This is a powerful, deeply moving article by Kristina Riga about the loss of black teachers in the school districts that have embraced “reform.” It appears in Mother Jones, where Rizga has been a staff writer for many years.
Rizga focuses on the story of one teacher, Darlene Lomax. But the story she tells is about the widespread shedding of black teachers, women and men who were the backbones of their communities. In Philadelphia, almost 20% of black teachers are gone; in New Orleans, 62%; in Chicago, 40%; in Cleveland, 34%. School closings have been concentrated in historically black communities. Black teachers have been disproportionately displaced by “reform.”
She begins:
One spring morning this year, Darlene Lomax was driving to her father’s house in northwest Philadelphia. She took a right onto Germantown Avenue, one of the city’s oldest streets, and pulled up to Germantown High School, a stately brick-and-stone building. Empty whiskey bottles and candy cartons were piled around the benches in the school’s front yard. Posters of the mascot, a green and white bear, had browned and curled. In what was once the teachers’ parking lot, spindly weeds shot up through the concrete. Across the street, above the front door of the also-shuttered Robert Fulton Elementary School, a banner read, “Welcome, President Barack Obama, October 10, 2010.”
It had been almost three years since the Philadelphia school district closed Germantown High, and 35 years since Lomax was a student there. But the sight of the dead building, stretching over an entire city block, still pained her. She looked at her old classroom windows, tinted in greasy brown dust, and thought about Dr. Grabert, the philosophy teacher who pushed her to think critically and consider becoming the first in her family to go to college. She thought of Ms. Stoeckle, the English teacher, whose red-pen corrections and encouraging comments convinced her to enroll in a program for gifted students. Lomax remembers the predominantly black school—she had only one white and one Asian American classmate—as a rigorous place, with college preparatory honors courses and arts and sports programs. Ten years after taking Ms. Stoeckle’s class, Lomax had dropped by Germantown High to tell her that she was planning to become a teacher herself.
A historic Georgian Revival building, Germantown High opened its doors in 1915 as a vocational training ground for the industrial era, with the children of blue-collar European immigrants populating its classrooms. In the late 1950s, the district added a wing to provide capacity for the growing population of a rapidly integrating neighborhood.
By 1972, Lomax’s father, a factory worker, had saved up enough to move his family of eight from a two-bedroom apartment in one of the poorest parts of Philadelphia into a four-bedroom brick house in Germantown. Each month, Darlene and her younger sister would walk 15 blocks to the mortgage company’s gray stucco building, climb up to the second floor, and press a big envelope with money orders into the receptionist’s hand. The new house had a dining room and a living room, sparkling glass doorknobs, French doors that opened into a large sunroom, an herb garden, and a backyard with soft grass and big trees. Darlene and her father planted tomatoes and made salads with the sweet, juicy fruit every Friday, all summer long.
To the Lomax children, the fenceless backyard was ripe for exploration, and it funneled them right to the yards of their neighbors. One yard belonged to two sisters who worked as special-education teachers—the first black people Darlene had met who had college degrees. As Lomax got to know these sisters, she began to think that perhaps her philosophy teacher was right: She, too, could go to college and someday buy a house of her own with glass doorknobs and a garden. She graduated from Rosemont College in 1985, and after a stint as a social worker, she enrolled at Temple University and got her teaching credential.
On February 19, 2013, Lomax was in the weekly faculty leadership meeting at Fairhill Elementary, a 126-year-old school in a historic Puerto Rican neighborhood of Philadelphia where she served as principal. A counselor was giving his report, but Lomax couldn’t hear what he said. She just stared at her computer screen, frozen, as she read a letter from the school superintendent. She read it again and again to make sure she understood what it said.
Then, slowly, she turned to Robert Harris, Fairhill’s special-education teacher for 20 years, and his wife, the counselor and gym teacher. “They are closing our school,” she said quietly. They all broke down weeping. Then they walked to the front of the building in silence and unlocked the doors to open the school for the day.
