|
April 2004 | Issue Number
37
Brown v. Board of Education
Reflections on the 50th Anniversary of the
Landmark Decision
By Dan Laitsch and Katherine G. Rodi
In the 50 years since Brown v. Board of Education
of Topeka formally desegregated public schools, there has
been enormous progress in the academic success of African
Americans, particularly in high school completion, improved
test scores, increased college enrollment, and attainment
of advanced degrees, as well as full access to and participation
in all areas of employment. Despite the great strides that
have been made over the past half-century, however, many schools
in the United States are once again segregating; previous
efforts to address inequities and racial isolation, including
busing and affirmative action, are being rolled back; and
serious disparities remain in minority graduation rates, school
achievement, and participation in higher education.
Many of the current issues that educators
and policymakers face regarding race and minority achievement
have their roots in the history of Brown. The issues that
originated under the institutional racism that led to the
segregation of black students now apply more broadly to Hispanics,
Asians, and other ethnic, minority, and disability groups,
as well as economically segregated students and communities.
As we celebrate the successes of the past 50 years, it is
important to look at the broader picture surrounding Brown
and work to ensure that we hold true to the legacy of a belief
that separate is inherently unequal.
The Road to Brown
Fifty years ago, racial segregation of public schools in the
United States was the norm in 17 states. The 1896 Supreme
Court decision in Plessy v. Ferguson made racial segregation
possible when the justices ruled that state provision of "separate
but equal" public services did not violate the equal
protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution. Plessy remained the law until incremental challenges
to this doctrine began to appear in the late 1930s.
The effort to integrate U.S. public schools
was the culmination of a long-term strategy that also included
successful challenges to desegregate other public institutions—specifically,
publicly funded law schools. Between 1936 and 1950, Maryland,
Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas were all required to desegregate
their public law schools and admit black students (Pearson
v. Murray, Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada, Sipuel v. Board
of Regents of Oklahoma, and Sweatt v. Painter). In large part,
these cases set the stage for the Brown decision.
Brown v. Board of Education originated in
Topeka, Kan., where Linda Brown, a black 3rd grade student,
had to attend a segregated elementary school located a mile
from her home, even though she lived only a few blocks from
a white elementary school. Oliver Brown, Linda's father, unsuccessfully
attempted to enroll her at the white elementary school and
sought the assistance of the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). In 1951, the NAACP
began the process that ultimately led to the overturning of
Plessy when, on behalf of Brown and other black parents, the
organization asked the U.S. District Court for the District
of Kansas for an injunction that would prevent segregation
in Topeka's public schools. The injunction was denied, based
on the precedent set forth in Plessy, even though the judges
were sympathetic to the plaintiff's arguments. Brown and the
NAACP appealed this decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Brown Reaches the Supreme Court
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, also known as Brown
I, actually represented four cases that were tried together
under the same challenge:
Brown v. Board of Education
Briggs v. Elliot
Davis v. County School Board
Gebhart v. Belton
A fifth case, Bolling v. Sharpe, was also heard by the Supreme
Court at the same time, although the decision was released
separately. The NAACP legal team—which included future
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall—had carefully
selected the plaintiffs in these cases to maximize their chances
for successfully challenging the separate-but-equal doctrine.
The first four cases hinged on the argument that segregation
denied blacks equal protection of the laws as required by
the Fourteenth Amendment, which states (in part):
All persons born or naturalized in the United
States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens
of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge
the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Bolling v. Sharpe was an important extension
of Brown because it originated in the District of Columbia
and, because the District is not a state, relied on a broader
Fifth Amendment challenge ("No person shall be . . .
deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process
of law . . .").
The Supreme Court first heard the combined
cases in December 1952, but the justices were unable to come
to a decision. Justice Felix Frankfurter proposed that the
Court delay making a decision, instead asking attorneys for
each side to reargue the case with an emphasis on the historical
implications of the Fourteenth Amendment. The other justices
agreed, and the case was rescheduled for the next term. The
delay proved to be a significant turning point for Brown.
In early September 1953, Chief Justice Fred Vinson died, and
Earl Warren eventually became chief justice. Brown was reheard
in December of that year, and in March 1954 Warren began working
to overturn Plessy. Ultimately he was able to get all nine
justices to concur. On May 17, two days after the justices
formally voted to overturn the separate-but-equal doctrine
established by Plessy, the Court announced its decision (Totenberg,
2003). Chief Justice Earl Warren read:
We come then to the question presented: Does
segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis
of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible"
factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority
group of equal educational opportunities? We believe that
it does . . . . We conclude that in the field of public education
the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place.
Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore,
we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated
for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the
segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection
of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. (Brown
v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483, 485)
After Brown
While the Supreme Court struck down the separate-but-equal
doctrine of Plessy for public education—thus requiring
the desegregation of U.S. public schools—the Brown decision
did not abolish segregation in other public areas, nor did
it articulate a time frame for the desegregation of public
schools. It did, however, set the stage for Brown II. It also
added to the current and historical momentum that ultimately
led to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which did address public
segregation, strengthen voting rights, increase employment
opportunities, and reduce federal aid to discriminatory programs
(CongressLink, n.d.).
As part of the initial Brown decision, the
justices asked the parties in the case to return to the Supreme
Court within six months and present alternatives for implementing
desegregation. This follow-up case came to be known as Brown
II. The decision in Brown II (Brown v. Board of Education,
349 U.S. 294) stated that the desegregation of public schools
should happen "with all deliberate speed." For years
after Brown II, plaintiffs who challenged the existence of
segregated schools in the South dominated the lower federal
courts. Some state governments worked to defy the Court's
decision rather than desegregate. In Little Rock, Ark., Governor
Orval Faubus mobilized the state's National Guard to keep
nine black students from entering Little Rock High School
in 1957. Although Governor Faubus ultimately removed the Guard
troops, a hostile mob outside of the school kept the black
students from going to classes. Finally, at a request for
help by the city's mayor, President Eisenhower ordered U.S.
Army paratroopers from the 101st Airborne Division to escort
the students into the formerly all-white school.
Reforms Used to Circumvent Integration
Even though Little Rock High School had been technically desegregated,
the efforts to circumvent Brown continued. In 1958, Governor
Faubus convened a special session of the legislature to enact
two laws (Acts 4 and 5) allowing him to close the public high
schools in Little Rock, lease the buildings to private school
corporations, and allow the public funding allocated for education
to follow students to their "new" schools. In 1958,
the high schools were closed, and more than 750 white students
attended a new private school, T. J. Raney High School (named
after the head of the private school corporation). After a
year of turmoil involving the election, resignation, and recall
of many of the school board members—and ultimately a
federal court ruling that the school closures and voucher
system were illegal—the high schools reopened in August
1959 and began to peacefully integrate; however, it was not
until 1972 that Little Rock schools were fully integrated
(Rains, 1997; Central High Museum and Visitor Center, 1997).
Virginia, one of the original states included
in the Brown decision, also attempted to bypass the Brown
decision by passing legislation in 1956 that closed schools
with mixed enrollment, cut off funding, and provided tuition
vouchers for children to enroll in private (segregated) schools.
After the Virginia Supreme Court ruled the law was invalid
under the state's constitution, the legislature enacted a
new tuition voucher program and repealed the state's compulsory
education laws. Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that
Virginia's actions violated the Fourteenth Amendment's equal
protection clause and ordered the schools reopened (Griffin
v. County School Board, 1964). In their decision, the justices
announced: "The time for mere 'deliberate speed' has
run out." Because of Virginia's resistance, more than
2,300 black children in Prince Edward County were denied access
to public schools for four years, and integration was delayed
for almost a decade. In 2003, state representative Viola Baskerville
proposed a resolution, agreed to by both the Virginia House
and Senate, expressing the General Assembly's regret over
the school closings (House Joint Resolution No. 613).
Despite the resistance, other court decisions
began to carry out the Brown ruling by expanding and clarifying
the Supreme Court's expectations. But the evolution was hard
fought and slow in many states. In Green v. County School
Board of New Kent County (1968), the Supreme Court declared
that segregation resulting from public school choice was not
acceptable. This decision reaffirmed the Court's earlier rulings
that desegregation efforts must apply to all aspects of public
education, including faculties and staff, as well as transportation
and extracurricular activities. In 1971, Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Board of Education confirmed that once previous desegregation
orders had been violated, lower courts had broad authority
to determine necessary remedies, including the redrawing of
attendance boundaries and busing of students. In 1974, the
Supreme Court affirmed that the state could be held fiscally
responsible for addressing past issues of constitutional violations
through remedial and compensatory education (Milliken v. Bradley).
