Archives for category: Segregation , Racial Isolation and Integration

Arthur Camins, scientist and educator, describes how his schooling shaped his understanding of Justice and social responsibility. His article was originally published at the Huffington Post, but he also placed it in the Louisville Courier-Journal because of his professional experience in Louisville and the fact that the legislature is about to roll back Louisville’s successful desegregation program.

Camins writes:


Mr. Casey, my high school English teacher, was fond of proclaiming, “From suffering alone comes wisdom.” There seems to be plenty of suffering around, but wisdom seems insufficiently distributed to protect our nation from the alarming triple threats to our democracy from escalating authoritarianism, inequality and divisiveness. I wonder: What is it that turns the banality of suffering, into wisdom?

Why do some people turn against one another in tough times, while others toward one another? Moreover, what can be done to transform the wisdom of observers into mass engaged action?

As a teenager with a typical level of angst, I thought Mr. Casey was especially insightful. After all, maybe I too could be wise. He was one of my favorite teachers. His gift was to help to nudge natural self-centeredness toward empathy. With a little research, I discovered that his suffering quote was hardly original, but rather a tweak on a line from the writings of the ancient Greek playwright, Aeschylus. Mr. Casey helped me identify with novel’s characters and see myself their struggles. That helped me understand that I was not alone. But it was the movements of the 1960s that connected my self-absorbed worries with deeper struggles in the world around me and gave me a lifelong sense of belonging and purpose. I thought about him and the movements today as I wrestled with conflicting emotions of despair and commitment to act.

Personal suffering may sensitize people to the plight of others, but that is insufficient to move them to action. That requires empathy and a sense of belonging, shared experiences with common goals across typical divisions, and development of agency. These frame the requirements for a successful organized resistance.
I have little hope that elected officials will substantively address current threats to democracy and equity on their own. They never have. In the short-term, that responsibility rests on the shoulders of community activists. It always has. For the future, that obligation falls to educators. They have always been the hope.

Globalization, pervasive information technology, and escalating automation provide new contexts, but today’s threats are not unique. U.S. History is replete with examples of how the empowered have fostered divisiveness to protect their privileges: Poor whites against freed slaves and their descendants; Men against women; Old immigrants against recent arrivals; Previously persecuted religious sects against new religious minorities; Just-getting-by employed workers against the unemployed and underemployed; underpaid American workers against more exploited foreign workers in developing countries. The list is endless, as is its diversionary potential to protect the wealthy. Alternatively, the potential for unity across these groups to challenge power and insist on a more equitable future is monumental.

Historically, authoritarianism, lies, and repression have been the turn-to solutions when elites perceived a challenge. Today, empowerment of women, voter participation of non-whites and newer immigrants, and organized workers pose such threats. Even the potential for a widespread, unifying shift toward identification with the brighter values of collaboration, equity, and social responsibility challenge those who rely on traditional dark American myths of a dog-eat-dog competitive meritocracy and self-reliance to justify their position.

Trump and his Republican enablers depend on cynicism about the power of collective action, racial and socio-economic isolation, and a lack of empathy for others’ suffering.

Isolation breeds ignorance of the unknown other. Isolation makes us stupid. I use the term stupid purposefully. I do not mean intellectually limited. Rather, I mean committedly ignorant about matters of personal and social consequence. Such ignorance and stupidity are enabled when selfishness is exalted over empathy in the context of competition for structurally limited resources. Such ignorance and stupidity are promoted when the empowered encourage the disempowered to distrust each other and reject reason and evidence….

Shared experience across perceived differences combats the stupidity that isolation fosters. Community activists and educators can lead front-line push back, engaging citizens and students across traditionally divisive lines in explicitly designed shared experiences.

A disciplined resistance movement can provide an alternative sense of belonging by organizing around shared unifying concerns, such as health care, fair wages, equitable local, states and federal taxes, high-quality public education, protecting and expanding Medicare, Medicare and Social Security, climate change, protecting the environment, and sustainable development. Purposefully, doing so across neighborhood boundaries and workplaces enables empathy and identification with the suffering of others and structures for action.

