Yep. It was incredibly costly for those white parents who could afford to move. And, well, there are differences in typical behaviours between whites and blacks, so... it must have been an incredibly bad experience for the white children (and the well-behaved black children) who had to stay behind. Who cares about a few teachers who had to find another job? It pales compared to the costs of having to move in order to secure a decent childhood for one's children. It also pales compared to the negative experiences of those who couldn't move. (And weren't many of them fired because they were only qualified on paper? Didn't the black children deserve competent teachers?)
In first grade, in 1965, we moved to Kansas City MO. There was one of two blacks in my class. 2nd grade the class was 50/50 black and white. 3rd grade started out with me, one other white boy and one white girl. We moved about a month after 3rd grade started. The same thing must have happened in a thousand schools across America around the same time.
@@peterfireflylundthis is inaccurate! Most of the black teachers were significantly more qualified by every comprehensive report we have access to! Linda Brown stated in the docuseries that her teachers were far better than her white teachers and she was further along in her academics compared to her white peers! So the black teachers were fired on the bases of race and the assumption that white teachers= superior which is false!
This reminds me of how the integration of Major League Baseball with Jackie Robinson in 1947 more or less caused the Negro Major Leagues to suffer and then disappear completely. The negro leagues were very popular and was viewed as a successful black owned and operated business. It kept going for some time but eventually it was forced to cease operations.
Does anybody happen to know why fewer teachers were needed after desegregation? I'm probably missing something, but I'm confused why anyone lost their job simply because schools desegregated. Didn't the number of students remain the same?
Great question. It really was not about class size or student teacher ratio. Those (black) teachers lost their jobs because of racism. Even if an integrated/desegregated school had more children and the teaching staff was populated with teachers who were white. Also there was a burgeoning of white private schools as white parents did not want to send their children to integrated schools
The beneficiaries of "desegregation", was the school bus companies, and school districts that used the influx of students to leverage huge tax increases.
The effect on the teachers is unbelievable, and before now, unknown to me. I have worked in an all-Black school with the staff mixed at about half: half Black and half White. The Black teachers had an important influence that I didn't see mirrored in the white teachers, so there is a place for having a mix of teachers in our contemporary segregated schools.
My father never liked integration. He always wanted separate but equal. He said he hated sitting in a classroom with students who obviously had more money, better clothes, books , etc. looking down on him/ treating him as less.
But that's still inherently racist, beacuse the "separate but equal" argument was always complete bullshit! There was no such thing as "sEpArAtE bUt eQuAl" and there never would be, EVER! Especially for black and brown people. The real problem was the racist white people who looked down on others beacuse of the color of their skin! That was their problem, not your father's! Kids shouldn't be kept separate just because they're a different race or have different economic situations, even it makes them a little uncomfortable at first! The truth is that when things are kept separated by race, one group is always going to feel superior or inferior to the other and both are wrong. Segregation was about racism and oppression and nothing else! Do you agree?
The same thing happened to us poor white kids. We just never thought a out complaining about it. We were taught that life was not fair and it was our personal responsibility to work harder and someday rise above our circumstances. Out in cow country in the Great Basin of eastern Nevada and Eastern Idaho. In the 1950s, excuses were simply not tolerated. Kids in our tiny little schools were the children of agriculture workers, vaqueros, cowboys, and tradesmen; Mexicans, Indians and whites. I never saw an actual black person until I joined the Army in 1965. Boy did I get an education about black behavior.
Yeah. Be twice as good as the next guy to get the same treatment. Though thats what I was taught in the 80's. I cant imagine what they were doing in the 50's. @@stormrider9831
I must also mention that this topic (Brown v. Board Of Education) was covered by Malcolm Gladwell on his Revisionist History podcast. It was episode 3 of the 2nd season titled “Miss Buchanan’s Period of Adjustment”. It is still available and well worth the listen. It sheds more light on what happened to black teachers after the verdict.
I for most of my elementary school time i went to Mary Beck an experimental school That had no class room walls and mostly no desks. We had lap boards a desk without legs you put on your lap and was racially mixed. There were desk for the 5th and 6th grade at the one end and a class room for mentally challenged students. The school didn't however have learning diabilities program and in 5th grade it was determined I needed this program so the bussewd me to Riverveiw Elementary a on the north sdie where mostly rich white people lived. They school had one family of black children atthe school because almost no blacks lived in the area of the school that was the fist time i experienced class rooms, riding the bus, and changing rooms for different classes. I lived with my gandmother mostly until 6th grade when i lived with my Father mostly. I was treaste well by the students at review better than any other school. Though at MaryBeck from 1st to 4th i had one teacher mostly and i was one of herfavorite students at the time. In 6th grade I went to Hawthorn Elementary another mixed race school where i was the teacher's favorite the hgad desk and class rooms but didn't change classes for subjects. Though the students were better to me at Riverveiw i was glad to be in ointrergated schools gives much fairer picture about peiple in general. Elkhart had Junoir High schools at the time I went to Pierre Moran JHS 7th to 9th today its a middle school and is 6th through 8th. It was another mixed race school and except review all my schools to this poiint were closes enough to walk. MB was 2 blocks, HT was 1 block and PM was 4 blocks. Until High schoo where i took a bus again. I went to Memorial HS now Elkhart High School from 10th to 12th(added 9th the year after i graduated). Another mixed school The rich fromthe northside and the poor from the westside mostly. Any segregation in the school system was cause by where people lived not by design. I am glasd i went tyo public school and met people of different races et me see that people are people no matter thier ethnic background.
We discussed at length Brown vs. BOE when I was taking the principal certification courses and I always had the feeling we were not given the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Wish I knew this before I retired.
