MILWAUKEE INTER DISTRICT PUBLIC SCHOOL CHOICE AND ACHIEVEMENT: A STUDY
An Achievement History of Chapter 220 Wisconsin
Copyright by Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone, 1985, 1998
All Rights Reserved
SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, FAMILY CULTURE, AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT: A STUDY OF BLACK AND WHITE PUPIL PERFORMANCE AT AN INTERRACIAL SCHOOL by:
Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
E-mail:
Web site:
Phone: 414-934-9804
FAX: 414-934-9878
The University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee, (1985)
Under the Supervision of Dr. Harold M. Rose
ABSTRACT
Little progress has been made in eliminating race and social class related inequalities in education. Among blacks and the lower classes, race and class have historically operated as intervening variables between effort and success, desire and achievement, and ability and the practical manifestation of that ability. Social status, prestige, education, and occupational mobility have been difficult to attain and even more difficult to pass on to future generations.
The most immediate manifestation of inequality in educational opportunity is the low academic achievement of selected racial minorities, including blacks, and the lower classes. Obviously, the problem of low achievement cannot be resolved by the educational system alone. Individual student characteristics, school factors, and attributes of students' families have been found to be related to achievement.
The principal objective of this research is an examination of the role of parental status and behavior on the academic achievement of students attending a majority white upper middle class suburban school that participates in a program of voluntary interracial schooling. More specifically, this investigation concentrates on identifying the aspects of socioeconomic status and family culture that influence achievement and analyzing the differential effects of these influences on black and white student performance. The socioeconomic characteristics examined were: mother's educational level, father's educational level, father's occupation, family income, and home ownership. The measures of family culture were: parents' educational aspirations for children, parents' self-esteem, parents' locus of control, parents' social participation, and parents' reading habits. The effects of student status and behavioral characteristics are also investigated.
The results show that socioeconomic status, family culture, and attributes of students predict achievement. Different aspects of SES and family culture influence the achievement of black and white students. Number of suspensions is a predictor of both black and white student performance. The policy implications of these findings for interracial schooling are also discussed.
--------------------------------------------------------------
INTER DISTRICT SCHOOL CHOICE AND ACHIEVEMENT: A STUDY
SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, FAMILY CULTURE, AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT:
A STUDY OF BLACK AND WHITE PUPIL PERFORMANCE
AT AN INTERRACIAL SCHOOL
by
Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
E-mail:
Phone: 414-934-9804
FAX: 414-934-9878
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables . . . .
Acknowledgements . . . .
CHAPTER I--Introduction
CHAPTER II--Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
CHAPTERS III--The Research Project: Its Setting,
Motivation ,
Political Basis, and Methodology . . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTER IV--Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTERS V--Findings and Interpretations . .
Chapter
Notes
Bibliography
. . .
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Little progress has been made in eliminating race and social class related inequalities in education. Children enter schools with varying amounts of skills and knowledge which are often influenced by racial group membership and class status. Ideally, these differences should decrease as students advance in the educational system. Evidence indicates, however, that disparities between blacks and whites, and the lower classes and upper classes, become greater as grade level increases.
Among blacks and the lower classes, race and class have historically operated as intervening variables between effort and success, desire and achievement, and ability and the practical manifestation of that ability. Social status, prestige, education, and occupational mobility have been difficult to attain and even more difficult to pass on to future generations.
The individual and societal costs of educational inequality are great. Opportunities for obtaining further education and employment are significantly reduced for victims of inequality of educational opportunity. The social ramifications are both manifestations and perpetuations of the economic, political and social domination of blacks and the lower classes. Maintenance of such a system of domination severely compromises the principle of democracy and often results in poverty, social unrest, political apathy, disregard for social responsibility, and negative social behavior.
2
The most immediate manifestation of inequality in educational opportunity is low academic achievement. While selected racial minorities, including blacks and Hispanics, and the lower classes are most likely to be low achievers, other groups are increasingly becoming affected by inadequate academic preparation and performance UNational Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). The problem is indeed of great magnitude.
Educational inequality resulting from social class differences in the home or the school is almost invariably associated with educational inequality resulting from the derogated social position of blacks in American society as manifested in terms of unequal access to employment opportunities and residential segregation [Swanson (1979) and Wilson (1979)]. Upper and middle class white students often attend the better suburban schools in which facilities tend to be more modern and the influence of fellow students is more positive and achievement oriented. The fact is that racial segregation in the schools tends to represent class segregation and both have been found to result in lowered achievement.
School system efforts to eliminate the underachievement of many lower class and black students often entail either the provision of supplemental educational support or the changing of students' educational environments in terms of interracial schooling and the creation of a more diverse social class mix in the schools. Desegregation efforts involving only city school districts have, for the most part, failed to eliminate segregation along race and class lines. The Milwaukee,
3
l
Wisconsin public school system, for example, implemented its desegregation plan in the 1976-1977 school year. From 1978-1979 to 1981-1982, however, black enrollment in city schools increased from 42.2% to 47.8~. In October of 1983, there were still 21 schools in which the enrollment was over 80% black.1 Voluntary city/suburban transfer programs like Chapter 220 also provide an opportunity for race and class integration; however, such programs generally involve so few students that the problem of low achievement for large numbers of students is
unresolved .
Obviously the problem of low academic performance cannot be resolved by the educational system alone. Individual student characteristics, school factors other than racial makeup and school social class and family characteristics, have also been found to be related to achievement.
Certainly individual student characteristics such as student selfesteem and interest in school are related to student performance [Coleman (1966), Rosenberg and Simmons n971]. The effects of school factors are not so clear. Some scholars contend that attributes of schools have little or no effect on achievement and have offered alternative expla nations for disparities in performance (Coleman, 1966). Even most scholars who disagree with Coleman on the extent to which schools influence achievement acknowledge that "the success of schools in obtaining their goals is not solely dependent upon the characteristics and practices of the schools themselves."2
Social scientists have long recognized the importance of the inn uence of characteristics of students' families on achievement.
4
Researchers have identified many of the socioeconomic and family culture characteristics that are related to the academic achievement of white students. The often-nade assumption that white and black student performance is affected by the same aspects of SES and family culture has often resulted in incomplete identification of the specific aspects of socioeconomic status and family culture that are related to the achievement of black students. If, as argued by Shimkin (1974) and Sudarkasa (1981), cultural differences exist between blacks and whites that do not necessarily result from social class differences between the two groups, black and white student achievement may not be related to the same aspects of SES and family culture. Although the problem of low academic performance resulting from differences in SES and family culture is difficult to solve due to the enduring nature of family characteristics, identification of these characteristics and understanding of the nature of their impact on achievement is an integral part of the solution.
