Richard Rothstein has written brilliantly for years about the importance of equity in education. He has written brilliantly about the interaction of race, class, and poverty, and its effects on educational outcomes. His book Class and Schools is a classic in the study of poverty and education. Recently, he has studied federal policy and segregation. In this post, he describes a new study that he has completed about how Ferguson, Missouri, became what it is today.
He writes:
I’ve spent several years studying the evolution of residential segregation nationwide, motivated in part by a conviction that the black-white achievement gap cannot be closed while low-income black children are isolated in segregated schools, that schools cannot be integrated unless neighborhoods are integrated, and that neighborhoods cannot be integrated unless we remedy the public policies that have created and support neighborhood segregation.
When Ferguson, Missouri, erupted in August, I suspected that federal, state and local policy had purposefully segregated St. Louis County, because this had occurred in so many other metropolises. After looking into the history of Ferguson, St. Louis, and the city’s other suburbs, I confirmed these were no different. The Economic Policy Institute has now published a report documenting the basis for this conclusion, and the American Prospect has published a summary of the report in an article in the current issue.
Since a Ferguson policeman shot and killed an unarmed black teenager, we’ve paid considerable attention to that town. If we’ve not been looking closely at our evolving demographic patterns, we were surprised to see ghetto conditions we had come to associate with inner cities now duplicated in almost every respect in a formerly white suburban community: racially segregated neighborhoods with high poverty and unemployment, poor student achievement in overwhelmingly black schools, oppressive policing, abandoned homes, and community powerlessness.
Media accounts of how Ferguson became Ferguson have typically explained that when African Americans moved to this suburb (and others like it), “white flight” followed, abandoning the town to African Americans who were trying to escape poor schools in the city. The conventional explanation adds that African Americans moved to a few places like Ferguson, not the suburbs generally, because prejudiced realtors steered black homebuyers away from other white suburbs. And in any event, those other suburbs were able to preserve their middle class environments by enacting zoning rules that required only expensive single family homes.
No doubt, private prejudice and suburbanites’ desire for homogenous middle-class environments contributed to segregation in St. Louis and other metropolitan areas. But these explanations are too partial, and too conveniently excuse public policy from responsibility. A more powerful cause of metropolitan segregation in St. Louis and nationwide has been the explicit intents of federal, state, and local governments to create racially segregated metropolises.
Many of these explicitly segregationist governmental actions ended in the late 20th century but continue to determine today’s racial segregation patterns; ongoing segregation is not the unintended by-product of race-neutral policies. In St. Louis these actions included zoning rules that classified white neighborhoods as residential and black neighborhoods as commercial or industrial; segregated public housing projects to replace integrated low-income areas; federal subsidies for suburban development conditioned on African American exclusion; federal and local requirements for and enforcement of property deeds and neighborhood agreements that prohibited re-sale of white-owned property to or occupancy by African Americans; tax favoritism for private institutions that enforced segregation; municipal boundary lines designed to separate black neighborhoods from white ones and to deny necessary services to the former; real estate, insurance, and banking regulators who tolerated and sometimes required racial segregation; and urban renewal plans whose purpose was to shift black populations from central cities like St. Louis to inner-ring suburbs like Ferguson.
Governmental actions in support of a segregated labor market supplemented these racial housing policies and prevented most African Americans from acquiring the economic strength to move to middle class communities, even if they had been permitted to do so.
White flight certainly existed, and racial prejudice was certainly behind it, but not racial prejudice alone. Government turned black neighborhoods into overcrowded slums and then white families came to associate African Americans with slum characteristics. White homeowners then fled when African Americans moved nearby, fearing their new neighbors would bring slum conditions with them.
That government, not mere private prejudice, was responsible for segregating greater St. Louis was once conventional informed opinion. A federal appeals court declared 40 years ago that “segregated housing in the St. Louis metropolitan area was … in large measure the result of deliberate racial discrimination in the housing market by the real estate industry and by agencies of the federal, state, and local governments.” Similar observations accurately describe every other large metropolitan area. This history, however, has now largely been forgotten.
When we blame private prejudice and snobbishness for contemporary segregation, we not only whitewash our own history but avoid considering whether new policies might instead promote an integrated community. The federal government’s response to the Ferguson “Troubles” has been to treat the town as an isolated embarrassment, not a reflection of the nation in which it is embedded. The Department of Justice is investigating the killing of teenager Michael Brown and the practices of the Ferguson police department, but aside from the president’s concern that perhaps we have militarized all police forces too much, no broader inferences from the August events are being drawn.