The underlying culture was shocked by the forced integration, both races took aim at something that was being forced on them, that was not a community based, organic solution. While separating the races is harmful to the future of both, or all, skin colors, forcing my government fiat was not good. unfortunately, there is no "good and easy" way to make it happen.
@@roemellobaum-gz1vl The Federal government also took white homes and businesses in rural and less well known areas. Rural cities and counties were savaged. My family lost several old historic homes, churches and businesses that were made into parking lots that spent decades being empty, while the people who lived there were given partial value for the properties. Many never recovered from the destruction of their neighborhoods
@@patriot9455 when I watch people talking about integration was a mistake they never talk about urban renewal that played a part in black business loss and black neighborhoods loss
@@roemellobaum-gz1vl Urban "renewal" may have been an early plan to break down any and all cohesive neighborhoods in preparation for a global "community" controlled, managed, and manipulated by straw bosses who had fake titles and false authorities to make the way for the global redistribution of power and property. Before you scoff, look deep into what has happened in small, rural, bedroom and farming communities near and around large cities and the power those centers of power wield over the people. Be prepared to say "I never realized" and try to regain a local, cohesive community, not of one color, but of real communicated ideas and intellectual diversity under a true freely understood unity where ideas, not slogans, prevail. Look at how history is resented, how economics is taught. If they are taught as a winner and loser concept, you can be sure the goal is to break down communities into groups that can be used against each other.
Well, that was excellent and depressing. I had known that only 10 percent of schools were integrated after Brown by 1980 when the government stopped the effort of integration via the amendment worked on Senators Thurmond, Helms and Biden. But I had no idea on the severe damage done to black teachers and how it destroyed them in that profession. However, I wouldn’t call the picture of the classroom “integrated” where two black children are sitting in the back next to the white teacher, posed to make it look successful. It was a dog and pony show and integration failed at 10 percent because of “massive resistance.”
I'm guessing that the message was that they weren't focused on what mattered, and that was student and teacher success and property. Forcing the window dressing of diversity on a system that isn't otherwise broken results in creation of more problems that it solves.
It is inaccurate to tie your results to the Brown decision directly. It seems more a remnant of the inherently biased decision making of the school boards and state legislatures to not fairly access the result of retaining all of the white teachers and firing all of the black ones. Im certain that many teachers were perfectly capable teachers, many even more highly educated than their white peers. I know this because both of my parents were of that level. My mentor, a next door neighbor, was also an educator with a PH.D and other advanced degrees.
Not really, it's quite apt to connect them. As those teachers became largely redundant. Most of the teaching jobs existed solely because of segregation as the amount of black kids could, and after brown was, handled largely by white schools. To do a bit of quick dirty math, white kids outnumbered black kids roughly 8 to 1 which roughly translates to a increase of class size of around 2 on average if we assume a class size of 18 and assuming all kids went to white schools after brown. Most teachers should, and can, manage classes bigger than 20 kids meaning teachers at black schools were redundant. Realistically some schools kept on existing due to the amount of black students in some area's so realistically the amount of increase of class sizes in white school would even be lower than ~2. And in other places white kids outnumbered black kids even more than 8 to 1 which also lowered the increase of class sizes in white schools. And while there certainly is an argument to be had for racism in the school boards it would be a VAST over simplification to just point to racism. It was mostly people choosing to send their kids to formerly white schools, which translates to closed black schools and teachers being fired from those schools, and a massive amount of redundancy due to segregation that created teaching jobs.
@@relo999 did you actually witness this change? I did. And I can tell you that black people did not "choose" to send their children to white schools, the states and the school boards did. If desegregation and equity was the true purpose of the laws put in place then closing most of the "black" schools and firing of most of the "black" teachers was one of the worst implementations that an educational administration could have chosen. If balance had been given more (or, really any) consideration, blending the teacher staffs of both black and white schools and then picking the best qualified teachers from that pool to work at the now integrated schools would have been more in the spirit of the law. Instead, with only some unique exceptions, it occurred as you said - Black kids were sent to white schools where all of the teachers, administrators and staff were white. All students were basically made to adhere to methods, rules and standards that were unchanged even with an influx of students who were culturally different than had been there before. So, maybe to you it seems like splitting hairs, but it is clear to me as I read Brown, the changes in the laws were just basic Federal guidelines and standards that were designed to assist the states to achieve social change that they hoped would lead to fairness. The rub is that like the Constitution, Reconstruction and Civil Rights as acted upon in the Southern states mostly, the devil is in the details. There was nothing in Brown that said all the black teachers should be fired nor that all the black schools should be closed. Those were decisions made by local and state school boards and legislatures. Just as when Reconstruction was implemented originally, the South finagled a way to circumvent the spirit of the laws. The Federal government gave the people "Emancipation" and the South countered with "Jim Crow". Firing all the black teachers indiscriminately while keeping all of the white teachers is a variation of that theme - An action that continued the racially based inequity. Thurgood must be turning over in his grave if he is aware that some people are laying those kinds of actions at his feet as if that had been his intent, as if he warranted blame.
I think Black students behave better with a Black principal. The thought with integration was that it would improve the relations between the races. I question whether that has happened.
