abstracts A Periodic Briefing of IRP Research and Activities Table of Contents Executive Director's Message: You're invited to Citizens for Democracy Conference 2001 by john a. powell A white teacher's perspective on the effects of racial expectations in the classroom by Julie Landsman Census data illustrate minority population growth in Twin Cities By Eric Myott IRP staff members author and edit book on the links between housing and education segregation Contributions Executive Director's Message You're invited to Citizens for Democracy Conference 2001 by john a. powell After the presidential election reached its final, albeit dubious conclusion, an ad hoc group of Twin Cities progressives, who represent research institutes, advocacy groups and community groups, and who are deeply concerned about the increasing stranglehold on civic participation in the United States, began to meet informally on a semi-monthly basis. Eventually, they named themselves the "Citizens for Democracy." IRP has played a coordinating role for this group.

At the heart of our approach is our advocacy for Civil Rights and the importance of all voices in the civic expression of a vote. Within our group, we work consciously to include many voices. Our members include male and female members from the African American, Jewish, American Indian, gay/lesbian, white and Asian communi-ties. Ultimately, we've decided that the most effective way to share our commitment is to sponsor a conference on Saturday, Oct. 27 called " A Citizen's Call to Justice: Creating an Inclusive Democracy" (Please check out conference details on the back of this newsletter.) The conference is organized in response to our belief that the disenfranchisement in Florida and throughout the nation is not confined to the 2000 election, nor confined to a problem with voting machines. The travesty of last November's election rather serves as a powerful metaphor for an ongoing struggle for democracy in our nation. Those voices excluded last November are the same voices that were excluded from our Constitution, from voting, from wealth, and ultimately from participatory citizenship. We recognize that many social, racial, political, economic, and environmental injustices stem from this historical and exclusionary context, and we aim to address these institutionalized root causes strategically and collaboratively. We wish to offer a r regional response to a national travesty. Conference Goals Citizens for Democracy has organized a conference that will: Examine the fallout of the 2000 election and its place within our history as a democracy, Organize progressives and devise strategies that would make our elected officials accountable to the people, Connect with like-minded groups around the country, and Provide a truer democratic vision for a more perfect union. Our conference also has several concrete goals and outcomes: Provide an opportunity for progressive groups to connect and develop strategies for working together on broad issues affecting the health of democracy and civil rights. Develop a coalition of groups with a common mission and shared communication and voice. Ideally, we would create a structure whereby groups can ask for help from one another and can lend help when asked. Explicitly tie together the mutual interests among various advocates, and create a process for more effective crossover to influence policy issues where there is common agreement including housing, racial profiling, tax cuts, education, environmental issues. Produce a report for publication and distribution. Sponsored by: The Institute on Race & Povert y, Headwaters Fund, Voter March Minnesota, the DFL Education Foundation, the Minneapolis Urban League, The Minneapolis Branch of the NAACP, and the Center for Urban and RegionalAffairs (CURA) at the Humphrey Institute forPublic Affairs have provided initial funding for this event.

