Plessey vs. Ferguson

 

 

     American history shows the struggle between the northern and southern states as far back as the beginning of our country. Southern states favored slavery. Southern states did not want a federal government  that usurped states' rights. After Lincoln declared the end to slavery, the beginning of a continual struggle over differing values began. And in ways, it continues to this day. Let's examine how this has influenced public education.

 

     Slaves were not allowed to be educated. Only white children were allowed to go to school. Some slaves went underground to learn how to read, write and do math. This might be considered the earliest form of segregated education. Fast forward to the time period when our national government declared all slaves free citizens. This angered southern states who reacted by enacting Jim Crow laws and boldly proclaiming that the federal government could not tell states how to run their affairs. Now that voting was legal for all black citizens, southern states required black citizens to take tests impossible for them to pass and if they did pass, required a poll tax prior to being able to vote. Public transportation....you can ride the busses now, but you have to sit in the back.

 

     Enter public education. It was just too much for many wealthy white citizens to bear to allow their children to attend the same schools as poor black children. Schools were segregated. Tactics that chased away many black students from attending school. Resources that were directed at schools where white families' children attended. White politicians who proclaimed that the natural order of life was for blacks and whites to live separate lives.

 

     Plessey vs. Ferguson was an attempt to right these wrongs, but the court decided in favor of 'Separate, but equal'. The federal government responded by passing legislation forcing integration of schools. Busing was required to bring racial balance to schools. Wealthy white politicians in the south responded by concocting schemes that withdrew white children from public schools and transferred them to private schools. The notion of charter schools emerged. Both private schools and charter schools used every trick in the book to maintain an unspoken 'whites only' attendance policy. Powerful politicians directed public resources to these schools. The result: unequal educational opportunity and segregated schools. The Plessey decision of 'separate' continued with unequal educational opportunity.

 

     Does this sound familiar to what is happening today? Read a quick article by Christopher Bonastia, a sociologist who studies charter schools today here: http://www.alternet.org/education/racist-history-charter-school-movement. For a more detailed discussion of the political history of the birth of charter schools read, The Reign of Error written by Diane Ravitch.  Both Bonastia and Ravitch reach the same conclusion that there has been a political movement to segregate our public schools in the name of parental choice. For years, bit by bit, politicians have been creating the illusion that our public schools are failing and therefore should be replaced. Replaced with vouchers (paid for with public money) that parents can use to pay for placing their children in the school of their choice. Private schools and charter schools that rarely have open admission policies. Private schools and charter schools that do not have to follow all the same regulations and mandates as public schools. Failing schools is just heated political rhetoric that doesn't always have factual basis.

 

     We will leave private schools/religious schools for a moment and examine charter schools. Research shows that some charter schools produce students with acceptable achievement rates and some that don't. Exactly the same as traditional public schools. Some charter schools have a diverse student body. Some do not. But what really produces the differences between 'good charter schools' and 'not so good charter schools'? It seems to come down to social stratification, just as it does in the public schools. Students from wealthy families tend to have high achievement rates. Students from families living in poverty tend to have lower achievement rates. When you have a mixture of students from both subsets in a school, you see variable achievement rates for different populations of students. Conveniently for those politicians who would like to create private schools that are operated for profit, if you can attract students from wealthy families, achievement scores will likely be high. If you admit, or are required to admit, students from families from disadvantaged backgrounds or students with disabilities, not only will achievement scores be lower, but you will likely spend more to educate them.  If you are a business person looking for maximum profit, you will be making money with a segregated school with policies and practices that encourage the drop-out of disadvantaged or disabled students, resulting in students from wealthy families who require fewer resources to achieve good test scores. Policies and practices that are not allowed in public schools.

 

     Do we want our public education dollars to be spent educating kids or do we want some of our dollars (how much?) spent educating our kids and some of our dollars (how much?) going towards profits for wealthy business owners? Do we want public education to be treated as a business with market based realities? Look at the mess our health care system is in. Without intervention, insurance companies drop those who cost them their profits. It is likely to end up the same if education is market driven. The result will be the exact opposite of what The Equal Education Opportunity Act sets forth; the opposite of what the tenets of 'free appropriate education' IDEA legislation that guarantees all students with disabilities an education that meets their individual needs.

 

     President Donald Trump: product of private education, wealthy businessman, supporter of vouchers and charter schools.

 

     Betsy DeVos: product of private education, wealthy businesswoman, supporter of vouchers and charter schools.

 

     Do we want to go back to Plessey vs. Ferguson?  Tell them 'no'.