Implications_of_Brown_vs._Board_of_Education_in_the_21st._Century

Implications of Brown vs. Board of Education Implications of Brown vs. Board of Education in the 21st. Century Carmen L. Lozada SS310-08: Week (9) – Assignment: Final Project May 20, 2010 Kaplan University Abstract Brown vs. Board of Education forced America to examine questions of identity, intergroup relations, and the psychological effects of prejudice and discrimination. The purpose of this paper is to articulate the implications of Brown in the 21st century from the perspective of social sciences, namely, psychology and sociology as they relates to the identity and motivation of students as well as its overall effects on the educational system today. . Brown vs. Board of Education: Implications for the 21st Century Brown vs. Board of Education is one of the first outcomes of the protests of the Civil Rights movement in the 20th century (The King Center www.thekingcenter.com) which stood against the doctrine of "separate but equal" that had previously been the practice in the southern United States (US Dept. of Justice www.usdoj.gov). Brown v. Board of Education was not simply about children and education (Brown Foundation for Education Equity, Excellence, and Research, 2004). This court decision was instrumental in striking laws and policies that were products of the human tendencies to prejudge, discriminate against, and stereotype other people by their ethnic, religious, physical, or cultural characteristics, causing far reaching social and ideological implications, which continue to be felt throughout our country today. While Brown revolutionized The Civil Rights Movements, it has not fulfilled its original intent of providing equal educational opportunities and thus its implications for the 21st century have left much to be desired. History Brown vs. Board of Education was the name given to five separate cases that were heard by the US Supreme Court regarding segregation in public schools. Namely, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Briggs v. Elliot, Davis v. Board of Education of Prince Edward County (VA), Boiling v. Sharpe and Gebhrt v. Ethel. The case was argued by Thurgood Marshall and NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund. At the core of their arguments was the issue of the constitutionality of state sponsored segregation in public schools. Marshall argued that separate school systems for blacks and whites were inherently unequal, and thus, violated the "equal protection clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In support of this argument, Marshall introduced psychological briefs that relied on sociological tests that reported that “to the best physiological knowledge at the time, those subjected to prejudice, discrimination and legal segregation would experience numerous problems as a direct result which included self hatred, defeatist attitudes, a lowering of personal ambition and educational aspirations and would generally be encumbered by the experience”. In other words black children would feel inferior to white children http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResources/ConstitutionResources/LegalLandmarks/HistoryOfBrownVBoardOfEducation.aspx and thus, such a system should not be legally permissible (Brown vs. Board of Education 1954, as cited in Martin, 1998 p. 144). It further reported that “segregation leads to a blockage in the communication and interaction between the two groups, and tends to increase mutual suspicion, distrust and hostility” (Brown vs. Board of Education 1954, as cited in Martin 1998 p. 145). Given the fact that Brown v. Board of Education was the first Supreme Court case decision that was based, at least in part on social science data, I find it appropriate to examine Brown vs. Board of Education through the social sciences of psychology and sociology in order to explain its implications for the 21st century (The 50th Anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education, 2004). A Contemporary Argument The intent of Brown was to provide equal opportunity to black students by allowing them to attend schools that were generously financed and complete with resources that were lacking in the schools provided for blacks. Today, this argument continues. While Brown has been instrumental and far reaching in terms of civil rights, to some it has failed in its attempt to provide equal education (Don’t Mourn Brown v. Board of Education, 2007). Statistics show that during the last twenty (20) years, American schools have grown more segregated in spite of Brown. In fact the National Center for Education reported that the average white student attends a school that is eighty (80) percent white, while seventy (70) percent of black students attend where nearly 2/3 of the students are Black and Hispanic (Don’t Mourn Brown v. Board of Education http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/29 opinion/29 williams.html). Moreover, the percentage of black students in the South that