The School to Prison Pipeline

Screen Shot 2017-07-04 at 2.14.08 PM

  • The drop out rate for urban high schools in the U.S. is 40%.
  • 70% of prisoners in the U.S. are high school drop outs. (Coherent Education).

The connection between high school drop out rates and incarceration is known as the school to prison pipeline. Some people believe it begins with a disproportionate number of students of color who are punished, suspended, or expelled from school. “Black students are suspended or expelled three times more frequently than white students. And while black children made up 16 percent of all enrolled children in 2011-12, according to federal data, they accounted for 31 percent of all in-school arrests”(

This is the result of a zero tolerance policy. Students affected by the zero tolerance policy begin to fall behind academically, suffer emotionally, and often give up and drop out of school. These students are given their first exposure to the criminal justice system and so begins the cycle. Other believe the cycle starts when under-performing students are pushed out of high schools because their standardized test scores would not help the school increase their overall performance. Regardless of the reason, the problem exists.

Screen Shot 2017-07-04 at 4.51.19 PM

This is the cost to the dropouts. What is the cost to taxpayers?

  • High school dropouts cost taxpayers $300,000 over the course of their lifetime.
  • The average cost to incarcerate one prisoner per year in a federal prison in 2015 was on average $32,000.
  • If all of the high school dropouts from the class of 2011 earned diplomas, the nation would benefit from an estimated $154 billion in income over their working lifetime (

As if the importance of universal preschool has not been stated enough, one way to break the school to prison pipeline is to support preschool for all children, and educate teachers on how to use positive reinforcement with all students.  Halley Potter, a fellow at The Century Foundation found that many of the problems children have in school might begin in preschool, and have a lot to do with how white teachers view behaviors of white children differently than black children. What might be acceptable for white children, such as pushing another child down in frustration- the same action from a black student might be seen as the beginning of aggressive behavior and dealt with more harshly (  Potter found one resolution to this is to help teachers understand what motivates children to react as they do, and address this before it becomes a problem. How important is this? Wilson (2017) found that, “preschool improves poverty level kid’s achievement and high school completion” (Coherent Education).

  • The average per pupil spending amount in the U.S. is $11,000, but can go as high as $20,000 (New York) or as low as $7000 (Utah) (

What strikes me about the studies and data is the disparity of dropout rates and incarceration with students of color when compared to white students. If you carefully consider the amount of money spent to educate a student compared to how much it costs to incarcerate a prisoner, why aren’t we spending more time and energy ensuring all students have a quality education in this country – an education that begins with preschool?

My dad used to say figures don’t lie, liars figure. Rather than supporting the idea of strengthening our public schools to reverse these trends, the plan is to take this per pupil spending amount, funnel it towards charters and vouchers and see if that fixes the problem. The reformers figure they have the solution but the problem goes deeper than per pupil spending and charters. The problem seems to be rooted in racism and discrimination. Maybe we start there.

These are my reflections for today.


*follow me on facebook Reflections in Education




What happened to 9,000 low-income students in North Carolina?

Effective teachers know how to challenge students academically, and do so on a regular basis. Students enjoy the academic challenge, and will rise to the level of expectation placed on them by their teachers. The benefits of students placed in academically appropriate classes can be seen later in school as they qualify for Advanced Placement classes. Students on an AP track likely move on to college, for example.

In many districts across the country, qualifying students in public schools are offered academic enrichment or gifted and talented classes. These G/T courses go above and beyond what is taught in the classroom. Students are identified  for G/T courses through a process which may include test scores, grades, and teacher recommendations.  An investigation in North Carolina recently revealed a systemic disparity in the children who were being offered opportunities for academic enrichment.

Screen Shot 2017-06-07 at 4.24.47 PM

Two newspapers in North Carolina, The News & Observer and The Charlotte Observer conducted a six year investigation on which students were qualifying for gifted classes based on end of year test scores. “From school years 2009-10 through 2014-15 across the state, a lower proportion of low-income students with superior scores on end-of-grade tests were placed in math classes for gifted students the following year than their classmates from higher-income families” (The News & Observer and The Charlotte Observer). Specifically, 9,000 low-income students were left out of opportunities for gifted classes even though they qualified for them. Why were so many students in North Carolina being denied these opportunities?