Five miles away, as Germantown High School prepared for its 100th anniversary, its principal was digesting the same letter. In all, 24 Philadelphia schools would be closed that year. These days, when Lomax visits her father in the house with the glass doorknobs, she drives by four shuttered school buildings, each with a “Property Available for Sale” sign.
Back when Lomax was a student in Philadelphia in the 1970s, local, state, and federal governments poured extra resources into these racially isolated schools—grand, elegant buildings that might look like palaces or city halls—to compensate for a long history of segregation. And they invested in the staff inside those schools, pushing to expand the teaching workforce and bring in more black and Latino teachers with roots in the community. Teaching was an essential path into the middle class, especially for African American women; it was also a nexus of organizing. During the civil rights movement, black educators were leaders in fighting for increased opportunity, including more equitable school funding and a greater voice for communities in running schools and districts.
This terrible tragedy began in 1954. After Brown v. Board of Education, some 48,000 black teachers lost their jobs as “integration” was implemented by closing black schools and moving black children into white schools. It’s a history that gets forgotten in the glow of self-satisfaction over Brown; as is Martin Luther King’s late 50s expression of skepticism about Brown, saying that since whites still ruled the system, there would be very little good for blacks to come of the “integration” mandated by the 1954 SC decision.
An historical mirror of the modern day Charter School fiasco in places like New Orleans: only NEW schools and NEW teachers. Push out the “old” — and largely non-White culture-protective — teachers.
Yes, in many ways that’s true. But we should use the analogy to to learn some lessons. The mistake made by the court in ’54 was not making mandatory segregation illegal, but declaring integration an inherent good. That meant that blacks were suddenly at the complete mercy of whites; they were stripped of their ability to have choice, to have their own schools. Had the ’54 court simply outlawed mandatory segregation AND order equitable resource allocation, African Americans would have had choice and equal resources! Because the current public education system is still in the hands of whites — at the legislative policy level and union lobbying level — blacks continue to fight with one hand tied behind their backs. It’s not perfect, by any means, but their best allies today — if a good education for their kids is what they’re after — are the hedge-funders and philanthropists who are supporting the charter schools. This offers poor blacks the choice that the Supreme Court didn’t give them in 1954.
See decades of school funding litigation for an illustration of the limitations of court rulings that resource allocation must be “equitable.”
Thank God for Brown v Board. Integration is an inherent good.
If integration is an “inherent good,” then explain how Brown v. Board, which made the “inherent good” proposition a bedrock principle of Brown, resulted in the loss of jobs for 48,000 black teachers. That doesn’t seem so good to me.
Peter Meyer,
Gosh, it seems that the NAACP and the Movement for Black Lives don’t agree that hedge fund managers and billionaires are their best friends. If the Waltons loved poor folk, they would pay their employees $15 an hour instead of opening charter schools.
PBM, a couple other comments and a couple questions. Brown did not “declare” that integration is “an inherent good.” It “held” that de jure racial segregation was per se unconstitutional, regardless of how resources were allocated between segregated school systems. In so holding, the Court overturned Plessey v. Ferguson, which permitted de jure racial segregation as long as resources were equitably allocated. In my view, the Court had to overturn Plessey in order to reach the holding that de jure racial segregation is per se unconstitutional.
You say that the Court’s holding that de jure racial segregation is per se unconstitutional was not a mistake. But you seem to suggest that the Court should not have overturned Plessey. How could the Court have held that de jure racial segregation was unconstitutional without overturning Plessey? And how could the Court have overturned Plessey without using the rationale that an equal allocation of resources was not sufficient to make de jure racial segregation constitutional?
Dear FLERP. Brown did declare that “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal,” which sounds a lot like integration is an inherent good. It is this fallacious premise that allowed them to declare Plessy and its mandatory segregation unconstitutional. That is fine. There were plenty of ways to declare the mandatory segregation of Plessy unconstitutional. All I’m saying is that this — separate facilities are “inherently unequal” — was not the best. And, in fact, the sociology behind such a finding — the infamous “doll tests” — has been proven highly suspect. All I’m saying is that the “inherently unequal” standard has done great harm to African Americans; the primary result being the dismantling of a “segregated” black school system. You take it from there. Plessy certainly needed to be overturned; all I’m saying is that by pinning the argument on a fallacious sociological argument — segregation is inherently unequal — it continued to relegate blacks to second-class status; i.e. inferior unless they communed with whites. That is the sad standard we are still saddling blacks with.