This is not exactly correct. I think the reason why the hit came so hard (closing Black schools & firing the Black teachers) is because the motion was already in action. Let me explain: Brown v. Board was not the reason for stopping segregation. I love Thurgood Marshall and he is basically the winner here although, separate were equal was declared here in California. The Black teachers in Brown’s case were great and the schools were far better. And the students on both sides were fine as they were, but the change was already happening. California already put the stop on segregation and this motion was crossing over and through the nations but Brown case came into action prior and took credit. Mendez v. Westminster outlawed segregation 1947. It was the Mexican kids here who were segregated, Mexicans in poorer areas, dilapidated classrooms, under paid teachers. It was this case that opened the door for Brown. Sylvia Mendez, in this case, was just celebrated about a year ago because for the historic situation her father fought taking this case to court. Mendez received awards, plaques, and a statue (my friend is a reporter and covered the story). Sad to burst everybody’s bubble, but “separate but equal” was played out and done way before Brown v. Board. I don’t mean to take a win away from Blacks but the credit goes to the Mexicans of Westminster, CA first and foremost. I think what is bad is all coverage went to Brown case and not to Mendez v. Westminster and the teacher and schools for Blacks got hit blindsided even though those in charge knew this was coming. Which is why the move was so swift in shutting things down. I finally just watched cases on Brown and I’m a bit shocked while knowing the history of facts. I thought I was going to learn something about the famous Brown v. Board case that I didn’t know. What I know apparently other people didn’t. So here you go. Goggle it. It’s all true.
Dr. Kenneth B. Clark and Mamie Clark’s “Doll” studies greatly contributed to the Brown vs. Board of Education decision. The study has since been replicated countless times with the same profound results. It shows how greatly African American children and even children of all racial/ethnic groups have been affected by segregation and racial discrimination and disparities. It’s heartbreaking.
With a noted exception of three groups: the broad Asian American community, the Nigerian-American community and the Ghanian American community. Their cultural values have held them strong in these adverse situations.
@@jmontgomery1178 Thank you. Just yesterday I learned of this book: An Inconvenient Minority: The Attack on Asian American Excellence and the Fight for Meritocracy www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Minority-Admissions-American-Excellence/dp/1635767563/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
@@Hunpecked Lol the author of that book is a dope, he seemed so lost when asked basic questions about inequality and historical racism against Black/Hispanic people.
Almost everyone in the U.S. opposed integration. You can still see the interviews from the Topeka Kansas parents. Nearly all of them, black and white said the same thing. "They pay taxes so they ought to have the same kind of schools and materials, but we dont want them to go to the same school."
@@seanluzdeluna8153nope, it was very common. People like to be are those who look like them and come from similar backgrounds, many black people didn’t like integration as they were then put with kids who didn’t come from similar backgrounds and were often harsh towards each other because of that.
Virginia tried to keep from integrating by giving blacks better schools with all the supplies teachers would need. When integration came, teachers from black and white schools were transferred. White teachers were ecstatic to find they now had everything they needed to teach. Black teachers raised cain when they found they had to use outdoor bathrooms like all teachers had through the year before and no teaching supplies.
This does not ring true. Separate was never equal. I'm pretty sure Virginia did not give black schools and students better than their own. That wasn't the Southern way. Still isn't. Sorry.
@@VisforVictor sorry, but you are wrong. Virginia would do anything to prevent desegregation of schools. My aunt and her daughter were teachers and had front row seats to this. My aunt was transferred to a a previously black school and found she had teaching materials galore. Black teachers transferred to white schools found nothing. What this means is that Virginia really didn’t appreciate education in those days.
@@jockellis You do realize that schools in Virginia are still mostly segregated. So even if there are examples where a black school may at some time seemed better supplied than some other white schools, that is not the norm since the 1950s. Before then it was even way, way worse. For proof of that you only have to look at the financial distribution budgets of the Boards of Education in Virginia. Those are public records available to you if you want to know the truth. I understand though, you might not value the truth. Many don’t these days. You do realize Virginia had schools for hundreds of years before Virginia even had any thought at all of desegregation, right?
I am not thrilled by the idea of crossing a busy road if there was no traffic light, but there have been persistent rumors that the City of Topeka offered to build a pedestrian bridge that was rejected and the distance was only brought up later. Walking 7 blocks? I did that as a 7 y/o first grader. And kids STILL do that. Folks, that is less than a mile, given that the average of a city block is around 550 to 600 feet. That is about a 20 minute walk for a kid.
the big miss here is how much parents contribute to the success of any student. in the big cities the majority of failing students come from broken homes with little or no parental guidance. this is the big reason big city public schools are such a mess.
We went from separate and unequal (and yes, it was definitely an unequal, inferior education due to severe undersourcing of resources and a disparate impact of forcing black students to travel further distances than white students) to an integrated and unequal education (again, due to severe undersourcing of resources for inner-city schools compared to their wealthier suburbs and a disparate impact of forcing black students to travel further distances than white students if they have a “school choice” program within the district since the better resourced schools tend to be in suburbs that have a greater proportion of white students in them). However, I think that the biggest problem is that an equal education does not go nearly far enough - education must be equitable instead. Giving the same exact resources to schools with wealthier parents is not equitable. They should be given fewer resources since wealthier parents can (and will) step in and provide for their own as well. This problem only gets worse when the schools with lower socioeconomic pupils cannot even receive equal resources, let alone the greater resources that are necessary for them to thrive on an equal footing with schools with more affluent socioeconomic demographics. Brown helped by forcing the integration of schools, but without a mandate to provide EQUITABLE resources, which would require that schools with a lower socioeconomic mix of students be given more resources than the relatively affluent schools, this victory has ended up being a pyrrhic one.
