Jump to content

School segregation in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tamaz.young (talk | contribs) at 07:45, 15 October 2021 (copied from User:Tamaz.young/School segregation in the United States). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Ruby Bridges' escort from one of the workshops at the 2019 Martin Luther King Jr. Youth March and Celebration, hosted by Seattle Parks and Recreation.

Part of a series on
Racial segregation
Overview
Historical examples
Contemporary examples
Related

School segregation in the United States is the separation of students based on their race to the extent that an institution can be labeled to be for black students or white students.[1] This discrimination has a long history that leads up to modern times. In 1832, Prudence Crandall admitted an African American girl to her all-white Canterbury Female Boarding School in Canterbury, Connecticut, which was the subject of public backlash and protests. She converted the boarding school to one for only African American girls, but Crandall was jailed for her efforts for violating a Black Law. In 1835, an anti-abolitionist mob attacked and destroyed Noyes Academy, an integrated school in Canaan, New Hampshire founded by abolitionists in New England. In 1849, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that segregated schools were allowed under the Constitution of Massachusetts (Roberts v. City of Boston).[2]

Segregation took de jure form with the passage of Jim Crow laws in the 19th century, then de facto form after the ruling of Brown v. Board of Education which banned segregated schools on the basis of legality. Such laws were influenced by discrimination throughout the United States, as well as the history of slavery in the southern states. Patterns of residential segregation and Supreme Court rulings regarding previous school desegregation efforts also have a role.

School segregation declined rapidly during the late 1960s and early 1970s as the government became strict on schools' plans to combat segregation more effectively as a result of Green v. County School Board of New Kent County.[3] However, segregation appears to have increased since 1990 based on decreases in the black-white exposure index and the resegregation of blacks into public schools.[3] More recently, residential segregation in the United States and school choice determine the outcomes and effects of school segregation.[4] The disparity in the average poverty rate in the schools White students attend and Black students attend is the single most important factor in the educational achievement gap between White and Black students.[5]

Historical segregation

Reconstruction era

Jim Crow laws in the Southern United States required school segregation, 1877–1954.
Students in a one-room school in Waldorf, Maryland (1941)

The formal segregation of Black and White people in the United States began long before the passage of Jim Crow laws following the end of the Reconstruction Era in 1877.[6] The United States Supreme Court's Dred Scott v. Sandford decision upheld the denial of citizenship to African Americans and found that descendants of slaves are "so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect."

Following the American Civil War and the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment which ended slavery throughout the entire United States, the Fourteenth Amendment, guaranteeing "equal protection under the law", was ratified in 1868, and citizenship was extended to African Americans. Congress also passed the Civil Rights Act of 1875, banning racial discrimination in public accommodations. But in 1883, the Supreme Court struck down the Civil Rights Act of 1875, finding that discrimination by individuals or private businesses is constitutional.

Jim Crow Era

The Reconstruction Era saw efforts at integration in the South, but Jim Crow laws followed and were also passed by state legislatures in the South and parts of the lower Midwest and Southwest, segregating Black and White people in all aspects of public life, including attendance of public schools.[7]

The constitutionality of Jim Crow laws was upheld in the Supreme Court's decision in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), which ruled that separate facilities for Black and White people were permissible provided that the facilities were of equal quality.[6] The fact that separate facilities for Black people and other minorities were chronically underfunded and of lesser quality was not successfully challenged in court for decades.

New Deal era

Throughout the New Deal era, Franklin D. Roosevelt enacted certain housing reforms that focused their benefits on home buying aid to only white Americans. [8] These restrictions in loans introduce the effects that residential segregation projects on schooling by separating black and white neighborhoods. These housing projects were intentionally drawn so that black neighborhoods had less access to education and jobs which contributes to average poverty rates that Reardon relates to academic achievement gaps.[8][9]

The establishment of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund in 1939 serves as the foundation of the efforts and funding to challenge school segregation. Initially ran by Charles Hamilton Houston, who started his work by suing universities in the south for allowing blacks to apply to their graduate programs, the LDF shifted its leadership when Houston eventually hired Thurgood Marshall, the first director of the LDF and leader in court battles.

