Gill 1

Hassrat Gill
Dr. Thomas Trimble
ENG 3020
December 11, 2017
Research Essay

Gentrification and its Effects on Schools in Midtown

I. Introduction

Gentrification has becoming a focus point in recent years, as areas that tend to be home to

lower class members of society are being renovated in the tastes of middle class families instead,

in hopes to rejuvenate the area. There are many people who are interested in the effects on the

schools in gentrified areas, wondering if gentrification will lead to schools with a good

foundation and a diverse environment, or if it will instead lead to segregated student bodies and

institutions that benefit the wealthy over low income families. Detroit has slowly started to

become more and more gentrified, and it is an ideal location to see the effects of gentrifications

on the schools. Especially, with the bad reputation the schools in the city have earned in recent

years, as it is branded as the city with unsafe and inefficient education system. In this paper, I

will research and analyze how gentrification has effected the student body, but also if theres a

difference between how charter schools and Detroit Public Schools are changed by

gentrification.

Literature Review

In Jennifer Stillmans journal Gentrification and Schools: The Process of Integration

When Whites Reverse Flight, she discusses gentrifiers or gentrys and the possible, negative and

positive, effects on the neighborhood schools they have. Stillman argues gentrys tend not to have

kids, because of the many childless households, these new gentrifiers dont seem to put much

thought into school improvement. Those who do have children have a very large effect on the
 Gill 2

direction on the public school systems in these neighborhoods. Stillman states that many of these

gentry are aware of their effect, and have internal conflicts if they are actually helping or not.

Integration in Schools

Middle class families make up a major part of the new population, and many urban

schools want these families attending their institutions. Middle class parents hold much influence

over regional public schools, and are an important spark of change in these schools (Cucchiara

and Horvat). Stillman emphasizes how more influence from the middle class could improve the

schools. Stillman believes even if their children arent attending these schools, they can invest in

them, either by donating or volunteering, because of either their civic duty or to raise the

property values of their neighborhood.

Stillman proposes there are four waves of integration of these gentrys into the

neighborhood schools. The first wave include the first group of gentrys children called

innovators, who are seen as the risk takers. They see the possible positive effects of their

influence in the school systems and act to help make it come a reality. The second wave consists

of the second wave of gentrys children called early adopters, who were not old enough to be

in the first wave of children. The third wave consists of the early majority, which Stillman

defines as gentrys who arent risk takers and will only join the schools when they see others

succeed in these them. The fourth wave consists of late majority, who are gentrys that will

only enroll their children in neighborhood schools when it is finally considered a good school

where their children are guaranteed an exceptional education. With these steps and the more

integrated the school becomes, Stillman proposes the school becomes more diverse as well, with

a mixture of gentry and non-gentry students making up the school population. With diversity

comes a more welcoming environment for all students.

 Gill 3

School Choice

Many of individuals who make up the middle to high class population who come into

newly gentrified areas and have children have a vital decision to make: whether or not they

should send their kids to the neighborhood schools or if they should exercise their ability of

school choice. School choice is the right for a parent to choose to send their children to the local

public school, or send them to a charter or private schools (Jordan and Gallagher). These gentrys

tend to choose the latter, because it is seen as a safer option that guarantees their children acquire

a quality education. The gentrys tend to cluster in these other schools as well, especially if there

are better opportunities academically for their children. Jordan and Gallagher note, that low

income minority individuals are far less likely to exercise school choice, because of the many

constraints their economic positions put them in. For example, travel from their homes to their

possible school system. Stillman argues that these gentrys should send their kids to these local

schools, as it is their civic duty as members of the community to help improve their

neighborhoods.

Possible Cons and Pros

A major question that many wonder is if the integration of middle class gentrifiers can

help the low income long time residents of the neighborhood schools.

