DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 023 759 UD 006 688

Process of Change; The Story of School Desegregation in Syracuse, New York.Commission on Civil Rights, Washington, DC.Pub Date Jun 68Note -29p.Available from -Superintendent of Document s , V S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D C. 20402 (30)EDRS Price MI 1025 HC Not Available from EDRS.Descriptors -Clasvoom Integra:ion, Compensatory Education Programs, Data, 4Defacto Segregation,Educational Finance, Educational Parks, Educational Cluality, Elementary Schools, Junior High Schools,Leadership Rerponsibility,_ Public Opinion, Reading Achievement, *School Integration, Teacher Responsibility,*Transfer Programs. *Urban Areas

Identifiers -New York, SyracuseThis report describes the evenls leading up to the desegregation of the public

elementary and 1unior high schools in Syracuse and the effects and implications of thedesegregation process. School officials were influenced in favor of schooldesegregation by the negative results of an extensive compensatory educationprogram at a segregated lunior high school. The 1965-1966 desegregation planinvolved the dosing of two predominantly Negro schools and the busing of about 900elementary and junior high school pupils to integrated schools. Other Syracuse effortstowards educational equality induded a special academic program to attract highability Negro and white students to a formerly Negro elementary school and enrichedelementary classes conducted on the Syracuse University campus. The reportdiscusses the reactions of the Negro and white communities to desegregation, theeffects of busing on the school program, the preservation of educational standards,and the leadership role of the school staff. Also discussed are the interracial tensionsin the dassrooms and the importance of the teacher's preparation for work indesegregated schools. The construction of educational parks to replace existingelementary schools is proposed. (LB) .

1.

Contents

Preface iii

Chapter i : The City i

Chapter 2: Challenge and Response

Chapter 3: After Desegregation 9

3

Chapter 4: Proposals for Eliminating Racial Imbalance 17

Conclusion 26

Footnotes 26

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

JOHN A. HANNAH, Chairman

EUGENE PATTERSON, Vice Chairman

FRANKIE M. FREEMAN

Rev. THEODORE M. HESBURGH, C.S.C.

ROBERT S. RANKIN

WILLIAM L. TAYLOR, Staft Director

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights is a temporary, independent, bipartisan agencyestablished by Congress in 1957 and directed to:

Investigate complaints alleging that citizens are being deprived of their right to voteby reason of their race, color, religion, or national origin, or by reason of fraudulentpractices;

Study and collect information concerning legal developments constituting a denialof equal protection of the laws under the Constitution;

Appraise Federal laws and policies with respect to equal protection of the laws;

Serve as a national clearinghouse for information in respect to denials of equal pro-tection of the laws; and

Subm:, .eports, findings, and recommendations to the President and the Congress.

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, V.S. Government Printing OfficeWashington. D.C.. 20402 - Price 30 cents

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION & WELFARE

OFFICE OF EDUCATION

THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED EEICTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE

PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING R. POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS

STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDUCATION

POSITION OR POLICY.

PROCESS OF CHANGEThe Story of School Desegregation in Syracuse, New York

()

410 U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

Clearinghouse Publication No. 12. .0 June, 1968

i

PrefaceThis is a study of a community's efforts to provide quality integrated education in its public schools.

At a time when many communities North and South arc facing problems of racial segregation ofchildren in their schools and inadequate educational programs to meet the needs of all children, it maybe instructive to view the experience of a city which has attempted to cope with these problems. Theexperience of Syracuse, N.Y., is offered to educators, parents, and teachers, and civic and political lead-ers in the hope that it will enable them to obtain a perspective on the problems of their own commu-nities. This account is not a prescription for success, but it may provide some useful ideas andinformation.

This study of Syracuse grows out of an earlier Commission study, Racial Isolation in the PublicSchools. In the course of investigating the extent and causes of racial segregation in American publicschools, thc Co_amission also investigated the experiences of communities which had taken steps toremedy racial L;olation. Syracuse was one of eight such communities included in a survey done forthe Commission by Robert Stout and Morton Inger, entitled School Desegregation: Progress inEight Cities. Their findings, with additional materials, form the basis of the present study. In addi-tion, Commission staff visited the schools and interviewed school and community leaders, parents,and children in Syiacuse during the spring of 1967. These interviews and visits provided much usefulinformation on what had happened in the schools and in the community since desegregation.

The Commission appreciates the cooperation of David H. Jaquith, president of the SyracuseBoard of Education, and of Franklyn S. Barry, the superintendent of schools, and his staff. In addition,the Commission thanks the following persons for their contribution to this report:

DAVID SINE, Director of Research, Syracuse City Schools

THEODORE STURGIS, Assistant Director of Research, Syracuse City Schools

PAUL CASSAVANT, Assistant Director of Research, Syracuse City SchoolsMISS ELAINE CLYBURN, Visiting Teacher, Danforth School,SyracuseMIss RITA POMEROY, Social Worker, Bishop Focry Foundation, Syracuse

111

Chapter 1

THE CITY

In many respects Syracuse is a typical American city.According to the 1960 census 216,038 persons lived in thecity and 423,028 persons resided in the metropolitan arca.In upstate New York midviray between Albany andRochester, Syracuse is an industrial city and a universitycommunity. The median family income in 1959 for whiteswas $3,308 and $2,566 for Negroes. More than one-quarterof the labor force is employed in the electronic and indus-trial machine industries alone.1

Although nearly nine of every ro city residents arcnative-born Americans, they retain strong ethnic and racialidentities. Irish, Germans, Italians, Poles, East EuropeanJews, and Negroes live in clearly defined neighborhoods.2Syracuse is a politically conservative city. According tothe president of the Syracuse Board of Education, DavidH. Jaquith, Syracuse is a "relatively conservative city, tothe degree that you can equate New York State Repub-licanism with Conservatism." 3 Mr. Jaquith, himself, wasa Conservative Party candidate for Governor of New Yorkin 1961.

The Negro population in Syracuse is residentially seg-regated. More than four of every five Negroes in 1960lived in eight of the city's 61 census tracts in the centerof the city.* The high degree of residential segregationwas reflected in the fact that during the 1962-63 schoolyear 58 percent of all Negro elementary school childrenattended two of the city's 33 elementary schools. In theSame year, more than one-third of the Negro junior highschool students attended one of the 14 junior highs.

The public school enrollment for the 1967-68 schoolyear IS 30,844. The city's parochial schools enroll 14,000students. Negroes ar,- 19 percent of the public school en-rollment, and 2 percei.L of the parochial school enrollment.5

Population movements within the Syracuse metropoli-tan area in the past decade and a half have contributed toexisting racial patterns. For a few decades whites have beensettling outside the city in the suburbs, and Negroes, whocomprised 5.7 percent of the city's population in I960,

iNii.:kki-4+11RANK207116.110.1011rgrAik-4211Pf 4,-144E4 InOr..4*; MNNIl

have been moving into a fcw areas near the center of thecity. Between 1950 and 1960 there was a net loss of 11,768white persons in the central city and an increase of 226,373in the white suburban population. The 1950 Negro popu-lation of 5,000 grew to 12,289 in 1960.6

Until recently, Syracuse's approach to the problems ofschool segregation and educational equality waS typical ofmany American cities. Responding to community con-flict over racial imbalance in the early I96o's, the schoolboard denied that school desegregation was its proper con-cern. During the same period, the Syracuse Board ofEducation instituted the Madison Arca Project, a com-pensatory education program designed to improve educa-tion in two of the city's three predominantly Negroschools.

In 1963, however, the school board began to movetoward a different position. It issued a statement recog-nizing school segregation as a problem and declaring racialbalance to be an important educational goal. Not longafter thrt, the Madison Area Project was discontinued.School authorities declared it was not a solution to unequaleducational opportunity for Negroes. Two predominantlyNegro schools then were closed, and their students re-

assigned to 12 formerly all-white schools. In 1967, thesuperintendent estimated that the city was halfway to-ward the elimination of racial imbalance. The school sys-

tem is now developing plans for the total elimination ofracial imbalance.

Why has Syracusein many ways a typical Americancitytaken such atypical steps? Why did school officialstake steps to desegregate the schools? What has been theexperience of teachers and children in the desegregatedschools? Has desegregatiou *)een educationally successful?

How has the community regarded desegregation? Whatarc Syracuse's future plans for quality education in fullydesegregated schools? It was to answer these questions,at least in part, that this study was undertaken.

1

!

1

i

1Chapter 2

CHALLENGE AND RESPONSE

Initial ChallengeRacial imbalance in Syracuse schools first emerged as

an issue in 1962 when the Board of Education consideredproposals for a boundary change to relieve overcrowdingat the Sumner Elementary School.7 The school was in arelatively stable, racially integrated neighborhood, whichwas then just beginning to feel pressure from the expand-ing Negro ghetto. The proposed change would have zonedmany white Sumner students to another white school,thus increasing the proportion of Negro pupils at Sumner.Negro and white parents, supported by the local chapterof the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), argued thatthe school's racially integrated student body should bemaintained. They vigorously opposed the proposed bound-ary change and, as a result, the board rejected it.

But in 1962 the Sumner School was not typical; mostschools in Syracuse were racillh. imbalanced. There weretwo majority Negro elementary schools (more than 5opercent Negro) and 25 predominantly white (more than90 percent white) elementary schools. Six schools wereracially balanced. The two majority Negro schools en-rolled 58 percent of the Negro elementary students. Theone predominantly Negro junior high school enrolledmore than one-third of the Negro junior high school stu-dents. Broader demands for the official recognition ofracial imbalance as an educational problem arose from theisolated dispute over the Sumner School boundary. In May1962, CORE asked the school board to study the problemof school segregation and to recommend solutions. Theschool board's reaction to this request was summarizedby board member David H. Jaquith:

I don't accept the premise that racial imbalancecreates any kind of missed opportunity. I don'tthink the school should accept responsibility forsolving what is basically a housing problem.°

When the board declined to recognize the problem orto establish a study committee, the civil rights protestbroadened again. The Board of Education headquarterswas picketed, and Washington Irving, the one predomi-nantly Negro elementary school, was boycotted for a day.The boycott was the first in a series of actions by theSyracuse Negro community designed to pressure schoolauthorities to provide quality, desegregated education forNegro children.

Syracuse school officials have acknowledged that thisprotest from civil rights groups caused them to give more

serious attention to problems of racial imbalance. Super-intendent Franklyn S. Barry has said that the civil rightsactivity:

may have been the initial triggering event in thecity which started some action toward integra-tion. At any rate, this activity did lead to a moreconscious approach to such problems, and tosome soul searching on the part of the Board, theMayor's Office, and some local citizens.°

Two other factors contributed to the final decision tobegin desegregation. First, as a result of community pro-tests, Mayor William F. Walsh called in August 1962, forthe formation of an Education Study Committee under theaegis of the State Commission for Human Rights. Thecommittee was composed of members of the school board,the school administrative staff, civil rights leaders (includ-ing those who had led the school boycott), interested citi-zens, and staff members of the State Commission. Its reg-ular meetings served as a forum where board membersand civil rights activists and others began and continueda dialogue on the issue.

Second, in June 1963, the New York State Commis-sioner of Education, Dr. James E. Allen, Jr. required allschool districts in the State to report on the extent of racialimbalance in their schools and on their policies and plansto eliminate it.1°

In July 1963, one month after Commissioner Allen'sdirective, the Education Committee reported to the Boardof Education. It found that:

(i) . . . there does exist a pattern of racial imbal-ance in our Syracuse public schools;

(2) . . . racial imbalance . . . of any kind is in-consistent with basic principles of education in a freedemocratic society;

(3) . . . the Board of Education is . . . in a posi-tion of responsibility with respect to the racial com-position of the Syracuse schools;

(4) . . . it is possible to remedy the problem ofracial imbalance in Syracuse through a modificationof a number of school boundaries.11

The Education Committee recommended that the boardadopt a policy with respect to racial imbalance and instructthe administrative staff to formulate proposals for re-districting the schools with racial balance as an importantconsideration.