Civil Rights era

Plessy v. Ferguson was subsequently overturned in 1954, when the Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Board of Education ended de jure segregation in the United States.[10] The state of Arkansas would experience some of the first successful school integrations below the Mason-Dixon Line.[11] In the decade following Brown, the South resisted enforcement of the Court's decision.[10] States and school districts did little to reduce segregation, and schools remained almost completely segregated until 1968, after Congressional passage of civil rights legislation.[12] In response to pressures to desegregate in the public school system, some white communities started private segregated schools, but rulings in Green v. Connally (1971) and Runyon v. McCrary (1976) prohibited racial discrimination in private schools and revoked IRS-granted non-profit status of schools in violation.[13] Desegregation efforts reached their peak in the late 1960s and early 1970s, a period in which the South transitioned from complete segregation to being the nation's most integrated region.[10]

While African Americans faced legal segregation in civil society, Mexican Americans who lived in southwestern states often dealt with de facto segregation,[14] meaning no laws explicitly barred their access to schools or other public facilities, yet they were still separated from White people.[15][16] The proponents of Mexican-American segregation were often officials who worked at the state and local school level and often defended the creation and sustaining of separate "Mexican schools".[17] In other cases, the NAACP challenged segregation policies in institutions where exclusion was targeted only at African-American students and where there was an already established Mexican-American presence.[18]

Parents of both African-American and Mexican-American students challenged school segregation in coordination with civil rights organizations such as the NAACP, ACLU, and LULAC. Both groups challenged discriminatory policies through litigation in courts, with varying success, and at times challenging policies. They often had small successes.[19] For instance, the NAACP initially challenged graduate and professional school segregation because they believed that desegregation at this level would result in the least backlash and opposition by whites.[20]

Various means to desegregate schools have been tried including busing students.

Catholic schools

Initially, Catholic schools in the South generally followed the pattern of segregation of public schools, sometimes forced to do so by law. However, most Catholic dioceses began moving ahead of public schools to desegregate. In St. Louis, Catholic schools were desegregated in 1947.[21] In Washington, DC, the Catholic schools were desegregated in 1948. Catholic schools in Tennessee were desegregated in 1954,[22] Atlanta in 1962, and Mississippi in 1965, all ahead of the public school systems.

Protestant schools

In the late 1950s and early 1960s, when some states (including Alabama, Virginia, and Louisiana) closed their public schools to protest integration, Jerry Falwell Sr. seized the opportunity to open "Christian academies" for white students.[23]

More recent segregation

From 1968 to 1980, segregation between blacks and whites in schools declined.[12] School integration peaked in the 1980s and then gradually declined over the course of the 1990s, as income differences increased.[24] In the 1990s and early 2000s, minority students attended schools with a declining proportion of white students, so that the rate of segregation as measured as isolation resembled that of the 1960s.[25] There is some disagreement about what to make of trends since the 1980s; while some researchers have presented trends as evidence of "resegregation," others argue that changing demographics in school districts, including class and income, are responsible for most of the changes in the racial composition of schools.[12] A 2013 study by Jeremy Fiel found that, "for the most part, compositional changes are to blame for the declining presence of whites in minorities' schools," and that racial balance increased from 1993 to 2010.[25] The study found that minority students became more isolated and less exposed to whites, but that all students became more evenly distributed across schools. Another 2013 study found that segregation measured as exposure increased over the previous 25 years due to changing demographics.[12] The study did not, however, find an increase in racial balance; rather, racial unevenness remained stable over that time period. Researcher Kori Stroub found that the "racial/ethnic resegregation of public schools observed over the 1990s has given way to a period of modest reintegration," but that segregation between school districts has increased even though within-district segregation is low.[24] Fiel believes that increasing interdistrict segregation will exacerbate racial isolation.[25]

Causes

One reasoning for the resegregation of blacks lies in the fact that public schools were mandated by law to institute effective plans to combat segregation for only five years starting in 1968.[26] After the peak of desegregation in 1980, the pressure conservatives under Richard Nixon's presidency were instrumental in the ruling of Freeman v. Pitts which allowed for the preservation of school segregation.[26] Today, the increase in inter-district segregation is present because of the ruling of Milliken v. Bradley that banned desegregation across district lines, which allowed for the diverse districts to simply contained a few majority minority schools while most schools remained predominantly white.

