The Evolution of Disability Rights Movements: Great Britain and the United States

The Evolution of Disability Rights Movements: Great Britain and the United States

Joseph Staszak

“Know your limits, but never stop trying to break them,” said Kyle Maynard, a man born with congenital amputation, which means that his arms stopped forming at his elbows and his legs stopped forming at his knees. This however did not stop him from a motivational speaker, best selling author, entrepreneur, award-winning extreme athlete, and the first man to crawl to the summit of Mount Kilimanjaro[1]. The rights of people with disabilities have evolved rapidly over the past hundred years, specifically in the last thirty years, both within the United States and Great Britain. These two movements have similarities connecting the two, but appear to develop independently of one another.

It is important to understand two different things when discussing the history of disability rights and the discourse as a whole. The first is the two different models of disability, one being the medical model of disability and the other being the social model of disability. The medical model contends that individuals with disabilities are broken and that they need to be fixed or cured, whereas this social model contends that individuals with disabilities are not broken but instead handicapped by their environment. An example of the medical model would be certain very dangerous medical procedures such as chelation.[2] Since there is no actual “cure” for autism these medical procedures can cause a lot of damage to the individual that is receiving them. An example of the social model would be if a building does not have a ramp or elevator for an individual who uses a wheelchair. These two models have been used to define “disability” throughout U.S. disability history and separate the latter stages of the movement.

The second thing is the language that is used throughout history is very offensive and outdated and while these words are used in this paper they are not meant to be used in a harmful and demeaning way, but instead to give the reader a greater context to the way the individuals with disabilities have been treated throughout history.

Historically disability history focuses on learning about the different laws and acts, and how these ideas progress. However, not much time has been spent looking more in depth into the larger discourse of disability rights as well as how this discourse progressed and how it led to effective change. This fostered interest in if there might be any connection or similarities between the way that the disability rights movement progresses in the United States to how it developed overseas, and more specifically in a country relatively similar to the United States, Great Britain. More specifically, how did the disability rights movement with the United States evolve? How did the disability rights movement in Great Britain evolve over time? And were there any connections between these two movements, and if so what are they?

There is not a large variety of literature about the history of the disability rights movements in both the United States and Great Britain as they are relatively recent movements, only having progressed in the last fifty or so years. There is some literature regarding theories of disability, and the normalcy of disability. People, such Elizabeth Barnes[3] who writes about the social model of disability, and Lennard J Davis,[4] who writes about how normalization of individuals with disabilities within society has led to positive changes being brought about. These books, along with speeches by famous disability rights activists such as Judith Heumann and the Netflix documentary Crip Camp: A Disability Revolution, have all aided in the research process in defining the evolution of these movements and how they compare to one another.[5]

The disability rights movement in the United States has evolved much more rapidly than the subsequent movement in Great Britain, with landmark legislation such as the Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Developmentally Disabled Assistance and Bill of Rights Act (DD Act) of 1975, The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and many others coming before the major landmark decisions in the United Kingdom. The United States and Great Britain both see the beginning of their disability rights movements begin with a heavy focus on physically disabled veterans after World War two. However, the exposure of the Willowbrook Institution ushers in a new wave of disability rights within the United States, one that focuses on individuals with neurological disabilities, before the subsequent movement evolution inside Great Britain. The U.S. remains ahead of Great Britain with its evolution of disability rights for the remainder of the 20th century and into the 21st century.

This paper will begin to dive deeper into the progression of the disability rights movement within the United States and then look towards Great Britain and its evolution. It will discuss the different waves of the movement and how the discourse present in the United States during the 20th century leading up to the passage of the ADA. Next this paper will look at the way that the disability rights Movement within Great Britain develops, from mainly focusing on ex-service men with physical disabilities, to then sudden shift to focusing on individuals with more neurological and mental disabilities.

Disability rights movement within the United States

United States history is filled with many different rights movements that all seemingly overlap with one another. The Disability Rights movement is one of these, finding its beginning in the middle part of the 20th century, with a heavy focus on the veterans that had been disabled in World War 2. Laws and organizations form to help these individuals reintegrate back into society after the war and begin the normalization of individuals with physical disabilities, which leads to the eventual story of the Willowbrook institution. This story begins to shine the light on individuals with cerebral disabilities, such as autism, down syndrome, and many others. From the outcry of these individuals and more specifically their families the attention becomes on how they can be “cured” or “fixed” and brought back into society. It is not until these individuals begin to speak up on their own, that there is a real shift not only in policy but attitude and mindset within society. This continues with the discussion around independent living, which will begin the third and final era of disability rights within the United States, the self-advocacy era. This all culminates in the passing of the ADA in 1990, which marks a new beginning for individuals with disabilities in speaking up for themselves and how they can be integrated into society as a whole.

One of the key areas of overlap that the United States has in its disability rights movement with Great Britain is the early focus on veterans and ex-service men that had become physically disabled following World War two. This is where we see some of the first rhetoric of the medical model of disability, in an article published in the New York Times in 1946, Howard A. Rusk M.D. writes “Today public attention is focused on the young men of America who are returning from war disabled and handicapped. They number in the thousands.”[6] This highlights just how much of a focus this was during this time, it was a large part of the discussion happening, so much so that it was a full page article within the New York Times. Rusk makes it known how important it is to have systems in place that can help physically disabled veterans, who were the main group that was being advocated for during this time.

We see some of this help that had been put into place in the form of the Purple Heart Unit, also known as the Military Order of the Purple Heart, which is a national veterans organization. In an article about the Purple Heart Unit, the New York Times writes:

“The Military Order of the Purple Heart, nation-wide veterans’ organization, will embark on a peacetime program to speed veterans housing and to provide additional benefits for disabled servicemen, it was announced yesterday by the order’s new national commander Ray Dorris of Portland Ore…The housing program will take precedence over all other programs, Mr. Dorris said, adding that he would confer this week with Housing Expedite Wilson W. Wyatt and officials of the War Assets Administration in Washington on the granting of priorities on surplus equipment needed to complete the partially constructed housing projects.”[7]

This is one of the key organizations at the time putting a focus on helping disabled veterans. This is such a big and important undertaking that the organization is working with the U.S. government to try and get the necessary funding and supplies as quickly as possible. This is their paramount objective, surpassing all others, showing just how important the rights of the disabled veterans were during this time. After this there is a steady amount of legislation that is passed and signed to help disabled veterans, but the next evolution in the disability rights movement begins in the mid-1960s.

In 1965 Senator Robert F. Kennedy made an unannounced visit to one of the biggest institutions for individuals with neurological disabilities at the time, Willowbrook located in upstate New York. While there, Senator Kennedy observed some of the most inhumane and deplorable living conditions imaginable. After his visit to Willowbrook, Senator Kennedy testified at a committee hearing, which resulted in an investigation in the state institution. When speaking on the institution Kennedy had this to say “We hear a great deal these days about civil rights and civil liberties and equality of opportunity and justice … But there are no civil rights for young retarded adults when they are denied the protection of the State Education Law, which commands that all other children must receive an education.”[8] This was the first time that a major public figure spoke up in regards to disability rights in the United States. This would not be the last time that Willowbrook was public news, as around five years later a reporter named Geraldo Rivera ran a documentary that showed the deplorable conditions within Willowbrook. This would spark major outrage, and lead to a new nationwide conversation about the effectiveness and moral need for these large state institutions.

While it would take another five years for state institutions to begin to change with their unimaginable conditions, the interview of Bernard Carabello, this would mark the 1970s, the next evolution of the disability rights movement. The United States enters into its second wave of its Disability Rights Movement, which is the Parent wave, which sees the parents of the individuals with disabilities to be the advocates for their children, and puts the emphasis on helping and “fixing” individuals with disabilities. While this is a step in the right direction it still creates numerous problems and harmful stereotypes. The medical model of disability, which paints individuals with disabilities as “broken” and in need of being “fixed”, is still very much prevalent during this time. This period was very short as it only lasted a few years, but it is a crucial step in the evolution of the disability rights movement within the United States, as it moves the spotlight closer to the individuals with disabilities themselves which ultimately marks the final evolution of this movement.

While the independent living model was the first time that the idea of things such as civil rights would be discussed in regards to individuals with disabilities, a few years before this there was discourse around hiring individuals with disabilities into the workforce. In an article about how the year the employment market for individuals with disabilities is starting to become more normalized in society, Howard Rusk writes, “Throughout the country, community programs for the mentally retarded have been slowly demonstrating the truth of the slogan of the National Association for Retarded Children – ‘the retarded can be helped.”[9] While Robert Kennedy’s visit to Willowbrook was mainly about individuals living there and the inhumane conditions of the state institutions, this discourse is clearly more geared towards helping adults, people who are out of these state institutions, and how they can start to become included within society as a large.

This in turn would create a space for a lot of people such as self-advocates and the families of individuals with disabilities to begin talking about similar issues in regards to disabilities.  In their article Romel Mackelprand and Richard Slasgiver talk about the shift that occurred at the beginning of the 1970s, “The disability movement matures with the development of the independent living concept in the early 1970s. Initially led by people such Lex Frieden, Judy Heumann, and Ed Roberts, independent living applied the minority model as the foundation of the political process of gaining the civil rights of peoples with disabilities.”[10] These are just some of the prominent figures that come about and make names for themselves as Disability Rights activists during the early parts of the movement. The minority model, also known as the social model of disability, is something that is very important to modern disability rights activists, as it states that people with disabilities are not “disabled” by their bodies but by the “able-bodied” society that they live in. This is also referred to as the Social Model of Disability and provides a pivotal framework for discussing changes surrounding disability. This is the first large step into a new evolution of the disability rights movement, where the individuals with disabilities themselves are the ones advocating for change and what is best for them.

One of the major issues that was seen in these institutions was forced sterilization, in which individuals with disabilities were viewed by the public as not being able to contribute to society. An interesting case of this is seen outside of institutions, where parents of three kids all with disabilities are fighting to have them sterilized, however no hospital or medical facility near them would perform the procedure, since there were massive gains made by individuals in protecting others with disabilities from being forcefully sterilized. The parents took their argument to court and “thwarting them, either directly or indirectly, have been the tremendous gains made by the champions of individual freedoms and rights who have won many successes in trying to protect the mentally retarded who are capable of functioning independently in society.”[11] This is the perfect example of how the parent wave of disability and the medical model of disability which arose from the professional wave had very negative impacts on individuals with disabilities. This does however cause massive shifts that are happening during this time, as forced sterilizations, especially for those under the age of 21, were being rejected and more control and rights were being given to those with disabilities.

