1. Enrollment and Spending in the Cambridge Public Schools: Cambridge’s Declining Investment in its Public School System from 2000 to the Present An Analysis Developed by CPS parent Emily Dexter, Ed.D., February 2013 emilydexter@comcast.net

2. Summary Between 2001 and 2007, public school enrollment in Cambridge decreased by 20%, and is now only gradually recovering. Cambridge also decreased its investment in its school system: Between 2002 and 2012, Cambridge’s spending on its public school system decreased from 34% of the total city budget in 2002 to only 30% of the total city budget in 2012. The largest enrollment decrease was in middle-income “Paid Lunch” students, decreasing the city’s ability to have economically integrated schools. Cambridge needs to adopt policies, practices, and programs that will achieve two goals: 1) decrease achievement gaps between low-income and non-low-income students and between African American and Latino students as compared with white and Asian students; and increase enrollment by attracting middle income families of all races, ethnicities, and nationalities to Cambridge. One promising program would be a citywide K-5 world language program. Such a program would offer low-income students a benefit not available in other school districts, and would attract new middle-income families to Cambridge.

3. One of the largest challenges the Cambridge Public Schools faces is maintaining and increasing enrollment. In 2000, CPS enrollment was 7,367 students. In 2012 it was 6,224 students.

4. In particular, Cambridge runs the risk of not enrolling enough middle-income students to keep the schools economically integrated and diverse.

5. Source: Unless stated otherwise, all CPS enrollment figures are from the CPS FY11 Adopted Budget and FY13 Proposed Budget. Over 6 years, between 2001 and 2007, Cambridge’s enrollment dropped by 1,570 students (21%). Enrollment began to increase again in 2008. Over the past 5 years it has regained 427 students, a little more than one-fourth of what it lost.

7. Belmont and Arlington did not experience the same enrollment decrease in the first half of the 2000s.

8. While Cambridge’s enrollment decreased by 21% between 2000 and 2007, Belmont and Arlington’s enrollment increased by 5% and 8% respectively during that time period. Source for Arlington and Belmont enrollment figures: Mass DESE website.

9. Is it housing prices? Cambridge & Brookline Brookline is Cambridge’s main competitor for middle class, college-educated parents of all races and ethnicities who want to live in a cosmopolitan, semi-urban environment. Housing prices and cost-of-living in Brookline are just as high as in Cambridge, and showed the same steep increases in the 2000s. Brookline, however, did not suffered a dramatic decrease in its school enrollment like Cambridge did.

10. Cambridge 2011 Cost of living index = 145.0 (“very high”) Brookline 2011 Cost of living index = 146.1 (“very high”)

11. In 5 years, Brookline is projected to have 720 more students than CPS. Source for Brookline enrollment: Brookline Adopted Budget FY12 and Brookline Proposed Budget, FY13.

12. How did the decline in Cambridge’s enrollment affect the demographics of its student population?

13. Most of the CPS enrollment decline was in non-low-income (Paid Lunch) students, whose numbers went from 4,525 in 2000 to 3,055 in 2005. Source for data on CPS SES and race-based enrollments: Mass DESE website.

15. The future of Cambridge’s SES balance: Does it matter if middle-income families choose Brookline? Derek W. Black, professor at Howard University School of Law, wrote an 2012 article called, “Middle-Income Peers as Educational Resources and the Constitutional Right to Access.”

16. “Legally relevant educational resources tend to be conceptualized as those things schools can buy, develop, or create that have positive impacts on educational outcomes. This conceptualization is overly narrow and ignores reality. Schools enjoy any number of important re- sources that they do not and cannot buy, such as the communities, public services, partnerships, and private industries surrounding them that support the educational environment. The more important and direct noneconomic resource, however, is a school district’s middle- income students. Common sense and social science indicate that students learn not only from their teachers, but also from their peers. Middle-income peers (and their parents), in particular, bring a host of experiences, outside learning, and high expectations to schools that positively impact other students in their schools. The percentage of middle income students in a school can be more important to the educational achievement of all students in that school than any other resource or factor. Students, regardless of their individual socioeconomic status or race, achieve at higher levels in predominantly middle class schools and at lower levels in predominantly poor schools. In short, although not a traditional resource that schools can buy, middle- income students are an invaluable resource that exerts significant influence on the achievement of all students.” Derek W. Black, in Boston College Review, 32, 2, p. 337. (Bold is my emphases.)