Another aspect that supports the reversion back to segregated schools is the concept of white flight which occurs when white families utilize the privilege of school choice to move their children into schools with lower minority populations. Factors such as zoning of schools, housing policies, and school choice are the driving factors in the segregation today which shifts to incorporate not only grouping by race, but also by economic class.A wealthier family becomes more likely to relocate and invest in the educational resources of that school zone because it is more affordable. An extension of this choice becomes classroom specific in desegregated schools by way of implementations of courses at the levels of Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate, and Honors programs which tend to have a higher white majority.[27]

Sources of contemporary segregation

Residential segregation

A principal source of school segregation is the persistence of residential segregation in American society; residence and school assignment are closely linked due to the widespread tradition of locally controlled schools.[28] Residential segregation is related to growing income inequality in the United States.

The deterioration of cities and urban education systems between the 1950-80s is the consequence of several post-war policies like the Home Owners' Loans Corporation, Federal Housing Administration, Interstate Highway Act, discriminative zoning practices, and loss of war-time industrial employment perpetuated ‘white flight’ and suburban sprawl at the expense of poor, marginalized urban residents.[29] Mid-20th century urban divestment and suburban development redirected social services and federal funding to predominantly white residencies. Remaining urban residents witnessed dramatic decreases in quality of living, creating countless barriers to a stable life, including in academic success. Consequently, urban school districts became relatively accurate measures for documenting the increasing educational inequalities among students of color.[29]

A study conducted by Sean Reardon and John Yun found that from 1990 to 2000, residential black/white and Hispanic/white segregation declined by a modest amount in the United States, while public school segregation increased slightly during the same time period.[30] Because the two variables moved in opposite directions, changes in residential patterns were not responsible for changes in school segregation trends. Rather, the study determined that in 1990, schools showed less segregation than neighborhoods, indicating that local policies were helping to ameliorate the effects of residential segregation on school composition.[30] By 2000, however, racial composition of schools had become more closely correlated to neighborhood composition, indicating that public policies no longer redistributed students as evenly as before.[30]

In the 2005 Civil Rights Project conducted at Harvard University, researchers reported that over 80% of high-minority schools—where the student population is over 90% non-white—are high poverty schools as indicated by a large majority qualifying for free and reduced lunch.[29] Additionally, of five million enrolled students in two dozen of the largest central cities, 70% are Black and Latino students in predominantly minority-majority, urban schools.[29]

Another study targets spatial inequalities and student outcomes based on the physical and social presence in specific neighborhoods. Factors like pollution, perceived safety, proximity to other students, and healthy learning environments can all affect academic outcomes of various student groups.[31] In correspondence to high poverty environments, students are likely to face various obstacles that prevent effective learning environments including food and housing insecurity.[31] Likewise, Black, Latino, and Indigenous students experience twice the exposure to poor students than their Asian and white counterparts.[29]

Award-winning CQ Researcher Peter Katel amplifies the argument made by Maya Rockeymoore, CEO of Global Policy Solutions, who addresses the geospatial resegregation of schools as structural barriers for impoverished students in inner-city neighborhoods who are never actually prepared to achieve higher education.[32] Katel also reports that educational experts see high densities of marginalized students as a loss of financial resources that most white families do not experience because they are more likely to have the capability to move schools.[32] Acknowledging the resegregation of school and disproportionate allocation of resources is crucial to addressing how the achievement gap is concentrated in underserved urban communities.