Stillman argues that if gentrys do send their children to local public schools improve the

schools education and overall excellence. Keels et al. argues that middle class families have

more influence over the school administration and can further improve any problems parents of

students face. Stillman argues that the change that can come from these gentrys can improve the

lives of students who are part of families who are long time residents in the long run.
 Gill 4

Some scholars argue that there may be a tipping point in which the number of middle-

income students start indirectly harming the low-income students, because school administrators

will give more influence to the middle-income parents (Keels et al.). Studies also reveal how the

process of attracting higher income families sidelines low income parents interests, as their

attendance is not seen as important in the schools eyes because they do not guarantee as much

success as the higher income families (Cucchiara). Studies show the main reason middle-income

parents leave schools are because they dont believe their children are receiving a competitive

education, and these parents tend to use surveillance tactics to influence activities in classrooms

as well going to the school board to help their child receive a superior education (Hassrick and

Schneider). Keels et. al also argue that middle-income parents are more financially stable to

provide the demands of teachers for their children as well, which puts low income children at a

disadvantage in the classroom.

All these factors have consequences, and those all can threaten the diversity in these local

schools. While many middle class gentrifiers do support diversity in their childrens schools, the

gentrifiers threaten the diversity of these schools, and this may lead to segregation and other

patterns of inequality linked to race, class, and residence (Posey; Kimelburg and Billingham).

Kennedy et al. argues that if the schools became integrated, the good public education system

increases the chances of long time residents to stay in gentrified communities, but there are still

cases from all over the United States of displacement of mainly African Americans in

communities that are historically their neighborhoods. Displacement will most likely come from

when middle class families attract other middle class families, which is usually preceded by

rising housing prices. This will eventually increase the amount of middle class families in the

schools system, while will also increase the cultural, economic and social capital. As a
 Gill 5

consequence, however, the school inequality will only rise as the lower income families area

pushed out of these schools (Keels et. al).

Theres also the possibility of middle class families displacing low income minority

populations, but also practicing school choice and not sending their children to the neighborhood

schools. This would eventually lead to failing of said school as it becomes inevitable to be

disconnected to its surrounding neighborhood. This will lead to even higher housing prices and

make it unaffordable for the long time residents living in the neighborhood (Pearman and

Swain).

II. Methods

For this study, I wanted to focus in on how the student bodies of different Midtown k-12

schools are affected by gentrification, and if charter schools not part of Detroit Public

Community District (DPS) and DPS schools feel different effects. In order for this to succeed, I

needed to gather data on schools, both charter not part of the DPS, and public schools part of the

DPS over the last 15 years. I would only be using quantitative data for this study, as I felt it is the

best type of data to answer my question as thoroughly as possible.

I will be using two different aspects, the number of students in specific demographics, and

how students success rates are affected. I looked at all charter and public schools in 48201-

48202, which is what I defined as the Midtown area. The following list includes all the schools I

included in my research.

1. Golightly Education Center (DPS)

2. Cass Technical High School (DPS)
3. Detroit International Academy for Young Women (DPS)
4. Spain Elementary School (DPS)
5. Detroit School of Arts (DPS)
6. Benjamin Carson High School of Science and Medicine (DPS)

7. GEE Edmonson Academy (charter)

 Gill 6

8. Henry Ford Academy Elementary School (charter)

9. Henry Ford Academy School-Creative Studies (charter)
10. University Prep Academy (UPA) Middle School (charter)
11. University Prep Academy (UPA) Elementary School Ellen Thompson Campus
(charter)
12. University Prep Academy (UPA) Elementary School Mark Murray Campus (charter)
13. University Prep Academy (UPA) High School (charter)
14. University Prep Science & Math (UPSM) Middle School (charter)
15. Capstone Academy (charter)

I used the Michigan School Date website for most of my data. When looking at the student

population, I focused on two different demographic categories: economic status and race

demographics of each school.

For the race demographics, I calculated the demographics of Midtown using the Fact

Finder feature on the census website, by searching for 48201 and 48202 information. I then

found the racial demographics of each of the schools, took the average of all schools, then split

the averages between schools part of DPS and charter schools not part of DPS.

For students economic standing, I used the Michigan School Data website to find how many

students are considered to be economically disadvantaged and non-economically disadvantaged1,

in the years of 2011-122 to the school year 2015-16. I then looked at the average change of

amount of economically disadvantaged students from all the schools, and then split the averages

between schools part of DPS and charter schools not part of DPS.