A white teacher's perspective on the effects of racial expectations in the classroom By Julie Landsman The myth that all of our children start at the same place, that they are all encouraged in the same way, that they all are made to feel welcome wherever they go to school, is just that, a myth, with little basis in reality. During 25 years of teaching, I've worked in a broad spectrum of schools, including alternative schools for troubled kids and schools that are official magnets for "gifted" students. The two types of schools have many similarities: class sizes are small, students receive individual attention and most importantly, each has a large number of bright, capable students who demonstrate brilliance and promise in roughly the same proportion. However, one group has been defined as those destined for trouble and failure. The other group has been defined as destined for futures of greatness and hope. One group is admitted to their school because they are "successful", the other because they are "failures". Labeling students takes many forms, but messages are clear The mostly white school of gifted students has impressive buildings. Artists from all over the state and country come to the campus to sing, play music, read poetry, and perform for the students who have been carefully examined before being accepted into this school. In a school with mostly students of color, students attend classes in one renovated building that houses many programs and services besides their classic instruction. Speakers come to them too, but the subjects also include sexuality, rape, racism and drug education. Local artists also visit this school to work with students in visual art, poetry, history and other subjects that might interest them. Many of the students work at full-time jobs to support themselves, and often their children, while others are home-less. In my years at both of these schools, I have found the numbers of gifted students to be similar in each place. I found amazing examples of creative writing, of music, and of performance ability at the "drop-out school", as well as at the special school for the arts. However, the students in one group were already in trouble, and the others were on their way to good colleges. Why? What happened along the way that channeled one group into a drop-out high school, and another into a school for those designated as gifted? Expectations set kids up for success or failure From the time they entered school, African Americans and other students of color, were often not expected to do well. "Giftedness" can be defined early on in a restrictive and harmful way, a way that eliminates participation by many gifted individuals. Leaving students out of our gifted programs if they are not white is not just a problem within special settings. Instead the barriers come in many schools from the pervasive and highly detrimental use of language to keep certain programs white. If giftedness is defined as the ability to succeed in a Euro-centric curriculum, then many students of color will not be designated as gifted. For the few kids of color who do decide to participate in such a curriculum, they will not always feel welcome. In my years at both of these schools, I have found the numbers of gifted students to be similar in each place. In addition, the curriculum may be alienating to students who never see examples from their own culture included in the readings or in the study of history. And, because black students especially receive an inordinate amount of pressure from their classmates for "trying to be too white" if they try to take advantage of these programs, they may decide they cannot put up with such constant criticism and rejection. Yet even this phenomenon is complicated. Unfortunately, the deep and abiding racism that affects everyone in this country -- in ways both subtle and obvious -- prevents students of color from having teachers who truly believe in their ability to learn. It also motivates some teachers to overlook the behavioral problems of their white students. Somehow educators must find a way to make it safe for all students to believe and espouse the belief that they can succeed. But for this to happen, educators themselves must believe that every child, and every young adult, can learn. To do this, teachers must be equipped to look beyond the obvious. I found many students hiding their talents when I worked at the drop-out high school. They managed to hide their desire to do well under the garb of gangster dress and even gang involvement. Yet they were pleased when their work was critiqued and praised; they were excited to read good literature by white writers and writers of color; and they often spoke of their dreams when we spoke before class. Before school started -- when there was no one to put them down -- they talked with me about wanting to go to college and some spoke about the possibility of becoming doctors and lawyers. Why can't we link 'poor' and 'brilliant'? Our schools have failed to find the giftedness in these young men and women. We often do not put the words "gifted" and "gang member" together; we cannot link "artistic" and "drug dealer", or "poor" and "brilliant". It is in our failure of expectation -- our failure of true belief that all children can learn -- that we begin the process of letting our students down. The students of color who do make it into these special programs and classes for gifted kids are heroic in their persistent academic stubbornness. Often the students who are in these classes are the ones who've figured out early on how to get along with members of the dominant race. However, I believe it is asking too much of them to feel that they have to earn some sort of basic expectation of greatness from the teachers who teach them. White teachers and even teachers of color, need to be re-schooled and retooled in how to literally see differently. Teachers must be trained in how to define things differently, how to see gifted students as having a dark brown or mahogany skin, almond shaped eyes, thin tee shirts and sockless feet in the middle of the winter. They must become well versed in how to use language and curricula, books and community members in ways that don't shut out students but rather open doors and make them welcome. For all students to be recognized for their gifts, we must avoid pull-out programs that categorize our children at early ages. Rather, we must provide gifted education opportunities for every student. With high expectations, small class sizes, individual attention, a welcome and safe environment and a pervasive year-round inclusive curriculum that includes multiple perspectives, we can get rid of the set-aside school for gifted, and the set-apart school for students in trouble. This change will come if we have the conditions to make the change: small class sizes that allow for meaningful relationships to develop between teachers and students and in equal amounts of resources, materials and technology in each and every building. We need affordable housing and well-heated, well-maintained classrooms for everyone. When the education of all children is truly made a priority in this country, then our educational system will stop being a place to perpetuate racism and will become a place to defy racial definitions and lowered expectations. Julie Landsman has 25 years of teaching experience in Twin Cities public schools. She also teaches at the U niversity of St.Thomas and Hamline University. She recently published a book titled: A White Teacher Talks about Race, which has been extensively quoted in national and local media. Her essay in its entirety and information on how to obtain her book appears on the IRP Web site at www.umn.edu/irp . She will appear in public dialogues sponsored by the Library Foundation of Hennepin County and the West Metro Education Program on Oct. 9 and Nov. 13 from 7-9 p.m. at the Ridgedale Area Library and the Rockford Road Library, respectively.

