tomeasureexposureandisolationrates,weexploredthepercentageofacertaingroupofstudents(e.g.,Blackstudents)inschoolwithaparticularstudent(e.g.,Whitestudent)inalargergeographicalarea,andcomputedtheaverageofalltheseresults.Thebasicmodelcanbeexpressedasfollows:

𝑃∗ =$%𝑥'𝑋 ∗

𝑦'𝑡'+

,

'-.

• wherenisthenumberofschoolsorsmallerareaunits,• 𝑥isthenumberofthefirstracial/socioeconomic/linguisticgroupofstudentsinthe

schoolorsmallerareai,• 𝑋isthetotalnumberofthefirstracial/socioeconomic/linguisticgroupofstudents

inthelargergeographicalarea,• 𝑦' isthenumberofthesecondracial/socioeconomic/linguisticgroupofstudentsin

theschoolorsmallerareai,• 𝑡' isthetotalnumberofstudentsintheschoolorsmallerareai.

Wedescriptivelyanalyzedconcentrationandexposure/isolationatthreetimepoints:in2001(pre-gentrification),2007(mid-point),and2015(mostrecentyearofdataavailable).Itshouldbenotedthatthisbriefdoesnotreportdataonstudents’eligibilityforfreeandreducedlunch(FRL)after2010.TheuseofFRLforresearchpurposesisbecomingincreasinglychallenging,dueinlargeparttopolicychangesenactedbyCongressin2010thatexpanded“communityeligibility,”whichallowsschoolswithatleast40%ofstudentsidentifiedaseligibleforFRLtoprovidefreelunchestoalloftheirstudents(Chingos,2016).Asaresult,manyschoolsthatmeetthe40%thresholdwillshow100%ofstudentsreceivingFRL.

21

Findings

NewYorkCity’sShiftingResidentialandDemographicPatternsAsnotedabove,thisstudyfocusesonselectedelementaryschoolsinthe25fastestgentrifyingcensustractsinNYC.These25tractsarealllocatedinQueensandKings(Brooklyn)counties,whicharethetwolargestofthefiveboroughsofNYC(Figure2).Since2000,bothQueensandKingscountieshaveseengrowthintheirpopulations(TableA-1).The25tractshavealsoexperiencedpopulationincreaseofapproximately16%since2000.Duringthissametimeperiod,thecombinedtwocountiesandtheentirecitygrewby4.7%and6.6%,respectively.Intermsofhouseholdsize,thegentrifyingtractshaveseenamuchsteeperincreaseinone-andtwo-personhouseholds,andconversely,asteepdecline(10.6%)infour-personhouseholds(FigureA-1).Thistrendisnotsurprisingsincehouseholdsizedecreasesareacommonfeatureofgentrification:theshareoflow-incomefamiliestypicallydeclines,whiletheshareofsingleyoungpeopleandcouplesincreases.Theracialchangesinthecity’smostrapidlygentrifyingtractsarealsonoteworthy.Inthecombinedneighborhoods,theshareoftheWhitepopulationhasincreasedalmostthreefold,from11%in2000toover30%in2016(Figure3).Withinthesameneighborhoods,theBlacksharedeclinedsubstantially,from28.7%ofthetotalin2000to17.4%in2016.ThenumberofBlackresidentsinthe25tractsalsodeclinedduringthisperiod,fromapproximately24,000tolessthan17,000.Inthesameneighborhoods,whiletheHispanicsharedeclinedfromover50%to44%,theactualnumberofHispanicsincreasedslightly.DespitethesubstantialincreaseinWhiteresidentsacrossthemostrapidlygentrifyingareas,city-wideandinthetwocounties,boththeshareofWhitesandthetotalnumberofWhitesdeclinedbetween2000and2016.

22

Figure 3. Racial Change, 2000 to 2016

Source:Author’scalculationsusing2000decennialcensus(U.S.CensusBureau,2000)and2016(5-yearaverage)AmericanCommunitySurveymicrodata.Note:WhitecategoryarerespondentsthatareWhitealone,notHispanicorLatino.

Asmentionedabove,demographicanalysesofcitieswithextensivegentrificationhavefoundthatin-migrantstogentrifyingareasaremorelikelytobeyoung,White,college-educated,andwithoutchildren(Sturtevant,2014).However,ourdescriptiveanalysisofthetoddlerpopulation(aged0-5)andtheschool-agedpopulation(aged5-17)acrossNYC’smostrapidlygentrifyingareasrevealsthatintheseagegroups,theshareofWhitechildrenhasgrownsubstantiallysince2000.TheshareofWhitetoddlershasincreasedfrom7%to36%between2000and2016(FigureA-2).Conversely,boththeshareofandtotalnumberofBlack,Latino,andAsiantoddlersandschool-agedchildrendeclinedinthesameneighborhoods.ThecombinedshareofBlackandLatinotoddlershasdeclinedfrom86%ofthetotalin2000to62%in2016.Turningtoincome,itisnoteworthythatwhileinflation-adjustedincomeshaveincreasedslightly(3%)acrossNYCbetween2000and2016,thegrowthhasbeenmuchmoresubstantialinthegentrifyingtracts(FigureA-3).Duringthesametimeperiod,medianhouseholdincomeinthe25tractsgrewfrom$37,516in2000to$52,830in2016,anincreaseofalmost41%.Thestarkincreaseinmedianhouseholdincomeislikelyexplainedbythegentrifyingneighborhoods’influxofcollege-educatedresidents.AscanbeseeninFigure4,ontheaggregate,levelsofeducationalattainmentacrossNYChaveincreased,buttheincreasesinthecombinedmostrapidlygentrifyingtractshasbeenmuchmore

11.6

28.7

50.6

4.5

30.4

17.4

44.4

4.9

35

24.427

9.8

33.1

22.8

29.8

14

33.8

26.9

22.3

12.3

31

24.5 23.5

17.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

White Black Hispanic Asian White Black Hispanic Asian

2000 2016

GentrifyingTracts NewYorkCity BrooklynandQueens

23

substantial.Since2000,inthemostrapidlygentrifyingtracts,theshareofresidentswithbachelors’degreesandhigherleveldegreeshastripled,from11%to33%.Duringthesametimeperiod,theshareofNewYorkerswithbachelors’degreesandhigherincreasedfrom28%to36%.Conversely,inthecity’smostrapidlygentrifyingareas,theshareofthosewithoutahighschooldiplomadroppedfrom45%to25%from2000to2016.InNYC,theratedeclinedfrom27%in2000to20%in2016.Figure 4. Changes in Educational Attainment, 2000 to 2016

Source:Author’scalculationsusing2000decennialcensus(U.S.CensusBureau,2000)and2016(5-yearaverage)AmericanCommunitySurveymicrodata.Anotherindicatorofeconomicchangescanbeseeninshiftingpovertyrates.Gentrifiersoftenfindthemselvesmovingintocommunitieswithhighconcentrationsofpoverty(Goetz,2011).Notsurprisingly,inNYC’smostrapidlygentrifyingneighborhoods,thepovertyratehasdeclinedby22%overthelastdecadeandahalf,decreasingfrom27.3%to21.3%(FigureA-4).InNYC,thepovertyratehasdeclinedaswell,albeitmuchlessdramatically,downfrom18.4%ofallresidentsin2000to17.9%in2016.EnrollmentandSegregationinNewYorkCityElementarySchools(TPSandChartersCombined)

EnrollmentinelementaryschoolsacrossNYChasbeenincreasingoverthelast15years.Overall,boththenumberofelementaryschoolsandthenumberofelementaryschoolstudentshasincreased.Ingentrifyingareas,thenumberofelementarypublicschools(TPS

05101520253035404550

GentrifyingTracts

NewYorkCity BrooklynandQueens

GentrifyingTracts

NewYorkCity BrooklynandQueens

2000 2016

LessthanHS HighSchool SomeCollege BAandup

24

andcharterscombined)increasedfrom71in2001to105in2015,butthenumberofstudentsenrolledinelementarypublicschoolsfollowedadifferenttrend,withadecliningenrollmentfrom52,382in2001to51,608in2015(Table1).Innon-gentrifyingareasacrossthecity,boththenumberofelementaryschoolsandstudentsincreased(Table2).Alongsidethesechanges,theracialcompositionofelementarystudentenrollmentingentrifyingareasalsohasshifted.TheBlackshareofenrollmentdecreasedfrom50.3%in2001to42.6%in2015buttheshareofWhite,Hispanic,andAsianenrollmentincreased.WhiletheshareofWhiteandAsianstudentsincreased,theybothremainedrelativelysmallin2015(6.5%and3.9%,respectively).Blackstudentscomprisedthelargestsegmentofenrollmentin2001,butin2015,HispanicstudentsaccountedforaslightlylargershareofenrollmentthanBlackstudents.Theshareoflow-incomestudentsdeclinedfrom89.6%in2001to81.8%in2007.Table 1. Elementary School Enrollment in Gentrifying Areas

