Supreme Court Is Not Where The Action Is

Today, the Supreme Court restricted the degree to which public school districts can consider race in school assignment plans. The majority reasoned that "the way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race," as Chief Justice Roberts wrote.

Although he joined the conservative majority, Justice Kennedy left the door open for race to be an element of consideration for school assignment plans. "A district may consider it a compelling interest to achieve a diverse student population," Kennedy said. "Race may be one component of that diversity."

My main reaction: Yawn.

OK, I know this decision matters. I understand that city school boards, including my own San Francisco Board of Education, have a legitimate interest in maintaining racial integration in schools. Civil rights organizations are calling this a major setback to Brown vs. the Board of Education. And African Americans are much more likely than whites to support the idea that school boards should take the initiative to ensure racial integration.

But the real threat to civil rights and equal opportunity in this country is low achievement on the part of African Americans and Latino students, and the wide achievement gap between them and white students. Here in California, African American and Latino seventh-graders read at about the same level as white third-graders. (The Education Trust West has some great data showing the achievement gap in California.) And high school graduation rates for African American and Latino students are around 50% - 60% in most large cities.

This achievement gap is the real story. The civil rights leaders who pressed the Brown case 50 years ago might be disappointed in today's Supreme Court decision. But most of all, I suspect, they'd be disappointed with the wide achievement gap between the races that remains to this day.

The decision was close and might come out differently next time. But the Court is not where the action is. The good news is that, these days, we have a growing movement of schools, districts, elected leaders, foundations and parents who are leading the charge to close the achievement gap and educate all kids to high levels. I'm far more interested in what we're learning from them and how we can accelerate their successes than what the Supreme Court has decided this time around. They're the ones who are going to turn things around for America's underserved children.

Comments

[Chris Adams]

The main thrust of the piece was this:
The majority reasoned that "the way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race"

Our local school districts make policies based solely on race. Our child who is white can move out of his school because he is in the majority but cannot move to a closer and more desireable school because they are also white. Our affluent, highly educated black friend takes his daughter across the city to the best high school in the area.

Education is a difficult problem to solve. I believe that skin color should not be a factor at all. Economic factors currently define the public school landscape based on property tax rolls and PTA support.

I believe that all children would be best served getting the attention that the need at the time that they need it. Ideally this would include extra-scholastic programs such as nutrition, after school programs and the like.

By combining a mix of children into one class throughout the day none of them are served well. The children that can do the work eaily are bored and the children that do not understand are alienated. Children in either group often end up disrupting the lesson. Teaching to the middle produces mediocrity at best.

We are not satisfied with our publice scools and we are mortgaging our house to send our kids to pivate schools (elementary!) We are not even satisfied with those and we are moving closer to home schooling. We are trying to move to a place where we can utilize the public schools.

[Terra]

I believe this plan is one of the best to pass in more recent news. I am of caucasion background but not of upperclass nor of affluency of any kind. I expect my children to read and write beyond their appropriate age and group levels. It is not good to restrict a childs learning capabilities because of race, gender, affluency, or what not. Nor is is fair to restrict them because of peers not owning up to their own capabilities. I feel it is only right to grant the overall population segregated schooling if it will increase the knowledge of each child, given their prospective wishes.

The "No child left behind" law was created and intended to bring other children up to higher standards. However, it has failed in all regards and has only brought the above average and average children down to the lower levels.

Drop the "No child left behind" and prepare our children for brighter futures.

Education begins in the home and is encouraged by family, friends and society at large. It is the family and society that we are raised in which limits our futures and education.

If you do not like the Surpreme Courts decision then I suggest that you pack your child up and send them to a private school.

I have seen first hand what California schools are passing. We have dropped dramatically in testing nation wide with the "No child left behind" policies. This policy is leaving us at the bottom of society as a whole.

In the 1990's I personally took charge of my life and educated myself. In my late 20's I returned to college after serving in the U.S. Army for eight years. My bachelor's degree is now on hold as I have two small children that I can not afford daycare for during school hours. I can not afford to work for $7.50 an hour, as I have daycare to provide for. My education and training are useless when it comes to working because I have been medically discharged from the service. Yet, my son's/daughter's education is on the back burner because of lower standardization and a race issue.

Give up the drama everyone. It is time to stand up and educate our children ourselves.

[Ann Barnes]

Typical ugly American attitude. I'm only worried about my children, family, neighborhood. Insuring that schools are racially balanced is a euphemism for balancing the schools economically and socially. Sure, the white and upper class students perform better in school, they generally come from more affluent families and families where that promote the value of education. But ignoring the children who come from uneducated, overworked or destitute families will only contribute to a bad environment for our sweet priviledged children to live in in the future. What the quotas and the statistics do is require schools, districts, elected leaders, foundations and parents to focus on the disadvantaged members of our society.