What this investigation revealed is disturbing on so many levels- most importantly the investigation found a consistent pattern over six years (2009-2015). This was noted across rural, urban, and suburban districts across the state.

Analysis of data collected revealed:

  • In 2015, one of every three low-income students with superior math scores was labeled gifted, compared to one out of two high-scoring students whose family income was too high to qualify for federal lunch subsidies.
  • In Wake County, 24 percent of low-income third graders scoring a 5 in 2014 were labeled gifted in math the following school year. The percentage for their higher-income counterparts was more than twice as high: 54 percent.
  • In 2015, Wake County filled 291 gifted slots with higher-income fourth graders who had average end-of-grade math scores. At the same time, 228 low-income children with superior scores were left out. This also occurred in several other large districts, including Durham, Guilford and Forsyth.
  • These high-potential, low-income students are less likely to take high school math in middle school, an important step toward the type of transcript that will open college doors. Only one of every two low-income third graders who scored above grade level in 2010 took high school math in middle school, compared with three of four more affluent students with the same scores.
  • Even those low-income students who start high school math in middle school are far less likely to take Advanced Placement math classes in high school than classmates with similar scores but more family income (The News & Observer and The Charlotte Observer).

What are the ramifications of students not taking AP classes?  Students who only take Math 1 in eighth grade in NC, fall behind their college-prep counterparts, with many teachers believing that once students fall behind, they aren’t able to catch up.  “Among low-income students who test above grade level in sixth grade but don’t take high school math by eighth grade, only one in 14 go on to take four advanced math courses in high school. For those who do start high school math by eighth grade, the numbers are better: two in five.” (The News & Observer and The Charlotte Observer).

Screen Shot 2017-06-07 at 5.04.36 PM.png

While the investigators made recommendations based on the study results, I present a few of my own:

  1. Criteria for inclusion in G/T courses must be consistent and monitored -from within and outside the program. Administrators and curriculum supervisors may be well-suited for the task. This would ensure ALL qualifying students are given equal opportunities.
  2. Training for teachers who teach honors courses. AP teachers are required to meet certain criteria by the College Board.  Honors teachers may benefit from training to ensure they possess the tools to assist students who want to succeed, and are given every opportunity to succeed.
  3. Professional development for K-12 teachers to better understand how to meet the academic needs of all students in the classroom. Every student should be provided with academic challenges.
  4. Counseling students in and out of higher level courses- providing scaffolding and support for students placed in these courses for the first time. If a student qualifies in 6th grade for a G/T course, or 9th grade for an honors or AP course, this may be quite an academic shock as they have not performed in such a course. Facilitating their growth and success would ensure they are succeeding in these higher-level classes.

There are varying opinions on gifted and talented education. This study is not about the value of gifted and talented classes, rather it is about the equal opportunities afforded to all children.  This investigation revealed a weakness in the system in North Carolina. In response to the study, Cathy Moore, Wake’s deputy superintendent for academic advancement, said what the investigation revealed  was “disturbing.” “I think there is a sobering punch in the gut about what is happening here,” she said (The News & Observer and The Charlotte Observer).

“Students who show promise need to be challenged,” said Keith Poston, executive director of the Public School Forum of North Carolina, a nonpartisan advocate for better schools. “Schools need to see their promise and push them into more rigorous classes early so they aren’t left behind and left out.”

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Superintendent Ann Clark says the key is individual tracking. In high schools, for instance, Charlotte-Mecklenburg now has counselors reviewing each student’s transcript every year to make sure the student is getting appropriate classes to meet his or her goals, whether that’s earning a diploma or building up advanced credits to be competitive for a top university. (The News & Observer and The Charlotte Observer).

It may have been easier to understand one or two districts demonstrating such bias, but a six year study revealing state-wide systemic bias such as this is unacceptable. Regardless of how NC got here, the question is how do they get out? Perhaps a non-partisan study every year similar to the one in this investigation would ensure ALL students who qualify for gifted/talented and AP courses are offered these courses. Accountability would be a good first step.