When looking at student success rates, I focused on the math and reading/ela scores, and

graduation and dropout rates of schools as well.

1
I used the Michigan School Data website category, and am unsure on how they defined what is
considered economically disadvantaged.
2
Some schools did not have the available for the school year 2011-12, so I did the next closest
school year.
 Gill 7

For the math and reading/ela scores, because of the constraints of the Michigan School Data

website, were separated into the economically disadvantaged and non-economically

disadvantaged, where they were spilt up even more to the top 30% scoring, middle 40% scoring,

and bottom 30% scoring. From there, I looked at how the scores changed over the earliest

available time to the school of year 2015-16. I then looked at the average change of each

category of students from all the schools, and then split the averages between schools part of

DPS and charter schools not part of DPS.

When looking at the graduation and dropout rates, because this category only applied to the

high schools I only found the data of seven schools listed below.

1. Detroit School of Arts (DPS)

2. Cass Technical High School (DPS)
3. Detroit International Academy for Young Women (DPS)
4. Benjamin Carson High School of Science and Medicine (DPS)
5. Capstone Academy (charter)
6. Henry Ford Academy School-Creative Studies (charter)
7. University Prep Academy (UPA) High School (charter)

I compared the changes of graduation and dropout rates of schools from 2006-073 to 2015-

16, and then took the average of the rates of all schools, and then split the averages between

schools part of DPS and charter schools not part of DPS.

I found all the changes over time for the schools, by simply subtracting the latest school year

percentage from the earliest school percentage possible for each category, then averaging those

results for the all the schools, then splitting the averages between schools part of DPS and charter

schools not part of DPS.

3
Some schools did not have the available for the school year 2006-07, so I did the next closest
school year.
 Gill 8

I also found the years of when schools opened, so I could see around where they opened and

what types of schools opened.

III. Results and Analysis

Results

Racial Demographics

The first category I will be looking at are the average changes of the racial make up of the

schools, and will be using Midtown demographics as a comparison point.

Average Changes in Racial

Demographics of Midtown Schools
0.19%
2.25%
0.16%
1.72%
-0.12% 1.06%
0.68%
-
0.50%
-0.09%
-4.38%
-3.57%
-0.17%
-0.03%
-5.00% -4.00% -3.00% -2.00% -1.00% 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00%

Public Schools Charter Schools

Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Student Count. Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web

There is an increase in the percentage of individuals who identify as White in the

Midtown, by 7.8%. While there has been a small increase in the percentage of White individuals

in the DPS system (0.19%), there has been a larger increase in the White students in the charter

schools in Midtown (2.25%). There has also been a decrease of African American individuals in

Midtown by 8.8%, and a decrease in the percentage of African American students in both charter

schools (3.6%) and Detroit Public Schools (4.4%). However, all the increases and decreases

arent by very much, not a significant amount.

 Gill 9

However, there is still an overwhelming African American majority of 92% in all the

schools in Midtown, versus the 72% of African American who currently live in Midtown. While

the percentage of residents of Midtown who are White is at 20%, there is only 2.09% White

students over all enrolled in Midtown schools. There is about 4.09% enrolled in charters, versus

the 1.6% enrolled in Public Schools. Here the charter schools slightly skew the data higher.

Economic Demographics

The second category, is the percentage change of the students who are defined as

economically disadvantaged, defined by the Michigan School Data website. The graph below

shows how the average change of students who are economically disadvantaged in public

schools has gone down by 6% in recent years, compared to the charter schools where the

percentage has increased, even if by a small value.

Economically Disadvantaged: All

Midtown Schools vs Midtown
Charter Schools vs Midtown DPS
-6.46% average change of public schools
average change of charter schools 0.34%
average change of schools
-1.53%
-7.00% -6.00% -5.00% -4.00% -3.00% -2.00% -1.00% 0.00% 1.00%
Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Student Count. Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web

As of 2015-16 school year, the average amount of economically disadvantaged students

of schools in Midtown was 77%, with DPS having a 66% and charter schools having 84%. Here,

the charter schools slightly skew the percentage of economically disadvantaged students in

Midtown Schools slightly. With an increase of 40% of medium household income over the last

15 years, there is a positive correlation between the difference between average change in public

schools, but negative correlation between the difference between average change in charter

schools.
 Gill 10

Math and Reading/ELA Scores

The third categories I will be looking at are Math and Reading scores of students, divided

by those who are economically disadvantaged and those who are not.