Three years later, in Milliken II (1977), the Court devised
a three-part test to guide lower courts in applying remedies,
specifying that the ultimate goal was a return to local decision
making:
The remedy must be related to the "condition
alleged to offend the Constitution."
The decree must be remedial—designed
"to restore the victims of discriminatory conduct to
the position they would have occupied in the absence of such
conduct."
The federal courts must take into account
the "interests of state and local authorities in managing
their own affairs, consistent with the Constitution."
In 1991, the Supreme Court ruled that school districts could
seek to declare "unitary status," thereby ending
efforts at desegregation and returning to neighborhood school
attendance policies (Board of Education of Oklahoma City v.
Dowell, 1991). In 1992, and again in 1995, the Court reiterated
the desire for a return of decision-making power to localities,
writing that "the District Court must bear in mind that
its end purpose is not only 'to remedy the violation' to the
extent practicable but also 'to restore state and local authorities
to the control of a school system that is operating in compliance
with the Constitution'" (Missouri v. Jenkins, 1995).
More recently, the courts have begun to resolve much of the
litigation related to addressing past instances of unconstitutional
segregation, including long-running cases in Charlotte-Mecklenburg,
N.C.; Dallas, Tex.; and Kansas City, Mo.
Current Cases
Fifty years after Brown called for integration of schools
"with all deliberate speed," there are still a number
of challenges related to education and race in the courts—both
from long-term cases that have yet to be resolved and cases
resulting from more recent actions by public officials. Cases
in which the U.S. Department of Justice has been involved
include the following:
Lee v. Phenix City Board of Education (2000).
Disproportionately high numbers of black students were placed
in special education in Alabama and disproportionately low
numbers of black students were enrolled in the state's gifted
and talented programs, which pointed to a form of segregation.
A consent decree was filed requiring the state to provide
teacher training, mentoring, and improved reading programs,
as well as to change Alabama law regarding special education
prereferral, referral, evaluation, and eligibility criteria
to emphasize documentation of referral behaviors and interventions
attempted.
McFarland, et al. v. Jefferson County Public
Schools. In 2002, shortly after the Kentucky district emerged
from judicial supervision, a parent of two white children
sued the district because of its managed school choice policy,
which seeks in part to maintain a racial balance in each school
(NAACP Legal Defense Fund, 2003).
United States v. Bertie County Board of Education.
In early 2003, the district court ruled that the Bertie County
(N.C.) Board of Education needed to file a new desegregation
plan because of continuing inequities in staffing, student
assignment, and transfer options.
United States v. Calhoun County School District.
In 2003, Calhoun County (Tenn.) School District was required
to amend its intradistrict school choice policies so that
they would not result in increased segregation of schools.
United States v. Cotton Plant School District
#1 (Watson Chapel School District #24). In 2001, the Department
of Justice determined that the Arkansas district was using
busing and choice to maintain a white-majority school in a
black-majority district. The white-majority school was ultimately
closed as part of a new desegregation plan.
United States v. Port Arthur Independent
School District. In 2003, the Texas district applied for dismissal
of the desegregation rulings imposed upon it, despite noncompliance
with a 2001 agreement stemming from previous noncompliance.
The parties developed a new agreement regarding student transfers,
faculty and staff assignment, and development of a new magnet
program. The Department of Justice noted that "given
the district's history of noncompliance, the agreement precludes
the district from moving for unitary status for at least two
years to allow monitoring of the district's performance."
United States v. Tunica County School District.
The district sought to build a new school in a white-majority
community, however, to obtain the court's approval—because
the Mississippi district was under a desegregation order—the
school site ultimately had to be moved closer to black communities
(U.S. Department of Justice, 2003).
In addition to continuing issues at the K-12 level, issues
of affirmative action at the higher education level continue
to be a concern. The 2003 Supreme Court decision in Grutter
v. Bollinger upheld the narrow use of race in law school admissions
and, in doing so, acknowledged that despite 50 years of efforts
to address the effects of segregation, race is still a significant
issue in equalization of education. In the Grutter decision,
Justice O'Connor recognized the legacy of Brown:
This Court has long recognized that "education
is the very foundation of good citizenship" (Brown v.
Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483, 493). For this reason, the
diffusion of knowledge and opportunity through public institutions
of higher education must be accessible to all individuals
regardless of race or ethnicity. Effective participation by
members of all racial and ethnic groups in the civic life
of our Nation is essential if the dream of one Nation, indivisible,
is to be realized.