What are some of the plenty ways to declare that Plessey was unconstitutional without finding that de jure racial segregation was inherently harmful?
Peter,
I grew up in the segregated South. De jure segregation was harmful, demeaning, humiliating to African Americans, and gave whites an undeserved sense of superiority. It was a very degrading situation. It was classical racism. Thank God for the Brown decision.
And disturbing how, when we desegregated black teachers lost jobs en masse, and when we resegregated black teachers lost jobs en masse. Integration is an inherent good no matter what.
Dear Diane, you don’t have to have grown up in the south to know that de jure segregation is bad, in all the ways you suggested. But if you read my comments — here and elsewhere — you’ll see that I am very much only pointing out that Martin Luther King’s skepticism about Brown — that integration would put young black minds in the hands of racist whites –was born out, with the dismantling of a robust (if poor) black education system and the loss of jobs for thousands of black teachers, There are plenty of reasons to applaud Brown,among them it’s outlawing mandatory segregation, but let’s be aware of its limitations and nasty side effects.
pbmeyer I agree w/Diane (& you do also) that the Brown decision was necessary, you can’t have laws forbidding the races to mix, in schools or anywhere else. And yet true that many thousands of A-A teachers & admin lost jobs as a result, & decline in % minority teachers in public school systems continues right up to present.
The reasons for the initial huge loss seem straightforward: once you put everybody under the same roof, that 88/12 mix is going to be run by the 88%. I don’t see words specifically promoting integrated as better in the Brown decision. And I don’t even see anything implying that white schools were better– but the public consensus was probably that. Partly because of racism, but also because the separate black systems were grossly underfunded. Regardless, communities were & are segregated– minority community school autonomy inevitably undermined, subsumed into majority.
Community autonomy is also undermined by school choice as presently practiced in many states. US is a long way from the sort of social consensus required for a fair school-choice system. Take a look at a long-running voucher system that works, in Denmark: independent schools are set up & run by parents (no corporations or individual owners allowed; funding equalized; teachers paid the same across the board.
Brown decision did not mandate integration. It ruled unconstitional state laws that mandated racial segregation. Those laws made second class citizens of racial minorities. The reason the federal courts ordered integration plans from districts was because so many southern states adopted school choice plans to evade even minimal desegregation.
Very good related op-ed is here:
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/37530-black-to-school-the-rising-struggle-to-make-black-education-matter
You will see the destrction of the PATH TO OPPORTUNITY THAT once DROVE THE MIDDLE CLASS, when you ALSO read this article on how the black communities in Connecticut are deprived of education.
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Black-Teachers-Matter-in-Life_Arts-Black-Agenda-Report_Black-Agenda-Report_Equality-Of-Opportunity_Mass-Teacher-Firings-160912-372.html
This is the underbelly of what is happening as TOP DOWN management at the legislative level utterly destroys the BOTTOM where teachers and students are left bereft of everything that once was crucial for public education
DON’T MISS THIS ARTICLE because this is how it is done… the PLOY that left LA black kids with second grade education.
“Two Connecticut school districts sit side by side along Long Island Sound. Both spend more than the national average on their students. They prepare their pupils for the same statewide tests. Their teachers, like virtually all the teachers in the state, earn the same high marks on evaluations.That is where the similarities end: In Fairfield, a mostly white suburb where the median income is $120,000, 94 percent of students graduate from high school on time. In Bridgeport, the state’s most populous and one of its poorest cities, the graduation rate is 63 percent. Fifth graders in Bridgeport, where most people are black or Hispanic, often read at kindergarten level, one of their teachers recently testified during a trial over school funding inequities.”