You're reversing causality. More money won't solve the problem at inner city schools. Charter schools are ample evidence of this being the case. They frequently receive much lower funding than comparable public schools, yet turn out excellent students who are mostly minority. The students at charter schools have parents who are engaged. The parents of many/most inner city public schools are disengaged, and no amount of money will resolve that. There is no shortage of rural schools with similar problems to inner city schools, and they're pretty typically very white. Those parents are frequently as disengaged as inner city black parents. My stepson attends one of the best public schools in the country. It's one of the best because of the engagement level of the parents. About 75% of his school is Asian kids. You can't drive more than 5 minutes around those neighborhoods without seeing extracurricular learning centers for math, science, and computer programming. Last year's senior class sent 5 kids to Stanford. Money isn't the cause of success, it's the result of it. Money will take you anywhere you want to go, but it will never replace you as the driver.
@@smokedbrisket3033 Did I ever even once use the word money? Nope, not even once. What I wrote was we should provide more resources. There is a difference. More resources does not necessarily mean more money. Charter schools are a great example of providing more resources with the same amount of (or even less) money. How do they do this? They make more of the money go to the classroom as opposed to administration. They hire superior teachers for the same amount of money (or even less) by giving them more control over the classroom. Montessori charter schools, which tend to be some of the best performing charter schools, allow for more individualized instruction and allow the students to take ownership of material through peer teaching. Instead of providing after school sports or special interest clubs, the schools can provide additional after school instruction. Vocational education can emphasized rather than college prep for those students who are not inclined towards college. The key is to provide more appropriate opportunities that students otherwise would not have access to because of their parental socioeconomic status.
@@drmadjdsadjadi - it isn't about resources, or at best, they're secondary. it is about the commitment of the parents, which is instilled into their children. What were the resources available to the kids in the 30s, 40s, and 50s who went on to become engineers who designed and built rockets that sent us to the moon, and the SR-71, using slide rules? Who discovered the double-helix, chiral nature of DNA? Whether their parents were the demanding type, or the kids were already showing signs of greatness and the parents did everything they could to enable and encourage their children to reach higher than they ever dared dream, it didn't matter. Neither of those circumstances exist for "underperforming" schools. Charter schools work because they have those kinds of student and/or those kinds of parents. Inner city public schools fail because they have neither of those things. I don't think any of my grandparents went past 6th or 7th grade. Mom and Dad both grew up horribly poor, rural, and agricultural. But my dad ended up earning a PhD and became a vice chancellor at one of the largest land grant universities in the country. Mom became a school teacher. It was purely because their parents demanded excellence of them. I think we're probably arguing different sides of the same coin.
@@smokedbrisket3033 I do agree we are arguing two sides of the same coin but I disagree that parental involvement is as important as you think it is. Many charter schools succeed despite not having heavy parental involvement. The key is providing them with different ways to attack the issue of low student performance. Our biggest problem is the one size fits all approach that obviously does not work and it is equally problematic and simply unconscionable to give up on students simply because their parents are not involved. instead we need to double down in such cases and provide more resources to combat this. Once again, if isn’t necessarily about money and it certainly isn’t just about parental involvement because many inner city schools can be transformed into exceptional schools if they are allowed to innovate and by suspending the rules that hamstring these schools, we will go a long way towards solving the issue of low student performance.
@@smokedbrisket3033 I was thinking more about what you wrote and I think that the key is not parental involvement or expectations, but rather teacher expectations. If teachers expect excellence, it does not matter whether parents are involved or not. This is because parents often only recognize whether their child is doing well or poorly based on grades. Far too often inner city schools are told to socially promote and not make too many demands on their students. This is the real issue - it is the teachers, not the parents. Inner-city school teachers should not be hired unless they demand the same level of excellence as is found in the best schools in the country and we can do this by requiring a subset of all tests to be sent to the best performing schools for evaluation to ensure that the same standards are met. I used to teach at The University of the West Indies in Jamaica and our standards were the exact same standards as at Oxford and Cambridge, which is why our graduates performed exceptionally well in US graduate schools and often could get into any graduate school in the US even with grades that were lower than their US peers. We should never denigrate inner city schools because their students with the right teachers and curriculum can easily do just as well as students at suburban schools. The key is we have to expect them to perform well. It is when we begin by assuming they are not as capable, as so many of their teachers do, that we see them failing to thrive. The fact is inner city schools need to be far more selective in terms of their teaching staff than other schools if for no other reason than because teachers will only demand of their students what they expect their students to achieve.
It seems to me that Brown had the desired effect: It provided those parents who wanted it the ability to send their black children to schools with whites. On average, and especially in the South, black schools had far fewer resources relative to white schools because of racism. That black schools made due is irrelevant because they never should have been in that situation in the first place. What happened to the teachers afterward is a further consequence of racism rather than of the case.
Keep in mind that this film was composed in the early 60s. Things have changed for the better. Keep also in mind that segregation, since the 2020 election, has become the benchmark of progress in most institutions of higher education.
As I recall, another effect of this decision was more affluent whites moving out of cities to the suburbs, essentially re-segregating the schools.
Yep. It was incredibly costly for those white parents who could afford to move. And, well, there are differences in typical behaviours between whites and blacks, so... it must have been an incredibly bad experience for the white children (and the well-behaved black children) who had to stay behind.
Who cares about a few teachers who had to find another job? It pales compared to the costs of having to move in order to secure a decent childhood for one's children. It also pales compared to the negative experiences of those who couldn't move.
(And weren't many of them fired because they were only qualified on paper? Didn't the black children deserve competent teachers?)
In first grade, in 1965, we moved to Kansas City MO. There was one of two blacks in my class. 2nd grade the class was 50/50 black and white.
3rd grade started out with me, one other white boy and one white girl. We moved about a month after 3rd grade started.
The same thing must have happened in a thousand schools across America around the same time.
