Photo credit: www.educationnext.org

The Unregulated Landscape of Magnet School Admissions

“I might not be the one to share this.”

During a recent Zoom conversation with a prominent advocate in the magnet school movement, who regularly advises districts on developing or revamping their magnet programs, I inquired about the enrollment methods used at her own dance-focused high school established in a major Southern school district.

“If a student demonstrated exceptional dance skills, we sometimes just admitted them,” she revealed.

This remark highlighted a significant breach of her district’s policies aimed at ensuring equitable admissions for magnet schools. While her institution specialized in dance, it was apparent that the district had established protocols or algorithms for determining admissions. Instead, school leaders opted to bypass these guidelines, granting some talented dancers entry, which effectively meant that other students were denied spots based on subjective criteria rather than an equitable process.

Before quickly condemning this approach, it’s vital to recognize that magnet schools have mostly evaded intense examination regarding their admissions processes. A report published by my organization, Available to All, last year assessed the legislative landscape surrounding public school admissions practices. It was eye-opening to find that not a single state has instituted comprehensive laws that impose significant regulations on magnet school enrollment practices. Only a few regions, such as Florida, Delaware, and the District of Columbia, have imposed limited open-enrollment rules applicable to magnet schools, along with other public educational institutions.

This lack of regulation sharply contrasts with charter school legislation, which clearly outlines how admissions should function, often prohibiting preferential treatment during enrollment. Most charter schools are legally required to accept applications from all interested students and conduct lotteries when the applicant pool exceeds available spots. Furthermore, charter regulations commonly prohibit selective admissions processes that might consider academic achievement or specialized skills, such as auditions. The underlying premise is that without such constraints, school leaders could be inclined to selectively enroll students to create an ideal demographic or performance profile.

Moreover, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools (NAPCS) has taken steps to promote fair admissions approaches for charter schools. Recently, they released guidelines detailing when it might be appropriate for charter schools to utilize “weighted lotteries” to provide low-income students with an improved chance of enrollment. While I have reservations about their approach, which I believe undermines the principle of equal access to public education, I commend NAPCS for establishing a stance and promoting transparency in the process.

Later in my conversation, I asked the leader if Magnet Schools of America, the national body representing magnet schools, offers any guidance on admissions policies or protocols to prevent misuse. “No,” she admitted. “We don’t have anything like that.”

In the absence of both legislative safeguards and professional standards governing admissions, magnet schools can be likened to an unregulated frontier in public school admissions. As seen in the dance school scenario, the leaders of these institutions are human and, like their charter and traditional public school counterparts, may be tempted to sidestep established rules for personal or communal advantage. Such actions could be seen as attempts to preserve the unique culture of magnet schools, particularly those targeting specific talents.

Public school administrators are accountable to the communities they serve and should operate within legal and ethical boundaries. If such frameworks are lacking, it falls to policymakers to impose necessary regulations. It is crucial to establish uniform standards across all public school types. Why should magnet schools exist in a largely unregulated environment while charter schools operate under stringent oversight and precise state-mandated admissions guidelines? This inconsistency does not adequately safeguard the rights of families seeking educational opportunities for their children.

Any endeavor to develop standards for magnet schools must contend with the diverse formats these institutions take. In numerous regions, schools that function similarly to magnets may not even be referred to as such. For instance, Seattle has “options” schools, Kansas City has “signature” schools, and New York City features “specialized” schools. Each of these is designed to attract a diverse student body across the district rather than strictly adhering to geographical attendance boundaries, aligning them closely with the traditional concept of magnet schools.

Source
www.educationnext.org