NumberofElementarySchools

Enrollment White Black Hispanic Asian FRL

2001 71 54,3822,104(3.9%)

27,374(50.3%)

23,082(42.4%)

1,503(2.8%)

48,732(89.6%)

2007 80 44,607 2,022(4.5%)

21,295(47.7%)

19,577(43.9%)

1,504(3.4%)

36,480(81.8%)

2015 105 51,608 3,366(6.5%)

22,005(42.6%)

23,307(45.2%)

1,999(3.9%)

n/a

Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataNote:Enrollmentbyracemaynotadduptototalenrollmentnumberbecauseenrollmentofotherracialgroups(AmericanIndian/AlaskaNative,NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander,twoormoreraces)arenotincludedinthistable.Percentagesmaynotaddupto100%becausesharesofotherracialgroups(AmericanIndian/AlaskaNative,NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander,twoormoreraces)arenotincludedinthistable.

25

Table 2. Elementary School Enrollment in Non-Gentrifying Areas

NumberofElementarySchools

Enrollment White Black Hispanic Asian FRL

2007 681 437,555 72,354(16.5%)

125,846(28.8%)

171,950(39.3%)

65,467(15.0%)

330,421(75.5%)

2015 828 518,290 85,021(16.4%)

129,222(24.9%)

209,948(40.5%)

82,983(16.0%)

n/a

Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataNote:Enrollmentbyracemaynotadduptototalenrollmentnumberbecauseenrollmentofotherracialgroups(AmericanIndian/AlaskaNative,NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander,twoormoreraces)arenotincludedinthistable.Percentagesmaynotaddupto100%becausesharesofotherracialgroups(AmericanIndian/AlaskaNative,NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander,twoormoreraces)arenotincludedinthistable.TheincreaseinelementaryenrollmentofWhitestudentsingentrifyingareasisinlinewiththefindingsfromotherstudiesthathavefoundmiddle-classandWhitefamiliesincreasinglychoosingneighborhoodpublicschools(Mordechay&Ayscue,2017;Friedus,2016;Stillman,2012).Numerousstudieshavealsosuggestedthatgentrifyingfamiliestendtoclustertheirchildrenintoafew“vetted”schools,indicatingtheyarenotcomfortablesendingtheirchildrentoaneighborhoodpublicschoolsunlessothergentrifierfamiliesarealsoattending(Jordan&Gallagher,2015;Kimelberg&Billingham,2012;Hulchanski,2010).Thistrend,ineffect,doesverylittletoalleviateschoolsegregationingentrifyingneighborhoodsasgentrifierfamiliesclustertheirchildreninenclaves,resultinginlittlebenefitfromtheirinfluxes.Totestfora“clusteringeffect,”weexaminedthedistributionofWhiteenrollmentacrossalltheelementaryschoolsinthemostrapidlygentrifyingneighborhoods.Whileclosetofour-fifthsofalltheelementaryschoolsintheseneighborhoodshadlessthan5%Whiteenrollmentin2015,ninetotalschoolshadmorethan25%Whiteenrollment.Inaddition,sixschoolshadover30%Whitesandnoschoolhadover50%Whiteenrollment(FiguresA-5andA-6).Innon-gentrifyingareas,asomewhatsimilarpatternemerged.TheshareofBlackelementaryschoolstudentsdeclinedfrom28.8%in2007to24.9%in2015whiletheshareofHispanicandAsianstudentsincreased(Table2).Unlikegentrifyingareas,innon-gentrifyingareas,theWhiteshareofelementaryenrollmentremainedsteadyat16.4-16.5%.Despitetheshiftsinracialenrollment,Whiteelementaryschoolstudentsaccountedforasubstantiallylargershareofstudentenrollmentinnon-gentrifyingareasthaningentrifyingareasin2015(16.4%vs.6.5%,respectively).Similarly,Asianelementary

26

studentscomprisedalargershareofenrollmentinnon-gentrifyingareasthaningentrifyingareasin2015(16.0%vs.3.9%,respectively).Blackelementarystudentscomprisedamuchlargershareofenrollmentingentrifyingareasthaninnon-gentrifyingareasin2015(42.6%vs.24.9%,respectively).Hispanicelementarystudentsaccountedforalargeshareofenrollmentinbothareas—45.2%ingentrifyingareasand40.5%innon-gentrifyingareas.Acrossthecity,theelementarypublicschoolenrollmentismajoritystudentsofcolor,withHispanicstudentsaccountingforalargeshareofenrollmentinbothgentrifyingandnon-gentrifyingareas.Whiletheracialcompositionofelementaryschoolsingentrifyingareashaschangedsomewhat,theschools’enrollmentsremainpredominantlystudentsofcolor.Anexaminationofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedelementaryschoolsingentrifyingandnon-gentrifyingareasrevealsinterestingpatterns.Alltheelementaryschoolsingentrifyingareasaremajorityminority(Table3).Withinthiscontext,ingentrifyingareas,thenumberofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedelementaryschoolshasincreased;however,theshareofsuchschoolshasdecreased.Forintenselysegregatedschools,thesharedeclinedfrom91.5%in2001to82.9%in2015.Atthemostextremelevelofsegregation,hypersegregatedschoolsthatenroll99-100%non-Whitestudents,ingentrifyingareas,thesharedecreasedoverallfrom46.5%in2001to41.0%in2015.Since2007,thedeclineofhypersegregatedschoolsingentrifyingareaswasevenmoredramatic,droppingfrom53.8%to41%in2015. Table 3. Segregation Concentration in Gentrifying Areas

MajorityMinority(50-100%non-White)

IntenselySegregated(90-100%non-White)

Hypersegregated(99-100%non-White)

2001 71(100%)

65(91.5%)

33(46.5%)

2007 80(100%)

74(92.5%)

43(53.8%)

2015 105(100%)

87(82.9%)

43(41.0%)

Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataInnon-gentrifyingareas,boththenumberandshareofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedelementaryschoolsincreased(Table4).In2007,justoverhalfofthe

27

elementaryschoolsinnon-gentrifyingareaswereintenselysegregatedbutby2015,almosttwo-thirdsoftheelementaryschoolsinnon-gentrifyingareaswereintenselysegregated(50.5%and65.3%,respectively).Theshareofhypersegregatedelementaryschoolsincreasedslightly,from27.2%in2007to29.5%in2015.Table 4. Segregation Concentration in Non-Gentrifying Areas

MajorityMinority(50-100%non-White)

IntenselySegregated(90-100%non-White)

Hypersegregated(99-100%non-White)

2007 600(69.5%)

436(50.5%)

235(27.2%)

2015 740(89.4%)

541(65.3%)

244(29.5%)

Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataTherearemuchlargersharesofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedelementaryschoolsingentrifyingareasincomparisontonon-gentrifyingareas.In2015,82.9%ofelementaryschoolsingentrifyingareaswereintenselysegregatedcomparedto65.3%innon-gentrifyingareas.Atthemostextremelevelofsegregation,in2015,41.0%ofelementaryschoolsingentrifyingareasremainedhypersegregatedcomparedto29.5%innon-gentrifyingareas.Whilethelevelsofsegregationinnon-gentrifyingareasmightappearfavorablewhencomparedtogentrifyingareas,itisimportanttorememberthattheselevelsofsegregationarestillveryhigh.Itshouldalsobenotedthatwhilethereisalargershareofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedelementaryschoolsingentrifyingareasincomparisontonon-gentrifyingareas,thesharesofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedschoolshavedeclinedingentrifyingareas.Thistrendisthereverseofthatfoundinnon-gentrifyingareas,wherethesharesofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedelementaryschoolshaveincreased.WhenexaminingtheexposureofstudentsofeachracialgrouptoWhitestudents,wefoundthatinbothgentrifyingandnon-gentrifyingareas,thetypicalBlackelementaryschoolstudentwasexposedtothesmallestshareofWhitestudents(TablesA-2andA-3).In2015,ingentrifyingareas,thetypicalBlackelementaryschoolstudentattendedaschoolinwhich3.5%ofschoolmateswereWhitestudents,whichisanincreasefromthe1.3%ofWhitestudentswithwhomthetypicalBlackstudentattendedschoolin2001;however,itisstillaverysmallshareofWhitestudentstowhomthetypicalBlackstudentwasexposedin2015ingentrifyingareas.In2015,innon-gentrifyingareas,thetypicalBlackelementaryschoolstudentattendedaschoolwith5.5%Whitestudents,whichwassimilartothe5.6%of