A 2013 study corroborated these findings, showing that the relationship between residential and school segregation became stronger over the decade between 2000 and 2010. In 2000, segregation of blacks in schools was lower than in their neighborhoods; by 2010, the two patterns of segregation were "nearly identical".[28]

Supreme Court rulings

Although the US Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Board of Education set desegregation efforts in motion, subsequent rulings have created serious obstacles to continued integration. The court's 1970 ruling in Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education furthered desegregation efforts by upholding busing as a constitutional means to achieve integration within a school district, but the ruling had no effect on the increasing level of segregation between school districts.[33] The court's ruling in Milliken v. Bradley in 1974 prohibited interdistrict desegregation by busing.[34]

The 1990 decision in Board of Education of Oklahoma City v. Dowell declared that once schools districts had made a practicable, "good faith" effort to desegregate, they could be declared to have achieved "unitary" status, releasing them from court oversight.[35] The decision allowed schools to end previous desegregation efforts even in cases where a return to segregation was likely.[33] The court's ruling in Freeman v. Pitts went further, ruling that districts could be released from oversight in "incremental stages", meaning that courts would continue to supervise only those aspects of integration that had not yet been achieved.[34]

Soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division escort African-American students to Central High School in Little Rock in Sept. 1957, after the governor of Arkansas tried to enforce segregation

A 2012 study determined that "half of all districts ever under court-ordered desegregation [had] been released from court oversight, with most of the releases occurring in the last 20 years". The study found that segregation levels in school districts did not rise sharply following court dismissal, but rather increased gradually for the next 10 to 12 years. As compared to districts that had never been placed under court supervision, districts that had achieved unitary status and were released from court-ordered desegregation had a subsequent change in segregation patterns that was 10 times as great. The study concludes that "court-ordered desegregation plans are effective in reducing racial school segregation, but ... their effects fade over time in the absence of continued court oversight."[35]

In a pair of rulings in 2007 (Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 and Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education), the court's decision limited schools' ability to use race as a consideration in school assignment plans. In both cases, the Court struck down school assignment plans designed to ensure that the racial composition of schools roughly reflected the composition of the district as a whole, saying that the plans were not "narrowly tailored" to achieve the stated goal and that race-neutral alternatives had not been given adequate consideration.[36]

School choice

While greater school choice could potentially increase integration by drawing students from larger and more geographically diverse areas (as opposed to segregated neighborhoods), expanded choice often has the opposite effect.[37] Studies conducted on the relationship between expanded school choice and school segregation show that when studies compare the racial/ethnic composition of charter schools to local public schools, researchers generally find that charter schools preserve or intensify existing racial and economic segregation, and/or facilitate white flight from public schools.[38] Furthermore, studies that compare individual students' demographic characteristics to the schools they are leaving (public schools) and the schools they are switching to (charter schools) generally demonstrate that students "leave more diverse public schools and enroll in less diverse charter schools".[38]

Private schools constitute a second important type of school choice. A 2002 study found that private schools continued to contribute to the persistence of school segregation in the South over the course of the 1990s. Enrollment of whites in private schools increased sharply in the 1970s, remained unchanged in the 1980s, and increased again over the course of the 1990s. Because the changes over the latter two decades was not substantial, however, researcher Sean Reardon concludes that changes in private school enrollment is not a likely contributor to any changes in schools segregation patterns during that time.[30]

In contrast to charter and private schools, magnet schools generally foster racial integration rather than hinder it.[37] Such schools were initially presented as an alternative to unpopular busing policies, and included explicit desegregation goals along with provisions for recruiting and providing transportation for diverse populations.[36] Although today's magnet schools are no longer as explicitly oriented towards integration efforts, they continue to be less racially isolated than other forms of school choice.[36]

Implications of segregation

Educational outcomes

The level of racial segregation in schools has important implications for the educational outcomes of minority students. Desegregation efforts of the 1970s and 1980s led to substantial academic gains for black students; as integration increased, blacks' educational attainment increased while that of whites remained largely unchanged.[35] Historically, greater access to schools with higher enrollments of white students helped "reduce blacks' high school dropout rate, reduce the black-white test score gap, and improve outcomes for black in areas such as earnings, health, and incarceration."[25]

Nationwide, minority students continue to be concentrated in high-poverty, low-achieving schools, while white students are more likely to attend high-achieving, more affluent schools.[25] Resources such as funds and high-quality teachers attach unequally to schools according to racial and socioeconomic composition.[25] Schools with high proportions of minority enrollment are often characterized by "less experienced and less qualified teachers, high levels of teacher turnover, less successful peer groups and inadequate facilities and learning materials."[39] These schools also tend to have less challenging curricula and fewer offerings of Advanced Placement courses.[39]