These are my reflections for today.


Post script:  Since I started Reflections in Education in November, I have had 900 visitors with almost 1,300 views of 43 posts, and my site has been viewed in 10 different countries. That may not seem like a lot to you, but it does to me – I didn’t think anyone would read it.  So, thank you for reading, sharing and re-posting. I hope my blogs have got you thinking, talking, reading more, and reflecting. I will keep writing if you keep reading. I appreciate your support. Thank you.



DeVos: HBCUs “pioneers of school choice”

Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) were created in response to the Jim Crow laws in the South that mandated enforced segregation. These laws institutionalized educational disadvantages, resulting in shutting out black students from traditionally white schools. They were created in slave states after the Civil War.

Screen Shot 2017-05-14 at 8.41.29 AM.png

Last week I watched the video of Betsy DeVos giving a commencement speech at Bethune- Cookman University which is an HBCU. In the video, students stand and turn their backs to DeVos in peaceful protest. This controversy arose over statements DeVos made in February to a group of HBCU leaders. According to Douglas-Gabriel and Jan (2017) of the Washington Post, after a meeting with HBCU leaders, DeVos praised their schools for identifying “a system that wasn’t working” and taking it upon themselves to provide the solution.  DeVos said HBCUs “started from the fact that there were too many students in America who did not have equal access to education.”  She said HBCUs are “living proof that when more options are provided to students, they are afforded greater access and greater quality” (Washington Post).

Tweets poked fun of her characterization of HBCUs as about school choice— “as if white/colored water fountains were about beverage options” and comparing the Montgomery bus boycott to “pioneering new scenic walking paths.” (Washington Post).  

Screen Shot 2017-05-12 at 9.27.11 AM.png

Selena Hill of Huewire said, “This display of public outrage should serve as a wake-up call to DeVos and the Trump administration: It’s going to take a lot more than photo ops and empty speeches to win over black students. Black institutions deserve protection, more federal funding, and better public schools that prepare students of color for college. Anything less is unacceptable” (Huewire).

Some say the protest was appalling, disrespectful-saying students should have their diplomas taken away, and should have used this as an opportunity for engagement and discussion with the Secretary.

I’ll play devil’s advocate. What if what DeVos was saying is that HBCUs were “pioneers of school choice” because black students weren’t afforded an education due to segregation so they found a solution to a problem and created colleges and universities with opportunities for learning. She might think they were pioneers, but at the same time she has  oversimplified racial segregation, the Fourteenth Amendment and discrimination.

Putting the past aside is one thing – understanding the past is another. Equating discrimination and segregation to pioneering choice fails to acknowledge the discrimination in the first place. Blacks were forced to create their own schools because the laws of this country did not protect them- in fact Jim Crow Laws supported discrimination and segregation.

I’m reminded of recent comments by HUD Secretary Ben Carson who said slavery was considered “hope for freedom”,  and slaves were “immigrants coming to a land of dreams and opportunity.” If I remember correctly, slaves were forced into a life of servitude-often abusive, always inhumane. They were not here by choice, nor did they have much opportunity. DeVos’ statement about choice and Carson’s statement about slavery ignore  reality. From their perspective, DeVos and Carson thought they were speaking the truth. It’s hard for me to interpret their words as anything other than ignorance. George Santayana said it best, “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.”

My guess is the Secretary was not randomly selected to give the commencement address at Bethune- Cookman, nor was she shocked by the reaction from the students. I would bet money this was as contrived as Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on a bus in Montgomery. This was a planned visit, a canned speech, and likely nothing more than a publicity stunt. I would also guess that DeVos had no idea what an HBCU was before taking office-but maybe was schooled just after she learned she was giving the address.

The #1 rule of public speaking is to know your audience.

These are my reflections for today.




1.6 million poor kids lose in ED budget

Screen Shot 2017-05-19 at 7.10.40 PMphoto courtesy of

The White House released the proposed education budget this week. The budget is harmful to public education- cutting teacher training and funding to reduce class size, and ending the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, which would affect 400,000 students. And no surprise to anyone who has been following, charter schools would receive $500 million in new funding, an increase of 50%. This is  bothersome.