Similarly, integrated schools that emphasize academic, as well as social and emotional learning can build trust and a common sense of belonging. Curricula that infuse personal and social meaning into daily instruction offers the possibility for young people to see past selfish concerns.

I imbibed the lessons of Mr. Casey’s English class in 1967. It was a moment framed by the civil rights and antiwar movements. Those were times of suffering but also an era of hope. The wisdom that carries forth and provides a guide to action is that isolation and segregation make us stupid. Belonging and integration make us smart. Common struggle makes a difference.

This article was written a year ago, but there is no doubt that the trend lines towards resegregation are only getting worse.

Just this week, we learned that the Republican legislature in Kentucky is about to eliminate one of the nation’s most successful programs of school desegregation.

Last May, on the anniversary of the Brown decision, Emma Brown of the Washington Post wrote that public schools are resegregating.

This should not be surprising, because federal courts have gradually but decisively withdrawn from their role as enforcers of desegregation. District after district has been relieved of court orders, and new ones are not forthcoming. Similarly, the U.S. Department of Education has become passive in the face of resegregation. I have often said that Arne Uncan wasted a historic opportunity to encourage integration. Imagine if Race to the Top had offered state’s and districts financial incentives for increasing desegregation instead of test scores. We now know that “Race to the Top” was a flop. It advanced the school choice movement but didn’t help students or communities. DeVos picked up where Arne left off, promoting privatization of public schools.

Brown writes:

Poor, black and Hispanic children are becoming increasingly isolated from their white, affluent peers in the nation’s public schools, according to new federal data showing that the number of high-poverty schools serving primarily black and brown students more than doubled between 2001 and 2014.

The data was released by the Government Accountability Office on Tuesday, 62 years to the day after the Supreme Court decided that segregated schools are “inherently unequal” and therefore unconstitutional.

That landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education began the dismantling of the dual school systems — one for white kids, one for black students — that characterized so many of the nation’s communities. It also became a touchstone for the ideal of public education as a great equalizer, an American birthright meant to give every child a fair shot at success.

But that ideal appears to be unraveling, according to Tuesday’s GAO report.

The proportion of schools segregated by race and class — where more than 75 percent of children receive free or reduced-price lunch and more than 75 percent are black or Hispanic — climbed from 9 percent to 16 percent of schools between 2001 and 2014. The number of the most intensively segregated schools — with more than 90 percent of low-income students and students of color — more than doubled over that period.

It seems we are hurtling backwards into the past. On matters of economics, social security, race, and schooling.

Richard Kahlenberg of The Century Foundation notes that the Obame education reforms failed, with a price tag of $7 billion.

Advocates of school choice treat that failure as a rationale for school choice.

But, says Kahlenberg, the research is clear that racial integration produces significant gains, whereas school choice, especially vouchers, has none.

Nancy Flanagan is retired from a distinguished career as a teacher in Michigan. She sent the following comment accompanied by this article about how school choice has increased segregation in the public schools of Holland, Michigan.

Flanagan writes:

“This is the best, most accurate and representative piece on what the DeVos family–over 25 years–has done to public education in Michigan. Slowly, subtly, they have damaged the Holland public school system, trading on racism and fear to chip away at a once-highly respected and functional system. Please understand: Holland used to be an all-white, all-Christian, largely Dutch town. When diversity arrived, DeVos & Co. planted one of their first “innovative” charters there, Black River. Holland’s white enrollment has plummeted 60 percent. The linked article explains how DeVos used charters (because vouchers necessitated a change in state legislation, which they could not get through) as a strategy to bust integration and bust teachers unions, in the place where they had the most success: western Michigan.

“My best friend was a teacher for many years in Holland. As Hispanic (and it’s mostly Hispanic) families moved in, white families moved out. The dis-integration of a sturdy, well-run public district–the kind of district you wouldn’t expect to go under, because it once had considerable public support… This is not “low-hanging fruit”–a chronically stressed urban or rural district in poverty. This is the next phase…

Please read: http://bridgemi.com/2016/11/betsy-devos-and-the-segregation-of-school-choice/

 

 

 

John Oliver, one of our nation’s sharpest commentators on the subject of education, did an excellent report on school segregation, which has been rising over many years (mainly because increasingly conservative judges began abandoning school desegregation in the 1980s).