RESEARCH OBJECTlVE
The principal objective of this research is an examinations of the role of parental status and behavior on student achievement. More specifically, this investigation concentrates on identifying the aspects of socioeconomic status and family culture that in In uence academic achievement and analyzing the differential effects of these influences on black and White student performance. The effects of selected student status
10
wanted them to attend, (2) children interested in and usually possessing the ability for comprehension of the abstract and verbal schooling offered at the time, and (3) children who were probably going beyond the lower levels and whose families supported the ambition for further education (Burton, 1953). After 1852, schools had to attempt to provide an education for students who did not want to attend, those whose families did not value education, those with little interest in and ability for the type of education offered, children who were not going beyond the years of school required, and those whose families were more in favor of them working as opposed to attending schools Curricula was still formal, abstract, verbal, unrealistic, and in no way addressed the practical concerns of the lower classes.7
Warner, Havighurst, and Loeb (1944) and Sexton (1961) commented on the elite status of those who were initially educated. Prior to 1890, less than five percent of young people in the country attended high school and college. Mbst of them were of high economic status and were being educated in order to follow in the footsteps of their parents. A few were of lower social status but aspired to higher status through education. By 1930, ten times more students attended high school than in 1890. Warner, HaYighurst and Loeb attribute this increase to a change in the pattern of social mobility. During the nineteenth centUTy, economic and social mobility were generally the result of the acquisition of cheap land, steady work opportunities due to developing frontiers, and expanding opportunities in business and industry. The collapse of business expansion after 1930 and the fact that most of the....~
17
also reported that children with high self-regard tend to have parents with high self-regard.
Unlike childrens' self-esteem, their locus of control has been found to be unrelated to that of their parents MacDonald (1966), Jorgensen (1979)]. Jorgensen stated that "in contrast to the influence of maternal achievement expectations on the sense of personal control, the mothers' own control expectations had no relationship to either their children's sense of control or their ideologies about achievement.'' He further contended that a sense of internal control in children is fostered by parental socialization which ensures that they consistently receive valuable rewards (warmth, nurturance, approval and acceptance with little hostility, rejection, or withdrawal) and punishment that is consistent but not authoritarian.22 Dave and Phares (1969) also found that child rearing practices differed between internals and externals and that acquisition of the belief in children was related to child rearing practices.
THE SELF-
CONCEPT
After nearly a century of research on the self-concept, investigators are as far as ever from agreeing on what it is and what it includes QRosenberg, 1979~. A variety of terms such as self-values, self-regard, ego, self-image, self~attitudes, and self-esteem are often used interchangeably to describe the same basic principle.
Prior to 1890, the self was equated with metaphysical concepts
1
18
such as the "soul," the "spirit," or the "will." Discussions of the self were concerned with philosophical and religious non-physical interpretations of self. Not until the 17th century was a dualism between content and consciousness which dveloped into an acceptable distinction between self-concept and concept of self, established.23 Descartes is credited with having made the original contribution stem-ming from his philosophy of (cogito ergo sum), "I think, therefore I am." Locke and Hume explanded on the notion that man, as a thinking intelligent being, had the ability to consider the self as itself. In other words, one could not only evaluate other objects, but the self as well. Kant (1934) developed the dualism further and specified the distinction between self as subject and self as object.
William James provided the bulk of the basis for present self-concept theory. His assumption was that everything, including the self, was objective. James' contention was that the empirical self (the self to be perceived). was comprised of four components. They were: (1) the spiritual self, which is the source of interest, will, attention, and choice; a composite of all of one's religious, intellectual, and moral aspirations; (2) the material self, which consists of the material pos-sessions we see as part of us; (3) the social self, how others perceive use; and (4) the bodily self, which refers to physical attributes.24 James stated that "our feelings of self-worth and self-esteem derive partially from where we see ourselves standing in relation to others whose skills and abilities are similar to our own on particular self-
19
images.'2 Cooley and Mead elaborated on James' basic theories and agreed that the birthplace for self was in society and that the in-dividual's self-opinion is largely determined by what others think of him.
SELF-ESTEEM
Both self-esteem and locus of control are aspects of the self-concept. Rosenberg (1965) regards self-esteem as the direction of the self-attitude. Dbes the individual have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of himself? Does he consider himself worthy or unworthy? Self-esteem has two different connotations. One connotation is that the individual thinks he is good enough. The other is that the person thinks of himself as very good.26
lYhen we speak of high self-esteem, then we shall simply mean that the individual respects himself, considers himself worthy; he does not necessarily consider himself better than others, but he definitely does not consider himself worse; he does not consider himself the ultimate in perfection but, on the contrary, he recognizes his limitations and expects to grow and improve. Low self-esteem, on the other hand, Implies self-rejection, selfdissatisfaction, self-contempt. The individual lacks respect for the self he observes. The self-picture is disagreeable, and he wishes it were other~ise.Z7
Earlier research on race and self-esteem contended that the dis-advantaged and derogated social position of blacks in the Uhited States obviously resulted in a seriously damaged sense of self-esteem. Wylie (1979), however, reviewed twenty-eight different investigations that utilized well known instruments to measure the relationship between
20
race and self-esteem, including Rosenberg and Simmons' 1972 scale and concluded that the earlier assessments of low black self-esteem were inaccurate. While one may expect blacks to have lower self-esteem than whites, self-assessments based on societal evaluations of the individual are primarily influenced by the perceived and/or actual evaluations of significant others, or persons whose opinions of the individual matter the most. Most blacks socialize, live, attend school or some combination of the above, with other blacks. While black adults do not generally work in the environments that are majority black, evidence indicates that blacks have been able to develop defense mechanisms to protect their self-esteem when they are in extended con-tact with whites (Gordon, 1980).
While Rosenberg (1979) reported virtually no association between self-esteem and social class among pre-adolescents and only a modest relationship among adolescents, there is a moderate relationship be-tween self-esteem and social class among adults. He deduced that one reason social class affects the self-esteem of adults more so than that of children is that children are not yet exposed to the class-related occupational conditions that shape self-esteem.28 Rohn (1969) also supports the position that occupation influences adult self-esteem.