The conditions that created Ferguson cannot be addressed without remedying a century of public policy that segregated our metropolitan landscape. Remedies are unlikely if we fail to recognize these policies and how their effects have endured.

During the initial days and weeks following the Ferguson tragedy, we were faced with a Walmart shooting in white suburban Beavercreek, Ohio, near Dayton. A black man was in the store and he picked up an air rifle that looked like a real gun. He was standingn in the store, holding it, talking on the phone. Someone called 911 and the police came in and shot and killed him. Ohio has open carry laws. If it had been a real gun, he’d have been allowed to carry it. A frightened woman heard the shots, had a heart attack, and died. The officer was acquitted of any wrong doing, although 2 people died because of his rapid decision.
So in Ohio we did not set Ferguson’s incident aside. We thought that the problem is not only there, but potentially everywhere…for the reasons listed in this blog post.
LikeLike
It has happened in Utah as well. An African American young man was playing around with a samurai sword (perhaps real, perhaps a toy, it depends on who you ask). He was outside a shopping complex. Someone called 911 and he was eventually shot. The police say that he was charging them, and the official autopsy hasn’t come out yet, but the private autopsy done for the family shows he was shot five times from behind.
LikeLike
I have a problem with Stand Your Ground and police rights to shoot when they “think” they are in danger. Too many times they are wrong.
LikeLike
Deb.. it amazes me how selective media coverage is. I wonder how many readers not from Ohio were totally unaware of this tragedy you mention? What a horror.
As usual, Rothstein sets forth the details of a harsh reality in such a level-headed and clear manner. There are so many “Ferguson’s” in this nation now. Many title one schools are located in what used to be former working or middle class suburbs that have now become povertyBURBS. They became this way by the very manner in which Rothstein describes. It pains me when I see yet another grocery store in these neighborhoods close down and yet another Seven Eleven open in its place. It pains me to see bus route schedules in these areas less frequent but much more frequent in wealthier neighborhoods when often the people living in these poorer neighborhoods rely on buses to get to work, visit a doctor or to go to a grocery store. It is painful to see segregation like this and to know that public policy is the GREAT ENABLER.
LikeLike
That is why I posted, Art. In the news here, there WERE comparisons, there WERE recognitions about the fact that this isn’t isolated, not at all. BUT, we also had those who were denying the comparisons, crying political posturing, etc. It is always this way.
SW Ohio is full of knee-jerk types who immediately cry out with hidden racist commentary, because, being in the district of John Boehner himself, there are many people who have a lot of money, a lot of privilege, and a lot of segregated communities. However, there are many people in those communities who are are Asian, Indian, European, as well as white Americans. Many vote to protect “their” money, in the form of avoiding taxes. People from other should go to board meetings to “observe” the attitude of the taxpayers who have, say, large property holdings that they inherited, who have no interest in the school other than to avoid chipping in, and when there is a chance that any money would go to the Cincinnati Public Schools, they are adamantly against it. I have attended out of curiosity. It is not a pretty thing.
So, I agree with the observations of Richard Rothstein. “Government” is what we like to blame, but particularly in local school districts, “government” is the local voter. When people care about protecting their money to the point of disenfranchising other economic classes or races, the problem is the voters’ attitudes about people other than themselves, about assumptions made and generalized unfairly.
There is too much of a tendancy to look outside of self for blamd instead of looking in the mirror. Too many people only care what they can do for their own children, and what THEY can get for “free” … but not allowing the same opportunity for others, no matter their neighborhood. What kid asks to be born anywhere? It makes my brain hurt to try to consider the calousness and hatefulness with which many of us treat those who are unlike ourselves.
I grew up rather insulated from diverse cultures and religions. I then self-insulated for some years. When my sons went to the University of Cincinnati, did some traveling abroad, had friends who were from other races, cultures, and religions, I realized that I was insulating myself from something imaginary. That changed my political views somewhat. I am morally conservative, but I am not voting for those that oppress other religions or for those who sabotage the middle class and the poor. I will not vote for people who are against public education if I am aware of such.
Life is about learning. And, giving to others is not to be avoided. We can’t take it with us.
LikeLike
Very interesting.
Ordering his book now.
LikeLike
And the anti-“big gubmint” crowd is strangely[?] silent when “big gubmint” incentivizes, mandates and manipulates in order to achieve the outcomes outlined by Richard Rothstein.