First, we will be looking at Math scores of the students. There hasnt been a significant

change in any of categories of either economic standing when compared to the students in each

class standing, as shown in the graph below. There has been barely any change for those who are

economically disadvantaged with at most a 0.2% change, but there has been a slight change for

those students who are non-economically disadvantaged, but still not a significant change.

Average Change of Midtown

School's Math Scores from 2011-12
to 2015-16
4.0%
2.0%
-0.2% 2.2% 0.1% 0.1%
0.0%
Average Bot 30 -1.3%
Average Mid 40 Average Top 30
-2.0%
-0.9%
economically disadvantaged non economically disadvantaged

The small change there is, is that more of them have shifted from the top 30% and middle

40% to the bottom 30%, as shown by the 2.2% increase in the average bottom 30%. This is very

prevalent in charter schools where there has been a 4.7% decrease in the average top 30%, and a

3.9% increase in the bottom 30%. In public schools, the math scores have bottomed in the

middle 40%, but have increased in both the bottom and top 30%, with an increase of 1.3% in the

bottom and an increase of 2.4% in the top scores.

Secondly, we will be looking at Reading/ELA scores. There is more of even distribution

for the these scores when looking at all of the Midtown schools, with differing of economic

status is only 0.7% in each of the class standings categories. While the percentage of the
 Gill 11

economically disadvantaged and those who are not, both decrease in the middle 40% (3.7% and

3.3% respectively), and both increase more in the top 30%. Although, they still both increase in

the bottom 30% as well.

Average Change of Reading/ELA

Scores from 2011-12 to 2015-16 of
Midtown Schools
10.0%
1.6% 0.9% 1.8% 2.4%
0.0%
Average Bot 30 -3.7% Mid
Average -3.3%
40 Average Top 30
-10.0%

economically disadvantaged non economically disadvantaged

Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Top 30/Bottom 30 Analysis Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web.

For Charter Schools, the non-economically disadvantaged tend to change more for the

middle 40% and top 30%, by decreasing in the former by 6.4% and increasing in the latter by

4%. The economically advantaged increase in the top 30% and bottom 30% by 2%, and decrease

by 4% in the middle 40%. For Public Schools, the economically disadvantaged increase in the

bottom 30% by 1%, but students of either economic standings tend to increase the same amount

in the top 30%.

Something both graphs show is a general decrease in the middle 40% of students, the

only place where the middle of 40% doesnt decrease is the economically disadvantaged math

scores and the Charter Schools math scores, but the scores dont increase by much either. They

shows a slight correlation between an increase the bottom and top 30% scores, which may lead

to a large achievement gap in the schools themselves.

Graduation and Dropout Rates

The last category we will look at will be average change graduation and dropout rates of

Midtown Schools from 2002 to 2016. As shown by the graph below, there has been a slight
 Gill 12

increase in the dropout rate (1.47%), but not a significant one. There has been an even small

change in graduation rate, a 0.23% change in graduation rate.

Average Change in Dropout

and Graduation Rates of
Midtown Schools

average change in dropout 1.47%

average change in 0.23%

0.00% 0.50% 1.00% 1.50% 2.00%

Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Graduation/Dropout Rate Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web

However, for Charter Schools by themselves, there has been a slightly larger dropout rate

of 1.9%. There also has been a larger change in the graduation rate, a 4.23% decrease in the last

15 years. For DPS, there is a slightly smaller dropout rate, with an increase of 1.15%, but a much

larger increase in graduation rate (3.58%).