@@peterfireflylundthis is inaccurate! Most of the black teachers were significantly more qualified by every comprehensive report we have access to! Linda Brown stated in the docuseries that her teachers were far better than her white teachers and she was further along in her academics compared to her white peers! So the black teachers were fired on the bases of race and the assumption that white teachers= superior which is false!
This reminds me of how the integration of Major League Baseball with Jackie Robinson in 1947 more or less caused the Negro Major Leagues to suffer and then disappear completely. The negro leagues were very popular and was viewed as a successful black owned and operated business. It kept going for some time but eventually it was forced to cease operations.
Happy you created this video because most of us who study this were aware of this problem.
Does anybody happen to know why fewer teachers were needed after desegregation? I'm probably missing something, but I'm confused why anyone lost their job simply because schools desegregated. Didn't the number of students remain the same?
Thank you. I had the same question. Did class sizes increase?
Class sizes did increase tremendously.
Black teachers didn't get those new jobs due to racism and discrimination.
Perhaps many students switched to private schools that concentrated on education rather than social engineering.
Great question. It really was not about class size or student teacher ratio. Those (black) teachers lost their jobs because of racism. Even if an integrated/desegregated school had more children and the teaching staff was populated with teachers who were white. Also there was a burgeoning of white private schools as white parents did not want to send their children to integrated schools
The beneficiaries of "desegregation", was the school bus companies, and school districts that used the influx of students to leverage huge tax increases.
The effect on the teachers is unbelievable, and before now, unknown to me. I have worked in an all-Black school with the staff mixed at about half: half Black and half White. The Black teachers had an important influence that I didn't see mirrored in the white teachers, so there is a place for having a mix of teachers in our contemporary segregated schools.
My father never liked integration. He always wanted separate but equal. He said he hated sitting in a classroom with students who obviously had more money, better clothes, books , etc. looking down on him/ treating him as less.
But that's still inherently racist, beacuse the "separate but equal" argument was always complete bullshit! There was no such thing as "sEpArAtE bUt eQuAl" and there never would be, EVER! Especially for black and brown people. The real problem was the racist white people who looked down on others beacuse of the color of their skin! That was their problem, not your father's! Kids shouldn't be kept separate just because they're a different race or have different economic situations, even it makes them a little uncomfortable at first! The truth is that when things are kept separated by race, one group is always going to feel superior or inferior to the other and both are wrong. Segregation was about racism and oppression and nothing else! Do you agree?
The same thing happened to us poor white kids. We just never thought a out complaining about it. We were taught that life was not fair and it was our personal responsibility to work harder and someday rise above our circumstances. Out in cow country in the Great Basin of eastern Nevada and Eastern Idaho. In the 1950s, excuses were simply not tolerated. Kids in our tiny little schools were the children of agriculture workers, vaqueros, cowboys, and tradesmen; Mexicans, Indians and whites. I never saw an actual black person until I joined the Army in 1965. Boy did I get an education about black behavior.
Yeah. Be twice as good as the next guy to get the same treatment. Though thats what I was taught in the 80's. I cant imagine what they were doing in the 50's. @@stormrider9831
I must also mention that this topic (Brown v. Board Of Education) was covered by Malcolm Gladwell on his Revisionist History podcast. It was episode 3 of the 2nd season titled “Miss Buchanan’s Period of Adjustment”. It is still available and well worth the listen. It sheds more light on what happened to black teachers after the verdict.
I for most of my elementary school time i went to Mary Beck an experimental school That had no class room walls and mostly no desks. We had lap boards a desk without legs you put on your lap and was racially mixed. There were desk for the 5th and 6th grade at the one end and a class room for mentally challenged students. The school didn't however have learning diabilities program and in 5th grade it was determined I needed this program so the bussewd me to Riverveiw Elementary a on the north sdie where mostly rich white people lived. They school had one family of black children atthe school because almost no blacks lived in the area of the school that was the fist time i experienced class rooms, riding the bus, and changing rooms for different classes. I lived with my gandmother mostly until 6th grade when i lived with my Father mostly. I was treaste well by the students at review better than any other school. Though at MaryBeck from 1st to 4th i had one teacher mostly and i was one of herfavorite students at the time. In 6th grade I went to Hawthorn Elementary another mixed race school where i was the teacher's favorite the hgad desk and class rooms but didn't change classes for subjects. Though the students were better to me at Riverveiw i was glad to be in ointrergated schools gives much fairer picture about peiple in general. Elkhart had Junoir High schools at the time I went to Pierre Moran JHS 7th to 9th today its a middle school and is 6th through 8th. It was another mixed race school and except review all my schools to this poiint were closes enough to walk. MB was 2 blocks, HT was 1 block and PM was 4 blocks. Until High schoo where i took a bus again. I went to Memorial HS now Elkhart High School from 10th to 12th(added 9th the year after i graduated). Another mixed school The rich fromthe northside and the poor from the westside mostly. Any segregation in the school system was cause by where people lived not by design. I am glasd i went tyo public school and met people of different races et me see that people are people no matter thier ethnic background.
You cut the cake, I choose the pieces.
i learned much from this and was a very informative video. :)
Definitely agree....
We discussed at length Brown vs. BOE when I was taking the principal certification courses and I always had the feeling we were not given the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Wish I knew this before I retired.
The underlying culture was shocked by the forced integration, both races took aim at something that was being forced on them, that was not a community based, organic solution. While separating the races is harmful to the future of both, or all, skin colors, forcing my government fiat was not good. unfortunately, there is no "good and easy" way to make it happen.