Equally as disturbing is the $1.2 billion cut of the 21st Century Community Learning Center. This program provides after school academic enrichment for 1.6 million children in the US (ThinkProgress). Children who benefit from this program generally come from high poverty, under-performing schools.

According to the program’s 2014–2015 performance report:

  • 80% of parents whose children are served by after-school programs say that those programs helped them keep their job.
  • 65.2% of teachers reported an improvement in homework completion and class participation for students served by the program.
  • 56% of teachers reported improvement in student behavior (ThinkProgress).

Halley Potter, a fellow at The Century Foundation whose work focuses on educational inequality said, “Their stated reason for cutting after-school programs is the idea that there isn’t evidence quickly boosting student achievement.”

This budget is adding $500 million to a voucher program which has very little evidence to support its effectiveness (especially with regard to the positive effects on children living in poverty), while cutting programs which positively affect 1.6 million poor children and data supports its effectiveness. How does this make sense?

With data collected from 30 states, the program’s performance report shows how this program has an overlapping positive impact on the children and  families who participate. Let’s not forget the report which came out recently showing how the DC voucher program was not working.

What’s in the budget for DeVos?  “An additional $158 million for salaries and expenses in the Education Department.” A portion of this money will go for increased security for DeVos, who has contracted the U.S. Marshals Service instead of the ED’s security team (The Fader).

This budget is aligned with what Trump and DeVos have been pushing all along – the privatization of public schools. It’s interesting to note that with all the president has on his plate lately, he still has time to destroy public education and ignore the needs of so many children in this country.

DeVos and her husband are deeply rooted in their evangelical Christian beliefs. Her actions and her beliefs seem to take distinctly different positions on educating poor children. The irony is not lost on me.

Screen Shot 2017-05-19 at 5.47.23 PM

If you would like to get involved in the campaign to let your representatives in Congress know how you feel about the proposed budget:

These are my reflections for today.


The Voucher Sell Just Got Harder

Screen Shot 2017-05-03 at 5.27.36 PM

A study conducted by the US Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES), found that students in Washington DC’s federally funded voucher program performed worse academically, particularly on math test scores, after a year of private school. Reading scores were also lower, but researchers say that was not statistically significant (statistical significance helps to quantify if results are likely due to chance or  other factors).

The District of Columbia Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP) was created by Congress in 2004 to provide tuition vouchers to low-income parents who want their child to attend a private school. This is the only federally funded program in the country.

The program selected students to receive scholarships using a lottery process in 2012, 2013, and 2014, which allowed for an experimental design that compared outcomes for a treatment group (995 students selected through the lottery to receive offers of scholarships) and a control group (776 students not selected to receive offers of scholarships) (source).
This table shows the impact of the program after one year (source).

Screen Shot 2017-05-03 at 6.27.11 PM

There have been numerous studies conducted recently on the effectiveness of vouchers, data is consistent that children from low-income families who attend private schools on vouchers do not perform better. According to Rios (2017):
  • A November 2015 study of Indiana’s voucher program determined that students who attended private school through the program scored lower on math and reading tests than kids in public school.
  • In Louisiana, students who attend private schools through the voucher program showed significant drops in both math and reading in the first two years of the program’s operation, according to a February 2016 study by researchers at the Education Research Alliance of New Orleans.
  • Researchers at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative think tank, concluded in a July 2016 study of Ohio’s voucher program that students who took part in the voucher program fared worse academically than those who attended public schools (Rios, 2017).

All this comes on the heels of this administration posturing to dump $1.4 billion into more federally funded voucher programs. Mrs. DeVos had few things to say about the findings of the DC study.  She has long argued that vouchers help poor children escape from failing public schools. In defending the DC program, she said,  it is part of an expansive school-choice market in the nation’s capital that includes a robust public charter school sector. She added, When school choice policies are fully implemented, there should not be differences in achievement among the various types of schools (Brown, 2017).

I guess she didn’t read the study.

Opponents of vouchers read it, and were quick to stand behind the study.