attend white majority public schools has declined to around 30. Due to overwhelmingly black populations in northern industrial cities, the percentages of black students attending such schools outside the South are even lower. Furthermore, Hispanic Americans also often attend racially imbalanced schools. Also noteworthy, is the fact that schools predominantly attended by minority students are inferior – in per pupil spending and the training of teachers, as well as, in levels of student achievement – to predominantly white schools in nearby affluent suburban districts (Patterson, 2008) In light of the aforementioned statistics it would stand to reason that the arguments raised in the psychological briefs of the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education would hold true in today’s educational system. The role segregation played on the personality, motivational, educational and professional development of people of color was a primary issue in Brown as it is today. For example, a recent study conducted by four political science professors concluded that Black and Latino students in New York and Los Angeles that the students in general had hopes of academic success however, the schools they attend “do not live up to their ambitions” (Brown v. Board of Education at 55: Segregation in the 21st Century, 2009). For example, art, music and other elite programs offered at schools such as Stuyvesant High School and/or Beverly Hills High School do not exist in urban schools today (Brown v. Board of Education at 55: Segregation in the 21st Century, 2009). As a result parents and students alike are still fighting for educational equality today. Stereo Type Threat It is no secret that there exists an achievement gap between white students and black students. Often times these gaps in performance are erroneously attributed to skin color. While there is no single cause for the disparity, there is also no evidence that a characteristic such as race itself affects student’s abilities. However, there does exist evidence that suggests that the act of focusing on race does influences students ability. In fact, studies of mixed-race students and adopted students suggest that racial differences in test performance are perhaps entirely environmental (Bainbridge & Lasley, July 28, 2002). According to research from Stanford University, students that are aware of the historic poor performance of their peer group on test may be affected in their own performance of the test. This phenomenon is called the “Stereotype Threat”. Moreover, studies have also suggested that far more influential than race, are the socioeconomics and the educational levels of students’ parents. (Bainbridge & Lasley, July 28, 2002) factors that are without questioned affected by poverty. Hence, today more important than segregated schools is the need for integrated schools that encompass all social and economic classes and that can provide the same socio economic resources that exist in more affluent neighborhoods (Brown v. Board of Education at 55: Segregation in the 21st Century, 2009). Expectancy Theory In light of the aforementioned, consider for a moment the “Expectancy Theory”. The Expectancy Theory states that as we predict likely futures, we create expectations about future events. These predictions are based on three points; Expectancy probability, Instrumentality probability and Valance (Quick MBA: The Expectancy Theory). The expectancy probability dictates that one’s efforts will lead to the desired performance and is based on past experience, self confidence and the perceived difficulty of the performance goals; The instrumentality probability is based on the believe that if the performance expectation is met there one will attain a greater reward; and valence refers to the value the individual places on the reward (Quick MBA: The Expectancy Theory). Now, take into consideration the plight of urban school districts. Plagued by increasingly overloaded and underfunded schools and divided into two unequal class divisions within the public schools, urban schools foster a growing population of indifferent students. Using the Expectancy Theory, it stands to reason that these students are products of their environment. They are experienced in poverty, run down and dilapidated schools, crime infested neighborhoods and surviving the war outside their classrooms. Bombarded by their reality, the students are hardly able to expect anything better and thus are left with no motivation to achieve any better (Golba, A. (nd): How Does Education in Urban Schools Compare to Suburban Schools). A fact that is only too evident in the performance of Black and Minority students compared to Whites ((Bainbridge & Lasley, July 28, 2002). Stages of Change Theory To analyze Brown vs. Education from a social science perspective let us consider the Stages of Change Theory. The Stages of Change Theory states that people go through five main stages as they learn to adopt new behaviors. In stage one the person has