LOCUS OF CONTROL
Locus of control, also known as internal/external control, was first introduced as a factor in achievement in E. Jerry Phares' 1957
21
Ph.D. dissertation in which he examined the viability of the then ac-cepted theory that the strength of rewards and punishments were the most important factors in learning. In an experiment in which half of his subjects were informed that whether they accomplished a given task was dependent upon luck and the other half that the task required great skill and that some persons were very good at it. Subjects who thought that success depended upon their own skills reacted just as reinforcement learning theory would predict, Their expectations for success rose after successes and dropped after failures. Subjects who thought that success depended on luck, however, reacted very differently and in many cases expected success after having failed at a given task. It appeared that traditional laws of learning could not explain some types of human behavior.29
Rotter and Phares decided to test the proposition that as re-wards cease, a behavior becomes weaker and eventually stops, but be-havior that was learned with intermittent rewards takes longer to die out than behavior rewarded every time it occurred. They used the test of internal/external control developed by Phares in his dissertation. In 1962, Rotter developed a final internal/external control scale con-sisting of 29 forced choice items that was published in 1966.
When a reinforcement is perceived by the subject as fol-lowing some action of his own but not being entirely contingent upon his action, then in our culture, it is typically perceived as the result of luck, change, fate, as under the control of powerful others, or as unpredic-table because of the great complexity of forces surrounding him. When the event is interpreted in this way by an in-dividual, we have labeled this a belief in external control.
22
If the person perceives that the event is contingent upon his own behavior or his own relatively permanent characteristics we have termed this a belief in in-ternal control.3° Rotter's views were consistent with the traditional theories on learn-ing in that he agreed that the streng h and frequency of rewards were important in learning theory. He went a step further, however, in that he believed that whether or not the individual believed his be-havior produced the rewards or punishment was also an important factor in learning.
A number of studies have focused on social class and racial dif-ferences in locus of control. Gore and Rotter (1963) found no social class differences between students who were internally controlled (internals), and those who were externally controlled (externals), at a Southern black college. They noted, however, that the students were quite homogeneous in class status. Franklin (1963), on the other hand, observed significant social class differences in locus of con-trol for non-college age students. Battle and Rotter (1963) found that among black and white sixth and eighth graders, lower class blacks were considerably more external than middle class blacks and upper and lower class whites. Research also indicates that black adults tend to be more external then whites and that the upper classes are more internal than the lower classes IBanfield (1970), Gordon (1980~],
[4PLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
_
Whether interracial schooling is a viable intervention in the
23
cycle of educational inequality for blacks is an important and often debated public policy issue. We are aware of the many problems as-sociated with court-ordered interracial schooling, including public and often violent opposition, high suspension rates among minority students, and questionable evidence that achievement is increased. It seems that interracial schooling was not just a temporary phenomenon designed to appease certain elements of society. Some form of inter-racial schooling has been a reality for thirty years. A study of the factors that influence achievement in this specific environment is not only important because of the circumstances under which interracial schooling occurred, but has major implications for increasing pupil performance in general.
The self-concept influences a variety of other attitudes, values, and behavior patterns. In turn, the self-concept is affected by a range of forces. Are the determinants of self-esteem and locus of control the same for blacks and whites? Do these parental attitudes affect black and white students differently? Those addressing the issues of the self~concept, race, and achievement should find this research helpful.
Blacks are too often viewed as homogeneous in terms of attitudes, values and behavior as well as class status, although to a lesser degree than in the past. This research is also concerned with how black class stratification influences the educational progress of black children, an issue of no minor importance for black economic and social mobility.
24
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter II reviews the literature on the effects of school social class, interracial schooling, socioeconomic status,and family culture on academic achievement. The discussions of the impact of school social class and interracial schooling on achievement analyze the general find-ings of research into these relationships. Other relationships, in-cluding those hypothesized between socioeconomic status and aspects of family culture and race and achievement, are also addressed in the r w iew.
,CLASS A-ND AC4DEI`tIC ACHIEST
Scholars use several approaches in the measurement of school social class. Coleman and the various scholars who reanalyzed the Equality of Educational Opportunity (EE08) findings, used characteristics of student bodies, such as average daily attendance and percentage of students in college curriculum to measure school social class. Other scholars, in-cluding Herriott and St. John (1966), measured the social class of schools in terms of socioeconomic characteristics of students' families, like father's occupational status. A third approach focuses on school characteristics such as curriculum and attributes of the staff. Wilson (1969) looked at socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of student bodies. Determining school social class by social and economic characteristics of the neighborhoods in which schools are located is the least employed and viable method of classification. School desegregation and more is specifically specialty schools are no doubt partially responsible.
Rufus King, a college preparatory specialty high school located in the city of Milwaukee illustrates this point. King, which has re-ceived national recognition for academic excellence, is located in a predominantly black neighborhood. Some would classify the neighborhood in which King is located as lower class, while others, including Rose, consider the area middle class. No matter how the neighborhood is classi-fied, however, the school does not reflect the racial and socioeconomic make-up of the neighborhood.
Prior to the implementation of the school's specialty program in the 1977-78 school year, King was over 99% black. Murphy (1982) reported the racial mix of the school to be 51% white, 478 black, and 2' other minorities. Approximately 20t, 40% and 10' of students come from the lower, middle, and upper income groups, respectively. Parents are gen-erally more educated than the average adult and tend to be white collar workers. Mbst students reside in the areas immediately surrounding the school and on the East side, although a significant percentage of the students live on the near Southwest and Northwest areas of the city. Using student body characteristics, socioeconomic attributes of students' families, and school characteristics such as curriculum, King is at the very least a middle class school.
Using the first three approaches of measuring school social class, King would most likely be considered an upper middle class chool. Con-sidering the geographical location of the school in determining school SES would provide little information about the student body, students'
26
families, or school processes.
