In this New York Times article I weigh in on the dilemma facing the NYC Department of Education as it plans for middle and high school admissions in 2020-21 without the benefit of student achievement measures typically used for screened schools admissions.
My position isn't exactly as characterized in the article, though it's close. I worry that eliminating screens entirely next year would put too much stress on a system that is already dealing with a lot. I'd rather see a stopgap measure where schools are allowed (perhaps even encouraged) to suspend screens voluntarily. Schools not willing or prepared to do this could adopt a common metric using available student achievement data (something like a composite score). This would bring much-needed transparency to an already-chaotic system.
Most importantly, as Eliza Shapiro writes in this article, I think it is important we take a step back and ask what the instructional purpose of screens are, and whether the current system of sorting students into separate schools is the best way to meet that purpose. This time in history should also remind us that there are considerations at play beyond efficiency in instruction. Ultimately, any benefits of screened school admissions need to be weighed against the costs of segregation that result.