3

From these three sources arose a growing recognitionthat racial segregation caused educational problems forNegro and white children, and, therefore, was a legitimateconcern of the school system. A combine:on of local andState leadership had identified the problem of imbalance,created an awareness of the board's responsibility foreducational change, and stimulated school authorities tobegin considering concrete plans.

There did not yet exist a clear and unequivocal com-mitment, however. Prior to serious consideration of plansfor desegregation, school officials established the MadisonArea Project. This intensive program of compensatoryeducation was undertaken on the assumption that theeducational problems of Negro children in racially :so-lated schools could be solved by improvements in theinstructional program.

During the next 2 years, demands for more school de-segregation and the results of the Madison Arca Projectmoved the board toward a stronger commitment towarddesegregation.

Steps Toward DesegregationInitial steps toward desegregation were taken by the

Board of Education in 1963, the year in which Syracusealso hired a new school superintendent. Dr. Barry cameto the city from the superintendent's post in North Syra-cuse, a large suburban community. He was familiar witheducational problems in the Syracuse arca, and broughtto his new assignment a concern for the problems of urbanschools and the education of poor children.

The first step the board took on racial imbalance wasto issue the policy statement called for by the EducationCommittee. This statement voiced cmcern over the prob-lem of racial imbalance, and promiscd to consider correc-tive measures. But it viewed them within the frameworkof the neighborhood school policy:

. . . racial balance is an additional factor to beconsidered in boundary revisions, site selectionsand modifications of school plant facilities; thisbalance to be promoted in a manner consist-ent with the goal of providing in the neigh-borhood schools the best possible education forall pupils. (emphasis added)"

Next, the board took steps to implement this policy in1963. It adjusted the boundaries at the Sumner Schoolwhere attempts to relieve overcrowding the previous yearhad provoked controversy. The school's attendance bound-aries were revised so that some Negro students were trans-ferred to two neighboring, predominantly white schools,and racial balance at Sumner was maintained. The changewas made quickly, without fanfare, and without orga-

4

nized opposition from the neighborhoods involved. Theroutine administrative necessity of relieving overcrowdingwas utilized to achieve desegregation.

In the next school year (1964-65) Syracuse took fourfurther steps toward desegregation. The first was to closethe Brighton Elementary School, an old building whichhad been scheduled for abandonment, and reassign theLuc white and 5o Negro students to three nearby schools.Again desegregation of previously all-white schools wasaccomplished by taking advantage of a routine adminis-trative opportunity.

The second step was the voluntary busing of 58 Negrostudents from the overcrowded, predominantly NegroCroton Elementary School to the predominantly whiteSmith Elementary School. White parents at Smith ex-pressed some opposition, but the plan was not abandoned.An evaluation of the buscd children's reading achievementafter a year showed no significant difference in achieve-ment between them and similarly situated students whohad remained at Croton.13 Syracuse school officials arguethat this was due to the "pressure-cooker" atmosphere ofthe school, arising from an intensive study of the effectsof desegregation." In any event, the study also showedthat the achievement of white students at Smith did notdecline as a result of desegregation.

The third effort to facilitate desegregation involved an-other school closing. At that time Syracuse had severalschools with both elementary and junior high grades. Oneof these was the predominantly white Prescott School.Prescott had so few junior high students that it becameincreasingly difficult to sustain a full program. The super-intendent proposed closing it and assigning the studentsto Madison, the predominantly Negro junior high school.

There was considerable opposition to this plan. Whiteparents in the Prescott district vowed that their childrenwould never go to Madison, even if free transportationwere provided. In response to this opposition the schoolboard extended its "open school policy," in existence since1962, which allowed children to transfer to any schoolwhere there was available space. Virtually all of the Pres-cott junior high students exercised this option and en-rolled in predominantly white junior high schools. Manyentered the parochial schools. No desegregation resultedfrom the closing of Prescott.

The fourth step to facilitate desegregation was to havethe most significant impact on Syracuse's future plans.Thirty Negro students living in a section of the MadisonJunior High School attendance district were reassignedto the neighboring predominantly white Levy junior HighSchool.

Madison Junior High had been the chief target schoolof the Madison Arca Compensatory Education Project.

Two thousand children each year were involved in theproject. Beginning in 1962 approximately lhoo more perpupil 15 was added to the normal Syracuse per pupil ex-penditure in an effort to raise Negro students' achieve-ment and improve their motivation to learn. The projectsupported by the State of New York, the Syracuse Boardof Education, and the Ford Foundationprovided culturalenrichment programs, special classroom groupings, specialinstruction in reading and mathematics, and summerschool programs. Team teaching and flexible groupingsprocedures were utilized, and reading clinicians workedwith students reading below grade level. Pupil-teacherratios at Madison averaged 15.

Superintendent Barry described the program at theCommission's 1966 hearing on education in Rochester,N.Y.:

It attempted to provide a whole array of extk aservices. . . . To beef up education in thisarea . . . we had some very skilled people head-ing this, [inventing] new ways of developing theego, the self-concept, and new programs whichwould make education more attractive and mean-ingful to children."

The junior high portion of the project was evaluatedby school officials in 1965. The program was found tohave had a positive effect on student attendance andcommunity concern for education. But compared withstudent bodies at other junior high schools, the academicstanding of the Madison student body had not improved.It still ranked below all other junior high schools onstandardized tests. In fact there was some regression inachievement.17

The results of this evaluation of the Madison Area Proj-ect were compared with the performance of the Negrostudents who had been transferred to Levy. Class gradesand teacher ooservations revealed a substantial academicimprovement among the transfer students. Mr. Jaquithexplained why the Negro students were doing so muchbetter at Levy than they had at Madison. He said that thestudents had told school officials:

At Madison Junior High School, if you cooper-ated with the teacher and did your homework,you were a "kook". At Levy Junior High School,if you don't cooperate with the teacher and don'tdo your homework, you were a "kook". 18

The ResponseThe changes in the attitudes and performance of these

Negro students had an important effect upon school offi-cials. Mr. Jaquith previously had opposed board actionto correct de facto segregation. He had opposed busingNegro students to predominantly white schools, and sup-

295-211 0-68-2

ported compensatory programs in neighborhood schools.The reports on the Negro children at Levy caused himto change his position. Commenting on the Levy transfer

he said:

Thi:7 is what persuaded me. . . . And this evi-dence was good enough so that it was reasonablypersuasive to anybody who wanted to be open-minded about it."

Thus the observed effects of desegregation became apowerful imperative for further desegregation. The boardhad learned that Negro students would be accepted inpredominantly white schools, and that their performanceunassisted by any special compensatory programim-proved in desegregated schools.

There were other events in 1965 which prompted fur-ther desegregation. The Madison Area Project was near-ing terminai ion because the Ford Foundation grant wasexpiring. Enrollment at Madison had declined to a pointwhere the school district could no longer operate an effi-cient junior high school program there. Similarly, theenrollment at Washington Irving had declined in 3 yearsfrom approximately 1,175 students to little more than5oo. Negro residents were moving to other areas of thecity because urban renewal in the area of these two schoolswas demolishing homes to clear land for middle andhigher income housing projects, university student hous-ing, and a medical center. Most of the Madison and Irvingdistricts was scheduled for clearance, and urban renewalofficials had notified the Board of Education that unlesssomething was done to upgrade the two predominantlyNegro schools, white families would not be attractedto the middle income housing.2°

Making the DecisionAll of these influences produced a watershed in school

policy. The school staff began developing a comprehen-sive desegregation plan for the 1965-66 school year. Dr.Barry proposed closing Madison and Washington Irvingschools and busing the goo students to 19 predominantlywhite schools throughout the city.

School board members favored Dr. Barry's proposals.The plan seemed politically and educationally realistic.It would eliminate the Irving and Madison schools, andsolve the problem of having km-achieving schools in theurban renewal area. It would not involve the busing ofwhite childrenwhich the- board thought would be pro-tested vigorously by the white communityand it offeredpromise of remedying the educational deprivation ofNegro children.

Support is GatheredBefore the plan was voted upon, the board and the

superintendent sought community support for it. Mr.

5

Jaquith and Dr. Barry spoke to "any audience that wouldlisten." These included the Chamber of Commerce, serv-ice clubs, the citywide Parent-Teacher Association as wellas the school PTA's and Mothers' Clubs, professionalteachers' organizations, civil rights groups, and commu-nity organizations and neighborhood associations aroundthe city. In each presentation, the plan for closing Irvingand Madison was explained, the reasons outlined, andeach group was asked to support it.

Opposition to the proposed plan came chiefly fromNegro parents whose children would be bused. Their chiefobjection was that only Negro children would be bused.Some Negro parents were angered because they felt thedecision had been made without consulting them. i'2, onemother remarked:

I didn't like it the first time I heard about it,but you couldn't do anything about it.21

Others simply felt that they had not been adequatelyinformed about the proposed plans. Perhaps most difficult,however, were Negro parents' questions: why couldn't theschool board provide a good education for their childrenin neighborhood schools? Dr. Barry acknowledged thatit Ms unfair for Negro children to bear the entire burdenof transportation. At the same time he argued that:

The one purpose on which we must focus is todo in the shortest time as much as we can togive disadvantaged children improved educa-tion. . . . To get these youngsters performingeducationally would be the shortest route toracial equality. 22

Barry views educational deprivation as a product mainlyof the schools and classrooms, not solely the result of theindividual student's background. Schools attended mostlyby students from less advantaged backgrounds, he be-lieves, do not have an environment conducive to maximumintellectual development.

Some opposition arose among white parents 'n districtswhere the Irving children would attend school. At oneof the receiving schools parents formed an organizationto preserve neighborhood school assignment. This group,the Council for Better Education, argued that busingwould downgrade the schools, and that middle incomefamilies would move to the suburbs. The solution toNegro students' educational problems, a Council membersaid, was more compensatory programs. Criticizing theschool board for terminating the Madison Area Project,23the Council for Better Education called for a public ref-erendum on the question of school desegregation a fewdays before the board was to vote on the superintendent'splan. Mr. Jaquith announced that the board did not favorsuch a referendum.24

6

Some parents voiced concern about the effect of deseg-regation on the receiving schools. In explaining the planto parent groups throughout Syracuse, school officialsstressed that supportive services and facilities would beavailable in the newly desegregated schools. The promiseof such a program was designed to maintain and improveeducation as well as to allay the fears of these parents.

Instead of waiting for community groups to react tothe plan, Dr. Barry and Mr. Jaquith sought their supportfor desegregation. Mr. Jaquith maintains that it is im-portant for a school board to seek community support fordesegregation before making a final decision. In this way,he says, the details of the proposed plan may be modifiedto meet valid criticisms, and members of the communitybecome involved and committed in the process. He arguesthat the desegregation plan was accepted because:

there was some leadership on the part of thesuperintendent, there was a rational programwith some evidence to justify it, and there wasenough time . . . to implement it.25

Where the public schools are administratively and fis-cally dependent on the municipal government, as in Syra-cuse, the support of the city's civic and political leadersis particularly important. In part, the need for this sup-port is related to financial matters. Programs for schooldesegregation often require money, and although Statereimbursement for transportation was available, Syracusehad to finance the cost of transportation for the first year.Approximately $35,997 was to be spent on transportationfor desegregation during the 1965-66 school year; sincethe Syracuse City School District is a department of thecity government, the approval of city officials was soughtand secured.

Support for desegregation came from municipal authori-ties and unofficial civic leadership. The Chamber of Com-merce and the Mayor's Commission on Human Rightsformally endorsed it. The business community, repre-sented by the Metropolitan Development Association, sup-ported desegregation. Both of the city's daily newsr.pzi-..;supported it editorially and provided extensive coverageof official explanations of the plan. The desegregatiottplan also had the support of the Syracuse Committee forIntegrated Education (SCIE) a group representing civilrights groups and liberal church and civic groups. TheSyracuse Branch of the National Association for the Ad-vancement of Colored People (NAACP) formally sup-ported the plan, but CORE officially opposed the plan be-cause it required the Negro community to bear the burdenof desegregation.

After considerable public discussion, the Syracuse Boardof Education adopted the styerintendent's desegregationplan for the closing of Madison and Irving schools.

Implementing the planOnce the plan had been adopted, the administrative

staff began preparations for the opening of school inSeptember. Many considerations were involved in plan-ning for desegregation. The logistics of busing 900 ele-mentary and junior high students to 21 schools aroundthe city were considerable. The receiving schools had tomake preparations, principals and teachers had to beprepared for the changes, and parents and children neededorientation.

Planning for desegregation in the elementary schoolsfirst required that the number of places in each grade inthe predominantly white elementary schools be deter-mined. Schools more than 11/2 miles from the Irving-Madison neighborhood were selected, since the Statewould reimburse up to 90 percent of the cost of transpor-tation exceeding that distance. These were schools whichfew or no Negro students had ever attended. The assign-ment of children to the six elementary grades and kinder-garten also presented problmns. Som.: elementary schoolshad extra space in the primary grades and others only inthe upper elementary grades. Consequently, not every classin each of the receiving schools r:Aild be desegregated. Insome cases, additional space wes made available by chang-ing the grade organization of die school. At one receivingschool, for instance, the junior high school grades weretransferred to another junior high school, providing addi-tional facilities for desegregation at the elementary level.

Decisions on where to assign students to schools werea crucial part of the planning. All students from Irvingwere screened, and those who belonged in a special edu-cation class (those with an IQ below 75) were assignedto existing special education classes. Four hundred andseventy children remained to be assigned to 12 elementaryschools. Insofar as possible children in the same familywere assigned to the same school. In practice, however,families with two or three school age children frequentlyhad children in different schools. Children were assignedso that no more than to percent of a receiving school'senrollment the first year was Negro, and no more thanfive Negro students were assigned to a single class.

Preparations in each of the 12 schools also were re-quired. The biggest change in school operations occa-sioned by desegregation involved the establishment oflunch facilities in schools where no cafeteria or lunch roompreviously had existed. This meant that teachers wouldhave to relinquish a part of their free time to supervisethe lunch period. The lunch program was added in thesecond year of desegregation primarily through the effortsof civil rights groups.

Additional staff was assigned to all elementary schoolsto provide remedial services. Twenty-five remedial read-

ing teachers worked with children in 31 public and threeparochial elementary schools. One mathematics consultantwas assigned to work with teachers in all the elementaryschools. Even this program did not reach all children whowere academically retarded. The remedial reading pro-gram, for example, includes only those children who arci to 2 years behind grade level in reading. There is noremedial program for serious retardation in reading.26

As part of the desegregation plan the elementary socialstudies curriculum was revised to include treatment ofthe Negro's contribution to American history. This newcurriculum was introduced in all elementary schools forthe first time in September 1966.

In addition, each receiving school had a i-day programfor the bused children and their parents; the school districtprovided transportation. The nature of these orientationprograms varied from school to school. At some receivingschools, white mothers participated in planning the orien-tation and in meeting the new parents and children. Inother schools, the principal and teachers planned andexecuted the orientation with little or no parental in-volvement. In general, white parents in the 12 elementaryreceiving schools had little formal orientation, althoughthe desegregation program was presented before schoolPTA's. However, the orientation program did allowNegro parents and children to become acquainted withthe school facilities, program, and staff. Each new studentwas assigned a host student who showed the new studentaround the school.

Special preparation for teachers and school staff orig-inally was scheduled for all schools, but instead a 2-weekprogram for 25 teachers was offered on a voluntary basis.Principals of receiving schools met with central office per-sonnel to discuss the logistics of the busing program, luncharrangements, and other special problems. However, therewas no comprehensive preparation of the receiving school'steaching staff.

The Syracuse Committee for Integrated Education calledattention to the need for orientation programs and sup-portive services in the schools. Simply desegregating stu-dent bodies by achieving some numerical balance was notthought to be sufficient. Orientation programs wereneeded, SCIE said, to enable children and adults to meetnew social and educational situations when schoolopened.27

* * *

With the closing of Madison and Irving schools racialimbalance at the junior high level had been eliminatedand one predominantly Negro elementary school had beenclosed. But Croton, another predominantly Negro school,remained.

7

Chapter 3

AFTER DESEGREGATION

Syracuse school authorities and the Syracuse Committeefor Integrated Education recognized that the achievementof some numericai racial balance in a &segregation planwas not synonymous with quality integrated education.Once the schools had been desegregated, new issuesemerged in these schools as a consequence of the changesin the racial composition of the student body." For thefirst time, most Negro children were attending predomi-nantly white schools, and white students had Negro class-mates. Most of the teachers in the receiving schools werewhite with little experience teaching racially mixed classes.White and Negro parents were concerned about how de-segregation would affect their children.

What are the issues of greatest importance for parentsand educators after the initial phaSt of desegregation?How are children affected by desegregation? In examin-ing the experience in Syracuse two issues seem most sig-nificant: ( r) community accommodation to change, and(2) classroom developments which may foster or impedelearning.

Community AcceptanceIn Syracuse, three factors were crucial in influencing

community acceptance of desegregation: ( r) the minimaleffects of busing on the school program; (2) the mainte-nance of educational standards; (3) and the leadershiprole exerted by several principals and teachers.

Busing.Syracuse school officials planned in some de-tail to insure the success of the busing program. Children

AL

4 di

,40:001

The Syracuse school system chartered city-owned buses totramp, / the 47C children to their new schools.

were picked up at designated corners near their homes.Extra personnel were hired to assist the children duringthe first few days. They were on duty at the bus stops tomake sure that children boarded the correct bus. Otherswho accompanied students on the buses during the entireschool year also worked as teacher aides in the schools.

Parents and principals reported some confusion the firstfew days over bus stops and routes. Negro parents wereparticularly concerned about disciplinary problems on thebuses during the first several weeks of the new schoolyear. As time passed, however, the parents reported thattheir children adapted to the ride and disciplinary prob-

411461Miliki:IMPnow

a

Busing caused few isoblems for studenu and school authori-ties after the first few weeks of the program.

lems -declined. Dr. Barry thinks that Syracuse has as gooda record in transportation as any suburban school district.

Educational Standards.When the elementary re-ceiving schools were desegregated, the Board of Educationsupplied compensatory and supportive services to provideremedial work in reading and mathematics to studentswho needed it. Bused students were assigned to regularclasses; children of varying abilities were grouped together.Academically retarded students were given extra tutorialhelp by the classroom teacher and the special readingteachcr. While many of the Negro students from IrvingSchool needed extra help, some teachers noted that not allthe New o children were behind their whke classmates.Some were performing at grade levc: and presented nospecial educational problems.

Many teachers interviewed remarked that individualNegro students who had entered their dasses with seriouseducational deficiencies had made substantial gains in a

9

Mb 3'2 111 Mg nitg.2e, 24 24 33 31i M. J4 IN Si k AlS1111111 MI a.

... oo111i71.111 I; 10. Vi q q3 .015 % ergot,- 4 4! 4,7

t.air

-wql,.

1

V.,

41.

Children of varying abolisies were grouped together. Teachers gave extra help to those students who needed it.

year's time. A sixth grade teacher, for example, said aboutone of her students:

His reading level was about [the] fourth grade.His math was . . . in the end of the third pade.He has advanced in his math though. He is-com-pktely sixth grade now. I have given him a lot ofextra help.

Some teachers and principals notcd that the school andstudent environment had a pronounced effect on the per-formance of their Negro students. The p-incipal of oneof the receiving elementary schools who had taught atWashington Irving School prior to its closing noticedimprovement in the children's academic performance.This principal was asked what had accounted for thechange. He replied:

At Irving there was constant chaos . . . no learn-ing could take place. Here there is an atmospheremore conducive to learning.

Another teacher noted the influence of the other chil-dren on one of her Negro students:

When J. came to my class in September, he wasa very withdrawn boy. . . . The biggest changeI have seen . . . is [his] getting along with hisown peer group. He mingles with them muchmore and he takes part in what they are doing,

10

1

even though he is one grade level lower . . .

He has shown a great improvement in writingand wanting to do things . . . with theclass . . . .

The initial academic performance of Negro studentsin the desegregated schools was measured in a studydone by the Syracuse school system as a part of its evalu-ation of the desegregation program." A sample of Negrostudents participating in compensatory programs in thepredominantly Negro Crown School was compared with24 Negro students who were bused to predominantlywhite schools. Bused students were matched on grade,age, sex, and IQ with Croton students. The results showedthat after i year the bused students' average achievementrate was twice that of the students in the compensatoryprogram. At the Commission's 1966 Rochester hearing,Dr. Barry reported these findings:

T he 24 children who were bused . . . achieved. . . a total of 9.2 months progress in reading

(in 8 months) while their matched counterparts(in the predominantly Negro school) . . . didbut 4 months."

Syracuse's experience also suggests that there are nodetrimental effects on the overall performance of whitechildren in the receiving schools. Teachers reported thattheir classes were doing the same level of work as they

had prior to desegregation. According to Dr. Barry, for-merly all-white schools which were desegregated in 1965are performing in 1968 at the same or higher levels.

One indication of the performance of the desegregatedschools is presented in Table A below. Reading achieve-ment scores are shown for a class as it progressed from

grade 3 (before desegregation in 1964) to grade 5 (year after desegregation in 1966). A comparison of col-umns A and B shows that in eight of the II schools therewas either no change in the median score or there wasan increase in the median score since desegregation. Inthree schools, the class showed a slight loss in its medianscore."

Table ANumber of Mouths Ahead of or Behindtbe Natiossal Norm (Standford Readieg Achieve-meet) for Grade 3 its 1964 mod Grade 5 is 1966, inDesegregated Schools, Syracuse, N.Y .*

Before Deae$rega.lionNumber of

Months Ahead of orSchools Behind the National

Norm (3.1) Grade

After Desegrega-tionNumber of

Months Ahead of orBehind the NationalNorm (5.1) Grade

3, 1964

A

5, 1966

+3 +92. 4 53 +74 +I +95 +6 +6 2. 2.7 +xo +178 +3 +2.

9 +7 +5I0 +2.5II +3 +4

*Figures based on grade median scores.

Role of the School Staff.The leadership of someprincipals and teachers apparently contributed to the ac-ceptance of desegregation by the Syracuse community.The principal of a school located in a community in whichopposition to busing had been most vociferous reportedthat in the first few weeks after the Negro children ar-rived, some neighborhood parents watched the schoolclosely. The principal firmly sought to reassure whiteparents that the school was functioning normally. Sheinformed the PTA that the school's normally high aca-demic performance was being maintained. Two yearslater this principal reported that parental concern aboutdesegregation had diminished to some degree and thata majority of the community had accepted desegregation.

The principal dealt with opposition to desegregationamong the teachers by making it dear that policymakingwas the function of the school board and that the teachers'responsibility was to teach in a manner consistent withthat policy. She appealed to the teachers' professional pridein working with individual children and indicated thatthis would be expected of them when the school was de-segregated. One teacher interviewed at this school stronglydisapproved of desegregation but, despite her feelings,she and other teachers had helped to make desegregationwork by devoting extra time to their students. When askedwhy, despite her views, she worked hard at the school,she replied:

The Board of Education set the policy and I workfor the Board of Education.

The school principal reported that no teacher in herschool had transferred or resigned because of desegrega-tion.

Another principal dealt with hostile white parents insuch a way that their attitudes toward the recently de-segregated school became morc positive. A white parenthad refused to send her children to school because "theyhad been chased home by a mob of Negro children." Theprincipal and the Negro girl who argued with the whitechildren visited the white family. When the principalexplored the problem and found that it was a minor dis-agreement among the children, the parent sent her chil-dren back to school. Since that incident, the principal hasnoticed that the attitude of the family toward the schoolhas become positive. This principal has also visited thehomes of Negro families and dealt with their complaintsimmediately to convince them that the school was inter-ested in their children. This approach, the principal re-ported, helped establish better rapport between home andschooL

SO another school principal helped Negro and whitechildren to know each other better by suggesting to theschool PTA that neighborhood families invite the busedstudents to lunch on a day when luncheon was not servedat the schooL

Some teachers made special efforts to help their studentsovercome individual problems. For example, one teachertook a bused student home whenever he missed the schoolbus because of a field trip or after-school work. Anotherteacher visited the home of one of her pupils and helpedthe child's parent with adult education coursPs. Theseteachers reported that such efforts resulted in closer co-opefation between home and school and improved theirabilay to help their students with classroom work.

Among the teachers and principals interviewed in Syra-cuse, several remarked that invariably Ncgro parentsreadily cooperated with the school staff when their chil-

11

dren were experiencing any learning problems. Theseparents responded to messages from teachers and fre-quently came to school to discuss their children's work.

On the other hand, Negro parents were not well repre-sented at PTA meetings despite the fact that the schoolsystem provided insportation for them. Mr. Jaquith andother school authorities have acknowledged the need tomake much greater efforts to involve parents in schoolaffairs throughout the city.

How Did Negro and White Parents Feel AboutDesegregation of the Schools?Several mothers ofbused children were interviewed. They reported that al-though they were initially dissatisfied with the busingarrangements, they were genetally pleased with the newschools. Virtually all of the mothers interviewed felt thattheir children were doing better work. A typical commentwas:

I thnk the new schools are better than Wash-ington Irving and my kids are learning more.

Aside from tSe academic benefits, some Negro mothersfelt that racially mixed schools had other advantages forlaeir children. One woman remarked:

I do think children have something to offer oneanother. When the students went to Grant [apredominantly white junior high that was de-segregated when Madison was dosed] they feltstrange because they had not been around whitestudent( [before]. Very shortly these kids aregoing to be in the adult world. They have tolearn to be able to function in the communityas a whole at some time or another; I think thisis the best time.

If Negro parents in Syracuse had accommodated todesegregation, how did white parents in the receivingschools react? Parents and school officials interviewedagreed that the initial apprehension among white parentsgradually diminished. By 1967 most parents had accepteddesegregation. One white mother thought that the extra,supportive services that were introduced into the schoolwhen it was desegregated made an imprcssion on parents.She remarked:

I think it made the overall situation more accept-able because they knew . . . that rather thanlowering the level of education it would enhanceit.

A white teacher thought desegregation would be bene-ficial for white children:

. . . there had never been a Negro child in theschool which seems to be . . . an unnatural situa-tion T hey [the white children] would have to

12

meet this problem and it's much easier whenthey are little.

Perhaps the chief indication of acceptance of desegrega-tion in the white commvnity is the statistics which showthat there has been no sharp decline in white enrollmentin the 12 elementary receiving schools since Negro studentsbegan attending the schools. Total white enrollmer inSyracuse's elementary schools had risen from 12,805 in1962 to 14,635 in 1965. In the 11 receiving schools "there was a corresponding rise in white enrollment inthe same 3-year period. The ii receiving schoolswitha combined white enrollment 1.11 1964 of 5,000lost r86white students during the first year of desegregation, butthere was a similar decline in white enrollment in all ele-mentary schools that year. In the second year of desegrega-tion white enrollment in the ii schools and the systemgenerally began to rise. In the 1967-68 school year thenumber of white students was still increasing.

Mr. Jaquith reports that very few white families havetaken their children out of the public schools specificallybecause of desegregation. On the whole, he feels thatschool desegregation has been accepted:

I think that the staff and the parents in the re-ceiving schools are reasonably adjusted to thesimoion....

Inside the ClassroomThe second issue posed by school desegregation is what

happens in the dassroom after desegregation. The ex-perience of Syracuse's elementary schools, based on staffinterviews with white and Negro students, teachers, andprincipals revealed that when Negro and white childrenattended class together for the first time, race invariablybecame a new dimension of the classroom. Interracialtension existed among children who were fearful of asso-ciating with those of another race. Interviews also re-vealed that teachers, mostly white, were frequently un-prepared, indeed reluctant, to deal with racial problems.Many staff members lacked knowledge about racial prob-lems and consequently were unable to cope with situationsin desegregated classrooms. Finally, interviews revealedthat some Negro children found the predominantly whiteenvironment somewhat hostile and difficult to cope with.

Interracial Tension.Tension among Negro andwhite students was most frequently expressed in the un-easiness the children fdt toward each other. Studentsviewed each other as clannish and ready to provoke fights.A white fifth-grade student explained what desegregationmeant to her during the first few days of school:

It wasn't too hard because most of them werefriends and they didn't know anybody, and we

- - --,.......1141rop,*.V.I.1 740,11*, ro Ir...

didn't know any of them. We just did not wantto play with any of them because we thoughtthey would want to start fights.

Children of both races said that outside the classroomthey preferred to associate with children of their own race.Teachers and principals invariably observed that the Negrostudents initiated "self-segregation", but the students'comments indicated that both Negro and white studentsshared this tendency. A Negro boy observed:

W hen we go ontside, the white kids . . . don'twant to play with us; they call us all kinds ofnames. They call us ugly and tell us we camefrom Africa . . . .

Students reported that they felt uncomfortable whenrace or color was mentioned in class. Negro students re-ported that when any reference to Negro was made, whitestudents would stare at them. Teachers, they said, wouldnot correct their white classmates for behavior they con-sidered offensive. One Negro boy commented:

In social studies class the teacher will say some-thing about Negro kids and everybody will lookat you . . . When we talk about white students,we don't look at them.

White students confirmed this observation. One studentremarked:

When the teacher is giving us a lesson and some-thing comes up about Negroes, everybody looksat the Negro kids.

In some instances, however, students were able to talkfreely about Negroes in the school curriculum, on tele-vision, and in the news. But even in these cases, Negroand white students did not discuss these topics with eachother.

For example:

Fourth girl: We're studying about Americanhistory and the cities. Twice I read in the paperthat there were riots in Tampa,Florida, and theywere throwing cocktails at the cars and they wereburning down buildings and houses.

Question: Do you ever talk about these thingswith the Negro children in your class?

Third girl: No.

Fourth girl: We talked about it with [student'sname] and she would get mad because we calledher a Negro once and she didn't like it.

There also was tension between some white staff mem-bers and Negro children. White teachers frequentlyviewed Negro children as a problem even before desegre-

v.megewouppe,,,,,Twiggarr,cs,r,.,

gation occurred. One teacher explained how she and otherteachers felt about teaching a racially mixed class for thefirst time:

We had heard about this rowdiness. . . . Wewere wondering would . . . they give us trou-ble. I think this was the most pressing issue withthe faculty, wondering what would come out ofthe Negro children compared to our whitechildren.

Another teacher acknowledged the tendency to viewNegro children as troublemakers:

After a while when you hear about someonewho geu into trouble and they are usually Negrochildren, there is just naturally going to be anassociation.

Sonie teachers and principals complained that Negrochildren used "bad" language, exhibited rough manners,were impudent, and were involved in frequent fights.While acknowledging that white children also causeddisciplinary problems, these teachers felt that Negro chil-dren created additional disciplinary problems in dass, inthe lunchroom, and on the playground. They also reported,however, that these problems declined as the year prog-ressed and that Negro and white students alike graduallyadapted to the standards of conduct set by the school staff.

Some white teachers who felt Negro children were dis-ciplinary problems mentioned their "belligerency", "de-fiance", and "lack of respect for authority". One explainedhow she viewed the problem:

Some of the children I have had . . . have joinedthe other group without any problem at all.Thenthere are others with a spirit of belligerency, de-fianceI just don't know how to cope with it.It is difficult to discipline the Negro children.They are resentful and defiant of discipline . . .

The behavior of such Negro children, on the other hand,appeared to stem from their hostility toward both whiteand Negro authority figures and from their feelings ofpersecution and discrimination in the desegregated school.Some of the Negro children saw injustices in virtuallyevery incident.33 Their feelings were exhibited in severalremarks. One boy, for example, reported that a bus drivercalled the students "niggers". He said:

If the bus driver has the nerve to . . . push usaround, well . . . I'm going to hit him back. Iain't gonna let no white person hit me.

One girl felt that Negro and white students were treateddifferently:

Some times when the white kids bother us wego tell the teacher and she doesn't do anything

13

about it. When we hit the white kids, she wantsto friss at us . . . and holler.

Some Negro students viewed their principalNegro orwhiteas taking sides against them. One girl commentedabout her white principal:

The principal at our school will just ignore you.She's on the white people's side. They won't doanything for you. . . .

A boy remarked about the Negro principal of his school:

He should try to be on his own side. If they geta whole bunch of Negroes on the white people'sside and we have . . . a war in Syracuse . . .and . . . we're just going be dead. . . .

Teachers and principals frequently failed to understandwhy Negro students exhibited this hostility. A corrmonfeeing was expressed by the statement of one teacher:

She [a Negro student] is sullen. This is verycharacteristic of these youngsters. . . . And thisif you say anything, they will make a face, asmuch as to say "how dare you." White childrendon't pout.

Another teadter observed:

The desire of the Negro children to retaliat iswhat makes it so difficult. The desire to get .tvenwith teachers and students. . . . There have kenincidents of vandalism after school. I think thisis also retaliation.

The comments of students and teachers indicate thatwhat teachers interpreted as poor discipline and belliger-ent attitudes were, in some measure, the reactions ofNegro children toward what they considered a hostile en-vironment That many teachers failed to perceive this isa measure of the need for much greater sensitivity on theteachers' part.

Interracial tension in desegregated schools is a productof fear, distrust, lack of understanding, and previous iso-lation. Many teachers view this situation only in terms ofunruly Negro children who need discipline. Some recog-nize that it is more complex and that teachers need as-sistance in understanding and dealing with the problem.One teacher admitted that she did not understand whyNegro students seemed so hostile. "If I did know why,"she remarked, "I might be able to do something about it."

The reduction of interracial friction in a school is im-portant to the ultimate success of desegregation. Thereis evidence, moreover, to demonstrate that the presence ofsuch friction can adversely affect the academic perform-ance of Negro students."

Racial Identity.Apparendy one of the most fre-quently misunderstood situations which emerged in de-

segregated schools was Negro children's problems of racialidentity. Teachers reported, for example, that when Negrostudents were called "a Negro" by other students, theywere insulted and sometimes burst into tears. Some teach-ers recognized that some Negro students had difficulty ac-cepting the color of their skin, yet they were puzzled bythese episodes and frequently were unable to help thechild with his feelings. Often the teacher's response onlytended to reinforce the Negro child's sense of inferiority.One teacher explained how she tried to help studentsaccept differences among people:

I say . . . that there are some things that we canwork on and improve and other thingsyou haveto accept.. . . If I were born a Negro, I wouldhave to accept it. If I were born a Chinaman, Iwould have to accept it.

A similar incident involves the use of the word "black"by Negro students as an insult. One teacher reported thatshe was called "a big black thing" by a Negro studentin her class who was angry with her. The teacher couldnot understand the student's outburst:

. . . Why is the color black so bad to them?Why do they think that? Afkr dl, you are sup-posed to accept yourself. Don't they accept them-selves?

Psychologists and psychiatrists have established thatNegro children are aware of color differenca as earlyas age three. They also have shown that Negro childrengrowing up in a cukurt in which white is deemed su:perior to black may seek to identify with white andreject black." Few Syracuse teachers who were inter-viewed understood the phenomenon of self-rejection asearly racial awareness. One teacher remarked that shehad attended a 2-week workshop prior to desegregation,but nothing she had learned there had helped her under-stand why Negro children felt the word "black" or "Ne-gro" was derogatory.

Teacher Attitudes Toward Race.More pervasivethan the basic lack of knowledge of children's percep-tions of race was the frequent fear and reluctance amongteachers interviewed to deal in any way in the classroomwith issues involving racx or color. Teachers portrayedtheir attitudes and practices in the classroom as color-blind.

A particularly common belief was that young children,particularly in the first through third grades, are withoutprejudice and totally unconscious of color. As one firstgrade teacher said:

Color means nothing to children. They don'tidentify themselves as white or colored.

Yet other first grade teachers pointed out that theirstudents readily discussed the color of their skin. Oneteacher recalled that white children in her class werequite surprised to discover that the palms of their Negroclassmates' hands were not black. And even those teAcherswho thought children were unconscious of color acknowl-edged that their students exchanged racial epithets suchas "blackie" or "white cracker". But these incidents wereinterpreted as bad manners or child's play rather thancolor awareness or prejudice. One teacher thought thatracial name calling among young children was meaning-less since Negro children used such terms as "nigger"among themselves.

A first grade teacher in a school where enrollment wasahnost 6o percent Negro was asked whether issues dealingwith race or color ever came up in class:

Answer: It never comes up in my class.

Question: Do you ever bring it up in any connec-tion.

Answer: I can think of no occasion.

Yet this same teacher did say that when her studentsengaged in racial namecalling, she discussed color differ-ences with them.

Other teachers were even more determined to avoid race.They maintained that talking about MCC Or racial preju-dice created rather than resolved problems. Most teacherswere reluctant to deal with racial differences because ofuncertainty about acting in a biracial situation. Oneteacher admitted:

I was never sure how to handle the Negro situa-tion [sic] if it came up in the classroom.

Although many teachers were reluctant to recognizerace, they themselves were color conscious. As one teacherobserved:

It is rare to hear race mentioned [in school].Sometimes, however, race is mentioned when it'snot pertinent: 'The little colored boy who wascutting-up in the lunchroom'. Other times, whenit would be proper to say Negro . . . it isn'tsaid.

On the other hand, some teachers did discuss race andprejudice in class in a conscious effort to promote under-standing. They maintained that one method of helpingNegro and white children deal with racial differenceswas to introduce the topic into the curriculum. The prin-cipal of a predominantly white school commented:

Children and adults must deal with it and wemust educate for this. These are noble ideas wetalk about, but unless you address yourself to

jagiagoicielIMIN11411111111MIMIGINIONifill

V., ,

them, then really you don't have any program.You have to mention race. The curriculum anduse of integrated books in Syra.use is a big helptoward this end.

A white teacher commented:

Now that we are doing some studying [of] . . .

famous Negro men, . . . this helps to have a lit-tle morl understanding not only here at school,but . . . athome . . . .

This teacher discussed prejudice and discrimination inher class:

I have started . . trying to give the childrenan understanding of what is going on today sothat they . . . will have some understanding ofhow to cope with [prejudice] in the future . . . .

On balance, however, more teachers were hesitant andunsure of how or when to deal with racial issues in theclassroom.

Preparation of StaffThat these problems exist in desegregated schools re-

flects the racial isolation experienced by both white andNegro Americans. Negro and white children bring tonewly desegregated schools an ignorance of each otherbecause they have had no previous association. This is afactor of prime concern to school officials after desegrega-tion has occurred.

Teacher preparation for desegregation in Syracuse wasminimal. In 1965 there was a 2-week voluntary workshopin the summer for teachers, administrators, and parents."Although each summer since i965 there have been simi-lar workshops, only 25 teachers from the entire schoolsystem have attended these sessions each year. There hasbeen no system-wide preparation for all teachers on theeducational and social problems occasioned by desegre-gated schools. Even those teachers who had attended theworkshops reported that the summer program had notnecessarily helped them understand children's racial atti-tudes or aided them in dealing with problems arising inbiracial classrooms. Individual teachers indicated that theywould appreciate such help:

Those problems have never been discussed inteacher meetings, parents meetings, or with thechildren. Many teachers wish that they were.

In summary, Syracuse's experience suggests that schoolofficials must prepare to deal effectively with desegrega-tion in the classroom as well as in the cotranunity. 'reach-ers and administrators who exert strong leadership help

the community and the students adjust to the change.Integrated textbooks and curriculum also contribute to-ward an interracial climate of acceptance. In the classroom,however, few teachers understand how children of bothraces perceive each other in a desegregated setting. Fewrealize that their own attitudes toward race, conditioned bythe racial separation in American society generally, havean impact on the children's adjustment to the new situa-tion and on the ultimate success of the desegregation pro-

16

gram. And although the school board and superintendentfirmly supported desegregation, for the most part teachershad little guidance in dealing with the concrete, practicalproblems of interracial association in the classroom. Dr.Barry has said that these problems may be due to a lack ofcommunication:

I think we are all so afraid of [race] that we don'teven talk about it. Maybe this is the thingthat is missing. . . . Let's get it out on the table.

. " "'..01191 ,.., -

Chapter 4

PROPOSALS FOR ELIMINATING RACIAL IMBALANCE

Despite the closing of Irving and Madison schools in1965, there continues to be substantial racial imbalancein Syracuse schools. When Irving and Madison wereclosed three other elementary schools 3' had majorityNegro enrollments. In 1966 a fourth school became ma-jority Negro." By the 1967-68 school year more than halfthe Negro elementary school children attended these fourschools, and there were five elementary schools where theNegro enrollment was 2 percent or less of the totalenrollment.

Although the problem of racial concentration existsnow only at the elementary level, Negro enrollment atone junior high schoolRooseveltis increasing. Alreadyits proportion of Negro students is more than twice(40.5 percent) that of the school system's ratio of Negrostudents at the junior high levd (15.5 percent). Althougha new junior high is scheduled to open in i968 which mayhelp to preserve racia l. balance, racial imbalance at Roose-velt may increase.

What plans does the Syracuse Board of Education havefor eliminating existing racial concentrations in its schools?The long range plan is envisioned in a feasibility study ofthe campus school plan." This plan envisions four educa-tion parks by 1990 serving all elementary school childrenin the city. But until this proposal becomes a reality, schoolofficials must deal with shifting racial concentrations, in-creasing radal imbalance, and community demands forquality integrated education on a year-to-year basis. Theproblems inherent in such a piecemeal approach are wellillustrated by the history of efforts to desegregate the Cro-ton School.

CrotonAfter the 1966 closing of Madison and Irving, Croton

Elementary School was the most immediate problem fac-ing school officials. Its enrollment of 1,100 (89 percentNegro) comes chiefly from two public housing projects,and academically it has been a low performing school,rated well below other Syracuse elementary schools onstandardized tests.

The success with Madison and Irving in 1965 led thesuperintendent and school board to develop a similarclosing plan for Crown. Dr. Barry recommended thatCroton students be bused out of their neighborhood andthat the school eventually be closed. For the first year,he proposed that zoo students be bused on a voluntarybasis from Croton to predominantly white schools begin-

ning in September 1966. As additional space was madeavailable in other schools, more Crown students wouldbe bused out until the school was empty. It would thenbe closed or converted to other use.

Immediate opposition to this plan arose from the Crotoncommunity. The opposition focused on the fact that theplan called for busing only Negro children and this wasconsidered discriminatory. A coalition of neighborhoodand civil rights groups generated such opposition to thesuperintendent's plan through boycotts and demonstra-tions that it was finally withdrawn.

There have been other proposals for desegregatingCroton. In March 1965, the Education Committee of theSyracuse Area Council of the State Commission forHuman Rights advanced two proposals for pairing Crotonwith four predominantly white schools on the city's SouthSide.4° One plan envisioned converting Croton into anEarly Childhood Center for children in kindergarten andfirst grade. The other plan proposed making Crown aSouth Side middle school for grades five to six. Both ofthese proposals, however, would have necessitated theinvoluntary busing of white students to Croton. Fearingdetermined white opposition to such action, the Boardof Education did not adopt these pairing proposals.

The superintendent and Board of Education thus werecaught between Negro parents who objected to busingtheir children out of the neighborhood unless Croton waskept "open and integrated" and white parents who wouldnot accept any plan to bus their children into a predomi-nand.), Negro school.

The school system's response to these conflicting com-munity pressures was to propose the voluntary integrationof Croton. In June 1966, Dr. Barry proposed extendingthe "open school policy" to give preference to Crotonstudents transferring out of the school. It was thoughtthat this plan would have the same effect as the mandatorybusing of 200 students. However, few students appliedfor transfer.

The next attempt to desegregate Croton School was Dr.Barry's proposal to bus ro white children to thc schoolon a voluntary basis. These students' places were to beraked ay Croton students who would be bused out vol-untarily to predominantly white schools. The plan, an-nounced in July 1966, stipulated that unless 7oo whitechildren and ro Croton children signed up by Sep-tember t, 1966, no transfers would be permitted. Withthe help of the city's clergy, and radio and television

17

appeals, the superintendent launched a communitywidecampaign to recruit the volunteers. To make Croton moreattractive, Barry promised special instructional programs,hot lunches, and smaller classes. Yet the appeal for whitevolunteers netted only 68 applications kr transfer andProject ro was canceled. Neither voluntary busing forwhite students or involuntary busing for Negro studentswas an acceptable solution for Croton.

The Excel Program.Failure to solve the problem ofCroton did not deter school authorities from makingfurther efforts. In the 1967-68 school year, the board ap-proved a two-part program for Croton." The first, theUnlimited Educational Achievement Pro;ram, is a spe-cial program for fourth, fifth, and sixth grade studentsof high ability. Two hundred and ten studentsr 70whites and 40 Negroeswere enrolled in the program.The Excel Program is self-contained; the children in ithave no contact with those regularly enrolled at theschool. The program was designed to:

emphasize science and math, a sequential coursein Spanish, an in-depth instructional programin English, literature, social studies, reading,spelling and writing. Physical education, art andmusic will be further enriched by a speciallydesigned performing arts program."

The purpose of the Excel Program; according to Dr.Barry, is "to break the stereotype of the school as all black,troublesome, and low performing." School officials hadno difficulty getting white children to volunteer for Cro-ton, because of the special program offered. Four hundredapplications were received for 210 openings. As 1 part ofthe project, r90 Croton students are bused on a voluntarybasis to predominandy while elementary schools. Trans-fers to predominantly white SC1100is were offered 011 1voluntary hasis to all children in grades 4 to 6. Spe-cial efforts were made to inform parents of the possibilityof transfes to other elementary schools.

CrotofronCampus.The second phase of the pro-tram, Croton-on-Campus, is a cooperative project betweenthe Syracuse City School District and Syracuse University.Since September 1967, 300 Croton students in grade 4to 6 have spent half of every school day in special classeson the campus of Syracuse University, where they have the

use of special facilities and instructions. The other halfof the day the Croton students return to classes at Crownwith a select group of highly motivated Crown teachers.Class size in Croton has been established at 25. It is muchtoo early to determine what impact this program has hadon Crown students.

The Croton-on-Campus Program was planned by schoolofficiais in close consultation with several parents in the

18

Crown community. Some parents, however, have objectedto the program. They have petitioned New York StateCommissioner of Education James E. Allen, Jr., to enjointhe school board from implementing the program untilan investigatiton has been made and their views fullypresented. The parents charged that the establishmentof six classrooms on the university campus attended byCrown children, almost all of whom are Negro, perpetu-ates racial segregation. They contend that the programis not a step toward eliminating racial imbalance in theschool system.43 School officials plan to extend both theCroton-on-Campus Program and the Excel Program inthe next few years. In particular, they hope to includemany more white children in the Croton-on-Campus Pro-gram and they intend to expand the Excel Program beyondthe present enrollment of 210.

School officials have concluded that racial imbalancecould not best be eliminated simply by continuing to dosedown predominantly Negro schools and bus their studentsto other elementary schools. They argue that it would notbe administratively feasible to continue to deal with racialconcentrations in schools on a piecemeal basis. The loca-tion and movement of people within the city school districtposed major problems for school planning. In addition,obsolete school plants needed to be replaced. Another majorproblem facing Syracuse school authorities was how bestto improve the quality of education offered in all schools.

Campus SchoolsThe Campus Plan was devised in response to these prob-

lems." David F. Sine, Project Director of the SyracuseCampus Site Planning Center and director of the Syracuseschools' research department, has written:

It [the Campus Plan] was born of a belief thatcontinuing to replace schools in each attendancearea, as needs arise, is an inadequate approachto urban education. It is inadequate within thelimits of a reasonable economy. It is inadequateif we are to realize our goal of maximum educa-tional opportunity for all children of the com-munity."

The Campus Plan envisions dusters of elementaryschool buildings on four sites, one in each quadrant of thecity. The new sites would replace all existing neighbor-hood elementary schools, and could be developed at thecity's outer edge where land can be acquired at 1 reason-able cost. Approximately 4,200 elementary school childrenwould attend each caz-pus.

As presently conceived, the first site would contain eightseparate satellite schools and a central core. The centralbuilding would house special facilities to be shared by all

"Vr 9\ 1"11ri*or Alps.

\ , .,AriglicT0, 1, Iiin

4/6v)INIi iokk*.

$114001r` 44,/4' 4)(11". ;Nr74

jpi ,4014041*,

-

_11111,--, :imam

Uuil1;1Lr

OA' ;11 /0,11011,1"A

11116."-'.-4-5-1111OM

f7-- pp

'peurstor:-.1,111111,21,119)

wc.tt,i7:41 tapiiii Ito11111 12111,411ET5.

s' .1 ib ill* s I'LA,1,1

1 Ijr17,13f1:1-1114111,11 11;. k.,, 1044 ,j r T.t ,r, tobrAlt

- 8\ .7/1..1.111-i 1...11 c* 111111 nad 111 --i-4111uv-.4%71k, 1101)111,pord i .

8-N

-404' ,1:

'\14;NA'',*- T. I 1-1 0-;,?:--101, e:t k.adt .41 I 01) Ji

:it \ 't

k -..emrsi.."Tme_ARM10.1117 II * V._ .7 kb k_ .F.1., 1 : - it

4:1,..--..Zo"-:, IIIM'ir, -,-- ' ----v ra . . D'I "Tizo-,-rr: i. ,..--, -_- c Al-airg'''''''--- -'. -1

'4 k \''4::45,,,f'-'<2;\''", .-'--- 1 -e.1:.= 1F71"jr IT-t-.Vf4 ";;; 11-VAI*7\PV41.1?, `,___;,±777,0nip illiZo,m, -._754:1 f 11,1 Fa ---,- 44- i f-litiii....q31'111 a 1 is1041111,11 wras *--'1111101 '

1

Ili'. lts *11,0-/-1:1it '41.41 ;,77=-1,;,-; 1-1 ' VII;71.41.1,741,11- 1 I ifi= 41przvp

is win 1-; ts, ,

-r"

110 =1.44,N .4"'

t_ff "..-.4--, "-- --iiih 2i 3 - - w-- 1 i ---4 -1 \I' I

I_ 1 711 ,.;,, .roiN i .,/

\ lopm.e. 4-Pliwat*

11.1k.

1 4= 443L '41

1%1-.7.--74.

(1,1- io,,t--tioe-1,-144I'1411:,'%1J4I)-tP010,P \,

4-110'94.-.1..."-:\lj_t

\S". IIj

1714_1 \(1110,15g,7

r111.

tl-LL

lirCII.Y.1,11 E ;;;;. .... ..i t. 1,If020*'(&a.:1 47,46111.1INIC!!1, 1 '1707Z

---4* .."4.'" "1:11114r6T1

T ?" i 1 1 rgq ' 14Eft, 1 , 1 ,.:-..;,-lry' .....304,-7,--,-., \ _

A,---r.

,_.s.,.:-_, elliik;111,,\ Li -7- ', n/ii .

v ---r,a(

4 , ;AA.,41 1 Fluali, )k A IL-7

474.,113d1 1 tt 14 1 ' lai. i 1 10117; , ;*1.-Iiii - -,!mew \

.1 1

II

II I

MEMIL

I

MOW/M..418 114

MEADOWBROOK

IMMO,

BRIGHTON

*SUSMinnSITS

CITY OF SYRACUSEN.Y.

rizzlEil=ximE15.DFPT. OF CITY PLANNING

111113

KE

Y

1 A

udito

rium

2 A

dmin

istr

atio

n3

1nte

r-S

atel

lite

Cor

e F

acili

tyS

peci

al E

duca

tion

Din

ing

Mus

icP

hysi

cal E

duca

tion

4 M

usic

5 S

cien

ce6

Den

tal

7 H

ealth

8 A

d9

Mai

n S

tree

t10

Lib

rary

11 E

TV

12 S

peci

al E

duca

tion

13 P

hysi

cal E

duca

tion

14 A

quat

ic C

ente

r15

Out

door

Rec

reat

ion

Prim

ary

Leve

l.1

3 z ta.

16 S

atel

lite

Sch

ool

17 In

ter-

Sat

ellit

e18

Brid

ge19

Ele

vato

r

Bus

Acc

ess

,11

Ser

vice

Bel

ow

1

1.Li

_r--

i

\--

=-7

----

----

----','

pI

To

Out

door

Rec

reat

ion

Are

as

Bus

Acc

ess

C:=

1==

=11

1=1.

11=

0 O

M40

all

OD

NO

4

4M

AIN

LE

VE

L C

EN

TR

AL

CO

RE

In th

is a

rchi

tect

ural

con

cept

ion

of a

Cam

pus

Sch

ool,

the

cent

ral

core

fac

ilitie

s ar

e su

rrou

nded

by

eigh

t sat

ellit

e sc

hool

s w

hich

wou

ld e

nrol

l4,

200

elem

enta

gyst

uden

ts.

1

4,200 children in !he eight units. These would incluck anauditorium, gymnasiums, kitchen, library, school health,educational television facilities, and other special-purposerooms. In addition, the eight surrounding schools wouldbe paired into four groups, and each pair would share acafeteria, library, and space for staff offices. Physical edu-cation and recreation areas also would be developed onthe 4o-f.cre site.

Size and Educational Quality.One of the most fre-quer t questions about large schools is whether, becauseof their size, they would diminish the attention givento individual children and whether the educational pro-gram in these schools would be substantially different fromthat currently offered in neighborhood schools.

By designing the Campus School for 4,2oo students,Syracuse pEns to capitalize on the large student body toorganize more effectively children and teachers intosmaller :wits, geared more closely to the individual needsof children. The 4,200 children attending each campuswill be assigned among eight satellite schools. Each satel-lite will thus have 525 students, about the =Me numberas present neighborhood schools. Each school would beserved by rg teachers providing an approximate pupil-teacher ratio of 28 : r. Four "teaching stations" in eachsatellite would surround a shared activity space, containingrooms for teachers and alcoves for small groups of stu-dent& This arrangement of space, school officials say,would make it easier to group and regroup children withflexibility. Demountable walls, movable partitions, andsmall alcoves would permit flexible grouping of studentsfor large or small group instruction, permitting seminar-like classes for intensive work, and large lectures anddemonstrations. Teachers thus would be freed to spendmore time with individuals or small group& Team teach-ing, reading and math specialists, dosed circuit television,

reading and science laboratories also would contribute tomore individualized instruction. Programmed instructionwith the aid of a computer located in the core facility,and the use of teaching laboratories, are seen by schoolofficials as another way to individualize instruction byallowing students to move at their own pace. Each satelliteschool would be staffed by a principal and other profes-sional personnel to assist in providing instructional, health,and food services for the students. Most of a child's dailyactivities would center around the satellite school.

It is said that the larger size of the Campus School willmake possible more comprehensive and intensive sexvicesfor students than now are possible in neighborhoodschools. At preset., for example, none of the library facili-ties in any Syracuse elementary school meet the standardsfor elementary schools set by the American Library Asso-ciation, and there is no trained librarian assigned to an ele-mentary school. It is conceivable that the Syracuse SchoolBoard could provide adequate library facilities in eachelementary school, but it would be costly and repetitiveto create a library at each school. At the Campus School,several different kinds of libraries could be established,and since a large number of children would use thesefacilities, there would be a maximum use of books andother materials.

In addition school officials point out that neighborhoodschools now offer no formal program in foreign lan-guages, and the elementary science program dependsupon the ability and interest of nonspecialized classroomteacher& In the Campus School, however, a regular cur-riculum in both languages and science could be offered.These comparisons are summarized in Tables 42 and 4b.

Syracuse school officials have concluded that new teach-ing facilities and techniques, a broader elementary schoolcurriculum, better usc of personnel and more flexible

Table 4aE4ucatiossal Services: Neighborhood Schools v. Campus School

library Health Food Educational TV andComputer

31 existing neighbor- No school has libraryhood elementary schools meeting ALA standards;

no librarians in any school;92433 volumes in 31sdiools

Campus Sehool i central library; minimumof 2.3,000 volumes tosun, with space for ex-pansion to 4,800; maxi-mum of 4 professionallibrarians

i8 nurses wrve 31 schools:only one school has a full-time nurse

3 full-time nurses; traveltime between schoolseliminated; central,modem facilities

Hot lunches served inevery school; kitchenslocated in 7 schools;lunches transported bytruthcentral kitchen; food

transported to satelliteschools by portable serv-ing carts

TV limited to UHF chan-nel; statewide network;programing not done byschool system. No com-puter

Space for audiovisualmaterials developmentcenter; an educational TVstudio, and a computer allin the core area

Source: Campus Site Planning Center, Report to the Syraame Board q Edacation and Propos4 1967, The Gawps, Plan forFirtare Elementary School Contraction pp. 116-132.

21

Tab

le 4

blos

ossa

ioss

4 P

rogr

ess:

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d S

choo

lsv.