28

Whitestudentsin2007.Inbothareas,thetypicalAsianelementaryschoolstudentattendedaschoolwiththelargestshareofWhitestudents.DespitetheincreaseinexposuretoWhitestudentsingentrifyingareas,thetypicalBlack,Hispanic,andAsianelementaryschoolstudentsattendedaschoolwithalargershareofWhitestudentsinnon-gentrifyingareasthaningentrifyingareasin2015.Analyzingatthelevelofisolationofvariousracialgroups,wefoundthatinbothgentrifyingandnon-gentrifyingareas,thetypicalBlackandHispanicelementaryschoolstudentswereisolatedwithamajorityofsame-racepeers(TablesA-4andA-5).TheisolationofBlackstudentswithsame-racepeersdecreased,moresoingentrifyingareasthaninnon-gentrifyingareas.Ingentrifyingareas,thetypicalBlackelementaryschoolstudentattendedaschoolwith75.9%Blackschoolmatesin2001and67.4%Blackschoolmatesin2015.TheisolationofHispanicstudentsremainedfairlysteadyinbothgentrifyingandnon-gentrifyingareas.ForboththetypicalBlackstudentandthetypicalHispanicstudent,isolationwithsame-raceschoolmateswasgreateringentrifyingareasthaninnon-gentrifyingareas(about66%ingentrifyingareasand56%innon-gentrifyingareas).In2015,thetypicalBlackstudentinagentrifyingareaattendedaschoolwith67.4%BlackschoolmateswhilethetypicalBlackstudentinanon-gentrifyingareaattendedaschoolwith55.2%Blackschoolmates.In2015,thetypicalHispanicelementaryschoolstudentinagentrifyingareaattendedaschoolwith65.5%HispanicschoolmatesandthetypicalHispanicstudentinanon-gentrifyingareaattendedaschoolwith57.1%Hispanicschoolmates.TheisolationofAsianstudentswithsame-racepeersincreasedslightlyinbothgentrifyingandnon-gentrifyingschools(to11.1%and43.2%in2015,respectively).TheisolationofWhitestudentsremainedsteadyinbothgentrifyingandnon-gentrifyingareas,butthetypicalWhitestudentwasisolatedwithmoresame-raceschoolmatesinnon-gentrifyingareasthaningentrifyingareasin2015(46.2%vs.23.3%,respectively).Insummary,regardingResearchQuestion1,wefoundthatelementaryschoolsinNYC’sgentrifyingareasarebecomingmoreraciallydiverseastheshareofwhitestudentenrollmentincreases.However,theschoolsarenotkeepingpacewiththemorerapidlyincreasingoverallorschool-agedchangeinthewhitepopulation.Thesharesofintenselysegregated(90-100%non-White)andhypersegregated(99-100%non-White)elementaryschoolsdeclinedingentrifyingareasofNYC,whilethesharesofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedelementaryschoolsincreasedinnon-gentrifyingareas.EnrollmentandSegregationPatternsbySchoolTypeDifferentpatternsemergedwhenweanalyzedthedatabyschooltype.Ingentrifyingareas,elementaryTPScontinuedtoenrollalargernumberofstudentsthanelementarycharterschoolsin2015(38,129and13,479,respectively);however,overallstudentenrollmentin

29

charterschoolsincreasedby356%whileenrollmentinTPSdecreasedby8%(Table5).TheshareofWhitestudentsincreasedinbothtypesofschools,andalargershareofWhitestudentsattendedTPSthancharterschoolsin2015(8.1%and2.0%,respectively).Similarly,theshareofHispanicstudentsincreasedinbothtypesofschoolsandalargershareofHispanicstudentsalsoattendedTPSthancharterschoolsin2015(51.5%and27.3%,respectively).Conversely,theshareofBlackstudentsdeclinedinbothtypesofschoolsandalargershareofBlackstudentsattendedchartersthanTPSin2015(67.3%and33.9%,respectively).Table 5. Elementary School Enrollment by School Type in Gentrifying Areas

NumberofElementarySchools

Enrollment White Black Hispanic Asian FRL

2007

Charter

9 2,953 22(0.7%)

2,460(83.3%)

445(15.1%)

13(0.4%)

2,244(76.0%)

TPS 71 41,654 2,000(4.8%)

18,835(45.2%)

19,132(45.9%)

1,491(3.6%)

34,236(82.2%)

2015

Charter

27 13,479 263(2.0%)

9,066(67.3%)

3,676(27.3%)

236(1.8%)

n/a

TPS 78 38,129 3,103(8.1%)

12,939(33.9%)

19,631(51.5%)

1,763(4.6%)

n/a

Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataNote:Enrollmentbyracemaynotadduptototalenrollmentnumberbecauseenrollmentofotherracialgroups(AmericanIndian/AlaskaNative,NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander,twoormoreraces)arenotincludedinthistable.Percentagesmaynotaddupto100%becausesharesofotherracialgroups(AmericanIndian/AlaskaNative,NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander,twoormoreraces)arenotincludedinthistable.Patternsbyschooltypearesimilarinnon-gentrifyingareas(TableA-6).Asisthecaseingentrifyingareas,theshareofWhiteandHispanicelementaryschoolstudentsincreasedwhiletheshareofBlackelementaryschoolstudentsdecreasedinbothchartersandTPSinnon-gentrifyingareas.In2015,largersharesofWhiteandHispanicelementaryschoolstudentswereenrolledinTPS(17.8%and41.2%,respectively)thanincharters(5.1%and35.0%,respectively).Conversely,in2015,alargershareofBlackelementaryschool

30

studentswasenrolledinchartersthaninTPSinnon-gentrifyingareas(55.2%and21.1%,respectively),aswellasingentrifyingareas.Exploringtheextentofsegregationinelementaryschoolsingentrifyingareas,wefoundthatthesharesofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedschoolsdecreasedinboththecharterandTPSsectors(Table6).However,theoverwhelmingmajorityofcharterschoolsremainedintenselysegregatedorhypersegregatedin2015.In2015,nineoutof10elementarycharterschoolswereintenselysegregated,andatthemostextremelevelofsegregation—hypersegregation—threeoutoffourchartersremainedhypersegregated,enrolling99-100%non-Whitestudents.ForelementaryTPS,in2015,79.5%ofelementaryTPSwereintenselysegregated,butatthemostextremelevelofsegregation,asubstantiallysmallershareofschools(28.2%)washypersegregated.Table 6. Segregation Concentration by School Type in Gentrifying Areas

MajorityMinority(50-100%non-White)

IntenselySegregated(90-100%non-White)

Hypersegregated(99-100%non-White)

2007

Charter 9(100%)

9(100%)

8(88.9%)

TPS 71(100%)

65(91.5%)

35(49.3%)

2015

Charter 27(100%)

25(92.6%)

21(77.8%)

TPS 78(100%)

62(79.5%)

22(28.2%)

Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataLikewise,innon-gentrifyingareas,thesharesofintenselysegregatedelementaryschoolsdecreasedinboththecharterandTPSsectors(Table7).AlargershareofelementarychartersthanelementaryTPSinnon-gentrifyingareasremainedintenselysegregatedin2015(86.7%and61.7%,respectively).Theshareofelementaryhypersegregatedschoolsalsodeclinedinbothtypesofschoolsinnon-gentrifyingareas.Again,asubstantiallylargershareofelementarychartersthanTPSwashypersegregatedinnon-gentrifyingareasin

31

2015(62.5%and23.9%,respectively).Overall,largersharesofbothchartersandTPSwereintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedingentrifyingareasthaninnon-gentrifyingareasin2015.Table 7. Segregation Concentration by School Type in Non-Gentrifying Areas

MajorityMinority(50-100%non-White)

IntenselySegregated(90-100%non-White)

Hypersegregated(99-100%non-White)

2007

Charter 38(100%)

34(89.5%)

30(78.9%)

TPS 562(87.4%)

402(62.5%)

205(31.9%)

2015

Charter 118(98.3%)