  • Martin West, a professor of education at Harvard, said the D.C. study adds to an emerging pattern of research showing declines in student achievement among voucher recipients, a departure from an earlier wave of research (Brown, 2017).
  • Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA.), who sits on the Senate Education Committee, said that given the findings of the study,  DeVos should “finally abandon her reckless plans to privatize public schools across the country” (Brown, 2017).
  • Bobby Scott (D-VA.), serving as ranking member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, slammed the DC voucher program in a statement to the Associated Press. “We know that these failed programs drain public schools of limited resources,” he said, “only to deliver broken promises of academic success to parents and students” (Rios, 2017).

According to the website for the Opportunity Scholarship Program, the OSP – offers scholarships – sometimes called vouchers – to low income children in the District of Columbia to attend a participating D.C. private school of their choice.  Ninety seven percent of participating children awarded scholarships are African-American and Hispanic, with an average income for participating families less than $22,000 per year. Nowhere does it say how successful the program is, because it isn’t. Nor does it say how students are better served, because they aren’t.

DeVos continues to sell the federal voucher program, and so far it’s working because she’s still talking. She wants to replicate the ineffective DC voucher program and take it on the road. The pricetag? $1.4 billion.

Screen Shot 2017-05-05 at 7.56.08 PM

A snake oil salesman knowingly sells fraudulent goods or who is himself (or herself) a fraud, quack, or charlatan.

These are my reflections for today.


Desegregation Begins

This is Part II in a series on Segregation.

Much of the South was slow to comply with the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision. On September 4, 1957 in Little Rock, Arkansas nine African American students wanted to start their first day at Central High School. Standing in their way was Governor Orval Faubus who ordered the Arkansas National Guard to surround Central and block the students from entering the building, claiming he feared riots and bloodshed at the school and his directive was to protect the students.

With steadfast determination, the nine students, who became known as the Little Rock Nine, showed up for school every day but were turned away. It wasn’t until President Dwight D. Eisenhower intervened and convinced Faubus to dismiss the guards and allow the students entry into the school that Faubus removed the guards but replaced them with local police. The next day, riots broke out at Central when the nine students tried to gain entrance to the building. Little Rock Congressman Brooks Hays and Mayor Woodrow Mann sent a telegram to Washington asking for help.  Eisenhower wanted to avoid a bloody confrontation in Arkansas. Following receipt of the telegram, he initiated Executive Order 10730, whereby he placed the Arkansas National Guard under Federal control and sent 1,000 U.S. Army paratroopers from the 101st Airborne Division to assist them in restoring order in Little Rock ( This was September 24th, nearly three weeks after school had begun, and three years after the Brown decision.

After one year of integration, Governor Faubus closed all four of Little Rock public high schools pending a vote from the citizens to decide whether or not to prevent African Americans from attending the school.  The United States Supreme Court declared Faubus’ action illegal and the public schools reopened August 1959. The nine students returned to Central where they were exposed to physical and emotional abuse. Only one of the original nine students graduated from Central High School (

Screen Shot 2017-04-14 at 5.41.10 PM

Most notable of the stories similar to Little Rock is the story of Ruby Bridges. On November 14, 1960 six-year-old Ruby, accompanied by her mother and armed federal marshals, entered William Frantz Public School (WFPS) in New Orleans, Louisiana.  The front of the school was barricaded, which kept protesters out but did nothing to protect Ruby and her mom from the shouts of hate and death threats.

I was one of just a few black children to pass the school board test, and I had been chosen to attend one of the white schools, William Frantz Public School. They said it was a better school and closer to my home than the one I had been attending. They said I had the right to go to the closest school in my district. They said going to William Frantz would help me, my brothers, my sister, and other black children in the future. We would receive a better education, which would give us better opportunities as adults. (Bridges, 1999, P. 12).

On the same day Bridges gained entrance at WFPS, and also surrounded by federal marshals, Leona Tate, Tessie Prevost and Gail Etienne fought for entrance into McDonogh 19. These girls became known as the McDonogh 3. They faced the same scrutiny as Bridges, with protestors outside.

