Sunday, July 27, 2014
YOLO COUNTY NEWS
99 CENTS

Dubious legal advice drove GATE lottery decision

By Carlton Larson

When the Board of Trustees of the Davis school district voted to implement a lottery for GATE admissions, it relied heavily on the legal advice provided by the board’s counsel, who contended that the current method of GATE selection exposed the district to the risk of a lawsuit. As several board members suggested, the lottery seemed to be the only legally permissible option.

The underlying problem is that the number of students deemed GATE-qualified exceeds the number of GATE seats. GATE-qualified students are all students scoring in the 96th percentile or higher on a standardized test, as well as students with one “risk factor” who score at the 95th percentile and students with two risk factors who qualify at the 94th percentile.

The district defines risk factors as economic disadvantage, environmental disadvantage, health problems, language or cultural disadvantage, and social and emotional problems.

Under the prior placement policy, GATE classrooms were filled first with students scoring at the 99th percentile, then the 98th and so on down the line. Because the students with two risk factors and a 94th percentile score always came last, they were more likely not to be placed in a GATE classroom.

The board has refused to release any formal opinions prepared by its counsel, so my understanding of her legal objection to this procedure is based on what she publicly presented to the board. The argument appears to be this: The existing selection procedure risked a disparate impact on what the counsel termed “protected classes.” The students who qualified in part because of risk factors were less likely to secure GATE placement than those students who did not. According to the counsel, this consequence was unlawful, and the only solution was to implement a placement lottery from among all GATE-qualified students.

Unfortunately, this advice is almost certainly wrong. I approach this issue not as a GATE parent (I have no children in the Davis school system), but as a professor at the UC Davis School of Law, where I teach and write about, among other things, equal access to public education.

As I listened to the counsel’s presentation to the board, I could not believe what I was hearing. Four other UC Davis law school professors, including some of the nation’s most distinguished anti-discrimination scholars, were with me in the audience and they all agreed that the counsel had offered highly dubious advice.

There is obviously no explicit discrimination against students with risk factors, since many will score in the 96th to 99th percentiles. Indeed, promising students with risk factors are specifically sought out to be retested with a separate, non-verbal test called the TONI.

Approximately one-third of the students who ultimately qualify for GATE do so by scoring in the 96th to 99th percentiles on the TONI. Moreover, few, if any, of the risk factors constitute “protected classes” under federal or state law.

But even if they were protected classes, the counsel’s argument still would fail for the simple reason that it proves too much. If standardized test scores are an impermissible basis for GATE placement, surely they also must be impermissible for GATE qualification.

If counsel is correct, choosing a threshold of 94 percent with risk factors rather than 92 percent with risk factors also would be illegal, because of the disparate impact on students with risk factors. So would choosing 90 percent rather than 92 percent, and so on. The whole program would seemingly be invalid. But not just GATE — the use of the SAT in college admissions and the use of Advanced Placement tests to award college credit would be equally unlawful.

I often instruct my students not to leave their common sense behind when analyzing legal issues. If a line of argument leads to absurd results, it probably is flawed. The counsel’s analysis logically extends to any school program that has a limited number of seats. There could be tryouts for a school orchestra, but a lottery would be necessary to determine which violinist sat in the first chair. There could be tryouts for the varsity football team, but the selection of the starting quarterback would need to be made by lottery from among all qualified quarterbacks.

Counsel was asked about this specific example during the hearing, and although the answer was garbled, she seemed to say that in certain circumstances a lottery would be required for filling positions on a sports team. If this is the logical consequence of her argument, then the analysis has gone seriously off the rails.

One would expect that advice to drastically change the district’s placement policy would be backed up by some substantial legal authority, or even the experience of other school districts. But there is nothing in the United States Constitution, in federal statutory law, or in state law that requires or even suggests that an admissions lottery is required in the circumstances in which Davis finds itself.

No published judicial decision has ever held that a lottery is required to ensure non-discriminatory access to a gifted program. We like to think of ourselves as special in Davis, but it is surprising indeed to discover that the laws themselves operate differently here.

The whole issue arose from a complaint filed by a parent alleging differing treatment of two standardized tests (an easy problem to fix). It did not seek a lottery. The agreement by which that complaint was settled did not require a lottery either. Yet somehow the lottery emerged as a legal mandate to fend off potential litigation. Perversely, the lottery “solution” will generate precisely the opposite result — lawsuits filed by parents of children rejected by the lottery.

As an educator, I am also deeply concerned by the policy consequences of the board’s decision, which include the real possibility that the highest-scoring students will be excluded from GATE classrooms entirely. The use of percentiles generally obscures the very significant differences in performance among the highest scorers on standardized tests.

The 2012 LSAT, which is used in law school admissions, is a good example. The test had 101 questions. Fifteen correct answers separated a student at the 26.1 percentile (45 correct) from a student at the 59.7 percentile (60 correct). But 15 correct answers also separated the 94.6 percentile (81 correct) from the 99.9 percentile (96 correct).

For elementary students, there is similarly a very real difference between reading two grades above grade level and reading 10 grades above grade level. The former student might benefit from GATE, but for the latter student, GATE is critical. The alternatives for that child are either intense classroom disengagement or skipping several grades, resulting in a classroom placement where she may lag socially and physically behind her classmates.