104(86.7%)

75(62.5%)

TPS 622(87.9%)

437(61.7%)

169(23.9%)

Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataInbothchartersandTPSingentrifyingareas,thetypicalBlackelementaryschoolstudentwasexposedtothesmallestshareofWhiteschoolmateswhilethetypicalAsianelementaryschoolstudentwasexposedtothelargestshareofWhiteschoolmates(TableA-7).ThetypicalBlack,Hispanic,andAsianelementaryschoolstudentswereexposedtoalargershare—oftendoubleortriple—ofWhitestudentsinTPSthanincharters.In2015,thetypicalBlackstudentinaTPSattendedaschoolwith5.1%WhiteschoolmatesandthetypicalBlackcharterschoolstudentattendedaschoolwith1.2%Whitestudents.In2015,thetypicalHispanicstudentinaTPSattendedaschoolwith7.3%WhitestudentswhilethetypicalHispaniccharterschoolstudenthad2.4%Whiteschoolmates.ExposuretoWhitestudentsremainedsmallinbothtypesofschoolsingentrifyingareas.Similarly,innon-gentrifyingareas,inbothchartersandTPS,thetypicalBlackelementaryschoolstudentwasexposedtothesmallestshareofWhiteschoolmateswhilethetypicalAsianelementaryschoolstudentwasexposedtothelargestshareofWhiteschoolmates(TableA-8).ThetypicalBlack,Hispanic,andAsianelementaryschoolstudentsinaTPS

32

wereexposedtoalargershareofWhitestudentsthanthetypicalBlack,Hispanic,andAsianelementaryschoolstudentsinacharterschool.In2015,thetypicalBlackelementaryschoolstudentinanon-gentrifyingareawhoattendedacharterschoolhad2.7%Whiteschoolmates,andthetypicalBlackstudentinaTPSattendedaschoolwith6.4%Whitestudents.In2015,thetypicalHispaniccharterschoolstudentinanon-gentrifyingareaattendedacharterelementaryschoolwith4.6%WhitestudentswhilethetypicalHispanicTPSstudentattendedanelementaryschoolwith10.9%Whitestudents.ThetypicalAsianstudentinanon-gentrifyingcharterattendedaschoolwith13.8%WhitestudentsandthetypicalAsianstudentinanon-gentrifyingTPSattendedaschoolwith17.7%Whitestudents.ExposuretoWhitestudentswasgreaterinbothtypesofschoolsinnon-gentrifyingareasthaningentrifyingareas;however,therearelowlevelsofexposuretoWhitestudentsinallareasandtypesofschools.InbothchartersandTPSingentrifyingareas,thetypicalBlackandHispanicelementaryschoolstudentswereisolatedwithhighlevelsofsame-racepeers(TableA-9).ThetypicalBlackelementaryschoolstudentwasisolatedwithmoresame-racepeersincharterschoolsthaninTPSwhilethetypicalHispanicelementaryschoolstudentwasisolatedwithmoresame-racepeersinTPSthanincharters.In2015,ingentrifyingareas,thetypicalBlackcharterschoolstudenthad75.4%BlackschoolmateswhilethetypicalBlackTPSstudenthad61.8%Blackschoolmates.Conversely,thetypicalHispaniccharterstudentattendedaschoolwith44.8%HispanicschoolmateswhilethetypicalHispanicTPSstudent’sschoolhad69.3%Hispanicstudents.ThetypicalWhiteandAsianelementaryschoolstudentsalsoattendedschoolswithmoresame-racepeersinTPSthanincharters,whichislikelyrelatedtothelargershareofWhiteandAsianstudentswhoattendedTPSthancharters.ThetypicalWhiteTPSstudentattendedaschoolthatwas24.0%WhitewhilethetypicalWhitecharterstudentattendedacharterthatwas14.8%Whiteingentrifyingareasin2015.Mirroringthepatternsingentrifyingareas,inbothchartersandTPSinnon-gentrifyingareas,thetypicalBlackelementaryschoolstudentwasisolatedwithmoresame-racepeersincharterschoolsthaninTPSwhilethetypicalHispanicelementaryschoolstudentwasisolatedwithmoresame-racepeersinTPSthanincharters(TableA-10).In2015,thetypicalBlackcharterschoolstudentinanon-gentrifyingareahad67.9%BlackschoolmateswhilethetypicalBlackTPSstudentinanon-gentrifyingareahad51.0%Blackschoolmates.In2015,innon-gentrifyingareas,thetypicalHispaniccharterstudentattendedaschoolwith49.9%HispanicschoolmateswhilethetypicalHispanicTPSstudent’sschoolhad57.9%Hispanicstudents.ThetypicalWhiteandAsianelementaryschoolstudentsalsoattendedschoolswithmoresame-racepeersinTPSthanincharters.Innon-gentrifyingareasin2015,thetypicalWhiteTPSstudentattendedaschoolthatwas46.8%WhitewhilethetypicalWhitecharterstudentattendedacharterthatwas28.4%White.

33

Insummary,inaddressingResearchQuestion2,wefoundthatwhiletheshareofWhitestudentsincreasedinbothelementarycharterschoolsandelementaryTPSingentrifyingareas,alargershareofWhitestudentsattendedTPSthancharterschoolsin2015.BothelementarycharterschoolsandelementaryTPSingentrifyingareasexperiencedadecreaseintheshareofintenselysegregatedandhypersegregatedschoolsbetween2000and2015;however,theoverwhelmingmajorityofcharterschoolsremainedintenselysegregatedorhypersegregatedin2015.Ingentrifyingareasin2015,atthemostextremelevelofsegregation—hypersegregation—77.8%ofcharterswerehypersegregated,enrolling99-100%non-Whitestudents,whileasubstantiallysmallershareofTPS(28.2%)washypersegregated.

HousingandEducationPolicyResponsestoGentrificationOverthepasttwodecades,gentrificationhasbecomeacentralrealityinmanyurbanneighborhoodsacrossthenation(U.S.DepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopment,2016;Maciag,2015).Managingthisurbantransformationsuchthatitsupportsschoolintegrationwillrequirethoughtful,coordinated,andtargetedpoliciesthatunderscorethedeepandfundamentalrelationshipsamonghousingmarkets,communities,andschools.Infact,undertheObamaAdministration,theDepartmentsofHousingandUrbanDevelopment,Education,andTransportationissuedajointletterin2016encouraginglocaleducation,transportation,andhousingandcommunitydevelopmentagenciestoworktogethertocreatesocioeconomicandracialdiversityinschoolsandcommunities(U.S.DepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopment,2016).Inthecontextofgentrification,policyresponsesshouldbeconstructedwiththegoalofracialandeconomicintegration.HousingHousingcostshaveskyrocketedacrossmanyofthenation’smetroareas,withgentrifyingneighborhoods,inparticular,puttingenormoussupplypressureonhighlydesirablehousingmarkets.InNYC,between2011and2017,thecitylostnearly183,000affordableunitsofhousingrentingforlessthan$1,000permonth—largerthantheentirepublichousingstock.Inaddition,between2009and2017,rentsacrossthecityroseby25%,withthemostrapidincreaseinBrooklyn(35%)(Stringer,2018).Therefore,atthecoreofmanaginggentrificationisthepreservationandproductionofaffordablehousing.Whilehundredsofthousandsofaffordablehousingunitsarelostfromdisrepaireachyear(Schwartzetal.,2016),thefederalgovernmentshouldprioritizethepreservationandproductionofaffordablepropertiesthatarein“opportunity-richneighborhoods.”Affordablehousingunitsingentrifyingneighborhoodsofferthepossibilityofbetteraccesstojobopportunities,socialnetworks,andpossiblyschools.OnerecentstudyofNewYork