In the area of education, there are also discussions happening during the 1970s about making sure that students with disabilities are more included. In 1974 the New Jersey legislature began debating the idea of passing legislation that would improve the conditions of students with disabilities in schools. In an article published by the New York Times an unnamed author writes “But proponents of improved education for the retarded children contend that the special session also provides the lawmakers with an ideal chance to require local school districts to install programs for youngsters with severe mental handicaps.”[12] Here it becomes clear just how inclusive the conversation has become. In just a few short years the narrative has switched from individuals with disabilities needing to be kept aside and isolated, to know there is a push for them to become integrated into schools, and as this article states, the push is for even those with neurological disabilities as well as just physical disabilities. This highlights just how much it took for people to fight for more protections for students with disabilities, specifically within schools. 

We continue to see the push for protections for individuals with disabilities at the state level, specifically in New Jersey. In his article titled Disabled Children Get New State Aid, Martin Whaldron writes, “This new policy is only one of several that reflect the quiet revolution underway in the state to protect the rights of New Jersey’s mentally ill, handicapped and ‘developmentally impaired’ residents. Some of these policies reflect an almost complete change in attitudes.”[13] This sudden shift in attitude comes from the work of many activists such but in particular, Judith Huemann is the most prominent of them, especially as she becomes famous for her work in New York City. She became famous for her self-advocacy in being the first person in a wheelchair to obtain a teaching license in New York, something that she had to fight very hard to get.

 There are also efforts at a national level as well to help give rights to individuals with disabilities, especially the right to education. In her article for the New York Times, Judy Glass writes about the changes that are arising out of the conversations about individuals with more neurological disabilities, such as learning disabilities. She writes, “Ten or 15 years ago, the term ‘learning disabled’ as a handicap was largely unheard of… five years ago, the learning disabled children were defined more by exclusion than by objective criteria.”[14] This is another example of the rapid change that occurred in this time frame, as the movement evolves more and more individuals begin to become involved in the movement. The term disability has not crossed over into the realm of education adding another step in ensuring the rights for those with disabilities.

There were also some setbacks that accompanied the disability rights movement, one of the biggest came in April of 1981, in which the Supreme Court ruled:

“that a Federal “bill of rights” for the mentally retarded enacted six years ago, did not oblige states to provide any particular level of care or training for retarded people in state institutions… In the case involving the retarded, the appeals court had ruled that the 1200 residents of Pennhurst, a state institution, were being deprived of their right to treatment.”[15]

This was a huge deal at the time as it further restricted the rights of individuals with disabilities who were still living within these institutions. These institutions were mistreating these individuals and with these laws saying that individuals with disabilities did not need to have their caretakers properly trained, it would only further their mistreatment. It is an unfortunate step backwards in this movement, but it contributes to the continued movement to get these institutions shut down and to get individuals with disabilities out of them and living on their own.

The representation of individuals with disabilities in public spaces went a very long way in helping the Disability Rights Movement within the United States. It gave those with disabilities someone that they could see themselves in, and feel like they were a part of society as a whole. This representation really started to take shape as we head into the late 1980s and early 1990s. One prominent figure at this time was Bob Dole, the Senate Republican leader who made it known that he was an individual with a disability, which was something that had not been discussed before.  In an article from 1986, Dole is quoted as saying:

“I can’t do buttons like you do, just feel and push them in there… I’ve got to be able to see the hole and sort of push the button in. The trouble is these buttons on this shirt are just about a fraction too high, so it’s very hard to do that. So every day you get a little test; you’re tested.”[16]

Dole at the time dealt with many physical disabilities, the main one being all the damage that he has suffered to his right arm. This was one of the first times that someone this prominent and well known within the United States government began advocating for himself as an individual with a disability. This is where we begin to enter into the final stage of the evolution of the disability rights movement, where these issues are not something that is being discussed within the federal government, and changes being implemented on a national scale, whereas before changes were often made on a smaller scale, either by state or even more local.

As the disability rights movement enters into its final stages there is now an even bigger push to help get individuals with disabilities normalized and integrated into society. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was passed in late 1989 and was set into law in 1990. The New York Times wrote this when discussing the new act, “The act was considered by its supporters to be one of the most sweeping pieces of civil rights legislation in decades. It extended throughout private industry a prohibition against discrimination toward the disabled by government agencies and companies that receive government contracts.”[17] The ADA was a monumental piece of legislation in regards to the disability rights movement in the United States resulting in federal mandates that made every aspect of society more accessible to those with a disability. It comes after years of hard work by many people and paved the road for the future legislation that would be passed in the years to come.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) marked a true turning point in the American disability rights movement, as it is one of the first acts passed that was focused on helping individuals with disabilities be able to feel a part of larger society. Steve Holmes a writer for the New York Times, described the ADA in the following way:

“The public accommodations provisions of the law, the Americans with Disabilities Act, mean more than merely providing adequate parking spaces or ramps for the handicapped. Restaurants may have to provide Braille or large-type menus for the blind or visually impaired people,… space for customers with wheelchairs and ensure that their friends and family may sit with them.”[18]

These are some of the major changes that came about as a result of the ADA, and they highlight just how little people with disabilities were seen in society, and how powerful the ADA was in shining a light on them. We see things today such as ramps, handicap parking spaces, and other inclusive infrastructure and think of it as common and something that has always been there, but for many people it has not. This time back into the social model of disability, showing how an individual can be disabled and handicapped, because there is no ramp to help them access a building.

There were numerous people that played a large role in helping to get the act passed, many of whom were famous disability rights activists within the United States at the time, including a man named Justin Dart Jr. “Mr. Dart was best known as one of the primary forces behind the Amercians with Disabilities Act, which was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Georgre Bush with Mr. Dart as his side, in 1990.”[19] Justin Dart Jr. was one of the most influential Disability Rights activists within the United States, he was constantly arguing and advocating for the passage of this act. He became very well known among those serving during this time, simply for how much he was around and speaking with people about how important this act was.

Disability rights movement Within Great Britain

The disability rights movement within Great Britain is rooted in highlighting the conditions of the physically disabled, specifically wounded veterans. Much of the early discussion that takes place within Great Britain deals with this select group of people with disabilities. It was not until more recently that the conversation has shifted to be more inclusive of people with neurological disabilities, along with people with more visible physical disabilities.  The movement moved towards the focus on group homes, which were similar to the institutions within the United States, before leading to Great Britain’s own version of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Disability Discrimination Act in 2005.

An early example of Great Britain’s focus on veterans can be seen when the Parliament is discussing a new finance bill that would have been used to raise money in 1951, Lieutenant-Commander Braithwaite said that “it would also adversely affect disabled ex-service men.”[20] His argument was that the petrol tax that was included in the new finance bill would increase the cost of road transport, and would force more people into using public transport, which was used a lot by disabled individuals at the time. Also when discussing this bill Sir Ian Fraser said that disabled individuals should be excused from the extra petrol duty. This shows how much people were thinking about the physically disabled veterans, as a part of society as a whole, similar to the conversation in the United States.

            Disabled veterans dominated a lot of the early discussion of disability rights within Great Britain as they were the most visible individuals with disabilities that were actively trying to be included into society. When discussing the approach to the idea of the  economic situation post war, Mr. King of Southampton urged “for an increase in the basic rate for disability pensions of disability pensions for disabled ex-service men.”[21] This is a good start for the conversation about disability rights in Great Britain and provides a solid foundation for the future.

            The idea of working and labor was also something that came up in discussions when discussing how to best include them in the labor force. When discussing the idea of defense-workers, looking specifically at summer resorts during the winter time. There is a group of workers that were used to help advance the “national effort”. The argument that these disabled workers could be employed to help in other aspects of the country, was taken before the Ministry of labor, and the position of disabled men specifically was brought up by a man named Mr. E. Evans, stating that it can be difficult for them to find work at times.[22] Mr. Evans is one of the first people that begins to speak out for those with physical disabilities within Great Britain, that is not speaking solely for disabled veterans, advancing the disability rights movement further.

            The infantilization and idea that individuals with disabilities need to be helped and cared for by others, even when they may be perfectly able to take care of themselves, is something that is present. For example, the London times published a newspaper article entitled, Debate on employment of disabled and elder persons[23]. Having people with disabilities be associated with the elderly shows how they were seen by larger society. People with disabilities and specifically in this case, those with physical disabilities are seen as weak and in need of someone to be helping them at all times even though there are things that they still might be able to do by themselves. In this case a lot of them are former veterans, specifically men, so they would most likely still be in good physical condition, only needing help in the area of their handicap. This is a very early argument describing the Social Model of Disability, where the individuals themselves are perfectly fine, it is society and their environment that is handicapping them.

            At the start of the 1960s we began to see the conversation in Great Britain evolve to begin to include individuals with neurological disabilities, alongside those with physical disabilities. Similar to the pattern in the United States at this time, it appears that Great Britain thought its best course of action was to have these individuals placed into group homes. In March of 1961 there was discussion about the construction of a new home in Bognor Regis, near the southern British Coast. The issue that was brought up was about whether or not that project had been abandoned because two local private schools apparently rejected the idea as they felt that the location was too close to their location, and they did not think it would be able to be the proper size necessary.. When talking about the issue Mr. Kenneth Robinson, who was a representative in Parliament during this time had this to say “Projects of this kind are constantly being frustrated by local difficulties being raised about sitting. Is there nothing the Minister can do, perhaps in conjunction with the Minister of Housing and Local Government, in trying to influence local authorities to be a little more sympathetic towards this type of development.”[24] This shows some of the issues that the disability rights movement in Great Britain faced in its early stages, with many doubting if it was even necessary to have these group homes.

            Similar to the United States, in Great Britain these individuals with neurological disabilities are subjected to being separated from the larger part of society by being placed into these group homes. These group homes similar to the institutions in the United States seem to be mistreating the individuals with disabilities as well. Unfortunately, at this time individuals with neurological disabilities are seen as “rejects” and “outcasts”. This also led to the mistreatment of these individuals as they were seen as needing to be removed from society, including many horrible things being done to them such as Euthanasia.

One of the most prominent people in both England and the United States was C. Killick Millard, who was mainly working between 1930-1955 but was the main figure and was a very well known and respected doctor during this time. Ian Dowbiggin writes about Millaird describing him as having “dedicated much of his life to legalizing the right to die, he was likewise motivated by the conviction that an educated, rational and mentally competent person would consent to mercy-killing if suffering from a painful, terminal illness or disability.”[25] This gives insight into how individuals with disabilities were viewed as not able to be educated the same way as their non-disabled counterparts, and how having a disability was seen as something that would not make you of use to the larger part of society. This is another aspect of the disability rights movement in Great Britain that has a parallel to the United States, which is the way that both of these movements had a time where they looked to medical professionals for the answers.

