Click for Critique #1
Click for Critique #2
Click for Critique #3

Equal but Separate

The Madison County Consolidated School District is a newly formed county district consisting of the Deerpark School of Sylvan in the suburbs, and the Jefferson City schools. Minorities and urban poor have dominated the city schools in the most recent years. This plan was developed as a result of pressure from the city residents and court rulings in order to bring about educational equality and an acceptable racial balance in all of the schools.

On a voluntary basis some teachers followed these students to their new schools. The teacher mentioned in this case, Rosemary Andrews was particularly interested in the success and progress of her students. She had some concerns in leaving behind a system that was making some changes through the hard work and dedication of the staff and community, however she believed that a move to a more modern school with more resources would be a better situation for the students in general. Upon arriving in her 4^th grade classroom she discovered that most of the children in her classroom were from Jefferson City and that the other 4^th grade was comprised of students from the Sylvan area. Ms. Andrews was immediately concerned about the apparent separation of the students. This was not the intent of the consolidation as it was first formulated. In her mind this would only perpetuate the racial and economic division of these two groups of students. The students would not be afforded the social and academic interaction that would allow for growth and understanding. Ms. Andrews felt that in this sense the school was an educational failure and undemocratic in its beliefs and practices.

Ms. Andrews confronted the principal, Robert Shire of Sylvan, and explained her anger and disappointment with the placement of the students. Mr. Shire assured her that Deerpark would eventually comply with the spirit of the consolidation, but they also are committed to preserving the educational integrity of the school. Deerpark has a very rigorous and progressive curriculum that the students of Jefferson City have not been exposed to in their educational experience. Scores from Jefferson City show that those students are below the academic levels of their same age peers in Deerpark. Mr. Shire believes it will take time to bring them up to the appropriate grade level. He explains further that it would be unfair to both groups to have them put together in the same classrooms. It would be disruptive to the instructional process in general.

The issues in this case will be explored in the following manner. As a controversy, the issue can be analyzed with a benefit or cost scenario. By looking at the benefits and costs described both by Ms. Andrews and Mr. Shire it may be determined if they are: divisible or indivisible, absolute or positional, and symbolic or substantial. By reviewing an historical perspective of integration and desegregation in the educational system as described by Perkinson as well as Tesconi and Hurwitz, one can explore what has led to the issues discussed in this case. Soltis and Feinberg suggest that the case be considered from a conflict theorist’s and a functionalist’s point of view. How would a conflict theorist solve the issue of educational equality? Does Mr. Shire and Ms. Andrews represent the interest of the dominant class?

HISTORY

The history of the segregation and attempts at integration go back to the time of the reconstruction following the Civil War. The Northern power holders believed at that time that the south was sorely lacking in a sufficient educational system. With this in mind many philanthropic groups sent "Yankee teachers" to the south to begin the process of educating both blacks and whites. The southern residents saw this as further domination by the North and were very opposed to the new education. At the same time the South was also dealing with the issue of freed blacks. Fearing their domination or retribution those in authority passed Black Codes that controlled their freedoms in day to day activities, both economically and socially. The legal tactics of violence and intimidation made persons of the black race more vulnerable to indiscriminate violence against them. They no longer had the protection of their white owners. Due to the racists beliefs of the white community they would not allow their children to attend the newly formed schools, hence the schools had predominately black enrollments. The northern teachers also began teaching the children the fundamentals of government and how to be a part of the political system. The information taught was biased to the northern way of life. Again, this angered the Southern white community that believed that they were the superior race in all of America. They began educating their own children in the beliefs and traditions of the south, thus the beginnings of white supremacy.

As the public school system was established in the south during the immediate post-war period, bills were passed that constrained black persons by curtailing their educational opportunities while at the same time providing liberal educational opportunities for whites. Southern schools developed free public schools for "for whites only". At this same time Congress was passing a set of resolutions that would become the Fourteenth Amendment. In effect this amendment declared that blacks were citizens with all rights inherent in that position. Under military governance the north proclaimed that the south must ratify the Fourteenth Amendment in order to be represented in Congress. According to Perkinson the South was forced to halt the Black Codes and the discriminatory educational system. However, in further research of this situation it was shown not to occur.

Most black leaders believed that an equal education with whites in an integrated school setting was the answer to social and economic equality. Southern whites dreaded racially mixed schools and saw the black race as being uneducable and mixed schools being pedagogically inferior.