A stunning statistic:

In 1988, there were 2,762 schools with one percent or less white children; by 2011, that number had ballooned to 6,727 (via Propublica).

The South, he notes, is now the most desegregated region of the country. The state with the most racial segregation is New York!

What if Race to the Top had offered its billions of prize money to states that offered and implemented ambitious plans to desegregate their schools. That would have made the $4.35 billion worthwhile. Instead, we have battles over high-stakes testing, Common Core, and charter schools. To what end?

In the Trump era, will anyone care about school desegregation? We will see.

Karen Wolfe is a parent activist in Los Angeles. She wrote the following plea to the school board of LAUSD, which will make a decision tomorrow:


Dear Board members,

I just learned that a proposal for a brand new LAUSD Playa Vista middle school is to be voted on at tomorrow’s board meeting.

Please vote No on Agenda Item 14, Establishment of the New Middle School Pathway in Collaboration with Loyola Marymount University.

· It was clear last December, when the board rejected this, and it is clear now. This is a segregated school for certain families to feel more comfortable being in LAUSD. The curriculum is STEM, which is already available at the curriculum at the existing middle school. If this becomes the well resourced, favored school, all nearby middle schools will experience an exodus.

If the only justifiable rationale for an additional middle school on the west side, where enrollment has dropped, is that these families prefer to segregate themselves from our LAUSD children, then it is morally imperative that the school district do everything in its power to make integration of our students a priority. Especially given the potentially horrifying impacts of last week’s world events, then Interim Superintendent, Ramon Cortines’ words from last December’s board meeting seem prophetic:

“There are some people in our schools that don’t want to go to school with ‘those children’ based on class.…Because there are people that feel that they are entitled because of where they live, and I am saying you can’t escape it anymore. Our children need to grow up in an education that deals with all levels of socio-economics, all levels of ethnic and cultural diversity. We cannot escape it anymore.
This district and this area needs to be a model for this.”

I am not saying that parents have racist intentions. But unintended bias is something that needs to be interrupted.

· The Board Informative erroneously states that the policy implications of this vote are “unknown at this time.” Since the School District creates policy through board action, the policy is well documented in the near unanimous vote recorded at the December, 2015 board meeting, and the policy rationale is well documented in the transcript and recording below. In fact, then Superintendent Cortines requested board approval for a plan that prioritized integration policy. The only opposing vote was because Ms. Ratliff perceived the associated charter school as getting special treatment in the facilities upgrade.

· The communities most heavily impacted by the establishment of this school should be provided an opportunity to give input for the board to consider. School board president Zimmer wisely stated in December, 2015, “it is absolutely clear to us now, and is the way we are going to move forward. All stakeholders together working together for a solution here that works for all families. For all families. I believe even in this difficult week, even as there’s been missteps and communication which I apologize for, I believe it is possible for us to get to answers that work for all families, all children and all schools by working together. All stakeholders together in this process.” That was a year ago. Last month, at a small meeting of the education committee of the Westchester/Playa neighborhood council, we were told that one group of stakeholders had worked to create this school. We were reassured though, that a community meeting would be held before the board voted. This new school would have wide reaching impacts, and the larger community including Westchester HS, Orville Wright MS, Marina Del Rey MS, and feeder elementary schools should have a fair opportunity to discuss them and propose mitigations for potential problems.

· I have heard two different district staff explain that this proposal is what Orville Wright teachers want because they did not want this school located on their campus. That is like telling a restaurant owner that a new restaurant is being built next door because he didn’t want one on his patio. The teachers and parents I have spoken to at Wright tell a different story. They would have felt differently if LMU had approached them in a collaborative manner, rather than simply to take Wright’s real estate for their own separate school, offering nothing to the teachers or children at Wright.

· The agreement calls for waivers from the UTLA and AALA contracts. Parents do not have contracts with the schools. We and our children have to live by the rules contained in those labor contracts, and we can look them up on the internet. If this school is going to have different rules, then those rules and the reasons for waivers should be part of the community’s consideration of this project.

· Loyola Marymount boasts the largest and longest running Teach for America corps. TFA is a drastically different organization than it was 20 years ago. Our board president is a rare exception to the well documented attrition rate of TFA. Over 70% of its temporary teachers leave after two years. Using a large number of TFA temps in one school would have a significant impact on a school. This should be part of the discussion.