One of the first major pieces of legislation to come from Great Britain in the realm of disability rights is the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act of 1970. This bill established welfare for those who were disabled or for those who suffered from chronic illness. This is an important part of the Disability Rights movement in Great Britain because while there may have been support for the bill, the speaker, who themselves identified as disabled, thought that the bill needed to be stronger. An article written in the London Times “Under the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act, 1970, builders had to provide access facilities where it was ‘in the circumstances both practicable and reasonable. There have been instances in the past 11 years when such facilities were not provided, mainly because nobody has enforced the law.”[26] The prolonged and delayed enforcement of laws is something that is far too common in disability law in particular, with vague and non-descript wording allowing companies and others to get away with not fully giving people with disabilities the accommodations they need. As mentioned in the London Times article it took almost eleven years for something to be done about this, and it is one of the reasons why disability rights are still an active fight.

Prolonged enforcement of laws and regulations can be tied back to an issue that was brought up almost twenty years prior to this incident, which involved giving disabled drivers a badge that would help identify them. In March of 1961, in response to the increasing parking problems of disabled drivers, a man named Mr Dobbs, who was a member of Parliament proposed “to provide a badge to be displayed by disabled drivers to help them and to assist police in using their discretion in dealing with traffic problems.”[27]It would take almost ten more years for this idea to become mainstream and implemented in the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act in 1970. The idea of these badges being used to assist police is very interesting because it speaks to a debate that is happening right now in the United States about how to best aid individuals with disabilities, specifically those with more “invisible disabilities” in regards to things such as traffic stops, and their interactions with police officers. For individuals with disabilities, especially those who may have neurological disabilities, understanding social cues and following directions can often be a tough task, and unfortunately in the United States, police officers can at times give conflicting directions. This can lead to individuals with disabilities being treated harmfully by police officers and not fully understanding why.

We began to see a mindset shift in Great Britain in the late 1990s and one example of this comes from a man Lee Duffin, who although he spent most of his life working in sales and marketing, joined a charity that helped young adults with disabilities to become more self-reliant and independent. Although his main job was fundraising, he said “I had no experiences in fund-raising or the mentally handicapped, but I was so impressed by the charity’s philosophy of helping the young adults to lead a fairly independent and fulfilled life that I wanted to help.”[28] This is a massive shift from just thirty years prior where individuals with disabilities, specifically those with neurological disabilities, were seen as needing to be kept away from society and kept in group homes. This comes in the years following the United States and the idea of independent living that was introduced by disability rights activists there.

As we enter into the 21st century we see the last of the group homes or “long-stay care homes” that were prominent in the late 60s and early 70s and began to become less prominent into the late 80s and 90s. The last of these homes shut down in Great Britain in 2004 and was a part of the effort to help people with disabilities become larger members of society. John Hutton the public health minister had this to say “people in Britain with learning disabilities were among the most socially excluded in the country. Only one of them has a friend outside the immediate circle of their family or paid-for carers.”[29] This is one of the biggest shifts and evolutions in the direction of fostering independence for those with disabilities. In 2001, there were an estimated 1.4 million people living with disabilities in Britain. Around this time as well, there were schools in Britain that received investments in communication aids for students who would need them. This is similar to what happens in the United States, which is that if schools receive federal funding that they have to provide students with the accommodations that they need.

In the United States the Americans with Disabilities Act (or the ADA) in the 1990s provided people with disabilities the rights to access society and for changes to be made to help them it is not until the early 2000s that Great Britain enacts something similar. In 2004 the British government passed the Disability Discrimination Act which acts similar to the ADA. it was described by the media as:

“The most significant aspect of the new provisions is the duty of service providers to make reasonable adjustments to any physical features that are a barrier to the enjoyment of goods and services by disabled people … includes widening a doorway; providing a permanent ramp for a wheelchair user; relocating light switches, for someone who has difficulty reaching;… and providing tactile buttons in lifts’.’[30]

This directly connects to what the ADA did for Americans with disabilities and relates back to the social model, contending that in order for individuals with disabilities to be included within society there needed to be changes made to the environment as well.

Another piece of legislation that was passed in Great Britain that is similar to the ADA is the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA), which was passed in 2005. This act made it illegal to discriminate against individuals with disabilities within the workplace and to make the necessary accommodations to allow these individuals to succeed in the workplace. “Employing disabled people can attract disabled customers.”[31] This is a great way to think about how it feels to include individuals with disabilities within not only the workplace but society as a whole. Seeing people that represent who you are and how you view yourself is very important in helping people feel safe in society.           

Conclusion

            In conclusion, the disability rights movements of both the United States and Great Britain have some connections with one another but it was mainly the United States setting the precedent for and leading the way. Both of these movements have their foundations in the way that society began to see and treat veterans with disabilities following World War II. The care and thought that was given to these veterans opened the door for disability rights activists in each country to begin to further the conversation on disability rights. While the United States had its focused turn to institutions by parents, Great Britain began to look at group homes. In 1990 the United States passed the Americans with Disabilities Act, which provided comprehensive changes that would grant individuals with disabilities a chance to participate in society. 15 years later Great Britain would pass the Disability Discrimination Act, which would act similarly to the ADA. Ultimately showing how, even though the two movements evolve similarly over time, it is the United States that has its evolutions before Great Britain.

The significance of this capstone paper is that it allows for the start of a discussion on the history of disability rights not only in the United States but in Great Britain as well. It is important to just study the history of one nation’s evolution as it can close you off to possible ideas and changes that have been made in other nations that can be adopted in one’s own country. Individuals with disabilities have been mistreated throughout history in many different parts of the world and it is important to begin to understand how this happens and how different nations are able to move forward and away from this awful mindset and treatment of individuals with disabilities.

This capstone paper is significant for education as it allows for students to learn about a history and a movement that has rarely been discussed before. Much of the activism that occurs during the disability rights movement occurs during the late 1970s and 1980s, a time that is just now being discussed more and more in schools, particularly in secondary education. Individuals with disabilities have been treated inhumanely and as outsiders, but if we allow for their story to become a part of our taught history, we can work towards people accepting them for who they are. The disability rights movement also has connections to other historical events, including how the disability rights activists used tactics of other civil rights groups to help fight for their cause. There is also great opportunity for current events with this topic, as this movement is still going today, as many disability rights activists fight to have individuals with disabilities seen by the rest of society.

References

Alambritis, Stephen. “The Business View.” Times, March 4, 2008, 4[S3]. The Times Digital Archive (accessed November 21, 2022). https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/IF0503625387/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=b85a4ad4.

“An equal workforce, not forced.” Times, October 17, 1985, 12. The Times Digital Archive (accessed September 25, 2022). -https://link-gale com.ezproxy.tcnj.edu/apps/doc/CS201822545/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=book—-mark-TTDA&xid=f91d7aa7.

Barnes, Elizabeth. The Minority Body a Theory of Disability. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.

“Benefits defeats in Lords.” Times, May 22, 1990, 7. The Times Digital Archive (accessed October 17, 2022). https://link-gale-com.ezproxy.tcnj.edu/apps/doc/IF0501825665/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=c3331e85.

Burch, Susan, and Ian Sutherland. “Who’s Not Yet Here? American Disability History.” Radical History Review 2006, no. 94 (2006): 127–47. https://doi.org/10.1215/01636545-2006-94-127.

Cragg, Stephen. “Legislation Update.” Times, September 7, 2004, 7[S1]. The Times Digital Archive (accessed November 21, 2022). https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/IF0502698209/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=ec9de613.

Cooper, Jeremy. Law, Rights, and Disability. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2003.

Davis, Lennard J. Enforcing Normalcy: Disability, Deafness, and the Body. London: Verso, 1995.

Dearlove, Desmond. “A fight for the right to work.” Times, September 10, 1992, 19[S]. The Times Digital Archive (accessed September 25, 2022). https://link-gale-com.ezproxy.tcnj.edu/apps/doc/IF0503341113/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=36a91163.

Diane Henry, Special to The New York Times. 1977. “Parents of 3 Retarded Girls Fight Hospital Refusal to Sterilize them: Parents Press Bid to Sterilize Retarded Girls.” New York Times (1923-), Oct 02, 1. https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/parents-3-retarded-girls-fight-hospital-refusal/docview/123174722/se-2.

“Diary Of Next Week’s Events.” Times, July 8, 1961, 11. The Times Digital Archive (accessed November 21, 2022). https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CS184901864/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=5718e179.

Dowbiggin, Ian. “‘A Prey on Normal People’: C. Killick Millard and the Euthanasia Movement in Great Britain, 1930-55.” Journal of Contemporary History 36, no. 1 (2001): 59–85. http://www.jstor.org/stable/261131.

Evans, Richard. “Law will ensure access for disabled in new buildings.” Times, June 2, 1981, 3. The Times Digital Archive (accessed October 17, 2022). https://link-gale-com.ezproxy.tcnj.edu/apps/doc/CS50694338/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=7a585a9f.

Frean, Alexandra. “Care homes for the mentally disabled to shut.” Times, March 21, 2001, 4. The Times Digital Archive (accessed November 21, 2022). https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/IF0502655359/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=caf8b513.

From Our Correspondent. “Assisting The Disabled.” Times, December 4, 1951, 5. The Times Digital Archive (accessed November 21, 2022). https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CS85675396/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=8da0813e.

Heumann, Judith. Being Heumann. S.l.: WH. Allen, 2021.

Hobson, Rodney. “Working at a different pace.” Times, July 31, 1990, 17. The Times Digital Archive (accessed November 21, 2022). https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/IF0503253499/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=476c1f07.

“House Of Commons.” Times, June 6, 1951, 4. The Times Digital Archive (accessed November 21, 2022). —-https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CS67456198/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=f90b3-07e.

“House Of Commons.” Times, November 7, 1951, 7. The Times Digital Archive (accessed November 21, 2022). —-https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CS117788007/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=20fbf67

Howard A Rusk, MD Formerly Chief, Convalescent Services Division, Office of, Air Surgeon. 1946. “Hope for our Disabled Millions: They can be Rehabilitated, Says a Physician, if we Apply Methods used in Restoring Handicapped Veterans. our Disabled Millions our Disabled Millions.” New York Times (1923-), Jan 27, 1946. —-https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/hope-our-—-disabled-millions/docview/107574818/se-2.