Timeline

1900-1989 Midtown 1990-2005 Midtown 2006-2017 Midtown

Source: Made via My Maps on Google by Author using Schools Website

The maps above show when the currently open schools were founded. Since 1990, out of

the thirteen schools that have opened, nine are charter schools separate from Detroit Public
 Gill 13

Schools. There shows correlation between the opening of charter schools and gentrification in

Detroit.

Analysis

With the changes in population, the school demographics dont match up with the citys

population. The increase of people identifying as White has led to small increases in the school

population of White students, but only having 3% of Midtown Schools population be White

doesnt match up with White individuals making up 20% of Midtowns population. Even the

charter schools in Midtown still have a low 4% White population, meaning if White people are

having kids, many of them are not sending them to schools in Midtown. The vast majority of the

Midtown Schools population is still African American, even with decrease of African

Americans living in Midtown over the last 15 years. This shows us there had been steps toward

more diversity.

Over the last 20 years, there have been nine charter schools opened compared to the five

Detroit Public Schools. This shows correlation between gentrification and charter schools,

showing that perhaps that gentrification can lead to the opening of more charter schools. This

may show that the gentrys in Detroit tend to not want to send their kids to the public schools, and

invest more money in charter schools, but the high percentage of the economically disadvantaged

students (85%) makes this unlikely. Itll be more likely for more charter schools to have been

opened as more long time residents lose faith Detroit Public Schools.

Another factor to consider, is the percentage of economically disadvantaged students.

With the decrease of the economically disadvantaged, it seems to tell us that those who are

currently enrolled in Midtown DPS come from wealthier families than students that were

enrolled a decade ago. The ones enrolled in Midtown Charter schools havent demographically
 Gill 14

changed by a significant amount in the last ten years. Even if there has been changes in the

percentage of economically disadvantaged students, over all its only changed by 1.53%, which

isnt much. It seems even with gentrification leading to the influx of new people and supposed

influx of wealth, the amount of economically disadvantaged students in the schools havent been

effected.

With many of the test scores, the changes over time are small currently, but if they

continue with the decreasing of the middle 40% this may lead to an achievement gap within the

school. This would most likely leave the economically disadvantaged students more in the

bottom 30%, as these students are the ones who show the least change as of now. This could be

very harmful, and could turn many of the schools in Midtown into target schools. In terms of

what schools tend to be doing better, the Charter schools averages show them doing better in

reading/ela scores, but much lower in math scores compared to the public schools. The public

schools show little change in reading or math scores overall. The graduation rates slightly

increasing for public schools and decreasing for charter schools may show that gentrification has

a more positive effect on the public school system than charter schools. This may mean that

Detroits gentrification is actually improving at least the public schools.

All these factors show that the demographics of schools dont necessarily match the

demographics of Midtown. There have been slight differences in the schools to show some

positive correlation, but the numbers arent a huge change. This shows that either gentrys are

sending children to schools out of Midtown, or it hasnt been long enough for changes to be

made yet. Another option is that gentrys may not have children to send to schools, as many new

residents may not have or want children. Another conclusion that can be made from this data, is

that because the relative small change in the racial and economic demographics of schools,
 Gill 15

gentrys may not be pushing long time residents out of their neighborhoods. However the small

change could just be the start of displacement of low income, minority residents.

The same goes for the graduation and test scores. While the changes are there, theres not

a significant amount to establish causation between gentrification and the test scores or

graduation rates so far. This may be because the changes just need longer to take into effect, or

because that the gentrys in Detroit dont have large effects on success rates.

There also doesnt seem to be a significant difference between charter and public schools

in any of the categories, accept for some minor changes in test scores and graduation rates, as

there is a slight negative correlation in both for charter schools. This may be because of various

other reasons, and the change is so small that there isnt a concern right now of negative

causation.

IV. Discussion

Significance

This research is something that needs to be looked into. How gentrification effects the

schools in the area, specifically Midtown schools, is vital information that lets us know if

gentrification can help the future generation or not. If gentrification doesnt help the people who

are long time residents of the areas that are gentrified, there are steps that need to be taken to

help remove those effects. Gentrification is a very sensitive topic, because it is usually associated

with the displacement of the low income, minority residents in a worse position from where they

started. There is a need to study gentrified cities, so if the schools are not improving from what

they originally were there can be an attempt to learn why that happens and try to prevent it.