Two significant situations occurred between 1867 and 1875. In 1867 a New Englander George Peabody, gave $1 million to the South for encouraging and promoting schools. However this money was given only to those who could provide matching funds. Only cities and white communities could afford the matching funds. It was also felt at the time that white students were the disadvantaged due to their unwillingness to attend racially mixed schools, therefore the grant money was only given to segregated and non-public schools. In 1875 the Civil Rights Act was passed by congress without the provision for prohibiting segregated schools in public education. Again blacks were held victim to an unequal educational system.

The conflict of the formation of an equal and separate or an equal but segregated educational system can be traced to the early black leaders, Booker T. Washington and William E. B. Dubois. Washington expoused the belief that education for blacks should be geared toward a trade and skill, so that they could find their place in society, but not necessarily as equals. As a functionalist might believe it was the role of the black race to maintain an inferior position to whites but to contribute to the betterment of society through learning a trade or industry. Blacks would earn the respect of whites by practicing "thrift, industry and honesty" (Perkinson p. 53). In direct contrast were the beliefs of W.E.B. Dubois. Not evidencing the forward movement of the race by the present system and beliefs of Washington, Dubois held that black persons did not have to win the rights that were to be afforded to them through inherent rights as a citizen. The right of an equal education was not something that blacks had to achieve; it was theirs to have. Dubois aligned himself with the beliefs of the conflict theorists in that he believed in an elite and separate education for the blacks not based on merit. This was the solution to equality for the black race to become an educated elite and move on to higher education. Only a society of total equality could secure justice for the black race.

In May 1955 the Supreme Court ordered the racial desegregation of all public schools, however this was not a ruling that the south would comply with. Two conflicting movements developed at that time, a more nonviolent approach to an integrated America was led by the Rev. Martin Luther King, who believed that white America needed to be educated concerning the extent of racism. At the other end of the spectrum were the Black Nationalists who believed that their race should welcome a segregated America. Black Nationalists rejected the white schools and preferred to establish small community schools. Other black leaders of the sixties rejected the functionalist belief in merit and demanded job quotas and preferential treatment for the admission to higher education.

As black enrollments increased in the white schools, white parents removed their children and entered them in private schools. At this time schools underwent a change supported by Mr. Shire in this case. Schools became multi-leveled. Tracking students into levels of ability that in fact separated the students along racial lines. Also supporting Mr. Shire’s concern are the beliefs of some black leaders during the mid-sixties. Mixing lower class black children with middle class whites did not hasten an integrated society. According to Perkinson those schools that created a racial balance showed that being in classrooms with middle class whites did not stimulate the black students. They seemed to give up trying. For white children integrated classrooms created derogatory racial stereotypes, when there were none before. Black leaders called for compensatory education that would place them on level with white students. Then as Mr. Shire points out both groups could benefit from the integrated experience. Perkinson concludes in his historical review that; "while holding out the promise the promise of an integrated society, the American schools had in fact functioned as a barrier against it". (Perkinson, p 61) It should be noted that this historical review speaks of equality and integration as it relates to the black and poor white populations of the South. Feinberg and Soltis address the populations discussed in the case as minority and urban poor. We are not given enough information to determine particular races included in the general term of minority.

CONFLICT THEORY

The principal of Deerpark School, Mr. Shire has stated his belief that students from Jefferson City would benefit from a year of compensatory education before entering into the mainstream of the suburban classes. As a functionalist Mr. Shire believes that he is protecting the reputation and standards of the upper class school and also preparing the lower class students to elevate their abilities and enter the predominately white middle class environment on an equal playing field. It is not apparent however, if Mr. Shire intended for his policy to have the negative social and educational effects that Ms. Andrews delineates. From a conflict theorist point of view, as Ms. Andrews exemplifies, this action is meant to keep the lower class urban students at a disadvantage, by not allowing them the exposure to the same curriculum and instructed in a similar manner with the more advantaged students. Whether intentional or not, the problem as seen by a conflict theorist is that it takes the interests and morals of the dominant social group and elevates them to the level of acceptance by all. It then uses these norms to measure the success and contributions of all other groups in society. The interests of a particular group, as in this case suburban, middle class, are believed to belong to the society as a whole. This in turn maintains the position of the privileged class. Ms. Andrews believes that by combining the children in classrooms and allowing them to share and experience each other’s cultures, racial barriers can be resolved and all children would learn and benefit. In broadening her beliefs one might say that the resources and exposure to curriculum should not be given out according to ability level but should be given to those who need it most, in this case those children who have attended the Jefferson City schools. The benefits of the more rigorous curriculum should be afforded to those who need it most. Need, according to Tesconi and Hurwitz, can be defined, as the resources needed to achieve the wanted results. The wanted results in this case are that the new students be brought up to the level of the existing student population.

