Magnet schools or modern segregation? Grandmothers question district ethics, transparency

ALBANY — Emotional testimony from two Dougherty County grandmothers during a recent Dougherty County School System Board of Education meeting has reignited broader questions about equity, transparency and ethics within the district’s magnet school system, including whether public schools should require admissions testing, whether selective academic programs unintentionally deepen disparities, and why key admissions and disciplinary policies were difficult for families to access. 

At the center of the discussion were the district’s magnet schools, including Lamar Reese Magnet School of the Arts and Lincoln Elementary Magnet School, both of which operate under selective admissions criteria within the district’s charter system structure. 

Under the district’s 2026-2027 admissions guidelines for Lamar Reese, students applying for kindergarten through fifth grade must complete and pass an entrance examination before being admitted. Older students must also submit report cards, attendance histories and disciplinary records demonstrating compliance with the school’s PBIS behavioral standards of “Be Respectful, Be Responsible, and Be Safe.” 

Students can be removed later from the magnet program for poor academic performance, behavioral infractions, attendance problems or failure to comply with parent-student contracts. District officials clarified during the board meeting that Lamar Reese is not a traditional neighborhood school but a countywide magnet program requiring application and admissions screening. 

For one grandmother, Peggy Bozeman, those policies became the focus of weeks of frustration after her grandson — an honor-roll student transferring from Lee County — initially failed the school’s entrance assessment. After intervention from district leadership, she said the child was later allowed to retake the same test and passed. 

Bozeman questioned how a student could fail an admissions assessment one week and demonstrate mastery of the same material the next.

“How did this boy, in two weeks, take a test that he had failed and then go back and master it in two weeks?” Bozeman asked. 

Bozeman also alleged that she was told the child “does not fit the norm of what we allow,” a statement she interpreted as evidence that admissions decisions extended beyond academics alone. Ultimately, the student was required to attend Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary School instead, where she said behavioral and discipline problems regularly impede learning. She said he had been reluctantly involved in repeated altercations with other students but intentionally avoided fighting because he feared losing the ability to participate in sports. 

“He’s been attacked twice,” Bozeman told board members. “But he never fought back.” 

The family, she said, encouraged him to focus on athletics as motivation to de-escalate conflicts.

“What we did was get him involved in a basketball program,” Bozeman said. “Because he liked basketball so much, when they tried to attack him, he said, ‘I can’t fight you. I can’t fight you.’” 

Bozeman repeatedly questioned why public school admissions standards appeared to function similarly to selective private institutions despite being funded by taxpayers.

“As a taxpayer, I should be able to see a policy,” Bozeman said. “I have paid the bills.” 

A second grandmother, Kimberly Whiters, described a similar struggle involving disciplinary procedures at Lincoln Elementary Magnet School after her kindergarten grandson was allegedly threatened with removal because of behavioral concerns. 

According to Whiters’ testimony, the family initially struggled to locate any publicly accessible disciplinary policies online or at the school itself.

“I called the superintendent’s office and was directed to the webpage. It wasn’t there,” Whiters said. “Then they said go to the school. Went to the school. They did not have a copy.” 

The experience became more troubling, she said, during a meeting with the child’s teacher and principal.

“You know how in kindergarten they get a Friday folder and the parents have to sign it, and you get a smiley face or sad face?” Whiters said. “The teacher went back to February and whited out the smiley faces and changed them to sad faces during the meeting.” 

When questioned in front of the principal, Whiters said the teacher explained the changes by saying, “Well, I was trying to make the record match the behavior.” Whiters questioned the purpose of recording and rewarding behavior if the positive or negative marks did not correspond in real time with the child’s behavior and said families cannot effectively partner with teachers if they are not receiving accurate reports from the classroom. 

Whiters said the incident also raised concerns about the reliability and fairness of the disciplinary process and left her wondering how less persistent families would navigate similar situations.

“If I was a parent that wasn’t persistent, or a grandparent that wasn’t persistent, then he would have just been removed and no one would have said anything,” Whiters said. 

Her comments then broadened into a larger critique of selective magnet programs and whether concentrating high-performing students into specialized campuses unintentionally harms traditional neighborhood schools.

“My concern is that we’re cherry-picking kids for these magnet programs,” Whiters said. “And where does that leave the other neighborhood schools?” 

She argued the structure mirrors long-standing educational inequities.

“We’re basically doing to them what has been done to black and brown children for a very long time,” Whiters said. 

Whiters described the magnet system as functioning like “a publicly funded private school” by filtering students through admissions testing, attendance standards and behavioral expectations before granting entry into schools with stronger academic outcomes. 

“You’re taking out the best students and putting them into the magnet schools,” Whiters said. “And then how are those schools that you’ve taken their best students from ever going to catch up?” 

She also questioned whether magnet school performance metrics can fairly be compared to neighborhood schools when magnet campuses are permitted to selectively admit students.

“I expect Lincoln to score high,” Whiters said. “I expect Lamar Reese to score high because you’ve taken out many of the issues these teachers would have to deal with on a regular basis. You’re getting the cream of the crop.” 

The testimony highlighted broader policy questions increasingly debated nationwide as districts expand magnet and charter-style academic programs inside public school systems. Supporters of selective magnet schools argue the programs provide rigorous academic environments, encourage parental involvement and offer families educational choice within public education. Advocates also contend that admissions standards help maintain specialized arts, STEM or college preparatory curricula requiring additional student readiness and commitment. 

Critics, however, argue that requiring testing, behavioral screenings and attendance histories for publicly funded schools can unintentionally exclude vulnerable students — particularly students with disabilities, behavioral challenges, unstable home lives or limited early educational access. 

Education equity researchers also have questioned whether concentrating additional resources, experienced teachers and highly engaged families into selective campuses leaves neighborhood schools with disproportionate concentrations of academic and behavioral challenges while simultaneously reducing their access to top-performing peer influences. In the wake of what the district calls “strategic” and intentional spending beyond the budget on these target schools, additional questions remain unanswered. 

The concerns raised in Dougherty County also centered heavily on transparency. Although the district maintains formal admissions procedures for Lamar Reese and other magnet schools, both grandmothers testified they struggled for weeks to locate those policies online or obtain copies directly from administrators. 

At the time of the board meeting, the admissions and disciplinary procedures referenced by district officials were not visibly accessible through either the district’s primary webpage or individual school webpages, according to the families’ testimony. 

For critics, the issue extends beyond individual admissions disputes into larger questions about accountability inside a public education system funded by taxpayers but increasingly structured around selective access. For supporters, magnet schools remain one of the few tools districts have to retain families seeking specialized academic opportunities that might otherwise leave for private schools or neighboring districts. 

The debate now unfolding inside the Dougherty County School System reflects a growing national tension within public education itself: whether academic choice programs expand opportunity or unintentionally redistribute it.