by john powell and Marguerite L. Spencer, Guest
Columnists
Published Thursday, February 4, 1999; St.
Paul Pioneer Press
After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Brown vs. Board of Education (1954) that separate schools were not equal, white Southerners attacked the ruling as a denial of their right to choose to associate only with other whites. The court, however, ruled that no such a right exists at the public trough.
It is disturbing to see that a modest variation of these same arguments is reappearing in Minnesota in the form of the "desegregation'' rules proposed by the Children, Families and Learning Department.
As we consider our efforts to build a multiracial and multiethnic society, one thing is certain. Allowing racially segregated schools is a move in the wrong direction. As minority students are segregated not just by race but by socioeconomic status, segregation has a particularly pernicious effect on them.
History has taught us that when we consign students to these apartheid-like conditions, we depress their life opportunities and make a mockery of the ideal of equality. The Children, Families and Learning Department would have us believe, however, that as long as this arrangement is voluntary, it is acceptable.
Of course, racial and socioeconomic segregation is never really voluntary. What is voluntary for one group constrains the choices of another. One can choose to live in an all-white neighborhood and attend an all-white school only if the choice of people of color to live in such a neighborhood and attend such a school is frustrated.
This has been the way choice has worked in allocating both housing and education in our society. Carried to an extreme, the rhetoric behind voluntary choice is not just an attack on integrated schools, but on our belief in civil rights.
Who would suggest that unless we can persuade the tobacco industry to stop peddling its wares to children, there is nothing to be done? Yet the Children, Families and Learning Department wants us to believe that unless we can persuade parents and children to stop segregating by choice, there is nothing to be done.
The department also wants us to believe that voluntary choices made by parents and students will lead to integration. Although this reflects the rhetoric behind the current push for "neighborhood schools,'' it is not true.
Neighborhood schools will not be integrated unless the neighborhoods themselves are integrated. Although a 1996 survey of Twin Cities residents completed by the Institute on Race & Poverty showed that a majority of individuals of all races desire more integrated housing and schools, our metropolitan area remains one of the 10 most segregated in the United States.
If the new rules are adopted, schools would be considered "segregated'' in Minnesota only if racial imbalances occurred as a result of "intentional'' acts by a district. For example, a school that was made up of 100 percent students of color, low-income students or white students would be considered ``segregated'' only if the district had acted in a discriminatory manner to achieve such an outcome. But if it was a result of other forces, such as "housing, jobs and transportation'' that are "beyond the control of the districts,'' it would not be considered segregated.
This is absurd, for two reasons. First, even when school districts are not directly involved, all kinds of public and private, unintentional and intentional acts make segregation far from voluntary. Many of these can be linked to our state's housing and transportation policies.
Second, the very real and substantially harmful effects of segregation --effects that have been conclusively established by years of educational research -- occur whether the segregation is intentional or unintentional. Either way, our students suffer because of it. And either way, the state must act to remedy this harm so that all students can obtain the best possible education.
Rather than shrugging its shoulders at regional remedies that involve fair-share housing and tax-base sharing, the state must pursue educational and housing solutions. In the meantime, it needs to rely on a retooled mandatory, metro-wide desegregation plan -- one that does not simply rely on the good will of parents and districts.
Finally, it must push for educational research on everything from district restructuring to classroom dynamics, and strive to implement changes accordingly.
As the Legislature considers the Children, Families and Learning Department's proposed rules, we must let our representatives know that we expect policies that ensure all of our citizens have access to high-quality, integrated education.
Spencer is senior researcher and powell is executive director
at the Institute on
Race & Poverty (e-mail: irp@tc.umn.edu) at the University
of Minnesota Law School.