Equity, Excellence, and Integration
As Justice O'Connor noted, education is the foundation of
good citizenship and offers the basic building blocks for
successful participation as an adult and citizen in our national
and global societies. However, despite great progress in increasing
equity and excellence in the education of all students over
the past half-century, significant challenges remain.
According to a recent report by the Harvard
Civil Rights Project (Orfield & Lee, 2004), schools have
become significantly more segregated over the last 15 years,
particularly in districts emerging from judicial supervision.
In southern states in 1988, for instance, 56.5 percent of
black students attended schools where the majority of the
students were black; however, by 2001 that percentage had
climbed back to almost 70 percent. Similar trends were observed
in border states and in the Midwest and West. In the Northeast,
schools have slowly become more segregated, rising from 66.8
percent of minority students in minority-dominant schools
in 1968 to 78.4 percent by 2001.
The report also tracks the relationship between
student poverty level and the racial composition of schools,
noting that as the percentage of black and Hispanic students
in a school increases, so does the percentage of students
in poverty. In 87.6 percent of the schools that have 90–100
percent minority enrollments, more than half of the students
are also poor. Such extremely segregated schools with high-poverty
rates present a particular challenge to providing the resources
needed to ensure a quality education.
A recent report by the Educational Testing
Service (ETS) highlights some of the educational and societal
problems such high-poverty communities face (Barton, 2003).
The report offers 14 indicators of school and community health
associated with student achievement. At the school level,
six items were reported: quality of curriculum, strength of
teacher preparation, extent of teacher experience and attendance,
small class size, availability of technology-assisted instruction,
and school safety. Community characteristics included parents'
participation in their children's education, student mobility
rates, number of low-birth-weight babies, degree of lead poisoning,
hunger and nutrition, degree to which young children were
read to, amount of television watched, and availability of
parents. In every category there were gaps between minority
populations and whites, and for 11 indicators the report identifies
inequities between high- and low-poverty families (for two
of the remaining three indicators, data were insufficient
to evaluate the gaps).
The indicators and gaps identified in the
ETS report may be further exacerbated by the inequitable distribution
of resources between high- and low-poverty communities and
high- and low-minority communities. Research shows that resources
do matter in education (Greenwald, Hedges, & Laine, 1996),
but serious inequities remain (Biddle & Berliner, 2003;
Orfield & Lee, 2004). In many instances, the schools with
the highest levels of poverty and the greatest numbers of
minority students receive the fewest resources. According
to a recent report by the Education Trust, in the vast majority
of states, the school districts with the largest numbers of
poor students spend less money per pupil than the school districts
with the fewest poor students (Carey, 2003). Researchers estimate
that an additional $3.62 billion would be needed in New York
City schools alone to provide the resources necessary to ensure
an adequate education for all students (Chambers, Parrish,
Smith, & Guthrie, 2004). Similarly, students in wealthy
schools are much less likely than their peers in high-poverty
schools to be taught by teachers teaching subjects in which
they are not fully qualified (Jerald & Ingersoll, 2002).
The results of these inequities are severe
enough to have resulted in school finance lawsuits in 43 states,
with 19 cases still active as of the year 2000 (Education
Commission of the States, 2000). Although individuals frequently
initiate these lawsuits, in some cases districts have sued
over perceived inequities. Generally, the challenges take
one of two approaches: a challenge to the equity of funding
or a challenge to the adequacy of funding. Although school
finance litigation has historically focused on the equity
of funding, as content standards have been better defined
and assessed, lawsuits claiming that the states are not providing
adequate resources for all students to meet the required standards
are increasingly seen as more effective (Laitsch, 2003).
The Next 50 Years
Tremendous progress has been made in increasing the equity
and excellence of American schools since the original Brown
decision. Between 1972 and 1997, the number of black students
without a high school diploma has dropped by one-third, from
21 percent to 13 percent. The percentage of black students
completing a core academic curriculum in high school (four
years of English and three years of math, science, and social
studies) jumped from 12 percent in 1982 to 45 percent in 1994.
The percentage of black high school graduates taking advanced
courses including Algebra II, trigonometry, and physics almost
doubled between those same years. The average score of black
students on the National Assessment of Education Progress
rose in math and science between 1982 and 1996, and the number
of black students taking Advanced Placement (AP) exams has
more than quadrupled. Finally, college attendance and graduation
rates for black students have increased substantially since
1983.