34

HousingAuthority(NYHA)comparedhousingdevelopmentslocatedingentrifiedorrapidlychangingneighborhoodswiththoseinlow-incomeandraciallysegregatedneighborhoods.Theresearchersfoundthatthoseingentrifyingneighborhoods,onaverage,enjoyedhigherincomes,lowercrimerates,andhighertestscoresinlocalschools(Dastrupetal.,2015).Whiletheextentof“socialmixing”amongdifferentracialandsocialclassgroupshasbeendebated(Lees,2008;Davidson,2010),onepossibilityistoreplaceexistinghigh-densityhousing“projects”withnewlowerdensitymixed-incomecommunities.Thereisevidencethatresidentsacrosstheincomespectruminwell-designedmixed-incomedevelopmentsreportsatisfactionwithhousingandneighborhood(Levy,McDade,&Dumlao,2010).Infact,theFederalDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopment’s(HUD)HousingOpportunitiesforPeopleEverywhere(HOPEVI)Programhasbeenusedtoencouragesocialinteractionacrossraceandincomelines,albeittheevidenceofinteractionacrossincomeorracialgroupsinthesedevelopmentshasbeenmixed(Silver,2013).Inaddition,thereisincreasingevidencethatAirbnbandotherhome-sharingplatformsaregrowingininfluence,causingrentstoincreasesignificantlyinhighlydesirableandgentrifyingneighborhoods,particularlyinManhattanandBrooklyn,wherethemajorityofthecompany’srentalsareconcentrated(Wachsmuth&Weisler,2018).Airbnbhasmorethan50,000apartmentlistingsinNYC,makingitthecompany’slargestmarketintheUnitedStates(Stringer,2018).Thecityshouldconsideradoptingregulationsfromothercities(suchasAmsterdam,SanFrancisco,andSantaMonica)thathaverecentlypassedlegislationregulatingonlinevacationrentalservices,suchasAirbnbandHomeaway.ThenumberofAirbnblistingsinSanFrancisco,forexample,plungedbyhalfafterthecitytighteneditsregulationinanefforttoincreasethesupplyofaffordablehousinginoneofthenation’sleastaffordablemarkets(Said,2018).HUDrecentlyreleasedareport(2016)layingoutabroad-basedapproachtohousingaffordabilityingentrifyingareas.Theserecommendationsincludepreservingexistingaffordablehousingthroughrentalassistancedemonstrations,housingchoicevouchers,andpreservation-friendlyincentives.Inadditiontopreservingexistingaffordableunits,greaterdevelopmentofrentalunitsatalllevelscanreducepressureontherentalmarket,loweringhousingcostsandexpandinghousingchoiceforresidents,particularlyingentrifyingareaswithsignificantrentgrowth.Forexample,ThePhiladelphiaAssociationofCommunityDevelopmentCorporations(PACDC)hasbeenattemptingtoaddresshousingaffordabilityingentrifyingareasofPhiladelphiawithanequitabledevelopmentpolicyplatform.PACDCpublishedareport(Philadelphia,2018)titled,BeyondGentrification,TowardEquitableNeighborhoods,whichoutlinesfivestrategicrecommendations:strengthencommunityorganizations,buildandpreserveaffordablehousing,developneighborhoodcommercialcorridorsasjobcentersforlocalresidents,collectandanalyzedatatoachieveabetteringunderstandingoftheissuesrelatedtodisplacement,andimproveassistanceprograms.

35

InSanFrancisco,wherethereisextensivegentrification,displacement,andafull-blownhousingshortage,thecity’splanningofficeandmayor’sofficearecurrentlyworkingtodrafta“CommunityStabilizationStrategy.”Thisinter-agencyeffortseekstoprovidecityagencies,decision-makers,andthepublicwithacomprehensiveanalysisandthetoolsneededtomakestrategicdecisionstostabilizevulnerablepopulationsasthecitychanges.Theaimofthiseffortistomitigatetheimpactsofongoingdisplacement,helppreventfuturedisplacementduetoeconomicandpopulationgrowth,andbettermanageeconomicgrowthinordertoofferbenefitstoexistingcommunitieswithafocusonvulnerablepopulations.UpthecoastfromSanFrancisco,Seattleisattemptingtodealwithextensivegentrificationandahousingcrunch,asbigtechnologycompanies,suchasAmazon,continuetotransformthecity’shousingmarket.Policiesincludecreatingmoreaffordablehousingthatisrent-restrictedforlow-incomepeople,andthedraftingof“TheEquitableDevelopmentInitiative”withthepurposeofmitigatingdisplacementandincreasingaccesstoopportunityforSeattle'smarginalizedcommunitieswhoareatriskofdisplacement(Seattle,2018).Inaddition,theRainyCity’sMandatoryHousingAffordability(MHA)programisrequiringthatdeveloperscontributetoaffordablehousingwhenevertheybuildwithincommercialareasofthecity.Theprogram,currentlyinplaceinseveralneighborhoods,hassensitivelyapproachedareasthatareatriskofhighlevelsofdisplacement.Whilebalancingtheneedtomaketheprogramattractivefordeveloperswiththedesiretomaximizeaffordability,Seattleiscarefullyrezoningareaswiththegoalofminimizingdisplacement.NYCandothercitiescouldpotentiallybenefitfromstrategiesandrecommendationssimilartothosejustdescribed,whichaimtoensurethatthosewhoaremostdisadvantagedintoday’ssocialandeconomicsystemsaregivenopportunitiestobenefitfromimprovingneighborhoodsincities.Withsuchstrategiesinplace,gentrificationcanprovideapathtoeconomicopportunityformoreinner-cityresidentsandresidentsofcolor.Butabsentpolicyintervention,suchoutcomesareunlikelytooccur.SchoolsPoliciesthatactivelypromoteracialandsocioeconomicdiversityinschoolsshouldalsobeencouraged.LocalTPScanserveasattractiveschoolingoptionsfordiversegroupsoffamiliesandstudents.Inordertoattractadiversegroupofgentrifierfamiliesandpreviousresidents,TPScouldassesstheneedsofbothgroupsoffamiliesbydiscussingtheirneedsanddesireswiththemandbuildingprogrammingtoaddresstheirpreferences.Throughmarketingeffortsinprint,radio,andsocialmedia,TPScanensurethatresidentsareaware

36

oftheschoolanditsofferings.MakingrealtorsawareofthelocalTPSandenlistingtheirassistanceinsharinginformationabouttheschoolcouldalsobeeffective(Mordechay&Ayscue,2018).Magnetschoolscanbeusedtoattractbothgentrifierfamiliesandpreviousresidents.Magnetsprovideuniquecurricularandpedagogicalofferingsthatareoftenofinteresttodiversegroupsofstudents.Historically,magnetshaveincludedcivilrightsgoals,andinadditiontoimprovedacademicoutcomes,theyoftenfosterintegration(Siegel-Hawley&Frankenberg,2012).Inparticular,gentrifyingareaswithhighnumbersofEnglishlanguagelearnerscoulddeveloptwo-wayimmersionmagnetprogramsthatenrollhalfnativeSpanishspeakersandhalfnativeEnglishspeakers.Inadditiontodevelopingopportunitiesforbilingualism,biliteracy,andbiculturalism,theseprogramscreateopportunitiesforintegratedlearningenvironments.Moreover,duallanguageprogramshaveexceptionalacademicoutcomesforallstudents(Gándara&Mordechay,2017;Umansky&Reardon,2014).Duallanguageprogramsareverypopularandcanbefoundinmetropolitanareasacrossthecountry(Gándara&Hopkins,2010).Othermagnetthemes,suchasexperientiallearning,STEAM(science,technology,engineering,arts,andmathematics),orleadership,alsoofferthepotentialforattractingdiversegroupsofstudentsingentrifyingareas.ThefederalMagnetSchoolsAssistanceProgramadministerscompetitivegrantsforschooldistrictsseekingtocreateraciallydesegregatedmagnetsinpreviouslysegregatedschools.Arecentstudyof24schooldistrictsreceivingsuchgrantsacrossthenationidentifiednumerousstrategiesthatareimportantforenrollingaraciallydiversestudentbody(Ayscue,Levy,Siegel-Hawley,&Woodward,2017).Thesemechanismsincludeselectinganattractiveandrelevantthemesuchasthosesuggestedabove,conductingoutreach,providingfreeandaccessibletransportation,encouraginginter-districtchoice,intentionallyselectingadiversesite,andemployinglottery-basedadmissions.Placingsimilarrequirementsforracialandeconomicdiversityoncharterschoolsingentrifyingareasalsopresentsanopportunityfordesegregationandeducationalequity.GiventheexpansionofcharterschoolsinNYCandnationwide,itisessentialthatchartersfacilitatedesegregationratherthancontributetoresegregation.Asthisreportshows,charterschoolsinbothgentrifyingandnon-gentrifyingareasofNYCtendtobemoresegregatedthanTPS.Thus,itiscriticalforthesehighlysegregatedcharterstotakestepstoalleviatesegregation.Charterscouldfacilitategreaterdesegregationbyselectingadiverseneighborhoodinwhichtolocate,creatingdiversitygoals,providinginformationtodiversegroupsoffamilies,usingweightedlotteriesforadmission,andprovidingfreeandaccessibletransportation(Ayscue&Frankenberg,2018).Regionalcharterschoolswithappropriatecivilrightsprotectionscouldalsoplayaroleinfosteringintegration.