Cam

pus

Sch

ool

Art

Mus

icFo

reig

nL

angu

ages

Mat

hR

eadi

ng a

ndL

angu

age

Art

Scie

nce

31 e

xist

ing

neig

hbor

-ho

od e

lem

enta

rysc

hool

s

36 p

erce

nt o

f cl

asse

s ha

veno

pro

gram

, mos

tlydr

awin

g an

d pa

intin

g,no

spe

cial

roo

ms

Cam

pus

Scho

ol.

Inst

ruct

ion

in c

eram

ics

scul

ptur

e, m

etal

wor

k,pa

intm

akin

g, w

eavi

ng,

rugm

akin

g, p

hoto

grap

hy;

z le

ctur

e ro

om, z

pre

para

-tio

n ro

om, a

nd s

tora

gear

eas

2.5

elem

enta

ry m

usic

teac

hers

; 6 s

choo

ls h

ave

full-

time

teac

hers

; all

othe

rs h

ave

part

-tim

e; n

osp

ecia

l roo

ms

Aco

ustic

ally

des

igne

dro

oms

in c

ore

area

for

band

reh

ears

al, i

nstr

umen

tpr

actic

e, a

nd te

achi

ng, a

larg

e au

dito

rium

, 7 f

ull-

time

teac

hers

, clo

sed

cir-

cuit

TV

inst

ruct

ion

No

form

al p

rogr

am in

any

elem

enta

ry s

choo

l

Inst

ruct

ion

in a

t lea

sttw

o la

ngua

ges

in g

rade

s4,

5, a

nd 6

; at l

east

3sp

ecia

lists

ass

igne

d to

grad

es 4

-6

Stan

dard

pro

gran

i of

in-

stru

ctio

n by

cla

ssro

omte

ache

r; z

mat

h sp

ecia

list

serv

ing

zli,0

00 e

lem

enta

ryst

uden

ts

Clo

sed

circ

uit T

V in

stru

c-tio

n; m

ath

lear

ning

lab

with

3-d

imen

sion

al m

od-

els,

des

k ca

lcul

ator

s, a

ndot

her

lear

ning

dev

ices

; 3m

ath

spec

ialis

ts s

ervi

ng4,

200

child

ren

Stan

dard

pro

gram

of

in-

stru

ctio

n by

cla

ssro

omte

ache

r; 2

4 re

med

ial

read

ing

spec

ialis

ts f

ull-

or p

art-

time

in e

very

scho

ol

Rea

ding

lab;

8 r

eadi

ngsp

ecia

lists

ful

l tim

e, 3

spee

ch s

peci

alis

ts

Scie

nce

curr

icul

umof

fere

d is

dep

ende

nt o

nte

ache

r's a

bilit

y; n

o el

e-m

enta

ry le

vel s

cien

cesp

ecia

lists

em

ploy

ed; n

ola

bora

tori

es

Bas

ic la

b in

eac

h sc

hool

;m

obile

car

t dem

onst

ra-

tions

; clo

sed

circ

uit T

V;

mur

al s

peci

alis

ts in

cor

egr

ea; o

utdo

or n

atur

est

udy

area

s; 6

sci

ence

spec

ialis

ts

Sour

ce: C

ampu

s Si

te P

lann

ing

Cen

ter,

Rep

ort t

o U

se S

yrac

use

Ban

d of

Edu

catio

n en

d Pr

opos

al, 1

967,

Tbe

Cam

pos

Plan

for

Post

ore

Eko

mot

ary

Scho

ol C

oost

ross

ion

pp. 1

16-1

32.

4 ,i 4 .? ,

11101113.

Table 4c-Comparative Traosportatios Costs to Achieve Racial Wawa

Transportation ProgramNumber of

StudentsBused

Total CostTotal Net Cost After State

Reimbursement

Transportation to relieve racial imbalance, 1966-67 schoolyear 930 $31, 500 $3, 150

Total transportation program for entire school district,1966-67 (excluding field trips) 4, 00o 314, 966 31, 496

Transportation to fitst campus site

Transportation to four campus sites

Probable transportation to achieve racial balance inaddition to current busing

4, 2.00

12, 000

tflo, 000

400, 000

307, 185

it coo4o, 000

30, VS

grouping would enable the Campus Schools to offer sub-stantially better education and greater attention to stu-dents' individual needs.

Transportation.-If the Campus Plan were put intooperation, many more children would ride buses to schoolthan now are doing so. Approximately 4,000 of the 4,200children in attendance would be bused to the first CampusSchooL School officials have examined the time and safetyfactors in some depth. Hypothetical bus routes for thefirst campus site were established so that no child wouldhave to aoss a major street or walk more than one and ahalf blocks to a bus stop. Within these constraints it wasestimated that children would spend an average of 36minutes on a bus each day, and would spend 4-6 minuteswalking to and from a bus stop. It is estimated that theaverage walking time for pupils to get to and from theirneighborhood school is about 22 minutes. 'The CampusPlan feasibility study asserts that the slight thne disaavan-tage of riding buses would be offset by the fact that chil-dren would be less exposed to traffic and weatherconditions than if they walked to school.

Estimated transportation costs for Syracuse would in-crease under the Campus Plan, but school authorities say

Table 4d-Comparative Total Cost Estimates madState Cossributions, aad Approxisute Cost PerPupil: Neighborhood Schools v. Campus Plaa

NeighborhoodCost Schools

FirstCampus

&claimed project cost $10, 997, Po $10, 515. 030Cantribution from State aid $1, 551, 014 $3, 375, 188Total cost to Syracuse SS, 4460-86 $7, 149. 711Number of pupils accommodated . 3. 131 4. 144Average cost per pupil $3. 511 $2. 539

Source: Letter from David Sine to Phyllis McClure, staffmember, US. Commission on Civil Rights, Nov. 3, 1967.

that even without Campus Schools, transportation costswould increase with additional efforts to achieve racialbalance."

Construction Costs: Neighborhood Schools v. thaCampus Plan.-In considering elementary school con-struction needs for the city's schoolchildren, Syracuseschool officials assessed the cost of the Campus Plan againstthe replacement of neighborhood schools. If the CampusPlan is rejected, the district will have to replace eightneighborhood schools over the next 2o-year period. Tables4c1 and 4e comp= the costs of replacing the eight schoolswith five new neighborhood schools-for a total of 3,132students-with the cost of the first Campus School, whichwould enroll 4,144 students. The neighborhood school re-placement plan, for i,000 fewer students, would cost theschool district approximately $1.2 million more than theCampus School. Similar savings on education park con-struction were estimated in a feasibility study forPhiladelphia."

Table 4e-Cousparative &Ran Cost Estimates:Neighborhood Schools v. Campus Plan

CostNeighbor- Campus

hood PlanSchools

Site acquisition $1, 403, 000 470, 000Demolition of existing buildings is6, 000Building 7, 018, coo 7, 6x7, cooSite improvement 538, 700 400, cooFurniture and equipment . 634 coo 728, cooArchitect-eagineer Solo 100 490, 000Contingency 748, Boo 830, coo

Total 10, 997, 300 10, 524, 000

I Building costs are based on 1967 construction costsat ate per square foot and scaled 3 percent annually tothe hypothetical date of construction of respective schools.Source: Syracuse City School District, The Comps: Plan(a digest), Tables 5 and 6 at 33, 34.

23

How Costs Would Be Met.An important factor forschool officials, city officials, and taxpayers in consideringthe Campus Plan will be how the city can afford such aprogram, given its already heavy fiscal burden. TheCampus Plan feasibility study addressed itself to this ques-tion. A major financial consideration was the amount ofthe necessary annual debt payments. Under the CampusPlan the school district would nye an estimated $350,000on debt Dervice over a 2o-year period. The City SchoolDistrict would receive 45 percent of the total cost of eitherthe Campus School or the neighborhood schools fromState aid. Other financial aid for construction of CampusSchools might come f . foundation funds. In addition,the city might receive urban renewal grant-in-aid credit forschool construction and related costs. And the retirementof the eight neighborhood schools and the return of landto the city's tax rolls could increase the city's assessed valua-tion by as much as $1.9 million. Mr. Jaquith, the schoolboard president, feels that the city has the financial re-sources for much of the campus school program. As forother sources, Jaquith says:

1 think that we can get and are entitled to somekind of special outside assistance for the specialfacilities involved."

He also believes that the city would be providing superiorfacilities:

We can have the best kind of facilities, the kindwe could never conceivably afford in 34 separateelementary schools."

The Campus School and the Community.Thedistance of the Campus School from many students' homesis of concern to those educators and parents who feel theschool and home should work in cooperation. Mr. Jaquithrecognizes that this is a major problem of the CampusSchool, but points out that "in half the schools we haven'tgot this relationship now." One suggested way to bringthe school and home closer together would be to make theCampus School a center of community activities. Theschool's facilities could be used in the manner envisionedby the education park plan for Pittsburgh:

The schools themselves will be designed as com-munity and cultural centers. Citizens and organi-zations will be encouraged to use their libraries,exhibition halls, gymnasiums, and other facilities.And the schools will offer a greatly expanded pro-gram of adult educ4tion.5°

But definite plans for this aspect of the Syracuse CampusSchool Plan have yet to be developed.

Student Assignment.Two remaining questionsabout the Campus School are: (I) who will attend the first

24

i

Campus Shool and (2) how will existing racial patternsin elementiry schools be affected?

As presently planned students assigned to the first cam-pus would be a cross section of the district's elementaryschool population. Children of different socioeconomicbackgrounds and achievement levels would be represented,and the racial composition would reflect the racial makeupof the city's elementary school population in the year thecampus opens. Students from throughout the city wouldbe selected so that small groups of children from the sameblocks would be assigned to the same school in the Cam-pus School.

To achieve this diversity, children from 15 existingelementary schools would be assigned to the first campus.The 15 schools were selected on the basis of: (i ) over-crowding, (2) obsolescence, (3) racial imbalance, and (4)operating efficiency. Eight schools morc than 50 years oldwere selected for retirement when the first Campus Schoolis built. The entire enrollment of 3,150 students in thoseschools would be assigned to the new Campus; partial en-rollments from seven other schools (990 students) alsowould be assigned to the first Campus School.

This assignment pattern would permit the abandon-ment of obsolete school buildings and would help relieveovercrowded classrooms in other schools. This pattern alsowould increase somewhat the number of Negro childrenattending desegregated schools but would not substantiallyreduce existing racial imbalance. The racial compositionsof the eight schools to be retired under the proposal rangefrom o percent to 29 percent Negro and four of eight aremore than 90 percent white. None of the four schoolswhich now are more than 50-pt:cmt Negro enrolled willbe closed under the plan; approximately one-fifth of thetotal enrollment of these four schools would be enrolledin the first Campus. Thus these four schools will probablyremain majority Negro schools.

Former school board member Robert Warr has saidthat the first Campus School will not solve the existingproblem of racial imbalance:

it will take all four of the sites to eliminate theproblem of racial imbalance. The first [CampusSchool] will only eliminate it in some areas."

School officials estimate that if the Board of Educationand the Common Council approve the Campus Plan in1968, the first Campus School could be opened in Septem-ber 1972. The fourth Campus School would be completedby September i99o. If this schedule is maintained, the fullresolution of Syracuse's problems of racial imbalance-andquality education is more than 20 years in the future.

School officials advance two reasons for their decisionto delay the construction of all four Campus Schools. First,the establishment of one Campus School will permit the

staff and community to become familiar with the newfacilities ane program. School officials expect that thecommunity will readily support the construction of theother three Campus Schools once the educational programis in operation at one.