ANALYSIS OF CONTROVERSY

Those involved in a controversial situation believe and attempt to convince others that what they propose is the most beneficial choice. One way to look at a controversy as described in Analyzing Controversy, is to examine the benefits and costs. Benefits and costs can be categorized in the following types; divisible or indivisible, absolute or positional and substantial or symbolic.
The process begins by listing the claims made by Ms. Andrews and Mr. Shire in this particular case. Ms. Andrews believes that by integrating the two groups of children they will benefit by learning about each other’s cultures as well as overcoming racial barriers. According to the principal, Mr. Shire, the benefits of keeping the children separate would be to allow the Jefferson City children time to become comfortable with their new school and also time to catch up academically with the students of Deerpark. At the same time the school would benefit by keeping their high academic standards and scores. Divisible benefits are those that can be experienced by some but not all. With this in mind the benefits described by Mr. Shire are divisible benefits that will be experienced by those capable but experienced in a different way by those deemed not capable. Ms. Andrews believes that indivisible benefit are those that should not be restricted and must benefit all groups to be worthwhile to any. She also believes that the costs involved will be indivisible in that all groups will suffer from the lack of integration and understanding. Mr. Shire sees a divisible cost paid initially by the new students but at the benefit of all being equal in the long run. Both see the end result as being for the good of all, an indivisible benefit.

The next type of analysis is to consider if the benefit is absolute or positional. Absolute benefits can be of value to an individual no matter how many other people enjoy them. They do not necessarily give advantage to one group over another and they are dependent upon another’s sense of values. Ms. Andrews sees the original intention of the consolidated school district as being an absolute benefit to all, the understanding and equality of education for all students. The worth of a positional benefit depends upon the scarcity of that benefit. It does give others an advantage and is dependent upon another’s sense of values. Ms. Andrews believes that the beliefs of the principal are positional in nature in that only the advantaged may experience the stronger curriculum and instruction and the disadvantaged group will be denied the benefit achieved from an integrated setting.

The last classification for benefits and costs is if they are substantial or symbolic. A substantial benefit or cost is one that is recognized as valuable across groups. Only members of a certain group see a symbolic benefit as valuable. In this case both the principal and teacher believe that the benefits of their proposals are valuable to both groups. This is a limited look at the benefits and cost analysis of the beliefs of those involved in this case. As pointed out in Analyzing Controversy, one must also take into account the perceptions of each group and is there a common understanding of the issues.

In summary I believe most of us would take the position of Ms. Andrews in that the initial intent of the project was to bring about an equality of education and social interaction for both groups of children. With that in mind as Mr. Shire attempts to separate the two groups the original intent of the project is lost. However, we may also assume that the principal’s intent is not found in malicious beliefs. He is attempting to maintain the integrity of the school and at the same time perhaps protect the interest and integrity of both groups of children. Our biases however may lead us to assume that his intent is one of racial elitism. The historical review of this paper briefly touched the belief of some that a totally integrated situation is not the best solution for minority students. Certainly a more extensive look at this issue, outside the parameters of this assignment, would glean pertinent information that would allow us to further speculate on intent and benefits.

Ms. Andrews has been appropriate and professional in her actions with Mr. Shire. As the program is evaluated and monitored she may take the opportunity to share her concerns in a more formal setting. A more immediate course of action could involve a team teaching experience with the other fourth grade class. Many activities dealing with the social and cultural interaction and instruction could be developed. There was no expectation stated that the students in both classes had to remain in those classrooms separate from their peers for the entire school day. A sharing between teachers and students could easily be accommodated. Ms. Andrews may also find that seeking training for herself involving the new curriculum would certainly benefit the students in her classroom. One must be careful to not assume that she would be giving her students an inferior education.
 

Clabaugh, G.C., Rozycki, E. G. (1997). Analyzing Controversy, An Introductory Guide.

Dushkin/McGraw Hill.

Feinberg, W., Soltis, J. F.. (1998) School and Society. Teachers College Press.

Perkinson, H. J. (1995) The Imperfect Panacea, American Faith in Education. McGraw Hill.

Hurwitz, E.. Jr., Tesconi, C. A.., Jr. (1974). Education for Whom? The Question of Equal Educational Opportunity. Dodd, Mead and Company.

TO TOP