Howard A. Rusk, M.D. 1964. “Hiring the Retarded: ‘ 63 Marked Employment Turning Point for Mentally Handicapped in the U.S.” New York Times (1923-), Jan 06, 121. —-https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/hiring-ret—-arded/docview/115529793/se-2..

John Sibley. 1965. “Kennedy Charges Neglect in State Care of Retarded: KENNEDY ASSAILS CARE OF RETARDED.” New York Times (1923-), Sep 10, 1. —-https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/kennedy-charges-neglect-state-care-retarded/docview/116840893/se-2.

Jonathan Fuerbringer Special to The New York Times. 1986. “To Dole, it was an Education to Get Past Disability.” New York Times (1923-), Jun 16, 1. —-_https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/dole-was-education-get-past-disability/docview/110931546/se-2.

Judy Glass. 1980. “New Efforts to Assist ‘Learning Disabled’ Debated Across L.I.: New Efforts to Assist ‘Learning Disabled’ New Efforts to Assist ‘Learning Disabled’.” New York Times (1923-), Nov 23, 4. —-https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/new-effor—-ts-assist-learning-disabled-debated/docview/121268082/se-2.

“Legal Appointments.” Times, May 7, 1985, 29. The Times Digital Archive (accessed September 25, 2022). https://link-gale-com.ezproxy.tcnj.edu/apps/doc/CS486772903/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=boo——kmark-TTDA&xid=28b1fa67.

Linda Greenhouse, Special to The NewYork Times. 1981. “Justices Restrict A ‘Bill of Rights’ for the Retarded: High Court Calls U.S. Law Only Advisory for States Release of Retarded People ‘Findings’ in ‘Bill of Rights’ Court Restricts ‘Rights’ of Retarded Right to Refuse Medication.” New York Times (1923-), Apr 21, 2. —–https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/justices-restrict-bill-rights-retarded/docview/121615394/se-2.

Mackelprang, Romel W. and Richard O. Salsgiver. “People with Disabilities and Social Work: Historical and Contemporary Issues.” Social Work 41, no. 1 (01, 1996): 7-14. —https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/people-with–disabilities-social-work-historical/docview/215272364/se-2.

Martin Waldron. 1978. “Disabled Children Get New State Aid: Disabled Children are Getting New Help from the State.” New York Times (1923-), Mar 05, 3. —-https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/disabled-children-get-new-state-aid/docview/123790595/se-2.

Noyes, Hugh. “Disabled peers put aid plea.” Times, April 10, 1970, 1. The Times Digital Archive (accessed October 17, 2022). —- https://link-gale-com.ezproxy.tcnj.edu/apps/doc/CS17134218/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=8a9252f9.

“Parliament.” Times, August 3, 1951, 3. The Times Digital Archive (accessed November 21, 2022). Retrieved from  —https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CS50547971/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xi—d=92465—-b0b.

“Purple Heart Unit To Act On Housing: Order Back Speed-Up Of U.S. Efforts To Aid Veterans–Also To Help Disabled Men.” 1946. New York Times (1923-), Sep 08, 40. –https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/purple-heart-unit-act-on-housing/docview/107403078/se-2.

Special to The NewYork Times. 1974. “Improved Education Urged for Retarded: Disparities seen Resulting.” New York Times (1923-), Jun 23, 78. —–https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/improved-education-urged-retarded/docview/120059739/se-2.  

Steven A. Holmes. “Sweeping U.S. Law To Help Disabled Goes Into Effect: Gains Seen For Millions Statute May Force Businesses To Alter Buildings And Offer Specialized Services Sweeping U.S. Law To Help Millions Of The Disabled Goes Into Effect New Anti-Bias Legislation Could Bring Changes To Many Businesses.” Jan 27, 1992. New York Times ——https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/sweeping-u-s-law-help-disabled-goes-into-effect/docview/109037130/se-2.

Stevenson, Richard W. “Justin Dart Jr., 71, Advocate for Rights of Disabled People.” New York Times (1923-), Jun 24, 2002. —https://ezproxy.tcnj.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/justin-dart-jr-71-advocate-rights-disabled-people/docview/92295369/se-2.

“Subsidy Rate In Airport Charges.” Times, March 7, 1961, 4. The Times Digital Archive (accessed November 21, 2022). —-https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CS67723367/TTDA?u=tconj_ca&sid=bookmark-TTDA&xid=7df135cc.

Walker Alan and Peter Townsend. 1981. Disability in Britain: A Manifesto of Rights. Oxford: Martin Robertson.

[1] GDA Podcasts, GDA Podcasts, April 26, 2017.

[2] NHS, “Treatments That Are Not Recommended for Autism,” NHS choices (NHS, December 16, 2022),

[3] Elizabeth Barnes, The Minority Body: A Theory of Disability (Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018).

[4] Lennard J. Davis, Enforcing Normalcy: Disability, Deafness, and the Body (London: Verso, 1995).

[5] Crip Camp: A revolution, Netflix, 2020.

[6] Howard A Rusk, “Hope for our Disabled Millions”, New York Times, January 27th, 1946.

[7] “Purple Heart Unit To Act On Housing: Order Back Speed-Up Of U.S. Efforts To Aid Veterans–Also To Help Disabled Men.”, 1946, New York Times.

[8]John Sibley, “Kennedy Charges Neglect in State Care of Retarded. September 10, 1965. New York Times

[9] Howard A. Rusk, “Hiring the Retarded”, January 6, 1963, New York Times.

[10]Romel W. Mackeprang, and Richard O. Salsgiver, “People with disabilities and Social Work: Historical and Contemporary Issues”.1996, Social Work.

[11] Diane Henry, “Parents of 3 Retarded Girls Fight Hospital Refusal to Sterilize Them”, October 2, 1977, New York Times.

[12] “Improved Education Urged for Retarded”, June 23, 1978, New York Times.

[13] Martin Waldron, “Disabled Children Get New State Aid”, March 5, 1978, New York Times.

[14] Judy Glass, “New Efforts to Assist ‘Learning Disabled’ Debated Across L.I.” November 23, 1980, New York Times.

[15] Linda Greenhouse, “Justices Restrict A ‘Bill of Rights’ For the Retarded”, April 21, 1981, New York Times

[16] Jonathan Fuerbringer, “To Dole, It Was An Education to Get Past Disability”, June 16, 1986, New York Times.

[17]Richard, “Justin Dart Jr., 71, June 14, 2002.

[18]  Steven A. Holmes, “Sweeping U.S. Law To Help Disabled Goes Into Effect: Gains Seen For Millions Statute May Force Businesses To Alter Buildings And Offer Specialized Services Sweeping U.S. Law To Help Millions Of The DisabledI Goes Into Effect New AntI-Bias Legislation Could Bring Changes To Many Businesses.” Jan 27, 1992, New York Times.

[19] Richard W Stevenson, “Justin Dart Jr., 71, Advocate for Rights of Disabled People”, June 14, 2002.

[20] “House of Commons”, Times, June 6,1951, The Times Digital Archive.

[21] “House of Commons”, Times, November 7, 1951, The Time Digital Archive.

[22] “Parliament”, Times, August 3, 1951, The Times Digital Archive.

[23] “Diary Of Next Week’s Events”, Times, July 8, 1961, The Times Digital Archive.

[24] “Subsidy Rate In Airport Changes”, Times, March 7, 1961, The Time Digital Archive.

[25]Ian Dowbiggin, “A Prey on Normal People”, Journal of Contemporary History, (2001), 65.

[26] Richard Evans, “Law will ensure access for disabled in new buildings”, Times, June 2, 1981, The Times Digital Archive.

[27] “Launchers For Research in Space”, Times, March 14, 1961, The Times Digital Archive.

[28] Rodney Hobson, “Working at a different pace”, Times, July 31, 1990, The Times Digital Archive.

[29] Alexandra Frean, “Care homes for the mentally disabled to shut”, Times, March 21, 2001, The Times Digital Archive.

[30] Stephen Cragg,“Legislation Update”, Times, September 7th, 2004, The Times Digital Archive.

[31] Stephen Alambritis, “The Business View”, Times, March 4, 2008, The Times Digital Archive.

Lesson Based on the Movie Glory

Lesson Based on the Movie Glory

John Staudt

“Let the black man get upon his person the brass letter, U.S., let him get an eagle on his button, and a musket on his shoulder and bullets in his pocket, there is no power on earth that can deny that he has earned the right to citizenship.” – Frederick Douglass

Assignment:

  • Read the packet prior to our class viewing of the Edward Zwick’s film Glory (1989)
  • Highlight/underline and annotate the most important points; be sure you review the questions before we view the film.
  • Pay attention and answer the questions in the time allotted following the end of the film.

Background: The issues of emancipation and military service were intertwined from the onset of the Civil War. News from Fort Sumter set off a rush by free Black men to enlist in U.S. military units. They were turned away, however, because a federal law barred Negroes from bearing arms for the U.S. Army. The Lincoln administration was concerned that the recruitment of Black troops would prompt the Border States (Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri) to secede. By mid-1862, however, the escalating number of former slaves (contrabands), the declining number of white volunteers, and the needs of the Union Army pushed the Government into reconsidering the ban. As a result, on July 17, 1862, Congress passed the Second Confiscation and Militia Act, freeing slaves who had masters in the Confederate Army. Two days later, slavery was abolished in all the territories of the United States. In the Emancipation Proclamation, issued on January 1, 1863, President Lincoln announced that Black men would be recruited into the U.S. Army and Navy. Abolitionist leaders such as Frederick Douglass encouraged Black men to become soldiers to ensure eventual full citizenship (two of Douglass’s own sons enlisted). By the end of the Civil War, roughly 188,000 Black men (10% of the Union Army) served as soldiers and another 19,000 served in the Navy. 40,000 Black soldiers died over the course of the war. There were 80 Black commissioned officers; 21 Black soldiers and sailors won the Medal of Honor by the time it ended. Black women could not formally join the Army but served as nurses, spies, and scouts, the most famous scout being Harriet Tubman. In addition to the perils of war faced by all Civil War soldiers, Black soldiers faced additional problems stemming from racial prejudice. Segregated units were formed with Black enlisted men commanded by white officers. Black soldiers were initially paid $10 per month from which $3 was automatically deducted for clothing, resulting in a net pay of $7. In contrast, white soldiers received $13 per month from which no clothing allowance was drawn. In June 1864, Congress granted equal pay to the U.S. Colored Troops.

The film: Glory tells the story of the 54th Colored Massachusetts Infantry Regiment, one of the most celebrated regiments of Black soldiers that fought in the Civil War. Known simply as “the 54th,” this regiment became famous after the heroic, but ill-fated, assault on Fort Wagner, South Carolina. Leading the direct assault under heavy fire, the 54th suffered enormous casualties before being forced to withdraw. The courage and sacrifice of the 54th helped to dispel doubt within the Union about the fighting ability of Black soldiers and earned this regiment undying battlefield glory. Of the 5,000 Federals who took part, 1,527 were casualties: 246 killed, 890 wounded and 391 captured. The 54th lost a stunning 42 percent of its men: 34 killed, 146 wounded and 92 missing and presumed captured. By comparison, the Confederates suffered a loss of just 222 men. Despite the 54th’s terrible casualties, the battle of Fort Wagner was a watershed for the regiment. Civil War scholar James McPherson states, that the “significance of the 54th’s attack on For Wagner was enormous. Its sacrifice became the war’s dominant positive symbol of Black courage. Their sacrifice sparked a huge recruitment drive of Black Americans. It also allowed Lincoln to make the case to whites that the North was in the war to help bring a “new birth of freedom” to all Americans.

Questions – Answer all questions in complete sentences on a separate sheet of paper:

  1. List 2 reasons why men joined the 54th?
  2. Why do you think the white officers volunteered to lead them?
  3. Why do you think Colonel Shaw wants his regiment to lead the deadly assault on Fort Wagner?
  4. In the scene just before the final attack, Shaw approaches a reporter and says, “Remember what you see here.” Write a brief newspaper entry including a headline, dateline, photo (or drawing, engraving, map, etc.) and caption, and a brief (3-4 sentences) description stating what the reporter saw at the Battle of Fort Wagner.

In-class group activity: We will divide randomly into 4 groups. Each group will be assigned one of the images below. Your group will determine how the image represents the significance of the 54th’s achievements and legacy. Each group will then report back to the rest of the class.

Further reading:

Russell Duncan. Blue-Eyed Child of Fortune: The Civil War Letters of Robert Gould Shaw. This book contains a 67-page biography of Shaw as well as 300 additional pages featuring the various letters Shaw wrote to family members, some of which are read in the movie.

Joseph T. Glatthaar. Forged in Battle: The Civil War Alliance of Black Soldiers and White Officers. Paperback. Louisiana State University Press (April 2000).

David Blight’s article, “Race and Reunion: Soldiers and the Problem of the Civil War in American Memory” (6, no. 3 [2003]: 26-38).

A: Storming Fort Wagner. Lithograph by Kurz & Allison, 1890

Image B: Civil War photograph of Sergeant-Major Lewis H. Douglas, one of the first troops of the 54th to climb over the walls of Fort Wagner during the attack.

Image C: Augustus Saint-Gaudens (one of the premier artists of his day) took nearly fourteen years to complete this high-relief bronze monument, which celebrates the valor and sacrifices of the Massachusetts 54th. Colonel Shaw is shown on horseback and three rows of infantrymen march behind. This scene depicts the 54th Regiment marching down Beacon Street on May 28, 1863 as they left Boston to head south. The monument was unveiled in a ceremony on May 31, 1897.

Image D: One of the 54ths casualty lists with the names of 116 enlisted men who died at the battle for Fort Wagner. National Archives, Records of the Adjutant General’s Office, 1780’s-1917

Teaching with Documents: The 1892 Lynching of an African American Man in New York State

Teaching with Documents: The 1892 Lynching of an African American Man in New York State

Alan Singer and Janice Chopyk

The National Memorial for Peace and Justice in Montgomery, Alabama memorializes the over 4,000 African Americans murdered by vigilante terrorism in the American South between the end of Reconstruction in the United States in 1877 and 1950 and the more than 300 victims of racial terrorism in other states. Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia were the worst offenders, but there were also significant numbers of vigilante murders of African Americans in Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, and West Virginia. Eight hundred steel columns hang from the ceiling at the Memorial, each with the name of a county where a lynching occurred with the names of victims engraved on it. The only lynching in New York State during this period occurred in the town of Port Jervis, Orange County in 1892. Port Jervis is located on the Delaware River at the border of New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. At the end of the 19th century, it was an important stop on the Delaware and Hudson Canal for barges transporting anthracite coal to Philadelphia and New York City from Scranton area coal mines and on the New York, Lake Erie and Western Railroad.

In his new book, A Lynching at Port Jervis: Race and Reckoning in the Gilded (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2022), Philip Dray documents racial violence in Port Jervis about sixty-five miles northwest of New York City. The story of what happened to Robert Lewis, a 28-year-old African American teamster and coach driver on Thursday June 2, 1892 was largely told through the eyes of white residents and white-owned newspapers. Unfortunately, there are no sources that address the Black perspective on the lynching of Lewis by a white mob. A coroner’s inquest was held with witness testimony, but there is no surviving transcript. At least one witness, Officer Simon Yaple, is known to have named some of the members of the murderous mob, but none were ever tried or convicted of crimes.

Robert Lewis, described in the press as a powerful man of about five feet seven and 170 pounds, was accused of assaulting and sexually abusing a 22-year-old white woman named Lena McMahon on a riverbank where the Cuddeback Brook meets the Neversink River before it flows into the Delaware River just south of Port Jervis. Participants in the mob attack on Lewis claimed that before he was murdered, Lewis confessed to the assault and implicated McMahon’s white boyfriend, Philip Foley as an accomplice. Lewis was then lynched on East Main Street, now U.S. Route 6.

Lena McMahon reported to authorities that she was approached by a heavy-set Black man with a light complexion who she did not know, although he appeared to know her. In her testimony about the assault, McMahon claimed that she was “terribly frightened” because her assailant had an “evil look in his eyes” and that after she rebuffed him he grabbed her shoulder and covered her mouth in an attempt to keep her from screaming. Local boys interrupted the attack on McMahon and her attacker, presumably Lewis, picked up fishing gear and left the scene. While McMahon initially reported that the man who attacked her was a “tramp,” one of the boys later identified Lewis as the assailant.

Robert Lewis was seized by a posse on the towpath of the D & H Canal while riding on a slow moving coal barge, not a very likely escape plan and Lewis made no effort to avoid capture. He had fishing gear with him and said he was planning to spend the night fishing. Sol Carley, part of the posse that captured Lewis, claimed that he questioned Lewis while they were bringing him back to Port Jervis. According to Carley, Lewis confessed to what had taken place, but claimed that Foley, who he knew from the hotel where he previously worked, told him McMahon would be receptive to a sexual encounter and if he wanted a “piece to go down and get it.” Lewis seemed to think that the entire situation could be resolved if they questioned Foley and Lewis had a chance to speak to McMahon’s father.

The initial police plan was to bring Lewis to the McMahon home to see if she could identify him, although Lena McMahon continued to maintain her attacker was a stranger, probably a tramp, who was camping in the woods. This plan was interrupted when a rumor spread that Lena McMahon had died from her wounds, dooming Robert Lewis. A crowd of over 300 white men was gathered in downtown Port Jervis. Upon hearing the rumor, it was transformed into an uncontrollable mob and murdered Lewis. Port Jervis’ small African American community, in defiance of white authority, insisted on a proper funeral for Lewis and contributed funds for burial at Laurel Grove cemetery, while at least some whites tried to steal souvenir relics from his body.

Students can read, compare, and discuss newspaper coverage of the events in Port Jervis. In the age of #MeToo and Black Lives Matter, it is difficult to dissect aspects of events that took place over a hundred years ago, especially where the surviving documentation is sporadic and clearly biased. How much of Lena McMahon’s story should be believed? Does questioning her account reflect what we now recognize as gender bias? On the other hand, how much of her story was colored by racism? We know from similar accusations made by white women against Black men that led to the arrest and imprisonment of the Scottsboro Boys and the murder of Emmett Till, that in a climate of intense racism, white women protected their reputations by fabricating stories of disrespect or assault. It is hard to believe that Robert Lewis did not know that a “confession” meant a death sentence. A compelling question for students to consider is: What do the events in Port Jervis and the newspaper coverage tell us about race and racism in New York State during this period? Teachers should alert students that there are overtly racist comments in the newspaper articles, but that “negro” was in common usage at the time to describe the group of people we now call African American and was not a racist term.

Documenting the Lynching of Robert Lewis at Port Jervis, New York

A. LYNCHED AT PORT JERVIS. ROBERT JACKSON, A COLORED MAN, HANGED BY A MOB. New York Times, June 3, 1892           

Robert Jackson, a young colored man, was lynched in this village to-night, receiving swift retribution for an assault committed this morning on Miss Lena McMahon, daughter of John McMahon of this place. The crime occurred on the outskirts of the village, near the banks of the Neversink River. Two young negroes and a crowd of children were near by, but when the former tried to interfere Jackson kept them at bay with a revolver. He made his escape without trouble. Miss McMahon was left in an insensible condition. Her injuries may prove fatal. A posse started in pursuit of Jackson as soon as news of the assault spread . . . The capture of the fugitive was finally made at Cuddebackville, a small village on the Delaware and Hudson Canal about nine miles from Port Jervis, by Sol Carley, Duke Horton, and a man named Coleman. Jackson had borrowed a canal boat at Huguenot, and had reached Cuddebackville, when he was overtaken by the three men. On the way back to this village he confessed the crime, and implicated William Foley, a white man, who, he said, was in the conspiracy against Miss McMahon. Foley has been paying attention to the girl contrary to the wishes of her parents, and the feeling against him in this community is such that, should he be taken, a fate similar to that which has overtaken Jackson would probably be meted out to him. The news of the capture of Jackson soon spread through the town, and a large crowd of men collected about the village lock-up, awaiting the arrival of the prisoner. The word was whispered through the crowd “Lynch him, lynch him!” The suggestion spread like wildfire, and it was evident that the fate of the prisoner was sealed. On his arrival at the lock-up Jackson was taken in hand by the mob. The village police endeavored to protect him, but their efforts were unavailing. It was at first proposed to have Jackson identified by his victim before hanging him, in order to make sure of his guilt. With this object in view the mob tied a rope around his body and dragged him up Hammond and down Main Streets as far as the residence of E. G. Fowler, Esq. By this time the mob had reached a state of uncontrollable excitement, and it was decided to dispatch him without further ceremony. A noose was adjusted about his neck and he was strung up to a neighboring tree in the presence of over 1,000 people. For an hour the body hung from the tree, where it was viewed by crowds . . . Public sentiment on the subject of the lynching is divided, although a majority approve and openly applaud the work of the lynchers, declaring that a terrible warning was necessary to prevent future repetitions of the same offense.

Questions

  1. Where and when did these events take place?
  2. Who was Robert Jackson?
  3. What was Robert Jackson accused of?
  4. What happened to Robert Jackson?
  • What is the attitude of the New York Times toward these events? What evidence from the text supports your conclusion?

B. Mob Murder at Port Jervis, Brooklyn Eagle, June 3, 1892, pg. 4

A negro was hanged by a mob in Port Jervis on Thursday night. He was charged with the crime of violence on a white girl, who is now said to be lingering between life and death. The crime was committed. The victim of it and two other witnesses charged the commission of it on a negro called by the name of the one who was lynched. The accused criminal was caught a long distance from the spot, while trying to run away. He was not, however, taken for identification before any of the persons who had accused him. A rumor prevails around Port Jervis that, after all, the wrong negro was captured and killed. Negroes are not easily distinguished from one another, unless by marks of identification carefully registered on scientific examination and then carefully compared when any man to whom they presumably refer is apprehended. There is very little doubt that the negro who was killed was the man who committed the crime, but there is some doubt that he was. That doubt, however slight, should harrow the memories and consciences of the men who lawlessly destroyed him. Aside from this fact, the offense of which the negro was accused but not convicted does not carry the punishment of death in this state by law. http://www.bethlehemchurch.com/admin/Law has found that capital punishment in cases of violence against women has been inflicted on innocent persons. The accusation is easily made. It is hard to disprove. A predisposition to believe it exists when it is brought against the lowly and the humble, the obscure or the repulsive. The pardoning power is not seldom required to rectify the errors of courts and juries in cases of violence to women. On these accounts the punishment has been reduced below the death penalty, to give time and government a chance to correct the wrongs of law. The event at Port Jervis, Thursday night, was a disgrace to the State of New York. The heinousness of the offense may explain but does not excuse the popular violence. This is supposed to be a government of law. Citizens are supposed to be law abiding. Moral culture and obedience to law are supposed to be an insurance that communities will not take the law in their own hands in any cases, and especially in cases which excite and inflame them. It may be roughly said, so far as lynch law is concerned in New York State, that the greater the provocation the less the excuse. The crime of which this negro was guilty cannot be overcharacterized, but there are worse crimes than it, by the definition of the law of the State of New York. A worse crime is murder. Murder is the destruction of a human being without warrant of law, with malice and premeditation, and not in self defense. The hanging of the negro in Port Jervis on Thursday night mates with that definition of the crime of murder. It was murder.

Questions

  1. Are there features in the Brooklyn Eagle article you would identify as racist? Explain.
  2. Compare coverage of the events in Port Jervis as reported in the Brooklyn Eagle the New York Times. How is it similar or different?
  • In your opinion, are there errors of fact in the Brooklyn Eagle account? Explain.

C. Port Jervis Disgrace, The Daily Standard Union, June 3, 1892, pg. 2

Port Jervis has not added to her good name by the brutal murder of a negro, who was, no doubt, no less brutal than the white men who took the law into their own hands and inflicted the death penalty without sentence. Has the Empire State fallen so low that criminals cannot be punished by due process of law? . . . There is no reason why a Northern State inhabited by justice-loving people, should be Southernized by a few misguided men in a country town. A heinous crime was charged against the negro, but there was no sworn evidence that he was the guilty person. Sympathy was strong for the young woman who, it is said, suffered from the negro’s violence, and this sympathy was proper and creditable; but it does not justify killing by mass meeting. It is to be hoped that every one of the men who actually took part on compassing the negro’s death will be apprehended and made to feel the hand of the law he has outraged.”

Questions

  1. How is coverage of the events in Port Jervis in this article from the Daily Standard Union, a Brooklyn, New York newspaper, similar to and different from coverage in the New York Times and the Brooklyn Eagle?
  • What is conspicuously missing from this excerpt from the article? In your opinion, what does that suggest about the viewpoint of the Daily Standard Union about the events?

D. Local Newspaper Coverage

Port Jervis Union: The Excitement in this village over the lynching of the negro, Robert Lewis has abated somewhat but further developments are awaited with the most intense interest. Attention is now centered upon the work of the coroner’s jury which was empanelled yesterday and whose duty it is not merely to investigate the manner of Lewis’ death but if possible to trace out the leaders and instigators of mob violence and to fix upon them the responsibility which belongs to them. Public sentiment and the honor and fair fame of the village demand that an earnest effort be made to do this. Now that the excitement attendant upon the awful events of Thursday has partially subsided a decided reaction has taken place in public sentiment and there are few who do not deplore and condemn the work of the mob. It is now generally admitted that the ends of justice would have been fully satisfied by leaving Lewis to be dealt with according to the regular forms of law, while our village would have escaped the world-wide notoriety which now attaches to it as the scene of one of the worst manifestations of mob-violence which has occurred in recent years. To be known as a community controlled and dominated by lawless elements is a penalty which we must now pay.

Middletown Daily Press: What a hard question to decide: the right or the wrong of Thursday night’s outrage in Port Jervis. One man, a father, and a county official, said: “It’s all right for some of us to moralize. But put yourself in that father’s place.” Another man, also a father: “Those men are worse than the negro. No matter how heinous the crime, can any human being think of a life being tugged along through public streets by a howling, half mad crowd which handled the rope, without saying ‘They’re brutes, and God does not sanction their work.’”

Middletown Argus: That the punishment so summarily meted out to the black ruffian who made Lena McMahon victim of his lust was more than merited, there is no division of sentiment . . . Lewis might better have been left to be dealt with by court and jury, inadequate though his punishment, if convicted, would be, but informal as was his exit from it, no one will say nay to it that the world is well rid of him.

Newburgh Daily Journal: The outbreak in Port Jervis is wholly without justification . . . The mob’s crime was an attack upon the cause of law and order. It remains with the criminal authorities to deal with the perpetrators of this crime as the law provides.

Questions:

  1. The Port Jervis Union is a weekly newspaper. This issue was published two days after the events and coverage is on page 3. What is the primary focus of the article? What does this suggest about local attitudes toward the event?
  • What are the attitudes toward the events in Port Jervis expressed in newspaper coverage from neighboring towns?

E. The Dangers of Lynching (Editorial). New York Times, June 4, 1892

A considerable number of persons, some of them possibly very worth citizens in a general way and others pretty certainly nothing of the kind, united on Thursday in Port Jervis to hang a negro who had committed a criminal assault upon a white girl. The feeling that actuated the mob was doubtless the same that is cited as defense for like lynching in the Southern States. It is that the penalty prescribed by law is not sufficient for the offense which is punished by lynching. It is not to be denied that negroes are much more prone to this crime than whites, and the crime itself becomes more revolting and infuriating to white men, North as well as South, when a negro is the perpetrator and a white woman the victim . . . It is unlikely that such a change in the law would diminish the number of lynchings. These are commonly committed by crowds which are animated by so furious an indignation that they would not wait for the law to take its course, even though the punishment were capital and certain, but would insist upon themselves doing their prisoner to death rather than to wait for months, or even weeks, to have him done to death by the law. This lawless temper is not commendable, and it ought to be discouraged by the law. Although it is probable that the good citizens of Port Jervis sympathized with the mob when they first learned of its murderous work, it is also probable that they are by this time ashamed of it and of their sympathy with it, and regard the lynching as more of a disgrace to the town than the crime it avenged, for which only a single brute was responsible . . . [I]t is admitted that the mob, misled by one of the rumors that spread in times of excitement, came very near hanging the wrong man, and this is a danger that always attends the unlawful execution of justice . . . [T]he lynchers by their precipitation seem to have operated a defeat of justice almost as great as if they had hanged the wrong man. The negro not only confessed his crime, but declared that he had been instigated to commit it by a white man whom he named. . . . The greater criminal, if he be a criminal at all, is likely to go scot free because the people of Port Jervis have hastily and carelessly hanged a man who, if he had been spared, might have proved a valuable witness. This is a danger of lynching that the lynchers have incurred which they themselves must confess to be a serious drawback to the success of their method of doing justice.

Questions

  1. How does the New York Times describe the people who participated in the lynching of Robert Lewis?
  2. In the opinion of the New York Times, why is the incident regrettable?
  • What evidence, if any, does the excerpt from the editorial suggest about the biases of the Times?

F. VERDICT AT PORT JERVIS, No One Held Responsible for the Lynching of Lewis. The Aspen Daily Chronicle, June 15, 1892, pg. 3

The coroner’s inquest over the lynching of Bob Lewis, the negro, terminated at 4:30 o’clock yesterday afternoon. The jury, after being out one hour, rendered the following verdict: “We find that Robert Lewis came to his death in the village of Port Jervis on June 2, 1892, by being hanged by some persons or person unknown to this jury . . . The thinking public doubts Miss McMahon’s story, as it also does Foleys . The circumstances are to conflicting. If the young woman had practically no knowledge of her surroundings from Wednesday to Thursday morning, then she must have been crazy. Not a living female would or could be hired to stay over night in Laurel Grove cemetery, as she stated she did. The stormy weather and the delicate physique of the girl would knock that story in the head. It is a fact that when Foley was arrested on the morning succeeding the assault of Miss McMahon, he trembled like a leaf and had to be supported. There is something back of the whole affair and those facts are held by Squire Mulley justice of the peace, who refuses to allow the contents of Foleys blackmailing letters addressed to Miss McMahon, to appear in print. Mr. Mulley says that the investigation of Miss McMahon and Foley will be strictly private.

Questions

  1. What was the verdict of the coroner’s inquest?
  2. What is the attitude of this newspaper to stories of the incident?
  • This article appeared in a Colorado newspaper. What does that suggest about reaction to the lynching?