😡
It’s quite another matter when word and deed come to providing every parent and student a well-resourced and fully supported public school.
Grab some pearls, find a couch, and start repeating over and over again such pearls of EduBiz Jargon as “you can’t fix problems by throwing money at them.”
Works for the self-styled “education reform” crowd, but not so well for the rest of us…
$70,000 ‘severance pay’ for John Deasy, anyone?
😎
LikeLike
$70,000 for Deasy was a steal, no? Some of them leave with 6 figures. Anyone and everyone on every internet paper where comments can be left, should definitely write the truth. A coverup of his corruption continues, and accolades of his “accomplishments” abound. It makes me ill. I am new to the game, but I’m reading bad stuff about his interim replacement and I wonder, is this the best they can do in LA? Where is the real change?
LikeLike
Yes, that is a steal. We had to pay over $200,000 to get rid of Brizzard.
LikeLike
Dienne: it is clear that you haven’t studied the New Math of the Potemkin Village Business Plan for $tudent $ucce$$…
The word “Deasy” has only five letters; the word “Brizzard” has eight. When you’re a self-styled “education reformer” that lives and dies by by the metrics that feed “what you can’t measure you can’t control” and that prop up “management by fear”—
And you had remarkable accomplishments like John Deasy where a 12% graduation rate is really only 2% when you leave out all those pesky at-risk students he is allegedly so passionate about—
Then severance pay is by the pound, er, letter. That’s a hard data point. You’re telling me that 5 is bigger and better than 8? Sheesh…
Clearly you need reeducation. Perhaps you have been affected by the comments of Sad Teacher in support of genuine teaching and learning and you are straying from the true path of the “new civil rights movement of our time” by rejecting CCSS ‘closet’ reading for that now-discredited trio of logic, decency and critical thinking.
I suggest you purchase an advance copy of the new “Privatizer EduMath For Dummies” being co-authored by “Dr.” John Deasy and “Dr.” Terence Carter and “Dr.” Steve Perry.
It’s all going to be in there, and it’s not a long read, what will all the pictures to color and very large fonts and short short words—5 pages max, 10 if you count all the laudatory prefaces by the Gates, Broad, Walton and Koch foundations.
Happy trails.
😎
LikeLike
They throw the money at themselves rather than at the problem.
LikeLike
I don’t disagree that public policy has played a primary role in segregation, but we wouldn’t have the public policies we do without racism.
It’s not “market forces.” It’s not people of color not wanting to live in integrated neighborhoods (quite the opposite is true). It’s racism that makes integration a third rail for politicians. It’s racism that has led to such weak and spotty enforcement of fair housing laws, and why we mostly tolerate the shameful practices of the real estate and banking industries. We’re not “post-racial” and these issues aren’t about class as opposed to race.
Unfortunately, America seems to be in deep denial about this stuff.
LikeLike
I thought you were told to stop badmouthing public schools. Now you’re badmouthing America!
LikeLike
This is exactly what is happening to the students at my school! Between zoning, industrialization, and businesses, the students who attend my school are from 2 major apartment complexes. Slum lord living! These apartments are approximately 7-9 miles away which is a 1/2 hour bus ride – one way. That drive crosses under a major interstate highway, abandoned areas of land, restaurants, car dealerships, juvenile detention center, a run down bar, the water treatment facility, a year-round golf range, gas stations, a closed down high school (which our students would have gone to), and the list goes one. This is the boundary that the district created. My school is located in a quaint lower-end, middle-class neighborhood. But more than 90% of our students come from these slum-villes. These 2 apartment complexes are state subsidized and refugee housing assisted.
When you look at the data going back to 2005 when the boundaries changed, it is so obvious that as the demographics of our students from high-risk, low-income/poverty, increasing numbers of ethnicities that outweigh white kids (who are also at risk), our test scores decreased. The lines and bars on the graphs are mirror images of each other. A parent with limited English and math skills, can look at the data and interpret it. We are not a neighborhood school! We have over 40 different languages spoken; extreme chronic absenteeism and mobility; our building is falling apart; insanely overcrowded classrooms; high numbers of students with severe learning difficulties, inadequate social skills and mental/emotional conditions -like PTS in our refugees; close to 100% of our students on free-reduced meals… I think I’ve painted a decent picture of our students and their situations. All of this are in the boundaries for my school; the boundary that the district created.
Are these unintended outcomes? Probably, but the district refuses to recognize that, and to do something about it like change the boundaries so we have a more equitable representation of students. We were literally told by our superintendent, “That’s not gonna happen.”