“The stripping of resources is amazing and so is the Irrational spending Requiring at least a substantially rational plan for education is a problem in this state because many of our most important policies are so befuddled or misdirected as to be irrational. They lack real and visible links to things known to meet children’s needs.
How can this be?
Well, the corruption that riddles our legislatures sows the seeds of destrcution: the states funding of new school buildings was driven not by need, but rather by how much clout individual legislators might have; the teacher evaluation system and the high school graduation standards were all but meaningless.”
Here is a link to my series at Oped on Legislatures malfeasance.
http://www.opednews.com/Series/legislature-and-governorsL-by-Susan-Lee-Schwartz-150217-816.html
Or go to where I GO when I want to know what the individual states are up to … right here, byputting LEGISLATURE IN THE SEARCH FIELD…like I did here
https://dianeravitch.net/?s=legislature
I posted the Riga article at http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Black-Teachers-Matter-in-Life_Arts-Black-Agenda-Report_Black-Agenda-Report_Equality-Of-Opportunity_Mass-Teacher-Firings-160912-372.html with the comment below
You will see the destrction of the PATH TO OPPORTUNITY THAT once DROVE THE MIDDLE CLASS, when you read this article http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/12/nyregion/in-connecticut-a-wealth-gap-divides-neighboring-schools.html?emc=edit_th_20160912&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=50637717&_r=0
on how the black communities in Connecticut are deprived of education. This is the underbelly of what is happening as TOP DOWN management at the legislative level utterly destroys the BOTTOM where teachers and students are left bereft of everything that once was crucial for public education
“Two Connecticut school districts sit side by side along Long Island Sound. Both spend more than the national average on their students. They prepare their pupils for the same statewide tests. Their teachers, like virtually all the teachers in the state, earn the same high marks on evaluations.That is where the similarities end: In Fairfield, a mostly white suburb where the median income is $120,000, 94 percent of students graduate from high school on time. In Bridgeport, the state’s most populous and one of its poorest cities, the graduation rate is 63 percent. Fifth graders in Bridgeport, where most people are black or Hispanic, often read at kindergarten level, one of their teachers recently testified during a trial over school funding inequities.”
“The stripping of resources is amazing and so is the Irrational spending Requiring at least a substantially rational plan for education is a problem in this state because many of our most important policies are so befuddled or misdirected as to be irrational. They lack real and visible links to things known to meet children’s needs.How can this be? Well, the corruption that riddles our legislatures sows the seeds of destrcution: the states funding of new school buildings was driven not by need, but rather by how much clout individual legislators might have; the teacher evaluation system and the high school graduation standards were all but meaningless.’
Put legislature in the search field here and you will get this link to the shenanigans and criminal corruption at the top, which is ending income equality wher it begins at the bottom, in the classroom.
https://dianeravitch.net/?s=legislature
or go to my series at OPED News, where I have linked to the best posts on privatization, and legislative corruption.
http://www.opednews.com/Series/PRIVITIZATION-by-Susan-Lee-Schwartz-150925-546.html
legislative taekover; http://www.opednews.com/Series/legislature-and-governorsL-by-Susan-Lee-Schwartz-150217-816.html
In a strange way I can relate to this story. I grew up in the hardscrabble neighborhood adjacent to Germantown High School in Philly. I can remember riding on the trolley with my mother past Germantown High School to the shopping district on Germantown Avenue. I also entered the middle class through teaching and Temple University, but I am white. I believe there is value for students to have teachers that look like them, and also value in having teachers that don’t look like them. We need to teach acceptance of our diversity to all segments of our population. If we do this, we will have a healthier society! Fear and prejudice stem from that which we fail to understand. As an ESL teacher I was white teacher of mostly minority students. Fortunately, my school district was wise enough to hire a couple of minority teachers for the ESL department as well. It is important for students to see people that look like them in leadership roles. The statistics in this post about minority teachers are tragic, not only for the teachers, but for the students as well. “Reform” is a blind steam roller of unproven value that crushes everything in its path. Annihilation, segregation and colonialism are its byproducts, not innovation or improvement.
retired teacher: well put.
A brief comment about your point regarding “the statistics in this post.”