What about urban renewal when they tore down black business and black neighborhoods
@@roemellobaum-gz1vl The Federal government also took white homes and businesses in rural and less well known areas. Rural cities and counties were savaged. My family lost several old historic homes, churches and businesses that were made into parking lots that spent decades being empty, while the people who lived there were given partial value for the properties. Many never recovered from the destruction of their neighborhoods
@@patriot9455 when I watch people talking about integration was a mistake they never talk about urban renewal that played a part in black business loss and black neighborhoods loss
@@roemellobaum-gz1vl Urban "renewal" may have been an early plan to break down any and all cohesive neighborhoods in preparation for a global "community" controlled, managed, and manipulated by straw bosses who had fake titles and false authorities to make the way for the global redistribution of power and property. Before you scoff, look deep into what has happened in small, rural, bedroom and farming communities near and around large cities and the power those centers of power wield over the people. Be prepared to say "I never realized" and try to regain a local, cohesive community, not of one color, but of real communicated ideas and intellectual diversity under a true freely understood unity where ideas, not slogans, prevail. Look at how history is resented, how economics is taught. If they are taught as a winner and loser concept, you can be sure the goal is to break down communities into groups that can be used against each other.
My wife went to Marybeck. I went to Monger. We bothe went to Pierre Moran and Elkhart Central.
Well, that was excellent and depressing. I had known that only 10 percent of schools were integrated after Brown by 1980 when the government stopped the effort of integration via the amendment worked on Senators Thurmond, Helms and Biden. But I had no idea on the severe damage done to black teachers and how it destroyed them in that profession.
However, I wouldn’t call the picture of the classroom “integrated” where two black children are sitting in the back next to the white teacher, posed to make it look successful. It was a dog and pony show and integration failed at 10 percent because of “massive resistance.”
So what's the message here? Integration was bad?
I'm guessing that the message was that they weren't focused on what mattered, and that was student and teacher success and property. Forcing the window dressing of diversity on a system that isn't otherwise broken results in creation of more problems that it solves.
It is inaccurate to tie your results to the Brown decision directly. It seems more a remnant of the inherently biased decision making of the school boards and state legislatures to not fairly access the result of retaining all of the white teachers and firing all of the black ones. Im certain that many teachers were perfectly capable teachers, many even more highly educated than their white peers. I know this because both of my parents were of that level. My mentor, a next door neighbor, was also an educator with a PH.D and other advanced degrees.
Not really, it's quite apt to connect them. As those teachers became largely redundant. Most of the teaching jobs existed solely because of segregation as the amount of black kids could, and after brown was, handled largely by white schools. To do a bit of quick dirty math, white kids outnumbered black kids roughly 8 to 1 which roughly translates to a increase of class size of around 2 on average if we assume a class size of 18 and assuming all kids went to white schools after brown. Most teachers should, and can, manage classes bigger than 20 kids meaning teachers at black schools were redundant.
Realistically some schools kept on existing due to the amount of black students in some area's so realistically the amount of increase of class sizes in white school would even be lower than ~2. And in other places white kids outnumbered black kids even more than 8 to 1 which also lowered the increase of class sizes in white schools.
And while there certainly is an argument to be had for racism in the school boards it would be a VAST over simplification to just point to racism. It was mostly people choosing to send their kids to formerly white schools, which translates to closed black schools and teachers being fired from those schools, and a massive amount of redundancy due to segregation that created teaching jobs.
@@relo999 did you actually witness this change? I did. And I can tell you that black people did not "choose" to send their children to white schools, the states and the school boards did. If desegregation and equity was the true purpose of the laws put in place then closing most of the "black" schools and firing of most of the "black" teachers was one of the worst implementations that an educational administration could have chosen. If balance had been given more (or, really any) consideration, blending the teacher staffs of both black and white schools and then picking the best qualified teachers from that pool to work at the now integrated schools would have been more in the spirit of the law. Instead, with only some unique exceptions, it occurred as you said - Black kids were sent to white schools where all of the teachers, administrators and staff were white. All students were basically made to adhere to methods, rules and standards that were unchanged even with an influx of students who were culturally different than had been there before. So, maybe to you it seems like splitting hairs, but it is clear to me as I read Brown, the changes in the laws were just basic Federal guidelines and standards that were designed to assist the states to achieve social change that they hoped would lead to fairness. The rub is that like the Constitution, Reconstruction and Civil Rights as acted upon in the Southern states mostly, the devil is in the details. There was nothing in Brown that said all the black teachers should be fired nor that all the black schools should be closed. Those were decisions made by local and state school boards and legislatures. Just as when Reconstruction was implemented originally, the South finagled a way to circumvent the spirit of the laws. The Federal government gave the people "Emancipation" and the South countered with "Jim Crow". Firing all the black teachers indiscriminately while keeping all of the white teachers is a variation of that theme - An action that continued the racially based inequity. Thurgood must be turning over in his grave if he is aware that some people are laying those kinds of actions at his feet as if that had been his intent, as if he warranted blame.
@@VisforVictor Excellent response, THANK YOU!!
According to the left, Plessy v. Ferguson should have been "established law" and could not be overturned.
I think Black students behave better with a Black principal.
The thought with integration was that it would improve the relations between the races. I question whether that has happened.
So what's the point? School segregation was good?
This is not exactly correct. I think the reason why the hit came so hard (closing Black schools & firing the Black teachers) is because the motion was already in action. Let me explain:
Brown v. Board was not the reason for stopping segregation. I love Thurgood Marshall and he is basically the winner here although, separate were equal was declared here in California. The Black teachers in Brown’s case were great and the schools were far better. And the students on both sides were fine as they were, but the change was already happening.