G. MISS M’MAHON WRITES A LETTER, SHE EXPLAINS WHAT HER RELATIONS WERE WITH FOLEY. New York Times, June 25, 1892:

To the Editor of the Daily Union:

Sir: As my name has been so freely circulated throughout the press of the country during he past few weeks in connection with the infamous scoundrel, Foley, who has been airing his ignorance and viciousness in frequent letters from the county jail, that I wish, once for all, in justice to myself, to refute and brand as malicious falsehoods the statements this person has seen fit to utter. I first became acquainted with Foley when he assumed to be a gentleman, through the introduction of a mutual friend. He paid me attention, and I was foolish, as other young girls have been, to believe in his professions of friendship, and when I, in the indiscretion of youth, had some trifling difficulty with fond and loving parents who endeavored to give me wise counsel and advice, resolved to leave home, this inhuman monster egged me on and endeavored to carry into execution his nefarious scheme to ruin and blacken my character forever. When I discovered “the wolf in sheep’s clothing,” the true character of the parody of manhood, I at all risks and perils resolved to prosecute him as he so richly deserves. That resolution I still maintain, and I wish to assure the public that the maudlin, sentimental outpourings from this person, who, relying upon the fact that I was once his friend, has seen fit to make me the victim of extortion and blackmail, have no effect whatever on me, and it will not be my fault if he does not receive the punishment he so richly deserves. There is nothing to prevent this man writing letters, and I do not consider it either wise or discreet to pay any attention to them. I simply desire to say that his insinuations and allegations are falsehoods; that my relations with him have been those only of a friend. God only knows how much I regret that. I cannot have my reputation as an honest, chaste, and virtuous girl assailed by this villain without a protest, and I ask all right-thinking people who possess these qualities to place themselves in my position and then ask if they would act differently than I have done. The evil fortune that has overtaken me has been no fault of my own, and I trust that the light of truth will reveal this man as he truly is, the author of all my misfortune. I do not intend to express myself again to the public concerning this matter, nor pay any attention to what this man may say or do. All I desire is peace, and the consideration and fair treatment that should be extended to one who has suffered untold misery, and whose whole life has been blighted by one whose heartlessness and cruelty is only equaled by his low cunning and cowardice. LENA M’MAHON.

Questions

  1. Who is Lena McMahon?
  2. What prompted her to write this letter?
  3. What is missing from the letter?
  • What does the missing part tell us about events in Port Jervis?

H. Port Jervis Lynching Indictments. New York Times, June 30, 1892
The Grand Jury of Orange County to-day indicted nine persons in the Port Jervis lynching case. Two of these were officers of the village . . . Five of the indictments are for assault and the rest for riot.

Arrested for the Port Jervis Lynching. New York Times, July 1, 1892
Bench warrants for the arrest of five men indicted by the Grand Jury, and alleged to have been in the party who lynched the negro in this place, were issued to-day . . . The indictment is regarded as the weakest that could have been made.

Port Jervis Lynchers Not Indicted. New York Times, September 30, 1892
The Orange County Grand Jury reported to-day to Judge John J. Beattie. They said they had not indicted the Port Jervis lynchers of the colored man Robert Lewis. The reason was that the Port Jervis people had failed to give the evidence necessary to indict.

Questions

  1. What was the final resolution of the Port Jervis lynching?
  • In your opinion, what does this tell us about race and justice in New York in this period?

References      

Dray, Philip. 2022. A Lynching at Port Jervis: Race and Reckoning in the Gilded (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2022).

Disciplinary Literacy, Trade Books, and Culturally Responsive Teaching in Middle Grades Social Studies

Disciplinary Literacy, Trade Books, and Culturally Responsive Teaching in Middle Grades Social Studies

Dr. Caroline Sheffield & Dr. Jeremiah Clabough

Disciplinary literacy, which emphasizes teaching students the skills and strategies used by practitioners, has become more prevalent in U.S. schools over the last 15 years. Therefore, teachers need to be deliberate as they assist students to think and write like practitioners (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008). The National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) has placed an emphasis on disciplinary literacy in its College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards (NCSS, 2013a).

            Emphasizing disciplinary literacy means social studies teachers need to give careful thought and consideration in designing learning experiences to develop their students’ historical, civic, economic, and geographic thinking skills (NCSS, 2013a). For some, this will mean redefining their classroom practices. Incorporating disciplinary literacy practices is complicated by the fact that many students are not reading on grade level.

Our intervention is centered on using trade books focusing on civil rights activists that address the racial discrimination Black Americans faced immediately after the U.S. Civil War. Students read excerpts of the trade books and additional sources as a whole class and in groups. They utilized these texts to answer analysis prompts where they used evidence to support their arguments. In this article, we share both our intervention and the successes from the project.

Culturally responsive teaching

The demographics in U.S. public schools have dramatically changed in the 21st century. White majorities in schools have given way to student populations that are more diverse. This is due in part to immigration patterns to the United States. With the changing demographics in the United States, social studies teachers need to reconsider how they design classroom instruction. One approach is to incorporate culturally responsive teaching, which is defined by Geneva Gay (2000) as “using the cultural knowledge, prior experiences, frames of reference, and performance styles of ethnically diverse student to make learning encounters more relevant to and effective for them” (pg. 29). Additionally, culturally responsive teaching emphasizes the need for high expectations and academic achievement for culturally diverse students, which reflects the empowered school culture described by Banks (2019). 

Gay (2000) calls for teachers to scaffold and connect ethnically and culturally diverse students with the curriculum of the varied academic subjects. Doing so helps teachers to achieve the transformative approach to multicultural education described by Banks (2019). In the transformative approach, “the structure of the curriculum is changed to enable students to view concepts, issues, events, and themes from the perspective of diverse ethnic and cultural groups” (Banks, 2019, p. 64). If social studies teachers are to move beyond the additive and contributions approaches to multicultural education, it is necessary to consider how to incorporate the experiences and viewpoints of minorities beyond a single month in the year (King & Brown, 2014). In the social studies, this would entail using a variety of resources to authentically represent different groups’ values and perspectives throughout the curriculum. Texts that reflect students’ cultures act as mirrors. This allows students to see themselves in their U.S. history curriculum (Bishop, 1990).

There are several key components of culturally responsive teaching for social studies teachers to consider. Effective instruction in the social studies includes primary and secondary sources that allow students to analyze different groups’ perspectives and beliefs about historical and contemporary issues. Doing so provides students with the information to develop a nuanced understanding of an issue and helps to prepare them to work with people from different backgrounds in our pluralistic democratic society (Banks, 2019; Gay, 1994). By focusing on their culture through reading assignments, students can also analyze and critique historical and contemporary power structures in U.S. society and thus equip them with the knowledge to take civic action to address social, cultural, economic, and political inequities (Ochoa-Becker, 1996). One of the approaches to addressing ethnic and cultural diversity in the classroom identified by Gay (2000) is the use of trade books as instructional tools.

Using trade books in the social studies

            The term trade book refers to books, other than textbooks, that are available in retail establishments. Trade books include informational texts, picture books, and graphic novels (McGowan & Guzzetti, 1991). Not only are trade books more engaging than the typical social studies textbook, but they are also better written (Palmer & Stewart, 1997). Trade books highlight individuals and events frequently excluded from traditional textbooks (Chick, 2008). Trade books are not shallow in content and difficult to read (Berkeley et al., 2016; Tracy, 2003).

Trade books enable teachers to focus on a specific individual or event in depth. Diverse perspectives can be accessed by using several trade books in a curated text set about a specific event or time (Palmer & Stewart, 1997). The diversity of available trade books, in content, format, and readability, offers teachers an opportunity to select texts that best match their students’ reading and learning needs (Liang, 2002; Saul & Dieckman, 2005).

For social studies teachers, trade books offer students a chance to step into a new time or place (Beck & McKeown, 1991) to meet lesser-known historical figures and make emotional connections to the events depicted (Chisholm et al., 2017). It is through this emotional connection that trade books can be used as tools to develop students’ historical empathy skills, which is the effort to better understand historical figures, their actions, decisions, and lived experiences (Endacott & Brooks, 2013). Trade books also offer social studies teachers a way to teach disciplinary literacy by requiring students to analyze for perspective, bias, and purpose (Shanahan & Shanahan 2008).

            As mentioned previously, in culturally responsive pedagogy, teachers employ varied sources that celebrate the history and lived experiences of the culturally diverse students in the classroom. Trade books are an excellent way to do this. For students of color, historical figures who look like them are often portrayed as victims, with little agency and impact on U.S. history (King, 2020). This is not the mirror we want our students to see. To counter this image, teachers should use texts that present people of color impacting their world. This is the framework we utilized to design our study.

Project background and setting

We designed a year-long project for the 2021-2022 academic year in which a sixth-grade teacher would use trade books to thematically teach the concept of civil rights in the United States from Reconstruction to the present. We envisioned thematic teaching to be the examination of a specific concept, in this case civil rights, while still teaching U.S. history chronologically. Thus, the thematic teaching approach was embedded into the existing content taught in the grade level. We chose to focus on the civil rights theme because we wanted students to recognize that the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s did not exist in a vacuum. There were events, individuals, and groups who strove for civil rights long before Dr. King.

We determined that trade books would be an effective way to address this theme, as there are books written for young people that address all of the eras of U.S. history. Many of them highlight the struggles and achievements of culturally diverse individuals. To identify high quality trade books aligned with the sixth-grade curriculum and the civil rights theme, we first referred to the NCSS Notable Trade Book lists. All trade books were read, evaluated with regard to both project goals and text quality, and were agreed upon by the two researchers and the teacher.

The thematic teaching through our project was conducted at the Academy (a pseudonym), a new public charter school located in a medium-size city in the Southern United States. At the time of this project, there is only a sixth-grade class of 100 students at the time of our project. The Academy’s mission statement is clearly aligned with the principles of culturally responsive teaching. The school mission is socially justice oriented, seeking to empower their students to be agents of change.

Black students represent 93% of the Academy’s sixth grade class. The remaining 7% include students who identify as Latinx, white, and Asian. The social studies teacher, Ms. Edwards (a pseudonym), identifies as a white female and has more than ten years of experience teaching social studies in both middle school and high school settings. We should acknowledge that both researchers identify as white, one a white male and the other a white female.

            The learning activities were co-constructed with the participating teacher. The three of us crafted an instructional plan that was both reflective of content that addressed the state standards, incorporated the selected trade book, reflected both the school’s mission, and the teacher’s understanding of the students’ learning needs. We helped the teacher monitor student work and aided with instruction, when requested. Based on the fact that the students’ completed work when we were present did not greatly differ from their work when we were not in the classroom, we posit that our participation in class instruction had little impact on the students’ performance.

Intervention

This paper explores the results of the first two eras addressed in curriculum: Reconstruction and the Progressive Era. The trade books chosen for these units included Henry Louis Gates, Jr.’s (2019) Dark Sky Rising: Reconstruction and the Dawn of Jim Crow and Walter Dean Myers and Bonnie Christensen’s (2008) Ida B. Wells: Let the Truth Be Told. Dark Sky Rising, a non-fiction chapter book, is written for the young adolescent reader and contains numerous primary sources embedded into the narrative. It explores the rise and fall of African American civil liberties during the Reconstruction era. Ida B. Wells: Let the Truth Be Told (Myers & Christensen, 2008) is a 2009 NCSS Notable Trade Book. It is a picture biography of Ida B. Wells’s life and includes her childhood, education, work as a journalist and suffragette, as well as her efforts fighting the lynching of Black Americans.