1
Nb matter how school social class is defined, scholars generally agree that it has a significant influence on the academic achievement of black and white students. Rose (1976) stated that black student achievement is related to school social class and that cognitive achieve-ment is a function of school social class composition even with other significant inputs held constant. The environment of the lower class school, according to Swanson (1979), is harmful to upwardly mobile stu-dents. He argued that school social class composition has an important influence on achievement due to the attitudes that schools foster. Upper class schools foster attitudes conducive to achievement, like future orientation. In majority black schools, he argued, the majority of the student population tends to be lower class. Middle class black children attending these schools are often exposed to peer influences, such as lack of achievement motivation, that are not conducive to high achieve-ment. Wilson (1969) agreed that racially segregated schools are almost inevitably lower class. As a result of residential segregation, he stated, whites tend to live in socioeconomically homogeneous neighbor-hoods. Blacks, on the other hand, generally live in neighborhoods that are not socioeconomically homogeneous.
In Wilson's study, school social class was determined by the compo-sition of students' neighborhoods. Neighborhood composition was deter-mined by the percentages of residents who were black and who were from families headed by unskilled laborers, domestics, unemployed, or welfare recipients.] Wilson concluded that the social class composition of the
27
primary school had the largest independent effect on sixth-grade reading level.2 He further found that among students attending schools with similar social class composition, neither school racial composition nor characterteristics of students' neighborhoods influenced achievement. This latter finding has important policy implications. It is often ar-gued that educational benefits can not be derived from altering the demo-graphic composition of schools as long as residential segregation con-tinues. Wilson's data suggested, however, that the effect of neighborhood segregation upon achievement is derived entirely from the resulting segregation of neighborhood schools on social class lines. Even in the absence of residential rearrangements, restructuring the composition of schools can be expected to affect achievement.3
Herriott and St. John (1966), like Wilson (1969), found school social class to have an effect on student achievement independent of the social class of the home.4 In their study, school SES referred to the socio-economic status of the aggregated clients of a school rather than of the areas in which schools were located. They argued that the SES of the school and the neighborhood in which it is located are not necessarily the same because people living near schools may not have children attend-ing them and pupils from outside schools' neighborhoods may attend.5 Schools were divided into four SES groups based upon the percentages of students from homes in which (1) the father was an unskilled or semi-skilled worker, (2) the father was a professional person, business execu-tive, or manager, (3) neither parent received an education beyond high school, (4) at least one parent was a college graduate, (5) the combined
28
family income was less than $5,000, and (6) the combined family income was over $10,000.6 Students in schools of high and low SES differed significantly in several respects. In schools in the lowest SES cate-gories, 20% of students had been held back one or more years, 36% were behind in math, and 43% were behind in reading. The corresponding per-centages in schools in the highest SES category were 4, 9, and 10 respec-tively.7 IQ was found to increase with school SES. It should be noted that academic achievement was measured in a somewhat subjective manner. Principals were asked to report the above percentages. Teachers and principals were asked to estimate the proportion of students who were "not interested in learning." Still, Herriott and St. John had sufficient information to enable them to conclude that school social class signifi-cantly affects achievement.
Coleman (1966) concluded that the effects of the school environment on student achievement, whatever its racial or ethnic composition, appear to reseat from the educational proficiency of that student body. In ad-dition to the achievement level of other students, the "realistic" aspi-rations of other students affect achievement.8 In other words, as the educational backgrounds and aspirations of other students increase, a student's academic achievement increases no matter what the individual student's background. These findings have important implications con-cerning school race as a factor in student achievement. While his results showed higher achievement for all racial and ethnic groups in schools with greater percentages of white students, they also indicated that the ap-parent beneficial effects of a student body with a high proportion of
29
white students do not result from school racial composition, but from the higher educational aspirations and better educational backgrounds generally possessed by white students.9 Since white students are more likely than black students to be middle class, it is reasonable to assume that schools with a higher percentage of white students would have student bodies with higher and more "realistic" educational aspirations and better educational backgrounds than black students. The percentage of families owning en-cyclopedias, (2) transfers in and out of school, (3) average daily atten-dance, (4) percent of students in college curriculum, and (5) average hours spent on homework, were used to determine school social class.
Jencks (1972) noted that it is probably wiser to define a "good" school in terms of student body characteristics than in terms of its budget. According to Jencks, once a good school starts taking in '~n-desirable" students (the definition of desirable sometimes pertaining to academic, social, and economic attributes), its standing automati-cally declines.l° He concluded that while an elementary schools' social composition had only a moderate effect on student's cognitive achievement, and school racial composition had only a small effect on black students' later occupational status, this evidence is far more convincing than that supporting the position that expenditures influence academic achieve-ment. The type of friends students are likely to make, the values they are exposed to, and satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the school, are all dependent upon the character of the student body.ll Jencks reanalyzed Coleman's EEOS data and also concluded that the achievement of lower class students, both black and white, was fairly strongly related to
30
the socioeconomic level of their classmates. This usually meant that a student's achievement was also related to the race of his classmates, since black classmates tended to be poor classmates, and vice versa. When the socioeconomic level of a lower class child's classmates was held constant, however, their race had no relationship to achievement.l2 This conclusion is consistent with Coleman's argument that school social class has an effect on academic achievement independent of the individual student's family background. Jencks reported that when race and the economic status of students within schools were controlled for, differen-ces in school policies and resources did Nat significantly affect verbal achievement. Black student achievement was found to be even less related to schools' policies and resources than white student achievement. This conclusion was inconsistent with Coleman's findings.
Cohen, Pettigrew, and Rile' (1972) in a reanalysis of the EROS data, supported the assertion that school social class influences academic per-formance, but contended that the percentage of black students in the school, controlling for the effects of (1) urbanism, (2) parents' edu-cation, (3) structural integrity of the home, (4) family size, (5) home index items, and (6) reading materials in the home, has an effect on academic achievement as great as or greater than that of the social class of the school. Using the same measures of school social class as Coleman, they also found that when school social class variables were considered, the variation in individual verbal ability accounted for by school per-cent black diminished to the vanishing point.l3 They further argued, however, that the unique proportion of variance explained is not the
31
only relevant statistic in regression analysis and that consideration of other aspects of the results might have led to another interpreta-tion. The authors suggested that had the EEOS interpretation been based on the following evidence as opposed to having been based on the unique contribution of the variance explained, Coleman would have con-cluded that the effects of school racial and social class composition were confounded. Cohen et al argued that comparing the unique contribu-tion of the variance explained by percent Negro before and after the addition of the five student environment measures estimated the effects of student environment measures on percent Negro. When the five school social class measures were introduced, the size of the Beta weight for percent Negro increased from -.147 to -.212. This increase was inter-preted as meaning that school social class mediates the effect of school percent Negro.l4 The contention is that a moderate proportion of the variance in school achievement explained by school social class is shared with school percent black, and that while school social class is impor-tant, Coleman overstated its effects as a determinant of achievement.