· The further gentrification of the west side is bringing new families into LAUSD’s boundaries. This could become the future lifeblood of our neighborhood schools. Creating a new school for a wealthier, predominately white population will set a dangerous precedent. As new families continue to move into the west side, they will expect their own schools. These newer families could enroll their children in existing middle schools and prevent the closure or merger of existing schools. The possibility of such segregation, especially in such close proximity should be avoided.

· Adding schools and classrooms to the west side will increase the available Prop 39 space, creating more work for principals and more conflict in schools already beleaguered by charter co-locations.

Finally, please do not go down this path. After last week’s presidential election, the beautifully diverse and vibrant California made clear that it would lead the way in protecting the values we hold dear. Please do not let us down; raise us up.

Sincerely,

Karen Wolfe

TRANSCRIPT AND RECORDING OF DECEMBER, 2015 BOARD MEETING
http://lausd.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?clip_id=377&meta_id=25162

Superintendent Cortines said:

Wright has an opportunity to be an outstanding middle school for the feeder elementary schools. “I really see a seamless system” in Westchester. It shouldn’t be about those that can yell the loudest. It needs to address the issues of Wright that this district has neglected for years of it becoming a leading middle school on the west side of the City. That is the plan I am recommending…

3:44 Now, I’m going to say it the way it is. I’ve been to those schools. And there are some issues here, and you’re going to disagree with me, some of you. I’ve spent my life, my professional career, 60 years, dealing with the issues of integration. I want you to know that when I was superintendent in Pasadena, and they would say to me, well the African American community or the black community. And I would say which one of the communities? One of the issues that you as a community are going to have to face is the class issue. There are some people in our schools that don’t want to go to school with ‘those children’ based on class. Ma’am, I see you saying it’s not true. I’ve seen it and I’ve gotten the letters that it is true. So I’m saying you together, in working on an instructional plan for the elementary and for Wright are going to have to face that head on. Because there are people that feel that they are entitled because of where they live and I am saying you can’t escape it anymore. Our children need to grow up in an education that deals with all levels of socio-economics all levels of ethnic and cultural diversity. We cannot escape it anymore. This district and this area needs to be a model for this. My recommendation is very clear that under the direction of Dr. Gibson and Mrs. Hildreth, the superintendent and other that we should begin the study that should be in the middle school , not just in one elementary but in five elementaries. That’s my recommendation.

Board President Zimmer said: I understand this is a public meeting. The courage that you have shown all of those 60 years demands all of our respect and thanks. If this was not clear from the beginning, it is absolutely clear to us now. And is the way we are going to move forward. All stakeholders together working together for a solution here that works for all families. For all families. I believe even in this difficult week, even as there’s been missteps and communication which I apologize for, I believe it is possible for us to get to answers that work for all families, all children and all schools by working together. All stakeholders together in this process. We can’t do it if we don’t have the facilities investment. Very clearly, that I believe in Orville Wright Middle School. I believe in the efforts, driven by staff, not by this district, by staff, teachers and families It’s s transformation process that I will continue to invest in. Has to be about instruction. So when we make commitments about meaningful instructional pathways, we have to work out how we fulfill that commitment without injuring a commitment to others…Each of the elementary schools in the feeder pattern, as we see a reinvestment in each of our schools, again driven by instruction, driven by the quality and excellence that we demand for our children, and we should demand for all children

Karen Wolfe
310.823.4204
@kwolfepack on twitter
http://www.PSconnectNow.org
PS Connect – Friends to Schools

The Supreme Court ruled in 1974 (Bradley v. Milliken) that a court could not order desegregation across district lines. The case referred to Detroit, which was highly segregated. That put an end to the possibility of metropolitan districts like the one already established in Charlotte-Mecklenburg, NC. The children of Detroit were doomed to remain in segregated, underfunded schools in an increasingly impoverished district.