Screen Shot 2017-04-14 at 5.42.06 PM

The Orleans Parish School board (OPSB) designated only two white schools for integration- Frantz and McDonogh 19. Located in the neglected ninth ward, these schools were in generally poor neighborhoods with lower class and white working class families in housing projects. “The ninth ward was always the last to get street lights, the last to get paved streets and the last to receive the myriad other city services which other sections were able to obtain more easily” ( Middleton, 2011, p. 51).

There was some speculation that WFPS was chosen as one of the integrated schools because it was thought that “black children would be better off in schools with lower test scores, so that ‘they would not feel inferior.’ Others have speculated that the working-class 9th Ward neighborhood had much less political sway than other parts of town and so was an easier choice for School Board members, who were less likely to have connections there. (Reckdahl, 2010).

The opposition to Bridges attending William Frantz went through Governor Jimmie Davis’ office who fully supported segregationists. Similar to Governor Faubus in Arkansas, Davis also said he would close all the public schools rather than see them integrated. Federal District Court Judge J. Skelly Wright struck down the anti-integration laws, allowing for integration to proceed.

In a last minute effort to stave off desegregation, Louisiana declared a school holiday for November 14, 1960.  Despite the governor’s threat “to jail him if he opened schools” and extreme pressure from constituents, school Board President Lloyd Rittiner refused to close the New Orleans Parish Schools (Rittiner as quoted in Reckdahl, 2010).  WFPS would opened its doors to Bridges and opened itself to the scrutiny of the world.

US Marshals, sent to ensure the implementation of the desegregation plan, planned to escort Bridges to WFPS.  US Marshals anticipated fewer protesters at WFPS than at McDonogh, but prepared for a response if the situation deteriorated.  The US Marshals, carrying sidearms in their suit jackets, arranged for a number of US deputies as well as local and state officers to be positioned in the neighborhood surrounding WFPS.  When they arrived at the school with Bridge on the 14th, they encountered a crowd of approximately 1000 people, much larger than anticipated.  Deputies Gilbert Bryant and Floyd Park “enveloped the girl and entered Frantz” (Turks, 2016, p. 41).

On the first day, Ruby sat in the office with her mom until 3:00 pm and went home. The second day she met her teacher, Mrs. Barbara Henry who taught Ruby for the rest of the year. The riots continued for some time in New Orleans, while Ruby showed up each day to school and Mrs. Henry taught her, ate lunch with her, and played in the classroom with her as Ruby was not allowed to leave the room to go to the lunchroom or the playground with the other children. Her bravery and determination to protect Ruby were admirable. “I didn’t want to allow hate to enter her life in any way to diminish her beautiful spirit” (Barbara Henry, as cited in Bridges, 1999, p. 52).

Though I did not know it then, nor would I come to realize it for many years, what transpired in the fall of 1960 in New Orleans would forever change my life and help shape a nation. When I think back on that time and all that has occurred since, I realize a lot has changed. I also know there is much more to be done. That fateful walk to school began a journey, and we all must work together to continue moving forward (Bridges, 2013).

The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

These are my reflections for today.




Bridges, R. (1999, p. 12). Through My Eyes. New York: Scholastic Press.

Turk, D. (2016).  Forging the star: The official modern history of the US Marshals Service.    University of North Texas Press, Denton:  TX.

Segregation Then and Now

*This is the first in a series of blogs about segregation in public schools. A more apt title for this series might be The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The seeds of segregation were planted in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson of 1896 when the  Supreme Court upheld state racial segregation laws for public facilities under the credo of “separate but equal”.  This applied to public facilities, transportation, and schools, and remained uncontested until the 1950s when black families who were frustrated with the quality of the schools their children were attending decided to do something about it.