Access to resources is not the only factor determining education outcomes; the very racial composition of schools can have an effect independent of the level of other resources. A 2009 study determined that attending school with a high proportion of black students negatively affected black academic achievement, even after controlling for school quality, differences in ability, and family background. The effect of racial composition on white achievement was insignificant.[40]

The categorization of ‘at-risk’ youth typically defines learning differences as disabilities based on a standardized, non-inclusive curriculum; the label ‘at-risk’ inherently follows students of color and low-income students as a generalized academic failure.[41] National academic standardization also extends to federal policies like the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), which implemented high-stakes standardized testing across the country in an attempt to address socio-economic disparities in learning outcomes.[42] Schools that were labelled “failures” and faced sanctions under the NCLB Act were typically high poverty schools in segregated districts.[29] Both the standardization of learning outcomes and the implementation of these policies fail to address the structural barriers that created high poverty, highly segregated schools.[42]

Short-term versus long-term outcomes

The research that has been conducted on the effects of school segregation can be divided into studies that observe short-term and long-term outcomes of segregated schooling; these outcomes can be either academic or non-academic in nature. Studies of short-term outcomes observe the relationship between school segregation and outcomes such as academic achievement (test scores), racial prejudice/fear, and cross-cultural friendships. Long-term outcomes may refer to educational attainment, occupational attainment, adults' intergroup relations, crime and violence, and civic engagement.[43]

The mixed findings of research on the effects of integration on Black students has resulted in ambiguous conclusions as to the influence of desegregation plans.[40] Generally, integration has a small but beneficial impact on short-term outcomes for Black students (i.e. education achievement), and a clearly beneficial impact on longer-term outcomes, such as school attainment (i.e. level of education attained) and earnings.[44] Integrated education is positively related to short-term outcomes such as K–12 school performance, cross-racial friendships, acceptance of cultural differences, and declines in racial fears and prejudice. In the long run, integration is associated with higher educational and occupational attainment across all ethnic groups, better intergroup relations, greater likelihood of living and working in an integrated environment, lower likelihood of involvement with the criminal justice system, espousal of democratic values, and greater civic engagement.[43]

A 1994 study found support for the theory that interracial contact in elementary or secondary school positively affects long-term outcomes in a way that can overcome perpetual segregation against Black communities.[45] The study reviewed previous research and determined that, as compared to segregated Black people, desegregated Black people are more likely to set higher occupational aspirations, attend desegregated colleges, have desegregated social and professional networks as adults, gain desegregated employment, and work in white-collar and professional jobs in the private sector.

Urban high schools reported significantly greater drop-out rates than their suburban counterparts. Nationwide, high school drop-out rates are centered in a few hundred public schools that are overwhelmingly impoverished, urban, and non-white.[29] The 2000 Census noted that roughly 50% of high school dropouts are employed and earning 35% less than the average national income while college graduates make 131% of the mean national income with 85% employment.[29]

Short-term and long-term benefits of integration are found for minority and white students alike. Students who attend integrated schools are more likely to live in diverse neighborhoods as adults than those students who attended more segregated schools. Integrated schools also reduce the maintenance of stereotypes and prevent the formation of prejudices in both majority and minority students.[28]

Proposed policies

Although the Supreme Court's ruling in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 limited school districts' ability to take race into account during the school assignment process, the ruling did not prohibit racial considerations altogether. According to the UCLA Civil Rights Project, a school district may consider race when using any of the following strategies: "site selection of new schools; drawing attendance zones with general recognition of the racial demographics of neighborhoods; allocating resources for special programs; recruiting students and faculty in a targeted manner; [and] tracking enrollments, performance, and other statistics by race."[36] Districts may use income-based school assignment policies to try to indirectly achieve racial integration, but in practice such policies are not guaranteed to produce even a modest degree of racial integration.[46]

Other researchers argue that, given restrictive court rulings and the increasingly strong relationship between neighborhood and school segregation, integration efforts should instead focus on reducing racial segregation in neighborhoods.[28] This could be achieved, in part, by greater enforcement of the Fair Housing Act and/or removal of low-density zoning laws. Policy could also set aside low-income housing in new community developments that have a strong school district based on income.[39]