Obviously, our school is a failing school with all these challenges at our feet. The district recognizes that to the point that they applied for the Federal School Improvement Grant, to ‘help’ us. Let’s make your school a turn-around school with the same students as last year and the year before… The simple fact that the district even applied for the grant, says that my colleagues and I are failing teachers. For the 8 years I’ve been at my school, I have never worked with such dedicated, committed, and caring teachers! We didn’t even have a turnaround of teachers who left because it was too hard. They left because of retirement or to start a family. Now we have 8 brand new teachers, 9 teachers who chose to stay and not be surplused out, and 5 veteran teachers from another school. Those teachers came from the same school that our new principal chose to bring with her. Not quite sure how to interpret that. Gone are the days when we had a cohesive and tight bond that existed before this turnaround. It has affected how we taught, how the students felt, and how the parents perceived us despite the chronic challenges we had. Now, there is segregation among our teachers.
We’ve been in school for a little more than 2 months now and our enrollment has increased, and students are not moving out. It’s like blowing up a balloon until it pops! Who knows if we are ready to pop because we continue to get new students every week. Does our superintendency recognize this? And are they willing to admit it? We are convinced that they won’t. The vision of our district leaders is completely unrealistic for students like ours. It’s as if they are turning a blind eye and not willing to listen to us or collaborate with us. Teachers at my school have been vocal for quite a few years, literally screaming for help! What we asked for, in part, is actually what we are getting because of the grant; full-time social workers and a psychologist, a part-time interpreter who is fluent in English, Arabic and Somali, and support for the overwhelming numbers of students with severe behavior problems so that we can actually teach instead if dealing with 2 or 3 students in our classes who take away every other students’ right to a safe environment to learn in. We thought that those things would help. But so far, our challenges seem to be worse this year, than previous years. And with 1/3 of the faculty brand new teachers, I fear for them and our students. Not because they are bad teachers; they are inexperienced with students like this, and learning just the basics of what teachers have to do, along with everything the grant dictates. Nothing is working. Maybe it’s too soon?
The fact that our district leaders are not willing to take ownership of the decision to create our boundaries, and the challenges that are coming with that at an alarming rate, has created a lack of trust for us teachers. We feel ignored, bullied, failures, and of course disenchanted. Morale is at a high-time low and the only outside group that realize it and feel our pain, is my district’s teacher association. They have an incredible relationship with district leaders, but this is something they haven’t been able to negotiate in favor of us. Our association directors are stellar to the point that NEA has recognized them for their negotiation effectiveness and increased membership. But with this issue, they are dealing with the most stubborn and unrealistic group of leaders.
Sadly, after our grant money is gone in 3 years, our school will most likely be shut down, and a new one built. That won’t solve our problems because the area that district leaders are looking at, does not change one thing about the demographics of the students who attend our school. The area is closer to those apartment complexes, but not by much. Not enough to affect transportation. This hasn’t been confirmed by the district, but based on what has been said, what we know from city council, and what our association recognizes as a pattern, most likely the school will be closed within 3-5 years. Too bad a new building doesn’t affect test scores or decrease behavior problems or absenteeism. It’s kind of a waste of money. It would be cheaper to hire more teachers so we don’t have 35 students in our kindergarten, 1st/2nd/6th grade classes. Unfortunately, there are no teachers out there!
Until we are able to close or even decrease the gap in employment, healthcare, and other resources, and recognize the inequality that has been created, we won’t be able to close the gap in education. Until we realize that segregation in society affects our schools, nothing good will happen. Just like generational poverty, we will have legacies of failed students – that is, students who are failed by the choices of government, big business, and the reformers. Nothing else!
LikeLike
Witnessed this in the district where I taught. The power in your account is in the detail. Keep writing.
LikeLike
Lest one think this is limited to St. Louis, look at the suburbs surrounding Philadelphia, Boston, and NYC and you’ll see the same kind of de facto segregation by race and wealth…. and it is nothing new, it’s just now jumping out at people. The “reformers” standardized testing results are reinforcing the adverse effects of this practice. I still hold out hope that some politician will point out this obvious disparity and appeal to voters’ sense of fairness and remedy the situation.
LikeLike
The story is the same in Essex County, NJ. I do not share your optimism wgersen. Politicians listen only to those bearing large gifts.
LikeLike
wgersen,
I think that the standardized test results reflect the de facto segregation by race and especially wealth, not cause them.
LikeLike