IRP analysis of Saint Paul traffic-stop data shows minorities stopped at rates higher than whites By Susie Hartigan On May 23, the Institute on Race & Poverty released its Report on Traffic Stop Data collected by the Saint Paul Police Department from April 15 through December 15, 2000. The Institute produced the report at the request of the Saint Paul Police Department (SPPD), which had voluntarily begun collecting traffic stop data on April 15, 2000. Like many other police departments around the country, the SPPD decided to record traffic stop data, including the race of stopped drivers, in order to determine whether the department was engaged in racial profiling. The report found that African-American drivers were stopped in disproportionately high numbers throughout the city of Saint Paul. The The report found that African-American drivers were stopped in disproportionately high numbers throughout the city of Saint Paul. highest numbers of stops occurred in neighborhoods with above average concentrations of both traffic stops and black residents, but the greatest disproportionality between population rates and stop rates for black drivers occurred in predominantly white neighborhoods with low overall numbers of traffic stops. Currently, the Minneapolis and Saint Paul police departments are the only law enforcement agencies in the state of Minnesota collecting traffic-stop data. IRP researchers also found that after being stopped, African American, Hispanic and Native American drivers were subjected to both pat-down searches and vehicle searches at rates substantially higher than the search rates for white drivers. IRP analyzed the data with two primary purposes: to help determine whether the SPPD was engaged in racial profiling, and if so, to identify the specific dimensions of the problem, and to evaluate the SPPD's data collection program and recommend improvements to the program. On May 24, IRP and the SPPD discussed the report at a joint press conference at the University of Minnesota Law School. Currently, the Minneapolis and Saint Paul police departments are the only law enforcement agencies in the state of Minnesota collecting traffic stop data. There is a common misconception that because most Minnesotans of color live in these two cities, data collection is not necessary e elsewhere in the state. This contradicts our finding that the disproportionate stopping of African American drivers was most pronounced in Saint Paul areas with the whitest residential populations. This suggests that racial profiling may be occurring throughout the state, even in places where the vast majority of residents are white. Mandatory data collection needed In order to address this concern, the Institute has advocated for state legislation mandating data collection by all law enforcement agencies in the state. Unfortunately, despite the testimony at legislative hearings of many people of color describing repeated questionable stops in all parts of the state, and despite the Institute's efforts in providing the Legislature with research about the growing national consensus that data collection is the best way to address racial profiling, the Minnesota Legislature failed to take meaningful action in this year's session. Instead, the legislature passed a bill so weak and ineffective that it was denounced by Minnesota's communities of color as "worse than nothing." Instead, the Legislature passed a bill so weak and ineffective that it was denounced by Minnesota's communities of color as "worse than nothing." The bill provides money for sqaud car video cameras as an incentive to law enforcement agencies that agree to voluntarily collect traffic stop data for one year. In addition to lacking a mandate for data collection, the bill omits several other provisions advocated by IRP and the local communities of color, including public access to the collected data, selection by an independent advisory group of an analyst for the data, and a requirement that officers provide stopped drivers with a card listing the officer's name and badge number, and detailing the procedures for filing a complaint of racial profiling.