This article reports the findings of a study of the most segregating lines dividing the children of different races. http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/08/where-school-district-borders-are-invisible-fences/497279/

[ALERT: I was just informed that Edbuild is funded by reformers who want to destroy our public schools. Keep that in mind as you read—DR]

“A few blocks away from Bernita Bradley’s house, the Detroit Public School district ends and the Grosse Pointe Public School System begins. The border is invisible, but with a 12-year-old daughter enrolled in DPS, the reminders for Bradley are impossible to ignore. Every student seems to have a Macbook. There’s the annual Grosse Pointe toy drive, which distributes free bicycles to kids who need them. And there are the parks with shiny new playground equipment, where parents routinely ask Bradley, “Do you live around here?”

“Ours are torn down and dilapidated,” Bradley says. “Just seeing theirs makes me feel bad.“

“According to a new report and interactive map by the education think tank EdBuild, the district border that Bradley navigates as a parent and an activist (she helped launch Enroll Detroit, which distributes information about school enrollment requirements to families) is the most income-segregating in the nation. The median property value in DPS is $45,100, versus $220,100 in suburban Grosse Pointe, and roughly half of the city student population lives in poverty, compared to one out of every 15 students across the district line—a difference of 42 percentage points. Local per-pupil public revenue is about the same, at around $4,650 per student, but that’s because Detroit now taxes properties at a rate of 8.7 percent each year to pay for its schools. This is 47 percent higher than the rate paid in Grosse Pointe, “where, it goes without saying, there are most likely no vermin carcasses under the desks,” says Rebecca Sibilia, the founder and CEO of EdBuild, in an email to CityLab.

“EdBuild’s report ranked the country’s top 50 segregating school-district borders. More than 60 percent of these borders are in Rust Belt cities in upstate New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, eastern Wisconsin, and Illinois, which have suffered from patterns of disinvestment similar to those in Detroit. As the city underwent decades of depopulation, hundreds of Detroit’s public schools closed, leaving properties abandoned and blighted. DPS now struggles with a budget deficit of nearly $300 million, along with frequent teacher shortages and staff walk-outs. Research shows that students coming from profound disadvantage need even more resources from schools than their wealthier peers to achieve equal outcomes—yet DPS cannot meet those needs, even with additional state funding.”

Katharine Meeks urges affluent parents to send their children to diverse public schools. She writes here of going to school in Wake County, North Carolina, which had a policy of desegregated schools. She entered the lottery to attend a magnet school, but was not accepted. She attended a regular public school and she is glad. The benefits of such schools, she writes, are enormous.

 

When she was in school, no school was allowed to have more than 40% of children who were eligible for free or reduced lunch, the federal standard for poverty/low income. Students were bused to maintain the balance of diversity.

 

She writes:

 

 

I’m glad I never got into the magnet schools because now I can share my experiences with people who might be nervous to send their children to schools with poor children. People who bought homes in areas with a socioeconomic buffer. People who worry that bus rides will be too long or think that the district will be unstable.

 

 

I attended my assigned school from kindergarten through twelfth grade in a district that bussed students to ensure no school exceeded 40 percentd free and reduced lunch. In other words, the school board mandated each school be socioeconomically representative of the larger district. Some of the schools I attended were closest to my home and some weren’t.

 

 

At each school, I received a high quality education. My teachers fanned the flames of my natural curiosity. In kindergarten, I was asked to show off my reading prowess on the morning news. In middle school, I competed as a “Mathlete.” In high school, I aced every single math problem on the SAT. From kindergarten through twelfth grade I received a top-notch, enriching arts education complete with field trips and community partnerships. I never worried about my safety.

 

I graduated among the top of my class. I got into every college I applied to and was offered several scholarships. I was more than well prepared for college, and continued to receive grants and scholarships once I was there. I exhibit my artwork and publish my writing. To top it all off, I have my dream job.

 

She cites studies that demonstrate the value of an integrated education, to all students. The benefits are universal. Learning in a diverse environment not only teaches critical thinking skills but prepares students to live in a diverse world.

Lest we forget, today is the 62nd anniversary of the historic Brown v. Board of Education, which ruled that separate but equal could never be equal. It began the long and painful process of disestablishing legally sanctioned separation of the races in different schools. As we have observed, de facto segregation has replaced de jure segregation and resegregation is on the rise.

