The debate over the legality of Lowell Excessive College’s former educational admissions coverage continued on Monday, with the distinguished faculty’s alumni affiliation asserting that San Francisco Board of Schooling members have mischaracterized the apply as a violation of state schooling legislation.
In a letter to Danielle Houck, San Francisco Unified’s chief normal counsel, the president of the Lowell Alumni Affiliation mentioned that district officers have been misinterpreting a provision within the state Schooling Code once they mentioned they believed that Lowell’s educational admissions coverage violated the legislation. Kate Lazarus, the group’s president, wrote that state legislation doesn’t bar the varsity from utilizing educational standards to find out admission.
Questions on whether or not the coverage is authorized have swirled for many years. Lowell is a complete highschool that has lengthy used candidates’ educational efficiency to find out admission, stirring authorized and moral debates amongst mother and father and politicians.
The college board changed Lowell’s aggressive educational admission course of with a now-temporary lottery-based admissions course of final 12 months in an effort to diversify the coed physique. Critics of the educational admission course of argued it was elitist and racist towards Black and brown college students, who have been under-represented within the faculty. For the reason that lottery system was applied, Lowell has grew to become extra numerous; it now has extra Black and Hispanic college students in its ninth-grade class this 12 months than at any time in no less than the previous 25 years.
Supporters mentioned it created a extra rigorous and acceptable studying atmosphere for extremely motivated and high-achieving college students and that holding the lottery system would hurt Asian American college students, who have been over-represented within the faculty.
The legislation in query does prohibit faculties from contemplating candidates’ educational or athletic efficiency for admission, nevertheless it creates an exception for “specialised faculties or applications” as long as the admissions standards apply to all candidates.
In her letter Monday, Lazarus characterised Lowell as being a “specialised faculty,” which might give it the authorized inexperienced mild to be extremely selective in its admission course of.
“This legislation had nothing to do with educational admissions at faculties like Lowell,” Lazarus wrote.
Nonetheless, Lowell isn’t formally acknowledged by the state as a specialised faculty, and whereas its college students are thought-about high-achieving, it isn’t formally acknowledged as a gifted program both.
Board members prior to now have mentioned they weren’t certain whether or not Lowell’s admission practices — in place because the faculty was based in 1856 — met the necessities of the legislation from the Nineteen Nineties. Many have believed that Lowell was grandfathered in and due to this fact not topic to it.
Lazarus mentioned in her letter that the varsity “has been acknowledged for many years earlier than the legislation’s enactment as a specialised faculty centered on the wants of high-potential, highly-motivated college students.” She mentioned that if the educational admission course of have been unlawful, the California Division of Schooling would have intervened by now.
No less than a number of present board members have mentioned they consider the educational admission coverage is illegitimate and that the district can’t revert to it. District officers have mentioned that extra work must be accomplished earlier than the district can decide on a brand new admissions coverage. Figuring out whether or not educational admissions are authorized at Lowell may require opinions from the Division of Schooling, the Legal professional Common’s Workplace or different neighborhood or authorized organizations.
Officers on either side of the talk, together with Lazarus, have expressed assist for additional dialogue of the matter with higher stakeholder enter after a choose initially overturned the choice to change to a lottery system due to procedural violations.
“The 1st step: Let’s determine what’s authorized and what’s not, after which have the moral, strategic and coverage debate,” board member Matt Alexander mentioned lately. “It’s going to be laborious. On all these points, it’s difficult.
“Whatever the end result, there must be an open dialogue.”
San Francisco Chronicle employees author Jill Tucker contributed to this report.
Andy Picon (he/him) is a San Francisco Chronicle employees author. E mail: andy.picon@hearst.com Twitter: @andpicon