37

Whilegentrifyingdistrictsmaydevelopnewprogramstoattractgentrifierfamilies,implementingequitablediversitypoliciescanhelpensurethatschoolsacrossthedistrictarediverse(Diem,Holme,Edwards,Haynes,&Epstein,2018).Withoutsuchpolicies,itislikelythatprogrammingintendedtoattractgentrifierfamiliescouldnegativelyimpactdiversityanddiminishthedistributionofopportunityamongschoolswithinaschooldistrict.Thiscautionapplieswidelytourbanareasacrossthecountry,includingNYC,thatareexperiencinggentrificationatasubstantialrateandthereforeholdthepotentialtomaketheirschoolsmoreequitableanddiverse.

ConclusionThepossibilitiesforcreatingdiverselearningenvironmentsasgentrificationunfoldsareoccurringonasmall,localizedscaleinNYC’sgentrifyingareas.However,muchmoreprogressisstillneeded.Inthecity’smostrapidlygentrifyingcensustracts,wheretheWhitepopulationhasincreasedfromapproximately11%toover30%between2000and2016,localschoolenrollmentpatternshaveexperiencedanincreaseinWhitestudentsfrom3.9%to6.5%.AlthoughpublicschoolslocatedingentrifyingareasofNYCremainpredominantlynon-Whiteandhighlysegregated,theyhavebecomemorediverseandlesssegregatedsince2001,moresoinTPSthanincharters.Theracialsegregationofneighborhoodsisstronglyrelatedtotheracialsegregationofschoolswithinthem(Clotfelter,2004).Gentrificationisagrowingphenomenonthathasconsiderablepotentialtoinfluenceneighborhoodsaswellasthelocalschoolswithinthem.Thisreinvestmentofcapitalinunder-resourcedurbancommunitieshastheeffectofputtingtheaffluentandthepoor,anddifferentracialandethnicgroups,inthesameneighborhoods,withthepotentialtodothesameinschools.Sinceoverhalfacenturyofresearchhasconsistentlyshownthatracialsegregationandconcentratedpovertyrarelybreedoptimalenvironmentsforlearning,thedesegregationofschoolsshouldbeadesirablepolicygoal.Neighborhoodsundergoingmassiveurban-coreredevelopmentandmetropolitangrowthhaveaparticularlyripeopportunitytoharnesstheupsidesofcommunitychangeandalleviatethestarkracialandeconomicisolationthatissopervasiveinU.S.urbancenters(Mordechay&Orfield,2017).However,housingmarketpressuresassociatedwithgentrificationalsohavethepotentialtoforcelongtime,low-incomeresidentsandresidentsofcolortomoveout,thusleadingtotheresegregationofcommunitiesandschools.Inordertocreatestableanddiverseneighborhoodsandcommunities,policyresponsesthatlinkhousingandschoolsarenecessary(seeMordechay&Ayscue,2018fordetaileddiscussion).Althoughgreaterhousingproductionandpreservationisnecessaryincommunitiesstrugglingtooffsetmarketpressures,inorderfortheoutcomeofgentrificationtobea

38

sharedopportunity,effortsatmeaningfulandsustainableschoolintegrationarealsocritical.Middle-classcommitmenttourbanschoolsprovidesauniqueopportunitytoimprovepubliceducation.Ifthegoalistocreatestableanddiverseneighborhoodsandcommunities,itiscrucialtoencouragemiddle-classfamiliestoinvestinurbanneighborhoodsandthelocalpublicschoolswithinthem.Anessentialpartofthiseffortisthatschoolsmustbeviewedasneighborhoodanchorsthatcanserveasvehiclesforultimatelyintegratingthecommunity.

39

ReferencesAyscue,J.B.,&Frankenberg,E.(2018).Howthedesignofschoolchoicecanfurtherintegration.InI.C.Rotberg&J.L.Glazer(Eds.),Choosingcharters(pp.177-191).NewYork,NY:TeachersCollegePress.Ayscue,J.,Levy,R.,Siegel-Hawley,G.,&Woodward,B.(2017).Choicesworthmaking:Creating,sustaining,andexpandingdiversemagnetschools.Amanualforlocalstakeholders.LosAngeles,CA:TheCivilRightsProject/ProyectoDerechosCiviles.Barton,M.S.(2016).GentrificationandviolentcrimeinNewYorkCity.Crime&Delinquency,62,1180-1202.Bayer,P.,Ferreira,F.,&McMillan,R.(2007).Aunifiedframeworkformeasuringpreferencesforschoolsandneighborhoods.Journalofpoliticaleconomy,115(4),588-638.Been,V.,Capperis,S.,DelaRoca,J.,etal.(2015).StateofNewYorkCity’shousingandneighborhoodsin2015.NewYork:TheFurmanCenter.Been,V.,Capperis,S.,DelaRoca,J.,etal.(2017).StateofNewYorkCity’shousingandneighborhoodsin2017.NewYork:TheFurmanCenter.Black,S.E.,&Machin,S.(2011).Housingvaluationsofschoolperformance.InE.A.Hanushek,S.Machin,&L.Woessmann(Eds.),Handbookoftheeconomicsofeducation,Volume3.North-Holland:Amsterdam.Blagg,K.,Chingos,M.,Corcoran,S.,Cordes,S.,Cowen,J.,Denice,P.,Gross,B.,Lincove,J.,Bajaj,C.,Schwartz,A.,&Valant,J.(2018).Theroadtoschool:Howfarstudentstraveltoschoolinthechoice-richcitiesofDenver,Detroit,NewOrleans,NewYorkCity,andWashington,DC.Washington,DC:UrbanInstitute.Chingos,M.(2016).Nomorefreelunchforeducationpolicymakersandresearchers.Washington,DC:BrookingsInstitution.Clotfelter,C.(2004).AfterBrown:Theriseandretreatofschooldesegregation.NewJersey:PrincetonUniversityPress.Darling-Hammond,L.(2007).Race,inequalityandeducationalaccountability:Theironyof“NoChildLeftBehind.”RaceEthnicityandEducation,10,245–260.

40

Dastrup,S.,Ellen,I.,Jefferson,A.,Weselcouch,M.,Schwartz,D.,&Cuenca,K.(2015).TheeffectsofneighborhoodchangeonNewYorkCityHousingAuthorityresidents.Bethesda,MD:AbtAssociates.Davidson,M.(2010).Lovethyneighbour?SocialmixinginLondon'sgentrificationfrontiers.EnvironmentandPlanningA,42(3),524-544.Diem,S.,Holme,J.J.,Edwards,W.,Haynes,M.,&Epstein,E.(2018).Diversityforwhom?Gentrification,demographicchange,andthepoliticsofschoolintegration.EducationalPolicy.Advanceonlinepublication:DOI:10.1177/0895904818807316Ellen,I.G.,&O'Regan,K.M.(2011).Howlow-incomeneighborhoodschange:Entry,exit,andenhancement.RegionalScienceandUrbanEconomics,41(2),89-97.Fessenden,F.(2012).AportraitofsegregationinNewYorkCity’sschools.TheNewYorkTimesMay11,2012.Retrievedfromhttp://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/05/11/nyregion/segregation-in-new-york-city-public-schools.htmFrankenberg,E.,Taylor,K.,&Mann,B.(April2018).Schoolsegregationandschoolenrollmentpatternsamidstneighborhoodgentrification.PaperpresentedattheannualmeetingofAmericanEducationalResearchAssociation,NewYork,NY.Freeman,L.(2005).Displacementorsuccession?Residentialmobilityingentrifyingneighborhoods.UrbanAffairsReview,40(4),463-491.Freidus,A.(2016).“Agreatschoolbenefitsusall”:Advantagedparentsandthegentrificationofanurbanpublicschool.UrbanEducation.http://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916636656Frey,W.(2011).Meltingpotcitiesandsuburbs:RacialandethnicchangeinmetroAmericainthe2000s.Washington,DC:BrookingsInstitution.Retrievedfromhttps://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/0504_census_ethnicity_frey.pdfFrey,W.H.(2018).Diversityexplosion:HownewracialdemographicsareremakingAmerica.Washington,DC:BrookingsInstitutionPress.Fry,R.,&Taylor,P.(2012).Theriseofresidentialsegregationbyincome.Washington,DC:PewResearchCenter:Social&DemographicTrends.RetrievedAugust6,2018from:

41

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/08/01/the-rise-of-residential-segregation-by-income/Gándara,P.,&Hopkins,M.(Eds.).(2010).Forbiddenlanguage:Englishlearnersandrestrictivelanguagepolicies.NewYork,NY:TeachersCollegePress.Gándara,P.,&Mordechay,K.(2017).Demographicchangeandthenew(andnotsonew)challengesforLatinoeducation.EducationalForum,81(2),148–159.Goetz,E.(2011).Gentrificationinblackandwhite:TheracialimpactofpublichousingdemolitioninAmericancities.UrbanStudies,48(8),1581-1604.Hanushek,E.A.,&Rivkin,S.G.(2010).ThequalityanddistributionofteachersundertheNoChildLeftBehindAct.JournalofEconomicPerspectives,24(3),133-150.Hulchanski,J.D.(2010).ThethreecitieswithinToronto:IncomepolarizationamongToronto'sneighbourhoods,1970-2005.Toronto:CitiesCentre,UniversityofToronto.Jordan,R.,&Gallagher,M.(2015).Doesschoolchoiceaffectgentrification?Posingthequestionandassessingtheevidence.Washington,DC:UrbanInstitute.Retrievedfromhttp://www.urban.org/research/publication/doesschool-choice-affect-gentrificationKahlenberg,R.D.(2001).Alltogethernow:Creatingmiddle-classschoolsthroughpublicschoolchoice.Washington,DC:BrookingsInstitutionPress.Kane,T.J.,Riegg,S.K.,&Staiger,D.O.(2006).Schoolquality,neighborhoods,andhousingprices.AmericanLawandEconomicsReview,8(2),183-212.Kimelberg,S.M.,&Billingham,C.M.(2012).Attitudestowarddiversityandtheschoolchoiceprocess:Middle-classparentsinasegregatedurbanpublicschooldistrict.UrbanEducation,48,198-231.Kucsera,J.,&Orfield,G.(2014).NewYorkState’sextremeschoolsegregation:Inequality,inaction,andadamagedfuture.LosAngeles,CA:TheCivilRightsProject.Lees,L.(2008).Gentrificationandsocialmixing:towardsaninclusiveurbanrenaissance?UrbanStudies,45(12),2449-2470.

Levy,DianeK.,ZackMcDade,andKassieDumlao.2010.“EffectsfromLivinginMixed-IncomeCommunitiesforLow-IncomeFamilies.”UrbanInstitute,Washington,DC.

42

.Lewis,A.E.,&Manno,M.J.,(2011).Thebesteducationforsome:RaceandschoolingintheUnitedStatestoday.InM.Jung,J.C.Vargas,&E.Bonilla-Silva(Eds.),Stateofwhitesupremacy(pp.93-109).PaloAlto,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.

Logan,J.R.,Oakley,D.,&Stowell,J.(2008).Schoolsegregationinmetropolitanregions,1970–2000:Theimpactsofpolicychoicesonpubliceducation.AmericanJournalofSociology,113(6),1611-1644.

Maciag,M.(2015).GentrificationinAmericareport.GoverningtheStatesandLocalitiesMagazine.Retrievedfromhttp://www.governing.com/gov-data/gentrification-in-cities-governing-report.html.Massey,D.S.,&Denton,N.A.(1988).Thedimensionsofresidentialsegregation.SocialForces,67(2),281-315.

McKinnish,T.,Walsh,R.,&White,T.K.(2010).Whogentrifieslow-incomeneighborhoods?Journalofurbaneconomics,67(2),180-193.Mickelson,R.(2003).Whenareracialdisparitiesineducationtheresultofracialdiscrimination?Asocialscienceperspective.TeachersCollegeRecord,105(6),1052–1086.

Mordechay,K.(2014).Vastchangesandanuneasyfuture:RacialandregionalinequalityinSouthernCalifornia.LosAngeles,CA:TheCivilRightsProject/ProyectoDerechosCiviles.

Mordechay,K.,&Ayscue,J.(2017).Whitegrowth,persistentsegregation:Couldgentrificationbecomeintegration?LosAngeles,CA:TheCivilRightsProject/ProyectoDerechosCiviles.Mordechay,K.,&Orfield,G.(2017).Demographictransformationinapolicyvacuum:ThechangingfaceofU.S.metropolitansocietyandchallengesforpublicschools.TheEducationalForum,81(2),193-203.Mordechay,K.,&Ayscue,J.(2018).Policiesneededtobuildinclusivecitiesandschools.EducationPolicyAnalysisArchives,26(98).http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.26.3659Mordechay,K.&Ayscue,J.(forthcoming).DoesNeighborhoodGentrificationCreateSchoolDesegregation?TeachersCollegeRecord.

43

NewYorkCityDepartmentofEducation.(2018).Demographicsnapshot—Citywide,borough,district,andschool.SY2013-14to2017-18—Allgrades.[Dataset].Retrievedfromhttps://infohub.nyced.org/reports-and-policies/citywide-information-and-data/information-and-data-overviewPatterson,K.L.,&Silverman,R.M.(2013).Urbaneducationandneighborhoodrevitalization.JournalofUrbanAffairs,35(1),1-5.Pearman,F.A.,&Swain,W.A.(2017).Schoolchoice,gentrification,andthevariablesignificanceofracialstratificationinurbanneighborhoods.SociologyofEducation,90(3),213-235.Philadelphia.(2018).PlanPhilly.Retrievedfrom:http://planphilly.com/events/2015/02/18/pacdcbeyond-gentrification-toward-equitable-neighborhoods-an-equitable-development-policyplatform-for-philadelphia.Posey-Maddox,L.(2013).ProfessionalizingthePTO:Race,class,andshiftingnormsofparentalengagementinacitypublicschool.AmericanJournalofEducation,119,235-260.Said,C.(2018,January18).AirbnblistingsinSanFranciscoplungebyhalf.TheSanFranciscoChronicle.Retrievedfrom:https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Airbnb-listings-in-San-Francisco-plunge-by-half-12502075.phpSchwartz,H.L.,Bostic,R.W.,Green,R.K.,Reina,V.J.,Davis,L.M.,&Augustine,C.H.(2016).Preservationofaffordablerentalhousing:EvaluationoftheMacArthurFoundation'sWindowofOpportunityInitiative.RandCorporation.Seattle.(2018).Equitabledevelopmentinitiative.Retrievedfrom:https://www.seattle.gov/opcd/ongoing-initiatives/equitable-development-initiative.Siegel-Hawley,G.,&Frankenberg,E.(2012).Revivingmagnetschools:Strengtheningasuccessfulschoolchoiceoption.LosAngeles,CA:TheCivilRightsProject/ProyectoDerechosCiviles.Silver,H.(2013).Commentary:Mixingpolicies:Expectationsandachievements.Cityscape,73-82.Smith,N.(1998).Gentrification.InW.vanVliet(Ed.),Theencyclopediaofhousing(pp.198-199).London:Taylor&Francis.

44

Stillman,J.B.(2012).Gentrificationandschools:Theprocessofintegrationwhenwhitesreverseflight.NewYork,NY:PalgraveMacmillan.Stringer,S.M.(2018).TheImpactofAirbnbonNYCrents.NewYork:CityofNewYorkOfficeoftheComptroller.Sturtevant,L.(2014).ThenewDistrictofColumbia:Whatpopulationgrowthanddemographicchangemeanforthecity.JournalofUrbanAffairs,36(2),276-299.Umansky,I.M.,&Reardon,S.F.(2014).ReclassificationpatternsamongLatinoEnglishlearnerstudentsinbilingual,dualimmersion,andEnglishimmersionclassrooms.AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,51(5),879-912.U.S.DepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopment.(2016).InsightsintoHousingandCommunityDevelopmentPolicy.Washington,DC:Retrievedfromhttps://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/Insights-Ensuring-Equitable-Growth.pdf

U.S.DepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopment,U.S.DepartmentofEducation,&U.S.DepartmentofTransportation.(2016).DearColleagueLetter.Washington,D.C.:Authors.Retrievedfromhttps://www2.ed.gov/documents/press-releases/06032016-dear-colleaguesletter.pdf

Wachsmuth,D.,&Weisler,A.(2018).Airbnbandtherentgap:Gentrificationthroughthesharingeconomy.EnvironmentandPlanningA:EconomyandSpace,50(6),1147-1170Wilson,W.J.(1987).Thetrulydisadvantaged:Theinnercity,theunderclass,andsocialpolicy.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Wyly,E.K.,andHammel,D.(2005).MappingNeoliberalAmericanUrbanism.Pp.18–38inGentrificationinaGlobalContext:TheNewUrbanColonialism,editedbyRowlandAtkinsonandGaryBridge.NewYork:Routledge.