I continue to be surprised that others have been/are surprised that black teachers (especially women) were/are disproportionately affected by corporate education reform in New Orleans and Chicago and Cleveland and elsewhere.
That disproportionate beat down is a feature, not a bug, of the “new civil rights movement of our time.” And precisely why some of the most prominent people fronting for privatization and charters and vouchers and such look like (at least superficially) the people upon whom they are raining down some of their most vicious and telling blows.
It’s called an “affinity scam.” When it comes to investments, e.g., here is the SEC definition of “affinity fraud”:
[start excerpt]
What is an Affinity Fraud?
Affinity fraud refers to investment scams that prey upon members of identifiable groups, such as religious or ethnic communities, the elderly, or professional groups. The fraudsters who promote affinity scams frequently are – or pretend to be – members of the group. They often enlist respected community or religious leaders from within the group to spread the word about the scheme by convincing those people that a fraudulent investment is legitimate and worthwhile. Many times, those leaders become unwitting victims of the fraudster’s ruse.
These scams exploit the trust and friendship that exist in groups of people who have something in common. Because of the tight-knit structure of many groups, it can be difficult for regulators or law enforcement officials to detect an affinity scam. Victims often fail to notify authorities or pursue their legal remedies and instead try to work things out within the group. This is particularly true where the fraudsters have used respected community or religious leaders to convince others to join the investment.
[end excerpt]
Link: https://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/affinity.htm
Given the love of $tudent $ucce$$ that the leading beneficiaries and enforcers and apologists of rheephorm evince, they simply take worst financial practices (as they do business and management practices) and simply transfer them to education.
Of course, they think they’re being cute and creative and innovative blahblahblah.
Their words and public image are about as substantive as that old slogan about “less filling, tastes great.”
☹️
Thank you for your comments.
😎
Thanks for your comments too. The affinity tendency that you mention explains a lot of discrimination. One of the reasons women are less likely to be hired or promoted is that a white male often does the hiring and promoting. We see this affinity play out in school choice. When people have a choice, they tend to seek out those that often look like themselves. Then, we wind up with all white or all black schools. We certainly see the affinity tendency at work in real estate. If integration of neighborhoods had worked, we would not be having such a problem with integration in public schools. Charters fail to understand that they are resegregating our cities through the establishment of cheap charters for minority locals and selective charters for white yuppie students. Our issues of race continue to be our Achilles heel.
Here’s an interesting comment about Brown v Board by Shirley Ann Jackson, African American president of Renneselear Polytechnic Institute and first women to receive a PhD in physics from MIT: http://www.idvl.org/sciencemakers/iCoreClient.html#/&s=6&args=386&c=386
Peter Meyer,
You seem determined to prove that African Americans would be better off if the Supreme Court had never outlawed racial segregation.
Really, it was awful. If you had been living in a state where segregation was the law, you would know that.
How can a supposedly democratic society that proclaims high ideals of justice and equality for all live with laws that impose racial barriers?
Dear Diane, I know that it is not politically correct to doubt the magnificence of Brown, but you are unfairly and inaccurately characterizing my position by suggesting that “African Americans would be better off if the Supreme Court had never outlawed racial segregation.” Sorry, but I never said it and never would. As I have said many times and in many places (see my essay of a couple years ago: http://ciep.hunter.cuny.edu/top-story-52814/), Brown was flawed and if we recognize some of those flaws we would be in much better position to tackle the current challenges to racial equality in our schools. And I need to point again that I share Martin Luther King’s skepticism of Brown, a fact that no one seems to want to address. cheers, –peter meyer
Peter, why don’t you post Dr. King’s criticism of the Brown decision? I have studied the decision, the legal and political resistance to the decision, but I missed Dr. King’s critique.
PBM, what is it that you think Brown Court should have held?
FLERP,
FYI, Peter Meyer is part of the corporate reform stable of writers. He writes for EdNext and other proponents of charters and opponents of unions. He once wrote an article about Mayor Bloomberg and his corporate reforms, and the mayor was depicted as a knight in shining armor. Here we are in 2016, and I wonder where the miracle went.