In the school choice realm, policy can ensure that greater choice facilitates integration by, for instance, adopting "civil rights policies" for charter schools.[39] Such policies could require charter schools to recruit diverse faculty and students, provide transportation to ensure access for poor students, and/or have a racial composition that does not differ greatly from that of the public school population.[37] Expanding the availability of magnet schools—which were initially created with school desegregation efforts and civil rights policies in mind—could also lead to increased integration, especially in those instances when magnet schools can draw students from separate (and segregated) attendance zones and school districts.[36] Alternatively, states could move towards county- or region-level school districting, allowing students to be drawn from larger and more diverse geographic areas.[28]

According to some scholars, school assignment policies should primarily focus on socioeconomic integration rather than racial integration. As Richard D. Kahlenberg writes, "Racial integration is a very important aim, but if one's goal is boosting academic achievement, what really matters is economic integration."[47] Kahlenberg refers to a body of research showing that the low overall socioeconomic status of a school is clearly linked to less learning for students, even after controlling for age, race, and family socioeconomic status. In particular, the socioeconomic composition of a school may lead to lower student achievement through its effect on "school processes", such as academic climate and teachers' expectations of students' ability to learn.[48] If reforms could equalize these school processes across schools, socioeconomic and racial integration policies might not be necessary to close achievement gaps.[48] Sociologist Amy Stuart Wells, however, argues that the original intent of school desegregation was to improve blacks' access to important social institutions and opportunities, thereby improving their long-run life outcomes.[49] Discussions about ending racial integration policies, though, largely focus on the relationship between integration and short-run outcomes such as test scores.[49] In Stuart's view, long-term outcomes should be emphasized in order to appreciate the true social importance of integration.