17. Cambridge spending on schools: What role does spending play in enrollment increase or decline?

20. Per Pupil Spending One of the reason’s Cambridge’s per pupil spending is so high is not because Cambridge is lavish with its school budgets at the school level. It is because enrollment currently is low. Though we have fewer teachers now than in 2000, we are still supporting the same number of curriculum coordinators, central office administrators, and maintenance workers, and heating almost the same number of buildings as we did when we had 7,500 students. Cambridge also includes many services in its school budget that other cities include in their human services budget, such as preschool costs, which inflate its per pupil spending statistics. In addition, according to the Massachusetts Department of Elementary an Secondary Education (DESE), Cambridge spends more on administrative costs ($1,204 per pupil in 2010-11) than comparable districts like Brookline ($750 per pupil) or Newton ($517 per pupil).

21. Chicken or egg? The decrease in school spending coincided with: The decrease in total enrollment The decrease in the percentage of Paid Lunch students The decrease in the percentage of white students Q: Did enrollment decrease because Cambridge reduced its investment in its schools? Q: Did Cambridge reduce its investment in its schools because middle class and white enrollment decreased?

22. Total ENROLLMENT

24. Recent enrollment trends Though CPS enrollment began to increase in 2008, the increases have been smaller than predicted based on the 5-years-prior birthrate.

27. The leading edge of the CPS enrollment increase is the Amigos Spanish immersion school. In 2013, for the second year in a row, Amigos was the number one choice of all kindergarten registrants and of Paid Lunch families. Curriculum innovation, such as JK-5 world language instruction, could help keep middle-income families in the Cambridge Public School System. Brookline passed a property tax override in 2008 in order to implement a district- wide K-6 world language program, which is now in its 5 th year.

28. 17% (97) of kindergarten 1 st round registrants listed Amigos as their 1 st choice. 84 were Paid Lunch. Amigos has 76 kindergarten spaces.

29. CONCLUSIONS Cambridge lost many middle class students in the early 2000s, and it wasn’t only because of increasing housing prices; i.e. it reflected a decision, on the part of some families with choices, not to live in Cambridge or, if they stayed in Cambridge, to enroll in private, parochial, or charter schools instead of the public schools. This middle class flight coincided with a decrease in city’s investment in the schools in what was probably a self-perpetuating cycle: the less investment, the more flight; the more flight, the less investment. Cambridge’s enrollment is now increasing, but not at the rate it has predicted, and not at the rate of its close competitor, Brookline. Continued

30. CONCLUSIONS, continued Cambridge values schools that are racially and economically integrated and culturally and linguistically diverse. It cannot maintain this diversity and avoid racial and economic segregation if its enrollment doesn’t increase and if it doesn’t enroll a higher proportion of middle income students. Student achievement research suggests that low-income and middle- income students show lower achievement in schools with a high concentration of low-income students; i.e. middle income students are a valuable resource when it comes to academic achievement. Some studies define “high-poverty schools” as those with more than 50% Free/Reduced lunch students. Cambridge needs to pursue policies and practices that will maintain and increase enrollment while also increasing the quality of its schools and the racial and economic integration of the school populations. Curriculum innovations such as JK-5 world language instruction could help keep middle-income families in Cambridge, while providing a valuable advantage to low-income students in the district.

31. For information and resources on school integration issues, see: www.school-diversity.org

32. Thank you for your interest in public school enrollment in Cambridge. If you have questions or comments about this analysis, please contact CPS parent Emily Dexter, Ed.D.: emilydexter@post.harvard.edu.