Census data illustrate minority population growth in Twin Cities By Eric Myott The cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have enjoyed their first increases of population between censuses in four decades. However, both cities saw their non-Hispanic white populations decrease. The non-Hispanic white populations of the combined cities declined from 79 percent in 1990 to 63 per-cent in 2000. It may not come as a surprise to anyone that the entire Twin Cities area is more racially and ethnically diverse than it was 10 years ago. During the past few months, IRP researchers have been carefully analyzing new census data, especially data important to policy makers and community leaders who address the needs of low-income people of color. During the past decade, the Twin Cities metropolitan area grew from 2.5 million to just under 3 million people, with over half the growth attributed to increases in African Americans, Asians and Hispanics. All of the major minority percentages of total population approximately doubled in the past decade. In 2000 Non-Hispanic blacks made up 6 percent of the population, up from 3.4. Percent in 1990. The Hispanic-Latino proportion of the population grew from 1.3 to 3.3 percent and the Asian population grew from 2.6 to 4.7 percent of the population. The non-Hispanic white population declined from 91.7 percent in 1990 to 84.7 percent in 2000. There also have been major shifts in the location of Twin Cities racial and ethnic groups. For example, in 1990 about a quarter of African Americans lived in the suburbs; this grew to up to one-third in 2000. Just over half of Asians and Hispanics live in Twin Cities' suburbs. In 2000, Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center, Falcon Heights, Lauderdale and Jackson Township joined Minneapolis as the few communities in the state that are home to more than 20 percent people of color. Twin Cities' suburbs that are home to more than 10 percent people of color grew from 4 in 1990 to 33 in 2000. There also have been major shifts in the populations of Minneapolis and St. Paul. In Minneapolis, census tracts with over 50 percent African Americans dropped from 3 to 2 on the south side of the city, but increased from 5 to 11 on the north side. The Asian population also increased on the north side but is less concentrated than the African American population. In South Minneapolis there are sizable Hispanic communities, largely absent in 1990. For example the Phillips neighborhood's Hispanic population increased from 667 in 1990 to 4,385 in 2000. The American Indian population in Minneapolis has decreased, particularly on the south side. In St. Paul, today the east side has more African Americans, Asians and Hispanics than in 1990. Of the 23 census tracts in East St. Paul, only two had over 30 percent people of color in 1990, but there are 16 such tracts in 2000. Has segregation in the Twin Cities increased or decreased? Surprisingly in some respects, the increased racial and ethnic diversity in the Twin Cities has not resulted in a decrease in segregation. Although there are a greater proportion of racial and ethnic groups living in the suburbs, changes in segregation rates remain mixed. One way segregation rates can be determined is by using a measurement called the dissimilarity index. The dissimilarity index is a number from 0 to 100 that reflects the percentage of people who would have to move to be equally distributed with another population group. Comparing the rates of racial and ethnic groups with non-Hispanic whites between 1990 and 2000, the African-American segregation rate is high, but is decreasing, from 63.5 in 1990 to 57.8 in 2000. Asians have a moderate and decreasing segregation rate, from 44.7 in 1990 to 42.7 in 2000. However, Hispanics saw a moderate, but increasing segregation rate, from 40.9 in 1990 to 46.6 in 2000. Though segregation rates have decreased for African Americans and Asians in the Twin Cities, a different pattern occurs relative to children. When compared with Non-Hispanic whites, the child segregation rates have increased with African Americans (from 61.7 to 63.8), Asians (from 50 to 51.6) and with Hispanics (from 45.4 to 50). An example of the differences between adult and child segregation can be seen in the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, which observed a non-Hispanic white decrease from 79 to 63 percent in 2000, but a under-18 white population decrease from 62 to 39 percent. Changes in segregation rates alone do not tell us if there are more or less between 1990 and 2000, the proportion of the African-American population has increased in tracts with over 95 per-cent white, but has decreased in tracts with 70-95 percent white. During the same period, African Americans living in tracts with less than 50 percent white has increased to over 35 per-cent. Asians also saw an increase in the proportion of their population in tracts with over 95 percent white, but saw a major decrease in tracts with an 85-95 percent white population. In the same period, Hispanics saw major decreases in the proportion of their population in mostly white tracts, but increases in tracts with fewer whites. Most research on segregation has concerned itself with the geographic distribution of racial/ethnic groups. However, the main concern about segregation is that it restricts groups from opportunities (housing, employment, education) that help generate wealth and allow social mobility in society; the geographic distribution of opportunities and people of color are crucial when considering segregation. For example, there are now much greater proportions of people of color in suburbs Richfield and Brooklyn Center, but fewer jobs than in 1990. Brooklyn Center also is much more ethnically diverse, but public transportation is much less accessible than in the central cities. When considering the effects of segregation, important questions about the effects of place and opportunity should be explored in conjunction with the future release of more detailed Census data, according to IRP researchers. Without better knowledge about the role place or where one lives plays in typical opportunities available to people of color, the extent of segregation is not fully understood. Eric Myott is a GIS (Geographic Information Specialist) at IRP. His e-mail address is mylloe@hotmail.com.