See also

United States

Other countries

Footnotes

  1. ^ A., Raffel, Jeffrey (1998). Historical dictionary of school segregation and desegregation the American experience. Greenwood Press. OCLC 754017266.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  2. ^ "BROWN V. BOARD: Timeline of School Integration in the U.S". April 2004.
  3. ^ a b Reardon, Sean F.; Owens, Ann (2014). "60 Years AfterBrown: Trends and Consequences of School Segregation". Annual Review of Sociology. 40 (1): 199–218. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-071913-043152. ISSN 0360-0572.
  4. ^ Frankenberg, Erica; Genevieve Siegel-Hawley (November 2009). "Equity Overlooked: Charter Schools and Civil Rights Policy" (PDF). The Civil Rights Project. Retrieved November 4, 2013.
  5. ^ Reardon, Sean F. (2016). "School Segregation and Racial Academic Achievement Gaps". RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. 2 (5): 34–57. doi:10.7758/RSF.2016.2.5.03. ISSN 2377-8253.
  6. ^ a b "Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws." Prejudice in the Modern World Reference Library. Ed. Kelly Rudd, Richard Hanes, and Sarah Hermsen. Vol. 2. Detroit: UXL, 2007. 333-357. Global Issues In Context. Web. October 19, 2013.
  7. ^ "Jim Crow Laws". National Park Service. Retrieved November 1, 2013.
  8. ^ a b Little, Becky. "What Is 'Redlining'?". HISTORY. Retrieved October 15, 2021.
  9. ^ Reardon, Sean F. (September 1, 2016). "School Segregation and Racial Academic Achievement Gaps". RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. 2 (5): 34–57. doi:10.7758/RSF.2016.2.5.03. ISSN 2377-8253.
  10. ^ a b c Orfield, Gary. "Schools More Separate: Consequences of a Decade of Resegregation." Harvard Civil Rights Project. (2001). (accessed September 24, 2013)
  11. ^ "Before Little Rock: Successful Arkansas School Integration". University of Arkansas. September 10, 2007. Retrieved September 13, 2020.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  12. ^ a b c d Sean Reardon; Anne Owens (October 2013). "60 Years After Brown: Trends and Consequences of School Segregation" (PDF). Stanford University.
  13. ^ "The Real Origins of the Religious Right". POLITICO Magazine.
  14. ^ "De Facto Segregation". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved October 14, 2021.
  15. ^ Powers, Jeanne M.; Patton, Lirio (March 1, 2008). "Between Mendez and Brown: Gonzales v. Sheely (1951) and the Legal Campaign Against Segregation". Law & Social Inquiry. 33 (1): 127–171. doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.2008.00096.x. ISSN 1747-4469.
  16. ^ Donato, Ruben; Guzmán, Gonzalo; Hanson, Jarrod (2017). "Francisco Maestas et al. v. George H. Shone et al: Mexican American Resistance to School Segregation in the Hispano Homeland, 1912–1914". Journal of Latinos and Education. 16 (1): 3–17. doi:10.1080/15348431.2016.1179190. S2CID 151545402.
  17. ^ Donato, Rubén; Hanson, Jarrod (June 15, 2012). "Legally White, Socially "Mexican": The Politics of De Jure and De Facto School Segregation in the American Southwest". Harvard Educational Review. 82 (2): 202–225. doi:10.17763/haer.82.2.a562315u72355106.
  18. ^ Foley, Nick (2010). Quest for Equality: The Failed Promise of Black-Brown Solidarity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674050235.
  19. ^ Powers, Jeanne M. (November 1, 2014). "On Separate Paths: The Mexican American and African American Legal Campaigns against School Segregation". American Journal of Education. 121 (1): 29–55. doi:10.1086/678124. ISSN 0195-6744. S2CID 144425943.
  20. ^ Kluger, Richard (2004). Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education and Black America's Struggle for Equality. New York: Vintage. ISBN 978-1400030613.
  21. ^ "Cardinal Joseph E. Ritter". Marian University. Archived from the original on May 27, 2010. Retrieved January 22, 2019.
  22. ^ "Most Rev. William Adrian, Ex‐Bishop of Tennessee". The New York Times. February 15, 1972.
  23. ^ Paretsky, Sara (2007). Writing in an Age of Silence. Verso. pp. 49.
  24. ^ a b Stroub, Kori J., and Meredith P. Richards. "From Resegregation to Reintegration: Trends in the Racial/Ethnic Segregation of Metropolitan Public School." American Educational Research Journal. no. 3 (2013): 497-531. (accessed September 24, 2013)
  25. ^ a b c d e f Fiel, Jeremy E. "Decomposing School Resegregation: Social Closure, Racial Imbalance, and Racial Isolation." American Sociological Review. no. 5 (2013): 1-21. (accessed September 24, 2013)
  26. ^ a b Rosiek, Jerry (2019). "School segregation: A realist's view". The Phi Delta Kappan. 100 (5): 8–13. ISSN 0031-7217.
  27. ^ Rosiek, Jerry (2019). "School segregation: A realist's view". The Phi Delta Kappan. 100 (5): 8–13. ISSN 0031-7217.
  28. ^ a b c d e Frankenberg, Erica.Frankenberg, Erica (2013). "The Role of Residential Segregation in Contemporary School Segregation". Education and Urban Society. 45 (5): 548–570. doi:10.1177/0013124513486288. S2CID 143706769.