California already put the stop on segregation and this motion was crossing over and through the nations but Brown case came into action prior and took credit.
Mendez v. Westminster outlawed segregation 1947. It was the Mexican kids here who were segregated, Mexicans in poorer areas, dilapidated classrooms, under paid teachers.
It was this case that opened the door for Brown. Sylvia Mendez, in this case, was just celebrated about a year ago because for the historic situation her father fought taking this case to court. Mendez received awards, plaques, and a statue (my friend is a reporter and covered the story).
Sad to burst everybody’s bubble, but “separate but equal” was played out and done way before Brown v. Board. I don’t mean to take a win away from Blacks but the credit goes to the Mexicans of Westminster, CA first and foremost.
I think what is bad is all coverage went to Brown case and not to Mendez v. Westminster and the teacher and schools for Blacks got hit blindsided even though those in charge knew this was coming. Which is why the move was so swift in shutting things down.
I finally just watched cases on Brown and I’m a bit shocked while knowing the history of facts. I thought I was going to learn something about the famous Brown v. Board case that I didn’t know. What I know apparently other people didn’t. So here you go. Goggle it. It’s all true.
Dr. Kenneth B. Clark and Mamie Clark’s “Doll” studies greatly contributed to the Brown vs. Board of Education decision. The study has since been replicated countless times with the same profound results. It shows how greatly African American children and even children of all racial/ethnic groups have been affected by segregation and racial discrimination and disparities. It’s heartbreaking.
With a noted exception of three groups: the broad Asian American community, the Nigerian-American community and the Ghanian American community. Their cultural values have held them strong in these adverse situations.
@@jmontgomery1178 That’s Very true.
@@jmontgomery1178 Thank you. Just yesterday I learned of this book: An Inconvenient Minority: The Attack on Asian American Excellence and the Fight for Meritocracy
www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Minority-Admissions-American-Excellence/dp/1635767563/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
@@Hunpecked Lol the author of that book is a dope, he seemed so lost when asked basic questions about inequality and historical racism against Black/Hispanic people.
@@wachowski9525 I thought the book was about discrimination against Asian-Americans?
Edit: Do you have a link to this supposed display of ignorance?
Great and informative video.
Almost everyone in the U.S. opposed integration. You can still see the interviews from the Topeka Kansas parents. Nearly all of them, black and white said the same thing. "They pay taxes so they ought to have the same kind of schools and materials, but we dont want them to go to the same school."
Is there a place where I can find these interviews. Doing a project in school about this
I seriously doubt "aLmOsT eVeRyOnE" was opposed to desegregation. Only racists were opposed to it!
who had the authority to allow non white students in all white schools during segregation?
@@seanluzdeluna8153nope, it was very common. People like to be are those who look like them and come from similar backgrounds, many black people didn’t like integration as they were then put with kids who didn’t come from similar backgrounds and were often harsh towards each other because of that.
Virginia tried to keep from integrating by giving blacks better schools with all the supplies teachers would need. When integration came, teachers from black and white schools were transferred. White teachers were ecstatic to find they now had everything they needed to teach. Black teachers raised cain when they found they had to use outdoor bathrooms like all teachers had through the year before and no teaching supplies.
This does not ring true. Separate was never equal. I'm pretty sure Virginia did not give black schools and students better than their own. That wasn't the Southern way. Still isn't. Sorry.
@@VisforVictor sorry, but you are wrong. Virginia would do anything to prevent desegregation of schools. My aunt and her daughter were teachers and had front row seats to this. My aunt was transferred to a a previously black school and found she had teaching materials galore. Black teachers transferred to white schools found nothing. What this means is that Virginia really didn’t appreciate education in those days.
@@jockellis You do realize that schools in Virginia are still mostly segregated. So even if there are examples where a black school may at some time seemed better supplied than some other white schools, that is not the norm since the 1950s. Before then it was even way, way worse. For proof of that you only have to look at the financial distribution budgets of the Boards of Education in Virginia. Those are public records available to you if you want to know the truth. I understand though, you might not value the truth. Many don’t these days. You do realize Virginia had schools for hundreds of years before Virginia even had any thought at all of desegregation, right?
Great video. Very detailed
I am not thrilled by the idea of crossing a busy road if there was no traffic light, but there have been persistent rumors that the City of Topeka offered to build a pedestrian bridge that was rejected and the distance was only brought up later. Walking 7 blocks? I did that as a 7 y/o first grader. And kids STILL do that. Folks, that is less than a mile, given that the average of a city block is around 550 to 600 feet. That is about a 20 minute walk for a kid.
So perhaps we should apply the same ratio standards to the NBA and the NFL.
the big miss here is how much parents contribute to the success of any student. in the big cities the majority of failing students come from broken homes with little or no parental guidance. this is the big reason big city public schools are such a mess.
We went from separate and unequal (and yes, it was definitely an unequal, inferior education due to severe undersourcing of resources and a disparate impact of forcing black students to travel further distances than white students) to an integrated and unequal education (again, due to severe undersourcing of resources for inner-city schools compared to their wealthier suburbs and a disparate impact of forcing black students to travel further distances than white students if they have a “school choice” program within the district since the better resourced schools tend to be in suburbs that have a greater proportion of white students in them). However, I think that the biggest problem is that an equal education does not go nearly far enough - education must be equitable instead. Giving the same exact resources to schools with wealthier parents is not equitable. They should be given fewer resources since wealthier parents can (and will) step in and provide for their own as well. This problem only gets worse when the schools with lower socioeconomic pupils cannot even receive equal resources, let alone the greater resources that are necessary for them to thrive on an equal footing with schools with more affluent socioeconomic demographics.