Even as we recognize and celebrate these
successes, it is important to also recognize that serious
challenges and inequities remain. Despite the improvements
noted above, significant gaps in the average performance of
white and black students remain, and many black students attend
segregated and high-poverty schools that are underfunded.
Policymakers, education leaders, teachers, parents, students,
and communities all have a role to play in erasing the vestiges
of segregation and institutionalized racism that existed prior
to Brown and the lingering effects felt today.
At the federal level, Representatives Chaka
Fattah (D-Pa.) and Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) have introduced
proposals designed to support a nationwide system of high-quality
and equitable public schools. Congressman Fattah and 180 cosponsors
have introduced legislation that would establish a Student
Bill of Rights (House Bill 236), and Congressman Jackson has
offered a constitutional amendment to guarantee the right
of all citizens to receive a public education of "equal
high quality."
To address many of the external factors affecting
the academic achievement of minority students, reform efforts
should also be broadened from a focus on schools to a focus
on schools as part of a larger learning community. Although
community factors aren't an excuse for low expectations, ignoring
these effects is not responsible policymaking. The community
schools movement, for example, holds great promise for improving
the quality of education available to all students, particularly
those who face the added challenges of community-wide poverty.
Such schools seek to help place education in a broader context
and unite a variety of disparate social and educational programs
into a unified and powerful whole (Blank & Shah, 2003).
Activists and researchers have also recommended
that reforms continue to focus on raising achievement expectations
and providing a challenging and rich curriculum, qualified
and experienced teachers, safe and orderly classrooms, support
of programs that help schools deal with issues of race, inclusion
of multicultural curricula, and active recruitment of minorities
into the teaching profession (Barton, 2003; Orfield, 2004).
School construction efforts and attendance boundaries can
focus on community diversity when building sites are selected,
thus improving integration while supporting neighborhood schools.
Policymakers and educators can continue to support diversity
as an inherent value in—and goal of—education, through
programs designed to ensure a diverse student body and open
access to education at all levels. Within the broader community,
policymakers can look at establishing and supporting programs
that provide fiscal stimulus and incentives for housing integration
as well as assistance for low-income families seeking access
to middle-class communities (Orfield, 2004). Finally, ongoing
measurement of and attention to the inequities present in
the current system can help to build momentum for continuous
improvement and ensure that progress made over 50 years is
not lost.
Educators and policymakers must pick up where
the courts have left off. As noted by the Supreme Court in
recent decisions, it is ultimately the responsibility of the
local communities to ensure that the legacy of Brown is honored.
References
Barton, P. (2003). Parsing the achievement gap: Baselines
for tracking progress. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing
Service. Retrieved February 29, 2004, from http://www.ets.org/research/pic/parsing.pdf
Biddle, B., & Berliner, D. (2003). What
research says about unequal funding. Policy Perspectives,
3(1). San Francisco: WestEd. Retrieved February 27, 2004,
from http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/pp-03-01.pdf
Blank, M., & Shah, B. (2004). Educators
and community sharing responsibility for student learning.
Infobrief (36). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development. Retrieved March 1, 2004 from http://www.ascd.org/publications/infobrief/issue36.html
Board of Education of Oklahoma City v. Dowell,
498 U.S. 237 (1991). Retrieved February 25, 2004, from http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/89-1080.ZO.html
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483
(1954). Retrieved February 25, 2004, from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=347&invol=483
Carey, K. (2003). The funding gap. Washington,
DC: Education Trust. Retrieved February 27, 2004, from http://www2.edtrust.org/NR/rdonlyres/EE004C0A-D7B8-40A6-8A03-1F26B8228502/0/funding2003.pdf
Central High Museum and Visitor Center. (1997).
Central High timeline: 1958–59. Retrieved April 30, 2004,
from http://www.centralhigh57.org/1957-58.htm
Chambers, J., Parrish, T., Smith, J., &
Guthrie, J. (2004). The New York adequacy study: "Adequate"
education cost in New York State [Project preliminary report].
Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research (AIR) and
Management Analysis and Planning (MAP). Retrieved February
27, 2004, from http://www.cfequity.org/Costingout/FINALVERSION-PRELIMINARYREPORT-2004-02-03.pdf
CongressLink. (n.d.). Narrative: The Civil
Rights Act of 1964. Washington, DC: The Dirksen Congressional
Center. Retrieved February 25, 2004, from http://www.congresslink.org/civil/esscon.html
Education Commission of the States. (2000).