 

The UCLA Civil Rights Project has been tracking the trajectory of racial segregation and desegregation for many years. Its newest research brief has bad news.

 

As the anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education decision arrives again without any major initiatives to mitigate spreading and deepening segregation in our nation’s schools, the Civil Rights Project adds to a growing national discussion with a research brief drawn from a much broader study of school segregation to be published in September 2016. Since 1970, the public school enrollment has increased in size and transformed in racial composition. Intensely segregated nonwhite schools with zero to 10% white enrollment have more than tripled in this most recent 25-year period for which we have data, a period deeply influenced by major Supreme Court decisions (spanning from 1991 to 2007) that limited desegregation policy. At the same time, the extreme isolation of white students in schools with 0 to 10% nonwhite students has declined by half as the share of white students has dropped sharply.

 

This brief shows states where racial segregation has become most extreme for Latinos and blacks and discusses some of the reasons for wide variations among states. We call the country’s attention to the striking rise in double segregation by race and poverty for African American and Latino students who are concentrated in schools that rarely attain the successful outcomes typical of middle class schools with largely white and Asian student populations. We show the obvious importance of confronting these issues given the strong relationship between racial and economic segregation and inferior educational opportunities clearly demonstrated in research over many decades.

 

 

The most intensely segregated states are New York, Maryland, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, and California.

 

It is worth noting that the two major federal initiatives of the past 15 years–No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top– completely ignored racial segregation.

 

Racial integration is no longer a federal or a national priority. It is no longer unusual to see the media celebrating the academic success of schools that are 100% nonwhite, without mentioning their racial isolation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I received this notice today. I responded and asked if the Commission might investigate how school choice via vouchers and charters was affecting racial resegregation. The growing resegregation of America’s schools should be an urgent concern for this Commission.

 

 
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Announces Date for Briefing Related to its Report, Public Education Funding Inequality in an Era of Increasing Concentration of Poverty and Resegregation

 
WASHINGTON, April 26, 2016 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights announced today that it will hold a public briefing on Friday, May 20, 2016, to examine the funding of K-12 education and how the inequitable distribution of these funds negatively and disproportionately impact the educational opportunities of low-income and minority students. The briefing will also address how the practice of underfunding public schools has exacerbated the academic achievement gap in an era where the nation’s most vulnerable children are increasingly educated in highly segregated and under-resourced schools.

 
The Commission’s public briefing and report titled “Public Education Funding Inequality in an Era of Increasing Concentration of Poverty and Resegregation” will address federal and state law related to public education funding, including Title I of the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The report will also offer recommendations on how federal, state, and local government can independently and collaboratively help ensure that all children in the United States have an equal opportunity to quality education regardless of race, national origin, and zip code.

 
Commission Chairman Martin R. Castro stated, “Education is the great equalizer in the United States. When we make access to education for our minority children more difficult and less equal and when the education they received is of less quality, whether de jure or de facto–it is unjust and must be changed. When we diminish educational opportunities for the least among us we diminish ourselves as a nation.”
Commissioner Karen K. Narasaki stated, “Despite Brown v. Board of Education, schools attended by minority children are still more likely to be racially isolated and lacking in sufficient resources with high concentrations of poverty. All students should have meaningful access to a quality education.”

 
WHAT:
Briefing on Public Educational Funding Inequality in an Era of Increasing Concentration of Poverty and Resegregation.
WHEN:
May 20, 2016, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST
Please arrive early as seating is limited or participate via teleconference.
WHERE:
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 1150
Washington, DC 20425 (Entrance on F Street NW)

 
LISTEN IN:

 
To listen to the Commission’s Briefing via telephone, please follow the instructions below:
Dial toll-free number 1-888-572-7034; Provide operator conference # 7822144.

 
DOCUMENTS:
The Commission is going green! Electronic versions of the briefing documents will be made available online the day before the briefing.
Deaf or hearing-impaired persons who require the services of a sign language interpreter should contact Pam Dunston at (202) 376-8105.
Follow, share, and be a part of the conversation on Twitter @USCCRGOV

 
Contact: Gerson Gomez
Media Advisor
(202) 376-8371
publicaffairs@usccr.gov

Tweet: https://Twitter.com/USCCRgov/status/725072639279124480