Zuk,M.,Bierbaum,A.H.,Chapple,K.,Gorska,K.,&Loukaitou-Sideris,A.(2018).Gentrification,displacement,andtheroleofpublicinvestment.”JournalofPlanningLiterature,33(1),31-44.

45

Appendix Table A-1. Population Growth in Gentrifying Tracts, NYC, and Brooklyn and Queens.

2000 2016 PercentageChange

GentrifyingTracts 83,651 96,959 15.9%

NewYorkCity 8,008,278 8,539,803 6.6%

BrooklynandQueens 4,694,705 4,916,863 4.7%Source:Author’scalculationsusing2000decennialcensus(U.S.CensusBureau,2000)and2016(5-yearaverage)AmericanCommunitySurveymicrodata.TableA-2.ExposuretoWhiteElementaryStudentsinGentrifyingAreas

TypicalBlackElementaryStudentExposuretoWhiteStudents

TypicalHispanicElementaryStudentExposuretoWhite

Students

TypicalAsianElementaryStudentExposuretoWhite

Students

2001 1.3% 5.0% 7.8%

2007 1.8% 5.3% 7.3%

2015 3.5% 6.5% 9.7%Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataTable A-3. Exposure to White Elementary Students in Non-Gentrifying Areas

TypicalBlackElementaryStudentExposuretoWhiteStudents

TypicalHispanicElementaryStudentExposuretoWhite

Students

TypicalAsianElementaryStudentExposuretoWhite

Students

2007 5.6% 10.1% 19.8%

2015 5.5% 10.3% 17.6%Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofData

46

Table A-4. Isolation with Same-Race Elementary Peers in Gentrifying Areas

TypicalBlackElementary

StudentIsolationwithBlackStudents

TypicalHispanicElementary

StudentIsolationwithHispanicStudents

TypicalAsianElementary

StudentIsolationwithAsianStudents

TypicalWhiteElementary

StudentIsolationwithWhiteStudents

2001 75.9% 66.7% 6.5% 23.3%

2007 74.1% 67.2% 8.2% 23.7%

2015 67.4% 65.5% 11.1% 23.3%Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataTable A-5. Isolation with Same-Race Elementary Peers in Non-Gentrifying Areas

TypicalBlackElementary

StudentIsolationwithBlackStudents

TypicalHispanicElementary

StudentIsolationwithHispanicStudents

TypicalAsianElementary

StudentIsolationwithAsianStudents

TypicalWhiteElementary

StudentIsolationwithWhiteStudents

2007 58.4% 56.6% 40.3% 47.8%

2015 55.2% 57.1% 43.2% 46.2%Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofData

47

Table A-6. Elementary Enrollment by School Type in Non-Gentrifying Areas

NumberofElementarySchools

Enrollment White Black Hispanic Asian FRL

2007

Charter

38 11,403 450(3.9%)

7,285(63.9%)

3,395(29.8%)

248(2.2%)

8,030(70.4%)

TPS 643 426,152 71,904(16.9%)

118,561(27.8%)

168,555(39.6%)

65,219(15.3%)

322,391(75.7%)

2015

Charter

120 58,915 3,034(5.1%)

32,503(55.2%)

20,643(35.0%)

1,665(2.8%)

n/a

TPS 708 459,375 81,987(17.8%)

96,719(21.1%)

189,305(41.2%)

81,318(17.7%)

n/a

Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataNote:Enrollmentbyracemaynotadduptototalenrollmentnumberbecauseenrollmentofotherracialgroups(AmericanIndian/AlaskaNative,NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander,twoormoreraces)arenotincludedinthistable.Percentagesmaynotaddupto100%becausesharesofotherracialgroups(AmericanIndian/AlaskaNative,NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander,twoormoreraces)arenotincludedinthistable.

48

Table A-7. Exposure to White Elementary Students by School Type in Gentrifying Areas

TypicalBlackElementaryStudentExposuretoWhite

Students

TypicalHispanicElementaryStudentExposuretoWhite

Students

TypicalAsianElementaryStudentExposuretoWhite

Students

2007

Charter 0.3% 2.8% 1.8%

TPS 2.0% 5.3% 7.3%

2015

Charter 1.2% 2.4% 5.8%

TPS 5.1% 7.3% 10.3%Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataTable A-8. Exposure to White Elementary Students by School Type in Non-Gentrifying Areas

TypicalBlackElementaryStudentExposuretoWhite

Students

TypicalHispanicElementaryStudentExposuretoWhite

Students

TypicalAsianElementaryStudentExposuretoWhite

Students

2007

Charter 1.8% 4.4% 20.5%

TPS 5.9% 10.2% 19.8%

2015

Charter 2.7% 4.6% 13.8%

TPS 6.4% 10.9% 17.7%Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofData

49

Table A-9. Isolation with Same-Race Peers by Elementary School Type in Gentrifying Areas

TypicalBlackElementary

StudentIsolationwithBlackStudents

TypicalHispanicElementary

StudentIsolationwithHispanicStudents

TypicalAsianElementary

StudentIsolationwithAsianStudents

TypicalWhiteElementary

StudentIsolationwithWhiteStudents

2007

Charter 89.3% 43.0% 0.9% 4.2%

TPS 72.1% 67.7% 8.2% 23.9%

2015

Charter 75.4% 44.8% 4.5% 14.8%

TPS 61.8% 69.3% 12.0% 24.0%

Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofData

50

Table A-10. Isolation with Same-Race Peers by Elementary School Type in Non-Gentrifying Areas

TypicalBlackElementary

StudentIsolationwithBlackStudents

TypicalHispanicElementary

StudentIsolationwithHispanicStudents

TypicalAsianElementary

StudentIsolationwithAsianStudents

TypicalWhiteElementary

StudentIsolationwithWhiteStudents

2007

Charter 75.4% 46.1% 13.4% 26.0%

TPS 57.4% 56.9% 40.4% 48.0%

2015

Charter 67.9% 49.9% 11.9% 28.4%

TPS 51.0% 57.9% 43.9% 46.8%Source:NationalCenterforEducationStatisticsCommonCoreofDataFigure A-1. Changes in Household Size, 2000 to 2016

Source:Author’scalculationsusing2000decennialcensus(U.S.CensusBureau,2000)and2016(5-yearaverage)AmericanCommunitySurveymicrodata.

4.8%6.60%

-1%

-10.60%-12.0%

-10.0%

-8.0%

-6.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

1-Person 2-Person 3-Person 4-Person

GentrifyingTracts NewYorkCity BrooklynandQueens

51

Figure A-2. Age Distribution of Children by Race in Gentrifying Neighborhoods, 2000, 2009, 2015

Source:Author’scalculationsusing2000decennialcensus(U.S.CensusBureau,2000)and2016(5-yearaverage)AmericanCommunitySurveymicrodata.Note:WhitecategoryarerespondentsthatareWhitealone,notHispanicorLatino.Figure A-3. Change in Median Household Income, 2000 to 2016

Source:Author’scalculationsusing2000decennialcensus(U.S.CensusBureau,2000)and2016(5-yearaverage)AmericanCommunitySurveymicrodata.Note:Medianincomeisadjustedto2016dollars.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Age0-5,2000Age0-5,2009Age0-5,2016 Age5-17,2000

Age5-17,2009

Age5-17,2016

White Black Latino Asian

$37,516

$57,335 $54,721$52,830$59,047 $58,453

$-

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

GentrifyingTracts NewYorkCity BrooklynandQueens

2000 2016

52

Figure A-4. Changes in Poverty Status, 2000 to 2016

Source:Author’scalculationsusing2000decennialcensus(U.S.CensusBureau,2000)and2016(5-yearaverage)AmericanCommunitySurveymicrodata.

27.3

18.4 17.6

21.3

17.916.6

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

GentrifyingTracts NewYorkCity BrooklynandQueens

2000 2016

53

Figure A-5. Distribution of White Elementary School Student Enrollment in Gentrifying Neighborhoods, 2016

Figure A-6. Elementary Schools by Distribution of White Student Enrollment in Gentrifying Neighborhoods, 2016

Note:Dotsrepresentindividualelementaryschools.