Peter also raved about the “Better Choice” charters in Albany as a model for the nation. Many of them have closed down because of poor performance.
A prognosticator he is not.
But it is interesting that he is now committed to discrediting the Brown decision, which was so important in changing the laws and customs of this country. Peter Cunningham has been writing recently that desegregation is an illusory goal, and we should forget about it. Seems to be the new line.
Such an interesting conversation. Where else could this take place?
As for me, I am not looking backwards.
I tis the present which needs strong measures.
What I see is the war on public schools, so that the the scions of the wealthy, get a good education, and the rest scramble for what remains.
We need to see that public schools are funded so great teachers can be hired, and kids who live in poverty can have a chance to acquire the skills and knowledge that will ensure some kind o income equality.
We need great teachers, and certainly more black educators, especially now that the remaining public schools have populations of ethnic minorities left out when charter schools cater to white children.
FLERP, with the caveat that I am neither a lawyer nor a constitutional scholar — just a journalist who has done some reading in and around Brown — I would have wished that the Court could have found a way to outlaw mandated segregation (referred to by commenters here as de jure), overturning Plessy, and then gone on to order equal funding of all public schools. Obviously, it was 1954 and the world was a different place and it’s doubtful the Court had the requisite academic or legal tools at hand to make such a call. But the equitable funding piece would have gone a long way to preserving the black school system, which, as King (and others!) suggested, would have been a lot better for black kids. But he are today; we now have tools at hand that make it possible for poor blacks to get a good education: mandatory segregation is against the law, numerous equitable funding cases have been brought, we now know (thanks to E.D. Hirsch, that a good curriculum will close the rich/poor black/white performance gag, and, last but not least, we have a healthy charter school system that offers poor African Americans a choice they have never had.
Again, Diane, thank you for allowing me express these forums on your blog. –peter m.
Peter,
Please be sure to let us know about the districts where a good curriculum has actually closed the achievement gap between rich and poor, and among groups. I am eager to learn about them.
Rudy S.,
Every other comment from you contains an insult. You can’t help yourself. I won’t post your comments anymore. You insult me and you insult other readers. That breaks rule #1 of this blog.
It’s in my “Beyond Brown” essay, previously cited. But here you go, taken from a 2004 book review in the NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/16/books/still-separate-still-unequal.html):
“I favor integration on buses and in all areas of public accommodation and travel…. I am for equality. However, I think integration in our public schools is different. In that setting, you are dealing with one of the most important assets of an individual — the mind. White people view black people as inferior. A large percentage of them have a very low opinion of our race. People with such a low view of the black race cannot be given free rein and put in charge of the intellectual care and development of our boys and girls.”
Those are not Dr. King’s words. Those are words attributed to him by another person, with no documentation to support them.
Shame on you.
I knew Derrick Bell. He was a close friend. He was disillusioned with the Brown decision not because it was wrong, but because so little progress had been made in establishing real equality for blacks. Don’t twist his words either.
Don’t throw the “shame” at me, Diane. The review speaks for itself, as do “King’s words,” which, in the context of this review, ring true.
But King never wrote those words, and someone said he spoke them. As a historian, I would not call that an authoritative statement. The Brown decision affected everything in the public sector that touched on segregation, but especially public schools. The reaction by segregations was to call for school choice to undermine any prospect of desegregation. Now Trump and your buddies at EdNext are championing school choice and the result will be predictable. More segregation. That makes it necessary, I suppose, to say the Brown decision got it wrong.
Sorry for all the typos on my last post — you guys are wearing me down. –p meyer
For the record, I’m not part of any stable of writers, corporate or otherwise, I wrote a story about Brighter Choice schools in Albany when they were knocking the socks off their traditional school competitors, and the only regrets I have about my Bloomberg story was that I suggested he run for president and that I was too nice to Diane! But as I’ve said multiple times, I’m a journalist (not a prognosticator) and my job is to get the facts right and I’m proud to say that over a 40-year career, I’ve done pretty well.