Week 14: Lit Review - Lizzy

McNeal, L. R. (2009). The re-segregation of public education now and after the end of brown v. board of education. Education and Urban Society, 41(5), 562-574. Retrieved from www.scopus.com

While searching for articles on community public school enrollment and segregation I found this really interesting piece on how impactful Brown v. The Board of Education really has been over a period of 50 years, and asks us to view these sorts of monumental changes to our society as substantive or symbolic in their influence. The symbolic function of the law is meant to reaffirm cherished values and show that something positive is being done and that the problem is being acknowledged. It is meant to satisfy the community, regardless of its effectiveness in actually fixing the problem. Substantive function of law is meant to promote actual changes that have practical utility and directly help solve the issue. The article is suggesting that perhaps in the current state of our public and private schools and neighborhoods (I am in the University City group and we are focusing on lack of enrollment within the public high school) Brown v. Board of Education was a critical symbolic move, but we have yet to substantiate its purpose with real and effective integration change within communities and schools.  Substandard academic achievement outcomes, low graduation rates and poor teacher quality are all unfortunate characteristics of public schools that are separate and unequal; according to this article re-segregation continues to fester perhaps due to the limited role of courts in ensuring that desegregation mandates are followed. Missouri v. Jenkins (1995) hits close to home for us as it significantly impacted school integration efforts by further defining the point in which a school district may be released from a court desegregation order. Basically, if you can prove to the court that you as a school have (temporarily) met all your ‘required’ elements to show your school is no longer segregated, you may be released from your mandate. This ruling also established that district courts cannot require state government to fund educational improvement programs such as magnet schools for the purposes of remedying “de facto” racial inequality in schools. Essentially this case according to scholars is one of many just within this article that are seemingly responsible for re-segregation of schools by ending the mandate. This article is full of great examples of various states fighting for de-segregation well after Brown v.  Board of Education and different posed ideas to remedy the issue. I think it is important to understand that just because something has been established in the Supreme Court does not mean the issue is ‘over’; symbolic progress is important in that it sets a ‘standard’ that we are “supposed” to be following, but we have to substantiate it, just like racism, sexism and other social ills that on paper we have established are not ok, but in reality we fight with it everyday. Applying these theories to how we interpret and evaluate social progression, policy and law can be a really powerful tool for us as social workers. Regardless of the group you are in this semester give this article a read!