not thought about making the change “Separate but Equal is constitutional” In the second stage the person begins to think about change “Brown vs. Board of Education”. Next in the third stage the person prepares for change “The Supreme Court declares the permissive or mandatory segregation that existed in 21 states unconstitutional although it did not require desegregation of public schools by a specific time” (Cozzens, 1995) Following in stage four the person begins to make the change “The Little Rock Nine enter Little Rock Central High School” (Galiano, (nd.): Little Rock Central High). Finally in stage five, usually two to three years after the change when the person continues the behavior they are able to recount the benefits of the change (The Health Communication Unit, 2003) “Brown vs. Board of Education paved the way for the Civil Rights Movement of the 20th Century”. In analyzing the Stages of Change Theory as it may relate to Brown vs. Board of Education, I would argue that over 50 years later society has yet to get through stage five. I base this argument on the fact that while equal access to school is no longer denied based on race there is overwhelming evidence that it is in fact denied based on socioeconomic and social class and as a result children today do not have “equal access to education”. (Golba, A. (nd): How Does Education in Urban Schools Compare to Suburban Schools). Equal Access Education There is no arguing the fact that Brown vs. Board of Education helped turn our nation into a multi-cultural society where the rights of minorities, women and other groups are protected. The challenges facing our educational systems today also prove that it was merely a stepping stone in the direction of providing equal education not only to Blacks but to all children regardless of race, gender or social class. In 1990 during an interview with Juan Williams of the New York Times, Justice Thurgood Marshall was asked whether or not he was satisfied with the outcome of the Court’s decision in 1954 and he replied that the point of desegregating schools was never about sitting Black children next to White children, but rather, the point was to give Black children the right to attend schools that were generously financed and provided the resources needed for the children to succeed. By placing the Black children in the schools, school board officials would have no other choice than to but to equalize spending to protect the interests of the White children. In the end the primary purpose of Brown was to provide equal access education to Blacks (Williams, 2007) Conclusion Brown vs. Board of Education will forever remain a landmark case. Its implications will continue to resonate within the Civil Rights community. A sadder truth is the fact that unless we the People take the next step from Brown to ensure the reshaping of inferior schools in an effort to secure equal access education to all children regardless of race gender or social class, its original intent shall be lost in translation and leave much to be desired for the 21st century. References Alonso, G., Anderson, N., Su Celine & Theoharis J. Brown vs. Board of Education at 55: Segregation in the 21st Century, retrieved on May 20, 2010 from http://www.progressive.org/mpalonso051809.html Bainbridge, W & Lasley T. (2002). Poverty Not Race Holds Back Urban Students retrieved May 20, 2010 from http://www.schoolmatch.com/articles/poverty.htm . Brown vs. Board of Education 1954, as cited in Martin, 1998 p. 144 Brown Foundation for Education Equity, Excellence, and Research. (2004) retrieved on May 20, 2010, from http://brownvboard.org/summary/. Cozzens, L (1995). Brown vs. Board of Education retrieved on May 20, 2010 from http://www.watson.org/~lisa/blackhistory/early-civilrights/brown.html Clark, Kenneth B, Chein, Isidor & Cook Stewart W., (September 2004). The Effects of Segregation and the Consequences of Desegration: American Psychologist, Vol. 59 No. 6 pp495-501. Galiano, A. (nd.). Little Rock Central High: History in Little Rock retrieved on May 20, 2010 from http://littlerock.about.com/cs/centralhigh/a/Integration.htm Golba, A. (nd): How Does Education in Urban Schools Compare to Suburban Schools retrieved May 20, 2010 from http://www.iusb.edu/~journal/static/volumes/1998/Paper5.html Patterson, James T. (2008). Brown v. Board of Education, The Law, The Legacy retrieved May 20, 2010 from http://www.america.gov/st/educ-english/2008/April/20080423213855eaifas0.6193506.html Quick MBA (2010): The Expectancy Theory retrieved May 20, 2010 from http://www.quickmba.com/mgmt/expectancy-theory/ The Health Communication Unit (2003). Summary of Social Science Theories: How to Use Stages of Change Theory retrieved on May 20, 2010 from http://www.thcu.ca/infoandresources/publications/Summary_of_Social_Science_Theories_v1.2.july.29.03.pdf Williams, Juan, 2007. Don’t Mourn Brown v. Board of Education retrieved on May 20, 2010 from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/29/opinion/29williams.html'_r=1 .