[Lu Kob]

I was devastated by the court's decision to resegregate schools. As we know for a society to prosper we need all the children to be given a chance and that is what America is missing, fairness. The sad thing is that our children and their children will be the ones who will reap the negetive outcomes of this.We've decided to home school our children, we feel that we could possibly even do a better job than these schools of today, we live in the inner city and are unwilling to bus our kids or pay enormous amounts to send them to private schools.It's a sad day for American school children which is why Bill Gates even said that he is sad to know that America will never again be #1 because it refuses to invest in Education.

[tes]

test

[Ken Gibson]

Bill,

Having retired from a daily commute to San Francisco's Financial District I now teach at a charter high school in East Oakland. I am Black, African-American and, based on anecdotal evidence 3/16 Native American and 1/8 European-American. My Uncle was a law student working on briefs with Thurgood Marshall for the Brown case.
On the whole, the current Court opinion is primarily a symbolic loss. While I have no doubt all African-Americans suffer from systemic racism in American society, poor African-Americans, and the poor among other non-European-Americans generally, receive the brunt of the adverse effects of discrimination.
The practical solution to the problem "created" by this Court is to require geographic sub-units of States to achieve a balanced distribution of economic power among public school sites.
For example, the State of California, if it is to benefit from the federal largesse with respect to public education should establish the requirement that each county achieve "income balance" across the public schools in a given county. Students from Hunter's Point would be forced to share their classrooms with students from Pacific Heights and Seacliff. Do you think I am naive? The other federal requirement would be that to the extent students' families send them to private schools, the State must raise funding for public schools.
The public school cost per pupil must be comparable to the average private school cost per pupil. Certainly, there are some accounting challenges to be addressed, but all non-profits are required to file financial statements annually, and these are public documents. If more than 10% of students resident in a county are in private schools, this suggests the public schools are underfunded or in need of reform. The local, state and federal governments should direct more funding there if the public schools spend less than the private schools on average per student. This is a market mechanism. The idea is that a certain portion of the population believes in private education for their children because they see themselves as elites. A larger portion of the population can afford private education but favor an egalitarian education experience if it is a good education. When many people feel compelled to put their children into private school it is because the public schools are perceived to be poor.
Perception is a critical issue here. The State, compelled by NCLB, has devised a regime of education by standardized testing. Despite the discredited origins of such tests and their repeatedly demonstrated cultural bias, these tests are the principal basis officials and parents have for evaluating performance of students and teachers on a comparative basis. Ironically, private school students don't waste the time and private schools don't waste the money on these State tests, typically. In many cases these tests misrepresent the real learning going on in public schools. In worse cases the testing cycle impoverishes the real learning that goes on in schools. Teaching is most effective when it is cultural relevant. Unfortunately, implementing the "pedagogy of the oppressed," a powerful educational tool, may not produce dividends on the next STAR or CAHSEE but it will produce more effective and productive college students and citizens.
We need to stop serving students such a limited menu. No wonder we need to import skilled and unskilled labor. All our students are supposed to be taught a single curriculum. This is hardly the recipe for a great society or a creative one. It is ideal for minting workers of limited creativity and unimaginative, mass-market consumers.
The problem is wider than racism, it is a cultural and class discrimination endemic to our society, yet widely unrecognized.

Peace.

K. Gibson

[Cakky Evans]

YAWN or PAWNS?
The Supreme Court decision against the lower courts is nothing to be "yawned" about. Permitting school districts less restriction with respect to racial segregation translates into white parents transferring their children from desegregated schools into schools where they won't have to be schooled with as many children of color.
Now why would a parent choose to do this? Perception of fewer resources of excellence within desegregated schools? Not wanting one's child to attend "lesser performing schools?" Wanting the best education possible for one's child is always laudable.
However, until parents evolve as advocate partners within their children's schools and get that it's not just about your child but all children, will you grasp why the Supreme Court decision is dangerous and unacceptable. Only then can a parent embrace that such "valid reasons" for wanting the best education is indeed institutional and family centered racism.
Bill, if you had a child of color would you perceive this as a "yawn?" You are out of touch or viewing this from a white privilege perspective which means you just don't know what you don't know. Certainly achievement gaps have a myriad of causes among which if my teacher looks like me I can learn better. A couple of years ago my son's honors classes had at best, just a couple of students of color. That's changed thanks to our school district initiating an "Opportunities to Learn" program. Test scores for all students have increased greatly while the achievement gap has progressively narrowed. Could it be that what you classify as a yawn is really a new dawn against equal education and illustrates how there are indeed new pawns on the Supreme Court?

[sfmom]

Wow, democracy a yawn? The SF private school crowd is certainly out of touch!

At least the public schools, unlike private schools, are educating African American students. Once again, public schools are criticized for providing a service private schools don’t even attempt.

Is the implication here that private schools, with their integration of a few well-off biracial students, are doing a better job for their non-minority students? Studies prove otherwise.