IRP staff members author and edit book on the links between housing and education segregation The Institute on Race & Poverty with Peter Lang Publishing Co. in New York have published a new book for policymakers, advocates and academics titled In Pursuit of a Dream Deferred: Linking Housing and Education Policy. IRP researchers and Lang editors believe that this book brings a fresh perspective to both education and housing debates. The authors advocate policies that recognize the link between each system and work to break down barriers to integration in both arenas. This analysis comes at an important juncture in American history, when policymakers and school officials increasingly talk about the value of colorblind policies, vouchers and neighborhood schools. Although all of these approaches claim to improve school systems, the authors suggest that they can have little positive impact if integration is not a fundamental component of education. The book argues that the reality of our democratic ideal of equality of opportunity inevitably turns on our recognition of the central role that segregation plays in maintaining inequality and denying communities of color key resources and opportunities. In Pursuit of A Dream Deferred features articles by Meredith Lee Bryant of Morgan, Lewis and Bockus in Princeton, N.J.; Kenneth B. Clark, distinguished professor of psychology emeritus of City University in New York ; Drew S. Days III, professor of law at Yale Law School; Nancy A. Denton, professor of sociology at State University of New York at Albany; Richard Thompson Ford, professor of law at Stanford Law School; Vina Kay, senior researcher at the Institute on Race & Poverty; Gavin Kearney, director of research and programs at the Institute on Race & Poverty; Charles R. Lawrence III, professor of law at Georgetown University Law Center; Gary Orfield, professor of education and social policy at Harvard University; john a. powell, executive director at the Institute on Race & Poverty and professor of law at the University of Minnesota Law School; Theodore M. Shaw, deputy director of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund; and Michael H. Sussman, attorney for Yonkers and Orange County in New York. The book will be available in September from Amazon.com for $32.95.

Contributions IRP is grateful for the contributions of the following g r a n t m a k e r s : The Ford Foundation: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 355,000 The Joyce Foundation: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 205,000 Annie E. Casey Foundation: . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 150,000 Otto Bremer Foundation: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 75,000 Thank you for your support.

abstracts Institute on Race & Poverty Research, Education and Advocacy

"Abstracts" is published on a quarterly basis to share IRP research findings, discuss current events influencing those adversely affected by racism and poverty, and to announce upcoming programs. The newsletter is edited by Lynn Nelson, who can be reached at 612.626.2277 and via e-mail at nelso355@tc.umn.edu. IRP staff members also contribute to the newsletter. Design by Derek Brigham - www.dbrigham.com. To be put on our mailing list, contact Eric Stiens at 612.624.2904 or stien002@tc.umn.edu. We share our mailing list on occasion with other University divisions with similar missions and goals. The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status or sexual orientation. This publication can be made available in alternative formats for people with disabilities. IRP Staff john a. powell, executive director Lynn Nelson, director of public education G a vin Kearney, director of research and programs Julie Nielsen, director of development and administration Vina Kay, senior researcher Marguerite Spencer, senior researcher Susie Hartigan, research fellow S . P. (Kumar) Udayakumar, research fellow Colleen Walbran, research fellow Eric Myott, GIS specialist Matthew D. Strieker, research specialist Ken Bechtel, office manager Eric Stiens, education, development & research assistant National Advisory Board John Calmore, University of North Carolina School of Law Gary Delgado, Applied Research Center Nancy Denton, State University of New York, Albany George Galster, College of Urban, Labor and Metropolitan Affairs, Wayne State University James Head, National Economic Development and Law Center Paul Hudson, Broadway Federal Savings and Loan Paul Jargowsky, University of Texas, Dallas S.M. Miller, Commonwealth Institute Michael Omi, University of California, Berkeley Gary Orfield, Harvard University John Red Horse, University of Minnesota, Duluth Susan Robeson, Filmmaker Florence Roisman, Indiana University School of Law, Indianapolis Steve Rothschild, Twin Cities RISE! Eric Saltzman, Harvard University Theodore Shaw, NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund Ada Shen-Jaffee, Columbia Legal Services Reverend Bill Smith, African Wellspring Mission Fred Smith, Center for Urban and Regional Affairs, University of Minnesota Maya Wiley, Applied Research Center Jack Willis, The Open Society Dorreen Yellow Bird, Grand Forks Herald Iris Marion Young, University of Chicago ©2001, 2002 Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota