Six vocational schools asked by the state to look at admissions

This story from the South Shore from mid-December was shared out again this morning, and in re-reading, I noticed what I hadn't the first time: it wasn't just Diman (which is Greater Fall River) and Greater New Bedford being queried:

Riley wrote to leaders at six schools, including Greater New Bedford Vocational Technical High School and Diman Regional Vocational Tech High School in Fall River.

What were the other schools?

Diman, GNBVT, Worcester Tech, Blackstone Valley, Montachusett, Bay Path... I tweeted one out but here is one copy I have on me, can get better quality to you in a bit. Same all around: https://t.co/ED0tdcr1SM pic.twitter.com/jiub7OCChW

— Ashley Cullinane (@AshCullinane) December 27, 2019

 In all of the letters (per Ashley Cullinane's reporting):

Riley asked the schools to work with the state to "identify ways that your district can address any policies or practices -- including those related to admissions, recruitment, and retention -- that may be impacting equitable student access to the strong vocational technical programs your school offers, and to voluntarily enact changes."

Let me note here, that, despite this being a policy matter, this is the first I've seen of Worcester being asked to deal with it; it has not appeared on a Worcester School Committee agenda. Update: but I did get the letter, which you can find here. 



Because the others are regionals, a straight comparison for them is a little more complicated to put together--let's come back to this--but Worcester Tech's against the entire Worcester district is pretty straightforward to run:

my graph; numbers via DESE's profiles from the district

While the Hispanic and white numbers are off, for sure, the one that leaps off the page here is English Language learners. As a district, Worcester's enrollment about a third English learners; Tech is 7.4%. As I can hear the immediate note that Tech is also only secondary students, please note: Burncoat is 27.8%; South is 32.2%; North is 34.2%; Doherty is 18.7%; Claremont is 35.3%; UPCS is 20.8%. It isn't about the grades served. That is part of what impacts the discrepancy in high needs, as would the economically disadvantaged gap.
As I've noted elsewhere and as is noted in the article, this comes at a time at the state has the admissions regulations of the vocational schools open for discussion. Note, though, that the Department did move forward with only half of the proposed revisions to the vocational regs in November, holding back the admissions revision. One assumes that is due to at least perceived need for further discussion, if not pushback from the field.

I couldn't help but note what all but one of the districts receiving letters have in common--all have a city in their region (all but Blackstone Valley Tech): Diman is Fall River, Greater New Bedford is New Bedford, Monty Tech is Gardner and Fitchburg, Bay Path includes Southbridge, and Worcester is of course Worcester. Due to the way Massachusetts school districts currently exist, that means these are all districts that actually include substantial (for a given meaning of that) populations of students of color and of English learners.
This is not to say the admission and enrollment isn't a problem; it is, and it's an issue, moreover, that the state, in any case, feels other districts with cities--Greater Lowell, Greater Lawrence, Whittier in Haverhill, to name a few--are handling better.
There are, though, a number of regional vo-techs across the state that draw entirely from districts that simply don't have any substantial population of English learners and students of color. When compared against their districts, then, they are reflective of the entire population within its borders.
Unless and until we are willing to talk about our enrollment lines, though, we will continue to call out particular schools and districts for not thoroughly serving all students, when we have no expectation that such a responsibility truly is shared.

PS: I hope to see more reporting and discussion of this in the districts impacted; I expect to see it in Worcester.