The second reason for delay is fmancial. School officialsestimate that four Campus Schools would cost approxi-mately $5o million. There is at present no Federal aid

for school construction costs. Even with substantial Stateaid, Syracuse could not afford to build the four CampusSchools at the same time. In order to meet the costs ofthe Campus Schools with its present resources, Syracusehas to spread the issuance and debt service of bonds overa 2o-year period. Thus, severe fiscal restraints make amore immediate total solution for quality integrated edu-cation in Syracsix unfeasible.

25

gq.

CONCLUSIONThe record of school desegregation efforts in Syracuse

is a mixed one. Desegregation is a clearly avowed aimof the school board and superintendent, and steps havebeen taken to remedy patterns of racial segregation in theschools. Despite this firm commitment, however, muchremains to be done.

Factors which appear to have accounted for the prog-ress made thus far are twothe active role of civil rightsgroups and the leadership exercised by public school offi-cials. The demands of civil rights groups and theirprotests have had an acknowledged influence on edu-cational policy. Commitment to quality integrated educa-tion, first advocated in 1962, now is the official policy ofthe Syracuse Board of Education. But if civil rights leaderswere responsible for stimulating official awareness andaction on racially imbalanced schools, it has been theschool officials who have led the community to accept thechanges. The leadership role of the superintendent andboard members has been crucial in Syracuse. The factthat they have not always been successful does not dimin-ish the importance of their commitment and leadership.Although it is frequently said that "my community isdifferent," Syracuse is not dissimilar to many communitiesin which there has been no progress toward school deseg-regation. Its experience suggests that if community groupsin other cities sought the goal in a determined mannerand if school officials exercised leadership, progress couldbe made.

What are the chief obstacles to achieving full racialbalance and improved educational quality ? First, thereare serious educational and social problems within de-segregated schools for which teachers and administratorsneed intensive guidance and training. Second, even if theBoard of Education adopted plans for completely mod-ernizing the entire educational system, implementation

Footnotes

Chapter I

'U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Censuses of Population andHousing: 196o. Final Report PHC (i)-154, Table Di, at 15; Uni-versity College of Syracuse University, The Negro in Syracuse (1964)at 10; information on the Syracuse labor force obtained from theSyracuse Chamber of Commerce.

Willie and Wagenfeld, Socio-Econotnic and Ethnic Areas Syra-cuse and Onondaga County, N.Y. 1960 at 30.

David H. Jaquith, President, Board of Education, speech beforethe Chicago Desegregation Institute, June 6, 1967.

US. Censuses of Population and Housing: 1960 op. cit. supranote I.

26

of those plans would be hampered by lack of adequatefinancing. Without substantial outside financial aid, schoolofficials say that it will be impossible to build four CampusSchools in less than 20 years. Syracuse cannot resolve itsproblems by itself. State and Federal assistance is neededbut at present there is little prospect that this aid will beforthcoming in the near future.

In summary, the lessons to be drawn from Syracuse'sexperience are that:

A school system can successfully and voluntarilyaccomplish desegregation if the community andschool leadership are committed to this goal.

Desegregation must be accompanied by improve-ments in the quality of education.

The scholastic performance of most Negro andwhite children in desegregated schools has beenmaintained or improved.

The classroom climate and the sensitivity ofteachers are important ingredients of successfuldesegregation. The process of integration is notcomplete until teachers and administrators areadequately trained to cope with problems of in-terracial tension so that children of both racescan accept and respect each other as equals.

White students do not necessarily leave the publicschools in large numbers. White enrollment maydrop initially, but in Syracuse white enrollmentcontinues to increase.

School districts must have assistance from Gov-ernment at all levelsmunicipal, State, and Fed-eralin order to accomplish complete desegrega-tion and improve educational programs.

All public school enrollment figures obtained from the ResearchDepartment, Syracuse City School District; Catholic school enroll-ment figures obtained from Diocesan School System, Syracuse.

US. Bureau of the Census, US. Census of Population and Hous-ing: 1950, PD54, Table 1; U.S. Census of Population and Housing:1960, PHC (i)-154, Table Pi.

Chapter 2

Information on the history of school desegregation efforts inSyracuse was obtained from two primary sources, except where other-wise noted: (a) Stout and Inger, School Desegregation: Progress in

Eight Cities, a study done for the US. Commission on Civil Rights;(b) Staff interviews with David H. Jaquith, President, Board of Edu-cation; Franklyn S. Barry, Superintendent of Schools; Harlan Cleve-land, Msistant Superintendent of Schools; and David Sine, Depart-ment of Research.

' Education Committee of the State Conunission for HumanRights, Minutes,Mar. t3, 1963, at 3.

'Franklyn S. Barry, Speech before the Ohio Conference on Raceand Education, Akron, Ohio, June z 0, z967.

"New York Commissioner of Education James E. Allen, jr., Spe-cial Message to All Chief Local School Administrators and Presidentsof Boards of Education, June 14,1963.

" Report of the Committee on Education of the Syracuse AreaCouncil of the State Commission /or Human Rights, 3-4. (July 12,1963).

" Syracuse City School District, Board of Education Policy State-meat Concerning Racial Imbalance in Syracuse Public Schools(July z6,1963).

"Research Department, Syracuse City School District, ResearchReport * 22-66, Study of the Effect of IntegrationCroton andEdward Smith Elementary School Pupils in U.S. Commission onCivil Rights, Hearing Before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights,Rochester, N.Y., Sept. 6-17, 4066, 21 327-8 (hereinafter cited asRochester Hearing).

" The intensive study of the effects of desegregation was done bythe Syracuse University Youth Development Center supported by theUS. Office of Education and the National Institute of Mental Health:Jerome Beker, A Study of Integration in Racially Imbalanced UrbanPublic Schoolsa Demonstration and Evaluation, May 1967. Beker'sstudy confirmed the school system's own research study on the aca-demic results of the transfer, Id. at 325. Beker also noted the highlyunusual atmosphere of the receiving school. His study notes "Thatthe youngsters did as well as they did, keeping up with if not ex-ceeding the performance of their peers at their former school, sug-gests that even greater progress may lie ahead for them. A one-yearfollowup, however, hardly permits more than tentative conclusionsto be drawn." Id. at 383.

In addition, the Beker study concluded from an inspection of stu-dent achievement data that there was 'little to support the daims ofthose who express the fear that disadvantaged Negro elementaryschool children will be 'hurt' more if they are forced to compete withhigh achieving middle dass whites than they might be by attendingmore homogeneous, inner city schools." Id. at 354-

II Although $ zoo per pupil was the average for the Madison AreaProject program in both the junior high and elementary schools, theactual per pupil expenditure in the junior high was higher than Szoo.Approximately 75 percent of the compensatory funds were spent inMadison Junior High. (Interview with David Sine, director ofresearch, Syracuse City School District.)

" Rochester Hearing at 219.

' Id. at 220."Id. at 234.

" Staff Interview with David H. Jaquith, President, Board ofEducation.

"Ungrading of Two Schools in Renewal Areas Sought," SyracuseHerald-fournal, Feb. z z, 1965.

' Staff interviews with mothers of children formerly attendingWashington Irving School.

"Negro Pupil's Reception Emphasized," Syracuse Herald-Jour-nal, Apr. 29,1965.

" Council for Better Education, Positive Building: A Proposal Sub-

mitted to the City of Syracuse Board of Education (January 1966).

"Referendum Isn't Expected on School Integration Plan," Syra-CM Herald-fournal,May 6, 1965.

21 Staff interview with David H. Jaquith, June z, 1967.

" Staff telephone interview with Sidney Cohen, coordinator of the

reading Program, Syracuse Public Schools (Mar. 4, 1968). $104,000in Tide I (ESEA) funds supports the remedial reading program in z9

of the 31 elementary schools. The number of all elementary schoolstudents who are more than 2 years behind grade level in readingis not known.

' Syracuse Committee for Integrated Education, "Education andIntegration" in Rochester Hearing, 331-2.

Chapter 3

" This chapter is baled ot di, desegregation experience in the ele-mentary schools only. Commisi.on staff visited eight schools, inter-viewed principals, te when, parents, and students of both races. These

interviews form the Luis of this chapter's assessment of the problems

encountered after desegn.qation.

Syracuse City Schoz4 District, "Research Report No. 23-66,Study of the Effect of IntegrationWashington Irving and HostPupils" in Rochester Hearing 21323.

" Rochester Hearing at 222. The initial gain in achievement ofbused students has apparently been maintained. Based on a smallsample of students. the evidence, limited as it is, indicates that the"reading achievement of fifth grade pupils from the WashingtonIrving Area . . . waS significantly higher in May, 1967, than was the

average reading achievement of a matched group of fifth grade stu-dents at Croton Elementary School." Research Department, Syracuse

City School District, A Study of the Effects of Two Years of Integra-

tionStudents Bused From the Washington Irving Area (Feb. 19,z 968).

" Median achievement scores for elementary schools supplied bythe Department of Research, Syracuse City School District.

" One of the 12 receiving schools was a new school which drewchildren from several other schools. Thus, it had no previous enroll-ment to compare with postdesegregation enrollment.

" It was imponible to determine from the interviews how muchdiscrimination and persecution by white authority figures againstNegro children actually existed in the schools. The significant pointwas, however, that Negro children believed that a great deal existed.

" See e.g., US. Commission on Civil Rights, Racial Isolation in the

Public Schools, 157-8 (z967).

" See e.g., Goodman, Race Awareness in Young Children (1952);Clark and Clark, Skin Color as a Factor in Racial Identification ofNegro Pre-school Children, z z Journal of Social Psychology z59-z69

(1940); see also Coles, Children of Crisis (1967)-

This training program was supported by the U.S. Office of Edu-

cation with funds available under Tide IV of the Civil Rights Act of1964.

27

Chapter 4

" These schools were Croton, Danforth, and Merrick.

" This was Sumner School.

" Campus Site Planning Center, Report to the Syracuse Board ofEducation on a ProposalThe Campus Plan for Future ElementarySchool Construction ('967). This feasibility StUdy was financed bythe US. Office of Education under Title III of the Elementary andSecondary Education Act of 1965, by the Educational Facilities Lab-oratory, and by the Rosamond A. Gifford Charitable Corporation.

"Education Committee of the Syracuse Area Council of the StateCommission for Human Rights, Alternate Proposals for ElementarySchool Integration (March, 1965).

" Board of Education, City School District of Syracuse, Minutes ofRegular Meetings Mar. 21, 1967 and July x8, 1967.

" Syracuse City School District, Unlimited Educational Achieve-ment Program at I (1967).

" Brief for Petitioners, Baker v. Board of Education at 2, 7 (onappeal before New York State Commissioner of Education).

28

"Information on the Campus Plan comes from the Campus PlanFeasibility Study op. cit. supra note 33, and staff interviews.

" Sine, "The Syracuse Campus Site Plan: A New Concept", 7Event: A Journal of Public Affairs i7 (Spring 1967).

" The difference between the estimated costs of $x8,000 of trans-porting 4,000 children to the first Campus School and the currenttransportation costs of $31,000 for approximately the SaMe number ISaccounted for by the fact that were the Campus School in operation,the students transported to the Campus School would live in con-centrated groups in the city and because opening times would bestaggered, bus runs could be doubled up.

" The Goode Cooperation, The Education Park: Report to theSchool District of Philadelphia at 19 (1967).

" Staff interview with David H. Jaquith.

"Id."'Pittsburgh Goes Back to School" in The Architectural Forum

June 1967, at 40.

" Staff interview with Robert Warr, former member, Board ofEducation.

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE :1968 0-295-211