Under the old placement regime, this child would have been guaranteed admission to GATE; under the lottery, she may well be excluded entirely. It is inconceivable to me why any school system would exclude its most precocious students from its most challenging curriculum. It is not just educational malpractice; it is, quite simply, cruel.

There are serious and legitimate issues currently being debated about the size, scope and structure of the current GATE program. But the lottery issue is not difficult. It is not required by any sensible interpretation of the law, has significant harmful effects and should be abolished immediately.

— Carlton Larson is a professor at the UC Davis School of Law.

Comments

comments

Special to The Enterprise

.

News

Community gardens stretch food dollars, study finds

By Special to The Enterprise | From Page: A1 | Gallery

 
Zombies by rail: It’s not just a show, it’s a trip

By Evan Arnold-Gordon | From Page: A1 | Gallery

Fatal Covell Boulevard crash recalled in court

By Lauren Keene | From Page: A1

 
Humphrey Fellows will host Global Forum

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A1 | Gallery

Wildfire spurs evacuation of 700 homes

By The Associated Press | From Page: A2

 
State can’t say if it’s meeting drought goal

By The Associated Press | From Page: A2

 
Rairdan joins race for Davis school board

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A2

Ukraine launches offensive to retake Donetsk

By The Associated Press | From Page: A2

 
Israel extends Gaza truce through Sunday

By The Associated Press | From Page: A2

New ordinance aims to prevent nut thefts from orchards

By Anne Ternus-Bellamy | From Page: A4

 
Biggest book sale to date opens Friday at Davis library

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A4

Luna family matriarch turns 100

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A4 | Gallery

 
 
Discussion of oil by rail EIR planned Sunday

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A5

 
Mace Innovation Center is focus of meeting

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A5

Freeway crash injures two drivers

By Lauren Keene | From Page: A5

 
Museum wants your old Davis High School yearbooks

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A5

Affordable housing forum planned in Davis

By Special to The Enterprise | From Page: A5

 
Protesters gather at Primate Center

By Tanya Perez | From Page: A8

 
State awards $40,000 for historic property survey

By Lily Holmes | From Page: A8

Free blood pressure screenings offered

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A9

 
Vanguard hosts economic development director

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A9

Get a sneak peek at documentary trailer

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A9

 
Davis Chamber Choir sings short summer program

By Jeff Hudson | From Page: A9

Tasting event benefits Yolo Land Trust

By Lily Holmes | From Page: A9

 
At the Pond: From Davis, it’s easy to get back to nature

By Jean Jackman | From Page: A10 | Gallery

Tickets on sale now for DHS Hall of Fame dinner

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A11

 
.

Forum

Feels like a million miles away

By Creators Syndicate | From Page: A7

 
Here’s what you need for a perfect wedding

By Marion Franck | From Page: A7

 
Check doctors’ vitals before they check yours

By The Associated Press | From Page: A7

Husband’s let himself go

By Creators Syndicate | From Page: A14

 
Questions on water rights

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A16, 1 Comment

Campus turns on the tap

By Our View | From Page: A16

 
So, what’s in a week’s worth of waste?

By Michelle Millet | From Page: A16

Pat Oliphant cartoon

By Debbie Davis | From Page: A16

 
Golf tourney was a big success

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A16

We can do more to help

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A17

 
New playground is wonderful

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A17

Just Us in Davis: Little Rock Nine hero to celebrate with Davis youths

By Jann L. Murray-Garcia | From Page: A17 | Gallery

 
.

Sports

Sutherland presents 1st clinic; golf column on its way

By Bruce Gallaudet | From Page: B1 | Gallery

 
New Korematsu teacher is an American Ninja Warrior

By Bruce Gallaudet | From Page: B1 | Gallery

Furyk opens 3-shot lead in Canadian Open

By The Associated Press | From Page: B1

 
Gray wins 6th straight, A’s 4 HRs beat Texas 5-1

By The Associated Press | From Page: B1

Kershaw throws 2-hitter as Dodgers beat Giants 5-0

By The Associated Press | From Page: B1

 
Nibali set to cruise to Tour victory

By The Associated Press | From Page: B2

Area sports briefs: River Cats take Game 1 of doubleheader

By Special to The Enterprise | From Page: B4

 
.

Features

.

Arts

.

Business

Companies will collaborate on crop insect control

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A13

 
Developer’s commitments: affordable and green

By Special to The Enterprise | From Page: A13 | Gallery

Go back to school with Great Clips

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A15

 
Lagerstrom represents Davis at Mary Kay seminar

By Special to The Enterprise | From Page: A15

UC Davis Health System earns ‘Most Wired’ award

By Charles Casey | From Page: A15

 
Bartholomew hires new associate

By Enterprise staff | From Page: A15

Yolo County real estate sales

By Zoe Juanitas | From Page: A15

 
.

Obituaries

Carlton Hope Meister

By Special to The Enterprise | From Page: A4

 
Jonathan Eric Hollander

By Special to The Enterprise | From Page: A4

.

Comics

Comics: Sunday, July 27, 2014

By Creator | From Page: A6