Brown helped by forcing the integration of schools, but without a mandate to provide EQUITABLE resources, which would require that schools with a lower socioeconomic mix of students be given more resources than the relatively affluent schools, this victory has ended up being a pyrrhic one.
You're reversing causality. More money won't solve the problem at inner city schools. Charter schools are ample evidence of this being the case. They frequently receive much lower funding than comparable public schools, yet turn out excellent students who are mostly minority. The students at charter schools have parents who are engaged. The parents of many/most inner city public schools are disengaged, and no amount of money will resolve that. There is no shortage of rural schools with similar problems to inner city schools, and they're pretty typically very white. Those parents are frequently as disengaged as inner city black parents.
My stepson attends one of the best public schools in the country. It's one of the best because of the engagement level of the parents. About 75% of his school is Asian kids. You can't drive more than 5 minutes around those neighborhoods without seeing extracurricular learning centers for math, science, and computer programming. Last year's senior class sent 5 kids to Stanford.
Money isn't the cause of success, it's the result of it. Money will take you anywhere you want to go, but it will never replace you as the driver.
@@smokedbrisket3033 Did I ever even once use the word money? Nope, not even once. What I wrote was we should provide more resources. There is a difference. More resources does not necessarily mean more money. Charter schools are a great example of providing more resources with the same amount of (or even less) money. How do they do this? They make more of the money go to the classroom as opposed to administration. They hire superior teachers for the same amount of money (or even less) by giving them more control over the classroom. Montessori charter schools, which tend to be some of the best performing charter schools, allow for more individualized instruction and allow the students to take ownership of material through peer teaching. Instead of providing after school sports or special interest clubs, the schools can provide additional after school instruction. Vocational education can emphasized rather than college prep for those students who are not inclined towards college. The key is to provide more appropriate opportunities that students otherwise would not have access to because of their parental socioeconomic status.
@@drmadjdsadjadi - it isn't about resources, or at best, they're secondary. it is about the commitment of the parents, which is instilled into their children. What were the resources available to the kids in the 30s, 40s, and 50s who went on to become engineers who designed and built rockets that sent us to the moon, and the SR-71, using slide rules? Who discovered the double-helix, chiral nature of DNA? Whether their parents were the demanding type, or the kids were already showing signs of greatness and the parents did everything they could to enable and encourage their children to reach higher than they ever dared dream, it didn't matter. Neither of those circumstances exist for "underperforming" schools. Charter schools work because they have those kinds of student and/or those kinds of parents. Inner city public schools fail because they have neither of those things.
I don't think any of my grandparents went past 6th or 7th grade. Mom and Dad both grew up horribly poor, rural, and agricultural. But my dad ended up earning a PhD and became a vice chancellor at one of the largest land grant universities in the country. Mom became a school teacher. It was purely because their parents demanded excellence of them.
I think we're probably arguing different sides of the same coin.
@@smokedbrisket3033 I do agree we are arguing two sides of the same coin but I disagree that parental involvement is as important as you think it is. Many charter schools succeed despite not having heavy parental involvement. The key is providing them with different ways to attack the issue of low student performance. Our biggest problem is the one size fits all approach that obviously does not work and it is equally problematic and simply unconscionable to give up on students simply because their parents are not involved. instead we need to double down in such cases and provide more resources to combat this. Once again, if isn’t necessarily about money and it certainly isn’t just about parental involvement because many inner city schools can be transformed into exceptional schools if they are allowed to innovate and by suspending the rules that hamstring these schools, we will go a long way towards solving the issue of low student performance.
@@smokedbrisket3033 I was thinking more about what you wrote and I think that the key is not parental involvement or expectations, but rather teacher expectations. If teachers expect excellence, it does not matter whether parents are involved or not. This is because parents often only recognize whether their child is doing well or poorly based on grades. Far too often inner city schools are told to socially promote and not make too many demands on their students. This is the real issue - it is the teachers, not the parents. Inner-city school teachers should not be hired unless they demand the same level of excellence as is found in the best schools in the country and we can do this by requiring a subset of all tests to be sent to the best performing schools for evaluation to ensure that the same standards are met. I used to teach at The University of the West Indies in Jamaica and our standards were the exact same standards as at Oxford and Cambridge, which is why our graduates performed exceptionally well in US graduate schools and often could get into any graduate school in the US even with grades that were lower than their US peers. We should never denigrate inner city schools because their students with the right teachers and curriculum can easily do just as well as students at suburban schools. The key is we have to expect them to perform well. It is when we begin by assuming they are not as capable, as so many of their teachers do, that we see them failing to thrive. The fact is inner city schools need to be far more selective in terms of their teaching staff than other schools if for no other reason than because teachers will only demand of their students what they expect their students to achieve.
This s/be featured on that other youtube channel. 'Great moments in unintended consequences'
Interesting...
It seems to me that Brown had the desired effect: It provided those parents who wanted it the ability to send their black children to schools with whites. On average, and especially in the South, black schools had far fewer resources relative to white schools because of racism. That black schools made due is irrelevant because they never should have been in that situation in the first place. What happened to the teachers afterward is a further consequence of racism rather than of the case.
who had the authority to allow non white students in all white schools during segregation?
Keep in mind that this film was composed in the early 60s. Things have changed for the better. Keep also in mind that segregation, since the 2020 election, has become the benchmark of progress in most institutions of higher education.
Somewhat better in some ways; In someways the same or worse.
This film was produced in the fall of 2019.
we are more segregated now than in the 60s
@@007kingifrit True that.