ECS StateNotes: Finance litigation. Denver, CO: Author. Retrieved
February 27, 2004, from http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/18/23/1823.pdf
Green v. County School Board of New Kent
County, 391 U.S. 430 (1968). Retrieved February 25, 2004,
from http://www.brownat50.org/brownCases/PostBrownCases/greenVKentCoSchoolVA.htm
Greenwald, R., Hedges, L., & Laine, R.
(1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement.
Review of Educational Research, 66(3), 361–397.
Griffin v. County School Board, 377 U.S.
218, 234 (1964). Retrieved February 26, 2004, from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=377&page=218
Grutter v. Bollinger, et al., 539 U.S. 02-241
(2003). Retrieved February 27, 2004, from http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/02pdf/02-241.pdf
Kober, N. (2000). Do you know the good news
about American education? Washington, DC: Center on Education
Policy. Retrieved March 1, 2004, from http://www.ctredpol.org/pubs/goodnewsamericaned2000/goodnewsamericaned2000.pdf
Laitsch, D. (2003, October). Focus on: Equity
and adequacy. EDPolicy Update, 2(10). Retrieved March 1, 2004,
fro URL="http://www.ascd.org/cms/index.cfm?TheViewID=2224">http://www.ascd.org/cms/index.cfm?TheViewID=2224.
Lee v. Phenix City Board of Education, Consent
Decree (2000). Retrieved February 26, 2004, from http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/edo/documents/leeor.htm
Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717 (1974).
Retrieved February 26, 2004, from http://www.brownat50.org/brownCases/PostBrownCases/Milliken1974.htm
Milliken v. Bradley, 433 U.S. 267 (1977).
Retrieved February 26, 2004, from http://www.brownat50.org/brownCases/PostBrownCases/MillikenII1977.htm
Missouri v. Jenkins (93-1823), 515 U.S. 70
(1995). Retrieved February 26, 2004, from http://www.brownat50.org/brownCases/PostBrownCases/MOvJenkinsII1995.pdf
NAACP Legal Defense Fund. (2003, December
4). LDF granted role in first challenge to a public school's
race-conscious student assignment policies since Supreme Court's
Michigan rulings. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved February
26, 2004, from http://www.naacpldf.org/whatsnew/wn_doc_ldf_mcfarland.html
Orfield, G., & Lee, C. (2004). Brown
at 50: King's dream or Plessy's nightmare? Cambridge, MA:
Harvard Civil Rights Project. Retrieved February 29, 2004,
from http://www.civilrightsproject.harvard.edu/research/reseg04/brown50.pdf
Rains, C. (1997). Central High 40th anniversary.
Retrieved February 25, 2004, from http://www.centralhigh57.org
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education,
402 U.S. 1 (1971). Retrieved February 26, 2004, from http://www.brownat50.org/brownCases/PostBrownCases/SwannvCharlotte-bussing.htm
Totenberg, N. (2003, December 8). The Supreme
Court and Brown v. Board of Ed: The deliberations behind the
landmark 1954 ruling. Washington, DC: National Public Radio.
Retrieved February 24, 2004, from http://www.npr.org/display_pages/features/feature_1537409.html
U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights
Division, Educational Opportunities Section. (2003). Case
summaries. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved February 26,
2004, from http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/edo/documents/casesummary.htm
Resources
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=347&invol=483
Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U.S. 294
(1955) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=349&invol=294
Brown at 50: Fulfilling the Promise http://www.brownat50.org
Central High 40th Anniversary Web site http://www.centralhigh57.org
Central High Museum and Visitor Center http://home.swbell.net/chmuseum
U.S. Department of Education, Office for
Civil Rights http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/index.html
U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights
Division, Educational Opportunities Section http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/edo
If we are to close the achievement gap, high-poverty students,
students with special learning needs, students of different
cultural and ethnic backgrounds, English language learners,
urban and rural students, and other underserved populations
must have access to an engaging and challenging curriculum,
high-quality instructors, the benefit of innovative pedagogy
and school designs, and the additional school and community
resources necessary to ensure that they excel academically
and thrive as individuals. Policymakers have a responsibility
to provide the policy and funding support necessary to close
the gaps.
—Gene R. Carter, ASCD Executive Director
|