  29. ^ a b c d e f g h Orfield, Gary, and Chungmei Lee (2005). "Why Segregation Matters: Poverty and Educational Inequality" (PDF). Harvard Education Publishing Group – via ERIC.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  30. ^ a b c d Reardon, Sean; John Yun (2002). "Integrating neighborhoods, segregating schools: The retreat from school desegregation in the South, 1990-2000" (PDF). North Carolina Law Review. 81. Retrieved October 19, 2013.
  31. ^ a b "Neighborhood, race and educational inequality". Cities. 73: 1–13. March 1, 2018. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2017.09.013. ISSN 0264-2751.
  32. ^ a b Katel, Peter (2020). "Racial Conflict". CQ Press.
  33. ^ a b Chemerinsky, Erwin. "The Segregation and Resegregation of American Public Education: The Court's Role." North Carolina Law Review. (2003): 1598-1622. (accessed September 24, 2013).
  34. ^ a b Dorsey, Dana N. "Segregation 2.0: The New Generation of School Segregation in the 21st Century." Education and Urban Society. no. 5 (2013). (accessed September 24, 2013)
  35. ^ a b c Reardon, Sean F., Elena T. Grewal, Demetra Kalogrides, and Erica Greenberg. "Brown Fades: The End of Court-Ordered School Desegregation and the Resegregation of American Public Schools." Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. no. 4 (2012): 876-904. (accessed September 24, 2013)
  36. ^ a b c d e Tefera, Adai; Erica Frankenberg; Genevieve Siegel-Hawley; Gina Chirichigno (2011). "Integrating Suburban Schools: How to Benefit from Growing Diversity and Avoid Segregation" (PDF). UCLA Civil Right Project. Retrieved October 19, 2013.
  37. ^ a b c Frankenberg, Erica; Genevieve Siegel-Hawley (November 2009). "Equity Overlooked: Charter Schools and Civil Rights Policy" (PDF). The Civil Rights Project. Retrieved November 4, 2013.
  38. ^ a b Miron, G., Urschel, J. L., Mathis, W, J., & Tornquist, E. "Schools without Diversity: Education Management Organizations, Charter Schools and the Demographic Stratification of the American School System" (2010). Boulder and Tempe: Education and the Public Interest Center & Education Policy Research Unit. (accessed September 24, 2013)
  39. ^ a b c d Orfield, Gary; John Kucsera; Genevieve Siegel-Hawley (September 2012). "E Pluribus...Separation: Deepening Double Segregation for More Students" (PDF). The Civil Rights Project. Retrieved November 1, 2013.
  40. ^ a b Hanushek, Eric A.; John F. Kain; Steven G. Rivkin (2009). "New Evidence about Brown v. Board of Education: The Complex Effects of School Racial Composition on Achievement" (PDF). Journal of Labor Economics. 27 (3): 349–383. doi:10.1086/600386. JSTOR 10.1086/600386. S2CID 32967483.
  41. ^ Gershon, Walter S. (October 1, 2012). "Troubling notions of risk: dissensus, dissonance, and making sense of students and learning". Critical Studies in Education. 53 (3): 361–373. doi:10.1080/17508487.2012.704881. ISSN 1750-8487.
  42. ^ a b Yaffe, Deborah (2009). "Addressing Achievement Gaps" (PDF). ETC Policy Information Center – via Education Resources Information Center (ERIC).
  43. ^ a b Mickelson, Roslyn Arlin; Mokubung Nkomo (March 2012). "Integrated Schooling, Life Course Outcomes, and Social Cohesion in Multiethnic Democratic Societies". Review of Research in Education. 36 (1): 197–238. doi:10.3102/0091732x11422667. S2CID 143278881.
  44. ^ Hanushek, Eric A.; Finis Welch (2006). Has School Desegregation Improved Academic and Economic Outcomes for Blacks? (PDF). Handbook of the Economics of Education. Vol. 2. pp. 1019–1049. doi:10.1016/s1574-0692(06)02017-4. ISBN 9780444528193. Retrieved November 19, 2013.
  45. ^ Wells, Amy Stuart; Robert L. Crain (1994). "Perpetuation Theory and the Long-Term Effects of School Desegregation". Review of Educational Research. 64 (4): 531–555. doi:10.3102/00346543064004531. S2CID 145441194.
  46. ^ Reardon, Sean F.; John T. Yun; Michal Kurlaender (2006). "Implications of Income-Based School Assignment Policies for Racial School Segregation". Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 28 (1): 49–75. doi:10.3102/01623737028001049. JSTOR 3699542. S2CID 20367573.
  47. ^ Kahlenberg, Richard D. (2012). "From All Walks of Life: New Hope for School Integration" (PDF). American Educator. Retrieved November 21, 2013.
  48. ^ a b Rumberger, Russell W.; Gregory J. Palardy (2005). "Does Segregation Still Matter? The Impact of Student Composition on Academic Achievement in High School" (PDF). Teachers College Record. 107 (9). Archived from the original (PDF) on December 4, 2010. Retrieved November 24, 2013.
  49. ^ a b Wells, Amy Stuart (2001). "The 'Consequences' of School Desegregation: The Mismatch Between the Research and the Rationale" (PDF). Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly. 28. Retrieved November 19, 2013.

Further reading

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=School_segregation_in_the_United_States&oldid=1050015304"