Black parents in New Orleans had grown increasingly unhappy with the poor educational support given to their children, who constituted nearly 60% of the city’s student population. Oliver Bush lived in New Orleans with his eight children. He was an insurance salesman with the all-black Louisiana Industrial Life Insurance Company and president of the Maccarty Parent Teacher Association. In 1952 Bush encouraged thirty five African American students and their parents to file a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Louisiana seeking desegregation of the New Orleans Public Schools. Mr. Bush agreed to allow his son Earl be the lead plaintiff (Middleton, 2011). This became known as Bush v. Orleans Parish School Board. Bush was supported by the Legal Defense and Educational Fund of the NAACP.  (Middleton, 2011).
“The lawsuit challenged segregation itself, claiming that Louisiana’s state statutes and constitutional provisions mandating school segregation violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.” (p. 329). Equal protection requires states to guarantee the same rights, privileges, and protections to all citizens.
The Bush case didn’t make it off the ground as it was withdrawn at the suggestion of Thurgood Marshall, who was serving as the lead counsel with the Legal Defense and Educational Fund.  Marshall  wanted to wait for the Supreme Court ruling on the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka case.

In the Brown case,  plaintiffs argued separate was not, in fact, equal. Schools did not provide the same facilities, trained teachers, or curriculum. Marshall once said, “Equal means getting the same thing at the same time and in the same place” (as cited in Byrne, 2005, p. 211).

The Brown case was actually five cases grouped together to go before the Supreme Court, arguing that separate was not equal.  Oliver Brown of Topeka, Kansas was an African American man whose daughter Linda faced a long commute to school every day. Brown was a welder and World War II veteran who served as an assistant pastor at his local church. When the Supreme Court consolidated the cases in 1952, Brown’s name appeared in the title, some say because it came first alphabetically.

Screen Shot 2017-03-25 at 10.20.08 AM

On May 17, 1954 in the landmark Brown v. Board decision, the US Supreme Court unanimously ruled segregation of public schools was unconstitutional (source).

Screen Shot 2017-03-25 at 10.26.22 AM

“We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” (source).

Marshall predicted the end of segregation would come by the fall of 1955. He wasn’t even close.  Some districts in the South voted to close schools rather than desegregate. In other districts segregationist academies opened. These academies were private schools established for white families who wished to avoid having their children enrolled in desegregated schools.  In Louisiana, voters approved an amendment requiring segregation in order to “promote and protect public health, morals, better education and the peace and good order in the State, and not because of race” (Middleton, 2011, p. 330).

As a result of the lack of compliance, the  Supreme Court was forced to consider the stalled desegregation of schools. In what became known as Brown II, the court addressed the concern of when schools had to desegregate. The decision came on May 31, 1955.

“Chief Justice at the time, the Honorable Earl Warren put a lot of pressure on local school districts and the courts which originally heard segregation cases to change and align their communities to fulfill their decision in favor of Brown. According to the Supreme Court’s revisit to Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, district courts and school administrators were to implement the doctrine the Supreme Court had decided upon in its first Brown decision. Chief Justice Warren urged certain localities to act on the new principles without delay and to move toward complete compliance with them “with all deliberate speed” (source).

Still with no desegregation in New Orleans resulting from the Brown II decision, Oliver Bush approached the Orleans Parish School Board (OPSB) asking them to comply with Brown, but got nothing. So Mr. Bush reopened his lawsuit. In February 1956, the case went before the Eastern District, this time the court agreed with the plaintiff in that the OPSB was violating the Constitution. Judge J. Skelly Wright ordered the OPSB to desegregate but imposed no date by which the law would be enforced (source).

In 1959, now three years after this decision, with no movement towards desegregation, Judge Wright ordered the OPSB to present a plan to desegregate within one year or by May 16, 1960 (Middleton, 2011, p . 330). Still the OPSB did not comply and Judge Wright finally imposed his own plan allowing all first graders to choose to attend their home school which would go into effect in September of 1960.


Six years after the Supreme Court ruled on Brown, public schools in the US, especially in the South, continued to resist the ruling to desegregate. Most people assume the Brown decision was an open and shut case and segregation was history. If it were only that easy.

These are my reflections for today.

April 1, 2017

References:                                                                                                                                                     Byrne, D. Ed. (2005). Brown v. Board of Education: Its impact on public education 1954-2004.  New York: Word for Word Publishing co., Inc.

Middleton, T. (2011). Norman Rockwell’s The problem we all live with: Teaching Bush v. Orleans Parish School Board. Social Education (75)6. 329-333.