The United States Senate Select Committee on Equal Educational Op-portunity (1974) indicated that tangible school facilities are much more important in determining academic achievement than Coleman and others who have concluded that school factors, particularly tangible facilities, have little effect on student performance reported. The socioeconomic mix of students in classrooms was cited as one of the school characteristics that increases academic achievement.
Wilson (1959) offered convincing evidence that school social class
i _ .1
32
is positively correlated with academic achievement. Edwards and Wirt (1967), editors of one of the many volumes in which Wilson's article appears, stated that the importance of the Wilson article derives partly from the tightness of its research design, which render it conclusions largely irrefutable, and partly from the information it provides con-cerning peer and school influences on levels of aspiration.l5 In a study of male students in thirteen high schools in and surrounding the San Francisco-Oakland Bay area, Wilson attempted to determine the effects of the school climate on students' educational values and aspirations. School social class was determined by: (1) father's occupation, (2) father's education, (3) mother's education, (4) length of residence in California, (5) race, (6) religion, as well as (7) impressions of the school "atmosphere" obtained while observing students in the halls, classrooms, and on playgrounds.l6
Schools were classified into three groups with A representing the highest class schools and C representing those schools in the lowest strata. Wilson found that 80% of students in class A schools, 75% in class B schools, and only 38% in class C schools wanted to attend college. College aspirations among children of professionals were much higher than the aspirations of manual workers' children in each school group. Wilson attributes much of this difference to attributes of parents. College aspirations varied-by father's occupation within and between school strata. Ninety-three percent of the children of professionals in class A schools as compared to 2/3 of the children of professionals in class C schools had aspirations to attend college. In working class schools, only 1/3 of the sons of manual workers compared to 1/2 of manual workers' sons in
!
33
middle class schools wanted to attend college. Wilson also found that the dominant class character of the school and students' class origins were positively correlated with students' aspirations for college at-tendance.
INTERRACIAL SCHOOLING AND ACHIEVEMENT
What exactly is interracial schooling and what are its societal and educational implications? The meaning of interracial schooling was de-bated even before the courts ordered an end to de jure segregation. Sometimes it is the contention that a school district is desegregated when one race schools are eliminated. Scholars argue that school dis-tricts are segregated unless each school reflects the racial makeup of the area in which the district is located. If the area in which the district is located is 25% black, for example, each school should have a black enrollment of approximately 25%. Simply speaking, then, desegrega-tion is considered an end to racial segregation.
The issue, however, is not that simple. Winy proponents of inter-racial schooling view school integration as a step beyond desegregation in terms of the attainment of social equality for blacks. Integration often refers to processes within schools. Schools have been considered desegregated but not integrated. Black and white students may be segre-gated by classrooms within schools. Some researchers argue that if cul-tural understanding and exchange are not promoted, schools are not inte-grated.
Voluntary city/suburban transfer plans, the focus of this discussion.
34
are by no means considered either desegregation or integration. These programs involve too few students to realistically be viewed as such. They have, in many cases, however, greatly altered the school environ-ments of black students in terms of racial and social class mix. The school environments of white students are relatively unaffected by the small increases in black students.
The findings on the effects of city/suburban transfer programs and interracial schooling in general, on academic achievement are mixed. St. John (1975), Weinberg (1975), and Crain and Mahard (1978) provided ex-tensive reviews on research investigating the relationships between inter-racial schooling and academic achievement. Crain and Chard reviewed nine studies of voluntary plans and reported that only two studies showed posi-tive results. One of these was a study of Boston's Operation Exodus and the other was Zdep's (1971) study of the Newark/Verona city suburban transfer program. The St. John and Weinberg reviews looked at a total of twelve studies of voluntary programs and found positive results in nine. The eleven studies found to have positive results by Crain and Mahard (1978), Weinberg (1975), ant St. John (1975) included three of Project Concern in Connecticut, Clinton's (1969) study, one by Samuels (1971), and a study performed by Helter (1972). Studies of METCO and Project Concern in Rochester, New York, also showed achievement gains for black students. Crain and Mahard (1978) found that two studies of ME] W and one of the Project Concern in Rochester, New York, showed negative or no effects on achievement.
St. John Weinberg, and Crain and Mahard come to very different con-clusions about the effectiveness of voluntary city/suburban transfer
3S
programs in raising black student achievement. St. John (1975) con-cluded that they have neither a positive nor negative effect on black student achievement, while Weinberg (1975) found interracial schooling to have an over-all positive effect. Crain and Mahard concluded that "sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.''l7
Why have scholars come to such different conclusions? According to Bradley and Bradley (1977), since Weinberg and St. John drew conflict-ing conclusions, both advocates and opponents of desegregation have been able to present evidence in support of their positions. Pettigrew, Useem, Normand and Smith (1966) cited a number of reasons why research-ers, particularly Armor, found negative results. They stated that Armor selectively reviewed only studies showing negative results. Addition-ally, Armor did not discuss (1) mitigating circumstances, (23 the fact that services to transfer blacks were actually reduced at the time of desegregation in three of the districts he studied, (3) findings of positive results in several of the programs reviewed, and t4) the possi-bility that white student achievement may have increased. Dual suc-cesses are not reported. They further stated that gains should not have to be "significantly" greater for desegregation to be viewed as success-ful in terms of increasing achievement. Lack of adequate control [Schellenberg and Halterman (1976)], and small sample size have also been cited as reasons for discrepancies in results.
While the nature of the impact of interracial schowling on black student achievement remains in question, there is general agreement that white students experience no negative effects. Z6ep (1971) analyzed a
36
voluntary city/suburban transfer program that began in 1968 involving a large eastern city and one of its suburbs. Thirty black children from the city were transported to suburban schools for a one-year trial period. The design of the program provided for the evaluation of any educational and behavioral outcome for both city and suburban children. black students in grades one through five were selected from 170 volunteers through a lottery procedure initiated by city school of-ficials. The black control group was selected from children whose par-ents had given permission for them to participate in the program, but who were not selected. The black experimental and control groups were matched by age, sex, and grade levels. The vice principal of the city school stated that to her knowledge, the children in both groups were representative of other residents of the neighborhood in which the city school was located in terms of SES and that neither group contained children who had behavioral or emotional problems.l8
Suburban classes not containing inner city children were compared to the classes in which black students were enrolled. When the black children arrived at the suburban school, they were met by a black teacher who was to provide assistance in making the transition to suburban class-rooms, if necessary. The black teacher worked on a cooperative basis with suburban teachers and gave remedial help when needed. The suburban com-munity is located approximately five miles from the city, and in 1968, had a population of about 15,000. Most of the suburban residents were white and a large percentage were high school and college graduates. Over 803 of the graduates from the local high school attended 2 and 4-year
Thirty-eight
a group of
37
universities or colleges.
Crain and Mahard (1978) noted a strong quality of schooling effect in the program. The overwhelming majority of students in the city school district were black and of low SES origins. In the sending city school, makeshift classrooms had been added and classes were overcrowded. First grade students only attended classes for half a day. The student-teacher ratio for reading instruction in the city school was often as high as 33:1 compared to a student-teacher ratio of 11:1 in the suburban school.l9 The mathematics taught in the suburban school was more con-temporary than that taught in the city school. Efforts were reportedly made to encourage black students to become part of the suburban school social climate. About 40 suburban families contributed to these efforts. Each of the black students had lunch at one of his/her suburban class-mates' houses every day.
Zdep's analyses showed that the program had positive effects on black student achievement. Post-test results showed significant achievement differences in reading, mathematics, and listening skills between children who remained in the inner city school and those transferred to the sub-urban school at the first grade level. For second grade students, there were also differences in favor of the transfer students, but they were not statistically significant. No significant differences in achievement by sex were reported. Results also showed that there were no significant achievement differences found between suburban students in classes con-taining city children and those not containing city children.
Zdep concluded that a poor black child will benefit more from
38
attending school with middle class children, white or black,-than he would from attending school with poor children.He also concluded that a black child, being more sensitive to peer influences, will benefit in an in-tegrated class with middle class whites, while white children would suffer few if any negative effects.20 Carlson (1974) reported that pub-lic opposition in Verona, the suburb of Newark, New Jersey that was the focus of Zdep's study, caused the study to be terminated.
The lETCO program in Boston, Massachusetts and Project Concern in Hartford, Connecticut, have been the subjects of a number of investiga-tions. The most widely published study of METCO was conducted by Armor (1972).
f]TCO began in 1966. Armor's analysis covered the period from October 1968 to May 1970. During that time, TACO involved the transfer of approximately 1,500 black students in all grade levels from Boston schools to 28 suburban communities. The design of the study was longi-tudinal. All students participating in the program underwent achievement testing in October 1968 and May 1969. Junior and senior high school students were administered questionnaires in October 1968, Hey 1969, and }lay 1970, which measured academic performance, aspirations and self-concept, attitudes toward and relationships with white students, and attitudes toward the program. The control group consisted of siblings of transfer students matched by grade level and sex, thereby controlling for the effects of family background characteristics.
Armor's results showed a pattern of higher achievement gains for transfer students, but the differences were not statistically significant.
39
Generally, increases in reading achievement were greater for elementary, secondary, and high school transfer students than for control students. For fifth and sixth graders, however, this trend was reversed. The con-trol group outgained the transfer group, but again, the differences were not significant. It should be noted that the control group of fifth and sixth graders had higher initial achievement scores than the transfer students.
halberg (1971) confirmed ArmDr's findings of no significant achieve-ment effects associated with AMMO. Armor's and lYalberg's findings were disputed by Orfield (1973) and Useem (1971). Blseem argued that due to non-response, Armor's sandpile of siblings was too small and non-random to constitute an adequate control group. Weinberg (1977) stated, however, that evidence does not indicate that a more adequate control group would have made a difference in Annor's results. Armor himself, in light of subsequent findings showing greater achievement gains for the transfer group than the control group, qualified his position.21
While Armor did not observe any significant achievement gains for transfer students, tEIC0 students apparently derived long-term educa-tional benefits. Seniors from the 1970 graduating class in the l£TCO program and in the contrD1 group were contacted in the spring of 1972 as part of an effort to assess the effects of the program on future educa-tional opportunities. Eighty-four percent of the transfer graduates ha" enrolled in colleges compared to only 56 percent of the graduates in the control group. By the end of the second year of college, only 59 percent of the transfer group still attended college compared to 56 percent of
40
the control students. This obviously indicates a higher dropout rate for transfer students. Still, more of the transfer students had some college than did control students. The METOO program appears to have had a very significant effect on college attendance.22 Transfer students also enrolled in higher quality colleges. Fifty-six percent of METCO graduates attended regular four-hear colleges compared to 38 percent of non-transfer graduates. Forty-seven percent of graduates from the trans-fer g,~up were enrolled in universities offering graduate degrees compared to only 12 percent of graduates from the control group.
The Useem (1971) and Meltzer (1977) studies of METCO concentrated more on racial attitudes and interpersonal cognitive skills than on aca-demic achievement. Meltzer found that interpersonal cognitive skills were more developed the longer students attended interracial classrooms and that apparently black students, out of social necessity, learn earli-er than white students to get along with members of the opposite race, which would account for the findings that white students' interpersonal skills increased more than blacks. In the Useem study, one third of white sample students had at least one black close friend. In schools where the principal positively sanctioned METCO and attempted to promote racial harmony, upper and middle class white students tended to have more positive attitudes towards the program.23
Hartford's Project Concern began in 1966 when 266 Hartford school children were voluntarily transferred to 34 schools in five affluent sub-urbs of Hartford. Transfer students were randomly selected by classroom units from schools with non-white student populations of at least 85~.
41
The control group was selected in the same fashion as the transfer group and consisted of 305 students remaining in the city schools.24 Mahan and Flahan (1970) contended that their finding of positive results could not be attributed to differences in home and social class related student characteristics. In the transfer group, 50% of students were from one-parent homes; 76% hat four or more siblings; 76' of parents were born in the South or in the Islands; and more than 30% of families were totally dependent upon welfare payments for support.25
In the fall of 1966, spring 1967, fall 1967 and spring 1968, experi-mental and control students were administered reading, mathematics, and personality tests. In grades K through 3, the transfer group surpassed the control group in the following areas:
(1) Increased verbal facility, both in oral communication and in response to standardized tests.
(2) Development in perceptual, space, and motor skills increased.
(3) The ability to see (or, at least, express) verbal relationships and to categorize verbal concepts showed significant relative growth. In the following areas, Ilahan and M6han found no significant differences between experimental and control groups:
(1) Numerical skills were not accelerated.
(2) There was no decrease in anxiety level.
(3) There was no measured difference between the groups in their expression of understanding of social expectations or of judgement in-volving common sense.26
Flahan's (1968) article highlighted aspects of Project Concern not
42
discussed in the Flahan and Mahan (1970) study including educational sup-port aspects of the program. }'ahan stated that the research implications are greater for Project Concern than the White Plains, MITCH, and Rochester programs due to the strength of its research design, and careful imple-mentation of both program and evaluative aspects of the study. Nbn-transfer students were provided a support team consisting of a teacher and paraprofessional aides while the other group had no supplements to suburban school resources in order to determine whether suburban inter-racial schooling, supportive assistance, or both, were responsible for increases in achievement.
Growth rates in verbal and numerical achievement were reported for both DISCO and Project Concern students. There was also a significant increase in IQ for Project Concern students. Even when controls received intensive compensatory treatment, the growth pattern in achievement and mental ability of transfer students was clearly superior to that of con-trols. Secondly, there was no evidence to suggest that white student achieve-ment decreases when educationally disadvantaged black students are placed in the classroom. Finally, city/suburban transfer is probably more effective at primary rather than higher grade levels.27
llahan also commented on the social adjustment of black students attending suburban schools. Sixty-eight percent of transfer students par-ticipated in after school activities and suburban teachers reported that 70 percent of transfer students made superior social adjustment.28
Grain and Flahard (1978) considered Project Concern as virtually mandatory and did not regard the Ffahan and Mahan (1968) study as showing
lit -
43
positive results. St. John (1975), however, felt that the fact that con-trol and experimental groups were comparable and the design called for a comparison between students receiving and not receiving supplemental aid added credibility to the findings. She reported greater gains for trans-fer students receiving supplemental aid than transfer students not re-ceiving assistance and that there was no evidence that supplemental educa-tional assistance benefited black students remaining in the inner city.Z9
Weinberg C1977) reviewed five studies of Project Concern, and in four of the five studies, greater achievement gains were reported for transfer students. Three of the studies were done by one or both of the Mahans, so it is logical that similar results would be found. Wood (1969) studied academic achievement among minority students in Project Concern a year after th'~program started using a control sample matched on WISC-Verbal I.Q. scores. The following are Wood's findings for the experi-mental group: (1) Grades K-l--Achievement in arithmetic, vocabulary, and verbal I.Q. increased; (2) Grades 2-3--Total performance on I.Q. in-creased significantly; (3) Grades 4-5--Vocabulary scores increased significantly. While gains were not sweeping, the overall direction was clear. The academic achievement of white children in the receiving schools was unaffected.30 Weinberg found Levy's study of Project Con-cern in suburban Cheshire inconclusive due to conflicting results.
Both Goldberg (1965) and M6han (1968) reported that Rochester, New York's city/suburban transfer program produced positive results. The city/suburban plan is only one aspect of Rochester's desegregation program. In February 1964, after the New York State Commissioner of
44
Education directed all New York State school systems to submit desegre-gation plans, Rochester implemented its Open Enrollment Plan. Under the program, each of the city's elementary schools was required to have some black students. The Voluntary Extended Hbme Zone or Triad Plan was also implemented. Under this program, attendance zones were enlarged so that a zone encompassed three contiguous schools. Children who had attended schools in any of the original zones were not displaced; however, child-ren who lived anywhere in the enlarged zones could attend any of the three schools. Goldberg felt that this plan preserved the basic values of the neighborhood school policy while still reducing racial isolation. Services to inner city schools were increased. Extensive involvement in pre-school programs, development of vocational and occupational oppor-tunities, and increased compensatory programs were made available in addition to the Triad and Open Enrollment plans.31
In the summer of 1964, 25 inner-city children attended six different primary schools in a suburban district adjacent to Rochester. Students were selected for participation on the basis of pupil readiness, teach-er's opinions of whether pupils could benefit from the experience, and parents' willingness to have their children participate. Parents were interviewed by a team of professionals from the New York State Department of Education.
Before Goldberg was contacted by the president of the school board of West Irondequoit, about 6,000 students attended West Irondequoit schools, of which only six were non-white. The degree of racial isola-tion in the suburb no doubt was part of their rationale (according to
45
Goldberg), for participating in a city/suburban transfer program. Goldberg made it clear that West Irondequoit was more interested in the "extratribal experiences," that Lincoln (1969) argued would benefit white and black children, than in whether desegregation would result in increased achievement for black students. He reported that:
The West Irondequoit schools came to realize that in their culturally advantaged schools, they were depriving their children of a rich cultural experience and understanding the basic principles of democracy.32 In its April 1965 newsletter, the West Irondequoit School Board stated that: "The Board believes that the presence in a single school of children from varied racial, cultural, socioeconomic and religious back-grounds is an important element in the preparation of young people for active participation in the social and political affairs of our democracy.~33
Goldberg was concerned with the social and cultural benefits de-rived from interracial schooling. Addressing the issue of metropolitan planm ng, he stated that the key to suburban cooperation with an urban system is the suburb's evaluation of the commitment of the urban system and that had Rochester not made early attempts to desegregate and up-grade its schools, West Irondequoit would not have been interested in urban/suburban educational cooperation.34
In addition to the School Board's sanction of the program, support included informational meetings for suburban teachers, exchange meetings of city and suburban teachers, and transfer parent conferences to ex-plain the purposes of the plan and discuss its details. The suburban
-
46
community indicated general acceptance of the program and made efforts to increase social acceptance. Parents of transfer students attended PTA meetings regularly and often attended coffee hours with suburban parents.35 There was, however, some suburban opposition. In the second year, the program was expanded to 35 students. Two other suburbs joined the program, and in 1970, 581 Rochester students participated in the transfer program.
In a 1970 study that compared black students in Rochester schools offering compensatory education, students in city schools without com-pensatory education, and students in the city/suburban transfer program, the Division of Planning and Research, City School District, New York, concluded that there were no differences in achievement between blacks in schools with compensatory education and city/suburban transfer stu-dents and that academic achievement depended on the quality of enrich-ment programs provided by school systems. Students in schools not receiving compensatory assistance (a lower pupil-teacher ratio and teach-er's aides) performed lower than the other two groups.
