Kids, Courts, and Our Future

Joy Moses

Kids, Courts, and Our Future

Two of the most well-known billionaires, Bill Gates and Oprah Winfrey, joined forces last week to combat America's educational crisis. In doing so, Oprah's cameras recorded what happened when students from a predominately black urban school swapped places with their white counterparts in the suburbs. One of the black students was almost brought to tears, and her mother did cry, when they saw the suburban school with its well-maintained facilities and superior educational opportunities.

America's separate and unequal schools have been highlighted in two recent works by Jonathan Kozol and the Harvard Civil Rights Project. The authors document the rapid resegregation of public schools in recent years. This pattern is related to a civil rights rollback movement in the courts.

Significant civil rights court victories began with school desegregation cases and Brown v. Board of Education. They grew to include cases that validated the rights of other minorities, women, people with disabilities, senior citizens, and workers. Undoubtedly, such progress has resulted in a conservative civil rights rollback movement that is aimed at cutting such cases at the root by booting them out of court before judges and juries hear the facts or review the proof offered by plaintiffs. This phenomenon is highlighted in a recent book (Awakening from the Dream) and by such groups as the National Campaign to Restore Civil Rights (NCRCR) and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR).

For students like those on the Oprah show, this civil rights rollback has translated into attacks on both school desegregation cases and efforts by school districts to voluntarily desegregate. For those belonging to other subgroups, there have been attempted and actual limitations in such areas as healthcare, employment, and the environment.

Although the world is continually awed by the power of Oprah and Gates, ultimately, fixing the problems posed by urban schools and a variety of other social ills will also require ordinary people using multi-pronged approaches that include grassroots advocacy, legislation, and of course, the courts. Thus, those concerned about justice and equality must be ever vigilant in contacting their Congressional representatives and expressing their views on judicial nominations and progressive legislation designed to reverse rollbacks in the courts.

Joy Moses: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 11:48 AM, Apr 19, 2006 in Progressive Agenda
Permalink | Email to Friend | Comments (6)

Comments

With a decreasing (or, at the very least, not increasing enough) tax base in urban areas coupled with urban parents who have the means putting their kids in private schools (if they don't just pack up and move to the suburbs), this is, sadly, an inevitable conclusion. It is why I for one support the idea of charter schools (even though it is imperfect) and school tax credits (as opposed to private school vouchers - there is a difference). I also support longer school days, more after school and summer enrichment programs, and incentives for teachers to do well, not just be there.

The CFE case, while well-intentioned, is not the answer. Throwing money at a problem won't fix it overnight. Though, I do agree that urban schools across the state (not just in NYC) are underfunded and suffering (not to mention, most of the suggestions I offered cost money as well). The entire funding and tax formula for schools is flawed, which contributes to the problem.

In the meantime, some small city school districts (the best example being the Newburgh Enlarged City School District) have magnet programs in their elementary and middle schools, further intergrating the populations. Also, because of the unique curricula that a magnet program allows, they are lauded by parents and wildly successful.

The Campaign for Fiscal Equity judgement, when enforced, will not throw money at a problem. The judgement amount of 5.6 Billion per year for NYC schools was arrived at by a panel of special masters. They reviewed a fairly specific funding plan based on a carefully prepared needs assessment. NYC public schools have been starved for decades. Funding them at appropriate levels will start to correct a vast injustice imposed on our children and city. Those who are interested in reviewing the materials in this action can see much of the material on-line at:

http://www.cfequity.org

It would be good if a state-wide solution to school funding were found. Such a solution has so far evaded the Republican majority in the State Senate which, in a party-line vote, rejected a school funding revision. How Republican Nick Spano of Yonkers will explain this vote to the parents of his money starved district, I do not know. Certainly, the three Republican State Senators from NYC who are seeking re-election have some explaining to do, too.

The CFE case is a good example of the importance of the courts in addressing important social issues. Every branch of government--executive, legislative, and judiciary--should be a forum for addressing the problems and concerns of all of the nation's people. That's why it is so troubling that the civil rights rollback movement is trying to limit access to the courts. Everyone deserves to at least have their cases heard and decided upon their merits. We may not always agree with the outcomes of individual cases, but the courts are supposed to allow people to have a voice and to seek justice where justice is absent.

I disagree with the notion that money doesn't matter. Suburban schools like those noted in my piece spend much more money per student than many inner city schools. As do elite private schools. I assume they do so for a reason. Further, I agree that some charter schools are doing an excellent job educating America's children. However, the most successful ones typically raise large amounts of money from private donations, making their per pupil expenditures much higher than those of the regular public schools. Clearly, charter schools also demonstrate that money does matter.

In the end, when we as a nation decide that it is appropriate to spend $26,000 per year on one group of students and about half of that sum on another group of students, we are sending a clear message that the former group is more valued than the latter. I think that is why the student and parent were crying--they were confronted with the notion that somewhere somebody had decided that they were worth less. In my eyes, all children are equally valuable and equally deserving of the absolute best that we can provide. To suggest otherwise contradicts our country's espoused religious and moral principles, not to mention the U.S. Constitution.

Please don't misunderstand me. As Rob Lowe's character said on the first season of The West Wing, I think our schools should be palaces. Perhaps my wording was too harsh on CFE and not well-explained. It is a step in the right direction, however NYC's school system is not the only urban school district that is suffering. There are small city school districts across the state that are silently suffering and largely ignored.

We are constantly raising the bar for students, and while I think that is wonderful, what no one realizes is, when you raise the bar, you also raise the price tag. A good education doesn't come cheap, and not enough people in this country value education - or at least, they value education for those that can afford it, and to hell with those who cannot.

I like the idea of charter schools simply because they have a free form to implement new strategies, which under NYS law is difficult to do in public schools. I think that they should be working WITH the public schools, not against them as is happening now.

Bottom line: we are among the bottom tier education-wise of most industrialized nations. For a country of our wealth and prominence, this is unacceptable.

NCLB is doing its share of the segregating, too, it appears. I'm surprised not to have seen something about the recent revelations about NCLB exceptions here on the DMI Blog yet, but the practice is entirely predictable and entirely attrocious.

The NCLB mandate was supposed to set strict standards, which regardless of you're feelings on standardized testing, proves that when you pass laws that are too strict you can be sure that they'll never be enforceable. That's exactly what's happening, but what's worse is that the demands to report statistics based on race will doubtless contribute to the achievement gap and segregation. I've expanded on this thought , for those that are interested. I'm too lazy to type it all in here!