Studying what type of students attend schools and how students are doing in the schools of
 Gill 16

gentrified areas can help us understand how the students are being directly affected by

gentrification itself.

Through my primary research, I have concluded there has been little change in both

demographics, and measures of success rates. There seems to be insignificant change in both

aspects, which I concluded is that gentrification in Detroit in recent years hasnt affected the

public-school system substantially. This may because the gentrys of Detroit are not investing or

sending their children to schools in Midtown. The Midtown schools arent improving, because

none of the new residents are doing anything to help improve them. Gentrification is supposed

to rejuvenated a city, and while Midtown has been revitalized the schools havent changed.

Limitations

I experienced many limitations when researching this topic. The first one I experienced

was when I was collecting, over the different topics and schools I couldnt establish a period of

time that was set for all of the different categories. I used the broad range of 2000 to 2015, when

many of the categories the years varied from 2002 as the earliest, to 2014. While I never did go

beyond 2015 school year, I chose the earliest start date I could. Another limitation I experienced

was specifically in the economic status category. I was not able to attain how they defined this,

so could not compare it to the change in the amount of economically disadvantaged in Midtown.

The last limitation I experienced was my inability to collect qualitative data. In my

original plan for methods, I wanted to conduct interviews with administrate members of the

schools and was going to send a survey to the residents of my apartment building, the Park

Shelton. Unfortunately, because of time constraints and rejections, I was unable to complete this

activity.

Further Questions
 Gill 17

For further research, I would expand my research to other gentrified areas in Detroit, for

example Corktown. This would provide a better picture on how gentrification affects Detroit as a

whole. I would also compare the schools in Detroit to other gentrified cities, for example New

York City, London, and Boston. This would provide better insight to see if gentrification effects

on schools are universal, or just affecting the schools in Detroit.

I would also focus some elements in. I would separate the different levels of schools and

comparing those to each other, for example, comparing middle schools to other middle schools

and elementary schools to other elementary schools. I feel I would be able to get more accurate

and conclusive results from the data.

I would also interview the parents of students who live in these areas, gentrys and long

time residents, to see their point of view on the situation to understand their point of view of all

that is happening. I would also like to interview the teachers and other faculty in concerned

schools to get a better picture of how it affects the school on a day to day basis.
 Gill 18

Works Cited

Cucchiara, Maia. ReBranding Urban Schools: Urban Revitalization, Social Status, and

Marketing Public Schools to the Upper Middle Class. Journal of Education Policy, vol.

23, no. 2, 29 Feb. 2008, pp. 165179.

Cucchiara, M. B., and E. M. Horvat. "Perils and Promises: Middle-Class Parental Involvement in

Urban Schools." American Educational Research Journal46.4 (2009): 974-1004. Web.

Hassrick, Elizabeth Mcghee, and Barbara Schneider. "Parent Surveillance in Schools: A

Question of Social Class." American Journal of Education 115.2 (2009): 195-225. Web.

Jordan, Reed, and Megan Gallagher. Does School Choice Affect Gentrification? Rep. Urban

Institute and the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, Aug. 2015. Web. 25 Oct. 2017

Keels, Micere, and Sara Keene and Julia Burdick-Will. The Effects of Gentrification on

Neighborhood Public Schools. City & Community, vol. 12, no. 3, 13 Sept. 2013, pp.

238259.

Kennedy, Maureen, and Paul Leonard. Dealing with Neighborhood Change: A Primer on

Gentrification and Policy Choices. Brookings Institution Center on Urban and

Metropolitan Policy, 2001.

Kimelberg, Shelley Mcdonough, and Chase M. Billingham. "Attitudes Toward Diversity and the

School Choice Process." Urban Education 48.2 (2012): 198-231. Web.

Pearman, Francis A., II, and Walker A. Swain. "School Choice, Gentrification, and the Variable

Significance of Racial Stratification in Urban Neighborhoods." Sociology of Education

90.3 (2017): 213-35. Web.