Samuels (1972) investigated Project Pocus (compensatory), Project Concern gNew Haven's city/suburban transfer program), and non-compensa-tory programs in Connecticut in order to determine their effectiveness in increasing (1) word knowledge, (2) word analysis,(3) reading, (4) total reading, (5) mathematics, and (6) self-image.36 Fifty-one Project Focus, thirty-seven Project Concern and fifty students who received no compensatory education (comparative group) were randomly sleeted to participate in the study.
47
The Project Focus students attended schools in New Haven. Their classrooms were self-contained, but they were allowed to attend other classes when assistance in reading, math, and other areas was needed. An attempt was made to meet the academic, cultural, and social-psychological needs of Project Focus students by employing special teachers in those areas. From 1969 to 1971, almost one million dollars over the regular per pupil expenditures was devoted to this program.
Project Concern began in the 1969-70 school year. The first graders involved in the program attended regular suburban classes and were pro-vided academic and psychological support as needed. Additionally, a support team, consisting of a teacher and a teacher's aide who provided academic and psychological support, accompanied groups of twenty-five students to various suburban schools.
In the spring of 1969, all three groups were given the Monroe Read-ing Aptitude Test to determine if their reading levels were equivalent at the kindergarten level. Students were also matched by age and sex. Post-tests in academic achievement and self-image were administered to the three groups of students in May 1971. The Metropolitan Achievement Test-Primary 1 was utilized as the measure of academic achievement. Self-image was measured by "All About Me," a test often employed by New Haven. Project Concern students scored significantly higher than the other two groups in reading. Results also showed that transfers had a more positive self-image.
According to Samuels, the emphasis placed upon reading in the sub-urban primary grades, the extra attention placed upon traditional verbal
48
skills in suburban childrenst homes, the level of confidence that sub-urban teachers have in their students' ability, the greater number of college graduates among suburban parents, and the intervention of city supportive teams may very well have contributed to the reading success of transfer students and to their trend of having a more positive self-image.37 Originally, it was hypothesized that Project Concern students would perform better than the other two groups in mathematics, but the results did not show this to be the case. One possible explanation is the intense compensatory education provided Project Focus students. Another possible explanation is that the comparison group attended a "marginal school," not yet an "inner city" or disadvantaged school in terms of social and economic status and racial composition.38
Samuels' results, based on a two-year study, showed that New Haven's Project Concern had a positive effect on the achievement of inner-city students and was therefore an effective educational intervention.
Operation Exodus in Boston is another voluntary city/suburban pro-gram in which positive results on achievement were found. Volunteers for the program were recruited by a private black parent's organization. Crain and }chard (1978) stated that a program with an ideological com-munity organization behind it may have appealed to a very different set of parents than a plan run by public school authorities, but they do not say in what respect parents would differ. In all likelihood, Operation Exodus parents were middle-class and community-minded.
CHAPTER 220
Chapter 220 in Milwaukee has not received the national attention
49
that METRO, Hartford's Project Concern, and Rochester's Project Con-cern have in the literature on desegregation and academic achievement. Palay (1978) and Kritek (1977) studied the 220 program, but the focus of these studies was not academic achievement.
In January 1975, Wisconsin State Representative Dennis Conta pro-posed a plan to establish a metropolitan school district to the Wiscon-sin State Legislature. The plan entailed merging Whitefish Bay and Shorewood High Schools with Lincoln and Riverside High Schools to form one district, the East Shore School District. The merger was to take place in September 1977. Students wishing to remain in neighborhood schools could do so. Students could also transfer part-time to other schools and full-time transfers could be made with East Shore Board authorization. Conta felt that the distinctions between racial group membership, low socioeconomic status, and low achievement are often overlooked, and that integration could serve important functions not directly related to improving educational skills, and it can and should be used to maximize the learning capabilities of children. Interracial schooling should be guided by learning potential and achievement level rather than by racial characteristics.
The Conta plan met with suburban opposition. Shortly after the proposal was introduced, a number of North Shore community groups voiced their disapproval. The Shorewood School Board and the Whitefish Bay and Shorewood Village Boards agreed to share expenses to hire a lobbyist against the plan.40
Kritek reported that a number of suburban district were over-
-
50
whelmingly opposed to a city/suburban interracial schooling plan. Several districts held advisory referenda and in each case,voluntary city/suburban transfer was voted against. In one district, a school board approved a transfer plan after citizens had voted not to implement a plan. Citizens attempted to have school board members recalled. In another instance, a suburban City Council passed a resolution urging the school board to reconsider its plan to accept 30 }Milwaukee transfer students. Mounting public pressure resulted in a hearing at which an alderman and the mayor rejected the plan. Two days later, the Ebard reconsidered and rejected the plan. In Brown Deer, citizens were op-posed to the program 3 to 1.41 Arguments against transfer plans included the view that they would increase class size, disciplinary problems would be created, fuel would be wasted transporting students, and that minority students would be more comfortable in Milwaukee with their peers than in strange surroundings.42
Conta's original plan was never passed. Assembly Bill 1020A became Chapter 220 effective Hey 4, 1976. Chapter 220 provides financial incentives to school districts encouraging transfers between schools or school districts that promote cultural and racial integration. Although 220 also provides for suburban students to attend Milwaukee public schools, most 220 students are black and transfer to suburban schools.
Under Chapter 220,each Wisconsin school district was required to have a planning council selected by school boards and consisting of five members: the superintendent, three school board members, and one citi-zen-at-large. If a suburban planning council recommended participation,
it met with its Milwaukee counterpart to set guidelines for the de-velopment of a plan. The joint plan was submitted to the suburban school board and if approved, was then considered by the Milwaukee school board.
The Nicolet High School District was the first to approve a plan. Whitefish Bay was the second district, and Shorewood, the third. The other districts that participated during the 1976-1977 school year ap-proved plans by the end of July. Brown Deer proposed the most ambitious plan in terms of the number of transfer students to be accepted.
-MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE-
See Part 2, 3, and 4 or E-Mail:dr.pamsm@sbcglobal.net >
Copyright by Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone, 1985,1998
All Rights Reserved
Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
E-mail:
Phone: 414-934-9804
FAX: 414-934-9878
http://leontodd.blogspot.com/2010/12/chapter-220-milwaukee-inter-district.html
No comments:
Post a Comment