Permissive social and educational inequality 40 years after Brown

Journal of Negro Education, The, Summer 1994 by Anderson, Beverley

After 40 years of social and educational battles incident to Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954), African Americans continue to experience socioeducational inequalities before the law. Four decades after Brown, attempts to evaluate its impact on Americans of African descent produce resounding equivocations. Clearly, de jure segregation in higher education has been eliminated, as evidenced by the presence and meritorious functioning of persons of African heritage as students, faculty, staff, and administrators in predominantly White colleges and universities across the nation. However, while Americans of African heritage flourish intellectually and socially on these campuses, on others they find themselves scarcely tolerated, and on still others they meet with open hostility (Skolnick & Currie, 1982). Dartmouth College, for example, has become known in recent years as much for its place among prestigious institutions of higher learning as for its maltreatment of African American faculty and students on its campus ("The Cole Example," 1990; "Dartmouth Professor," 1990). Similarly, Harvard University's poor record relative to the racial diversification of its law school faculty has received national attention ("Legal Beat," 1992; "Complaint," 1992). As Magner (1989) notes:

Ugly and embarrassing incidents between White and Black students continue to plague colleges and universities across the country. Hundreds of institutions of all sizes have been affected--some by brawls, others by racist flyers or graffiti, still others by fraternity or ghetto themes. Many administrators and scholars who have studied the incidents have concluded that they are not simply isolated and extremist acts, but that they reflect a disturbing pattern. (p. 1)

Concomitantly, de facto segregation, particularly in urban public elementary and secondary schools, abounds. Several states are currently engaged in negotiations to correct such situations or are defendants in lawsuits brought against them to gain legal redress ("Hartford Bill," 1993; Walters, 1993).

This article provides an overview of social and educational inequality in light of Brown. More specifically, it explores issues of educational inequality and related legal opinions to examine their relevance to public elementary and secondary schools as well as higher education.

In its larger context, the educational establishment in the United States is part of the network of social institutions through which the nation organizes itself to meet its needs and goals. As such, from a national perspective, the form and functions of this social institution fulfill the nation's agenda. Indeed, the major function of American education is to socialize young people into the cultural values of the society, introduce them to the principles of democracy, prepare them for the world of work, and facilitate their upward mobility. Access to quality education is thus a route to enjoyment of the fruits of the nation. Indeed, an important point made in Brown is this:

Education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditure for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. (Brown, 1954, p. 493)

If the foregoing is so, one may ask, "How, then, can unequal educational opportunities fulfill the national agenda?" Many theorists have focused on whether it is necessary or possible to organize social life without structured inequality. For example, sociologists have formulated theories attesting to the importance, inevitability, inherence, and universality of social stratification (Landtman, 1968; Lenski, 1966). The conflict perspective proposes that social inequality is not inevitable, but is inherent in capitalism (Dahrendorf, 1959, 1968; Wright, 1980a, 1980b; Wright, Hachen, Costello, & Sprague, 1982). Conversely, the functionalist theory, which suggests the necessity of structured social inequality, is more congruent to the national philosophy of the United States (Bowles & Gintis, 1976; Davis & Moore, 1945; Gans, 1971; Giroux, 1983; Parsons & Bales, 1955). This latter point of view suggests that inequality is necessary to motivate those at the bottom to strive to improve their lot; it also sees to make available a cheap labor force for menial jobs. Further, some work requires long and difficult training, and to motivate the most talented to undergo such preparation, they must look forward to being differentially rewarded.