Posey, Linn. "Middle- and Upper-Middle-Class Parent Action for Urban Public Schools:

Promise or Paradox?" Teachers College Record 114.1 (2012): 1-43. Web.

 Gill 19

Stillman, Jennifer Burns. Gentrification and Schools: The Process of Integration When Whites

Reverse Flight. Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.Web.

United States. Census Bureau. "Demographic Trends." Michigan: GPO, 2017. Web.

United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Student Count. Michigan School Data,

Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web

United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Graduation/Dropout Rate Michigan School

Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web

United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Top 30/Bottom 30 Analysis Michigan School

Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web.

 Gill 20

Appendix

Average Change of Midtown Charter

Math Scores from 2011-12 to 2015-
16
5.0%
3.9% 1.4% 0.3%
0.0%
0.0% Bot 30
Average -0.3% Mid 40
Average Average Top 30
-4.7%
-5.0%

-10.0%

economically disadvantaged non economically disadvantaged

Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Top 30/Bottom 30 Analysis Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web.

Average Change of Midtown Public

Math Scores from 2011-12 to 2015-
16
4.0%

2.0%
2.4%
1.3% 0.6%
0.0%
-0.4% Bot 30
Average Average Mid 40 -0.2% Top 30
Average
-2.0%
-3.6%
-4.0%

economically disadvantaged non economically disadvantaged

Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Top 30/Bottom 30 Analysis Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web.

Average Change of Reading/ELA

Scores from 2011-12 to 2015-16 of
Midtown Charter Schools
5.0%

2.0% 2.3% 2.2% 4.0%

0.0%
Average Bot 30 Average Mid 40 Average Top 30
-4.8%
-5.0% -6.4%

-10.0%

economically disadvantaged non economically disadvantaged

Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Top 30/Bottom 30 Analysis Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web.
 Gill 21

Average Change of Midtown Public

School Reading/ELA Scores from
2011-12 to 2015-16
2.0%

1.0%
1.1% 1.1% 1.1%
0.0%
-0.3%
Average Bot 30 -0.7%
Average Mid 40 Average Top 30
-1.0%
-2.3%
-2.0%

-3.0%

economically disadvantaged non economically disadvantaged

Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Top 30/Bottom 30 Analysis Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web.

Average Change in Dropout and

Graduation Rates in Midtown Charter
Schools

average change in dropout rate 1.90%

average change in graduation rate

-4.23%

-5.00% -4.00% -3.00% -2.00% -1.00% 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00%

Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Graduation/Dropout Rate Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web

Average Change of Dropout and

Graducation Rates in Midtown Public
Schools

average change in dropout rate 1.15%

average change in graduation rate 3.58%

0.00%0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%2.50%3.00%3.50%4.00%
Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Graduation/Dropout Rate Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web
 Gill 22

Average Change from 2002 to 2015

of Race Demographics in Midtown
Charter Schools
White 2.25%
2 or more races 1.72%
Native Hawaiian
-0.12%
Latino or Hispanic
-0.14%
Asian or Pacific Islander
-0.09%
-3.57% African Americans
American Indian
-0.03%
-4.00% -3.00% -2.00% -1.00% 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00%
Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Student Count Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web.

Average Change from 2002 to 2015

of Race Demographics in Midtown
Public Schools
White 0.19%
2 or more races 0.16%
Native Hawaiian 1.06%
Latino or Hispanic 0.68%
Asian or Pacific Islander 0.50%
-4.38% African Americans
American Indian
-0.17%
-5.00% -4.00% -3.00% -2.00% -1.00% 0.00% 1.00% 2.00%
Source: United States, Congress, Michigan School Data. Student Count Michigan School Data, Michigan Department of Education. 2017.Web.

Average Change from 2000 to 2015

of Race Demographics in Midtown
other 1.929%
White 7.787%
2 or more races 0.261%
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
-0.097%
Latino or Hispanic
-0.170%
Asian 0.425%
-8.875% African Americans
American-0.041%
Indian
-10.000% -5.000% 0.000% 5.000% 10.000%
Source: United States. Census Bureau. "Demographic Trends." Michigan: GPO, 2017. Web.