We used the trade books as anchor texts in the two units. In the Reconstruction unit, Dark Sky Rising (Gates, Jr., 2019). was used to explore literacy tests, poll tax, Plessy v. Ferguson, and Jim Crow segregation laws designed to keep African Americans second-class citizens in the latter 1800s. During the second unit, students read the trade book Ida B. Wells (Myers & Christensen, 2008) and watched videos about Wells to examine how violence was used as a tool to maintain white hegemony in the South.

Excerpts from Dark Sky Rising (Gates Jr., 2019) were used due to the book’s length. A whole class read-aloud strategy was used for both Dark Sky Rising (Gates Jr., 2019) and Ida B. Wells (Myers & Christensen, 2008). Students also did partner readings of sections from both trade books. They worked together to complete tasks that required them to synthesize information found in the trade books to explain how policies were created to disenfranchise African Americans and how violence was used to maintain these social inequalities.

Findings

There was evidence that two years’ worth of disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic impacted the students’ literacy skills. It was apparent in the interactions between the teacher and students that there was also a discrepancy between expectations in the middle school and the elementary school. Students were initially resistant to reading informational texts, synthesizing information, and writing to convey their understanding. Over the course of the year, the students’ resistance was reduced, and their work reflected improved literacy skills.

It was clear that they were not used to completing tasks like the ones assigned. Their written responses were short and rarely in complete sentences (see Figure 1):

Figure 1: Student Example 1, Impact of Plessy vs. Ferguson

Despite the brevity of the students’ answers, the majority of students’ responses were correct, indicating that they were able to successfully read the trade books and articulate responses to questions focusing on the obstacles African Americans faced.

There were encouraging signs from the first two handouts that with simple modeling from the teacher and researchers, some of the students included references from the trade book and primary sources to support their arguments. Students would add the page number where they found their answers to the questions (See Figure 2):

Figure 2: Student Example 2, Impact of Poll Taxes and Literacy Tests

By the end of the first two units, almost all students were consistently using evidence from sources to support their arguments, and they were doing so in complete sentences. Additionally, students made subtle thematic arguments regarding how different civil rights activists worked to address racial discrimination.

One other item of note was that in addition to strengthening students’ disciplinary literacy and historical thinking skills, they also started to discuss historical figures in three dimensional terms. Often, middle school students see historical figures as dead characters who lacked hopes and dreams (Clabough et al., 2017). These students started talking about the historical figures, Frederick Douglass from the first project and Ida B. Wells from the second project, in three dimensional terms in the second unit’s summative assessment. That assignment tasked students with drawing a Janus figure for Frederick Douglass and Ida B. Wells while also answering questions about these two individuals’ backgrounds and advocacies. The trade books and resources selected through the first two units were designed to highlight how and why both historical figures advocated for civil rights.

The students’ writing showed tremendous progress within the course of a month. Most were writing in complete sentences by the end of the Janus figure activity (See Figure 3):

Figure 3: Student Example 3, Janus Figure Assessment

 The majority of the students cited evidence at the end of the sentences from the trade books and the resources used. The students consistently wrote about Frederick Douglass and Ida B. Wells in three dimensional terms by capturing events in their childhood and family life, as well as their values and beliefs about civil rights issues.

Thematic vs. chronological teaching

            When social studies teachers talk about thematic teaching, they often speak of a dichotomy between chronological instruction and thematic instruction (Turan, 2020). Our work in this project suggests a different approach, one where teachers do not have to sacrifice chronological teaching to embrace thematic instruction. The units highlighted in this project were taught in a chronological order. However, they both included a focus on the struggle for African American civil rights, using the selected trade books as anchor texts. As demonstrated in their Janus figures, the students were able to make thematic connections between the two individuals. The theme was not diluted by teaching the units chronologically, and the chronology of the content was not lost in examining a theme. This project demonstrates that, at least in thematic teaching, you can have your cake and eat it too.

Trade books in middle grades social studies

            Social studies education has long embraced using trade books as instructional tools. There are quite a few articles describing the potential benefits of using trade books in the middle grades social studies class (Clabough & Sheffield, 2022; Wilkins et al., 2008). However, there is little research within the last twenty years that outlines how these potential benefits play out in the middle school classroom.

We found in our work at the Academy that using the trade books was an effective method to engage students in disciplinary literacy. The students demonstrated the ability to gather information from sources and draw informed and supported conclusions. They also began to employ historical empathy, a highly complex skill, with regard to the African American leaders studied in the Reconstruction and Progressive Era units. The results from this project indicate that the articles extolling the potential benefits of trade books in the social studies classroom were well-founded.

Culturally responsive trade books in social studies

Students need opportunities to explore their culture in meaningful ways (Gay, 2000). The exploration of culturally responsive trade books offers students a way to empathize with varied groups’ lived experiences, which is also an important aspect of historical empathy (Endacott & Brooks, 2013). Additionally, drawing on trade books that address diverse cultures helps to cultivate an inclusive learning environment that values all students.

The sixth-grade students were actively engaged in our project through class discussions during read alouds and group work analyzing trade books and supplementary sources. The content being explored focused on African Americans’ lived experiences with racial discrimination. Students were able to see how historical figures analyzed public policies and took civic action, thus demonstrating for the students the practical necessity of being able to complete complex reading tasks. Finally, students gained the skills needed as future democratic citizens to take civic action as change agents to address social injustices (NCSS, 2013b).

Conclusion

            During our time with the students at the Academy, the importance of starting small with building students’ disciplinary literacy skills and giving them space to grow became increasingly obvious. Within a month, the students went from writing sentence fragment responses in the first two tasks to consistently articulating their answers in complete sentences with references to support their arguments. This transformation was accomplished from support and modeling by the teacher and researchers. The exploration of culturally responsive trade books also allowed the students’ historical empathy skills to be strengthened as they could articulate historical figures’ values, beliefs, and advocacies. Social studies teachers need to strive for students to engage in disciplinary literacy in order to examine the experiences and achievements of marginalized groups and to explore complex topics within the U.S. history curriculum. Avoid the assumption that just because students are not reading on grade level, or struggle with writing, that they cannot engage in historical analysis. The students’ growth and engagement with the content that we observed in the first month of school suggests that with the right support, students can successfully grapple with complex historical content.

References

Banks, J. (2019). An introduction to multicultural education (6th ed.). Pearson.

Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M.G. (1991). Research directions: Social studies texts are hard to understanding: Mediating some of the difficulties. Language Arts, 68(6), 482-490.

Berkeley, S., King-Sears, M.E., Vilbas, J., & Conklin, S. (2016). Textbook characteristics that support or thwart comprehension: The current state of social studies texts. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 32(3), 247-272.

Bishop, R.S. (1990). Windows and mirrors: Children’s books and parallel cultures. In K. Holmes (Ed.), Perspectives on teaching and assessing language arts (pp. 83-92). Illinois Association of Teachers of English.

Chick, K.A. (2008). Teaching women’s history through literature: Standards-based lesson plans for grades K-12. NCSS.

Chisholm, J.S., Shelton, A.L., & Sheffield, C.C. (2017). Mediating emotive empathy with informational text: Three students’ think-aloud protocols of Gettysburg: The Graphic Novel. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 61(3), 289-298.

Clabough, J., & Sheffield, C. (2022). An unspeakable act: Disciplinary literacy, racial literacy, and the Tulsa Race Massacre. Research Issues in Contemporary Education, 7(3), 67-103.

Clabough, J., Turner, T., & Carano, K. (2017). When the lion roars everyone listens: Scary good middle school social studies. Association for Middle Level Education.

Endacott, J., & Brooks, S. (2013). An updated theoretical practical model for promoting historical empathy. Social Studies Research and Practice, 8(1), 41-58.

Gates Jr., H.L. (2019). Dark sky rising: Reconstruction and the dawn of Jim Crow. Scholastic Focus.

Gay, G. (1994). At the essence of learning: Multicultural education. Kappa Delta Pi.

Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.

King, L.J. (2020). Black history is not American history: Toward a framework of Black historical consciousness. Social Education, 84(6), 335-341.

King, L.J., & Brown, K. (2014). Once a year to be black: Fighting against typical Black History Month Pedagogies. The Negro Educational Review, 65(1-4), 23-43.

Liang, L.A. (2002). On the shelves of the local library: High-interest, easy reading trade books for struggling middle and high school readers. Preventing School Failure, 46(4), 183-188.

McGowan, T., & Guzzetti, B. (1991). Promoting social studies understanding through literature-based instruction. The Social Studies, 82(1), 16.

Myers, W.D., & Christensen, B. (2008). Ida B. Wells: Let the truth be told. Amistad.

NCSS. (2013a). The College, Career, and Civic Life Framework for Social Studies State Standards: Guidance for enhancing the rigor of K-12 civics, economics, geography, and history. Author.

NCSS. (2013b). Revitalizing civic learning in our schools. Retrieved from https://www.socialstudies.org/position-statements/revitalizing-civic-learning-our-schools

Ochoa-Becker, A. (1996). Building a rationale for issues centered education. In R. Evans & D.W. Saxe (Eds.), Handbook on teaching social issues (pp. 6–13). NCSS.

Palmer, R.G., & Stewart, R.A. (1997). Nonfiction trade books in content area instruction: Realities and potential. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 40(8), 630-641.

Saul, E.W., & Dieckman, D. (2005). Choosing and using information trade books. Theory and Research into Practice, 40(4), 502-513.

Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40-59.

Tracy, J. (2003). Racing through history. Journal of Education, 184(2), 63-68.

Turan, B. (2020). Thematic vs. chronological history teaching debate: A social media research. Journal of Education and Learning, 9(1), 205-216.

Wilkins, K.H., Sheffield, C.C., Ford, M.B. & Cruz, B.C. (2008). Images of struggle and triumph: Using picture books to teach about the civil rights movement in the secondary classroom. Social Education, 72(4), 177-180.

NCSS Response to AP African American Course Controversy

NCSS Response to the AP African American Course Controversy

Official statement of the National Council for the Social Studies:

NCSS recognizes that states and districts have the right to approve or not approve individual courses and, in so doing, have a responsibility to use a transparent evaluation process that includes educators and other experts in the field. When courses, especially those that were created and supported by some of the United States’ most esteemed scholars and organizations, appear to have been rejected without a transparent process, all educators and community members should be concerned and have the right to request more information on the process used.

Of equal concern to NCSS is that the current political climate might negatively impact the great work that is being done throughout the United States to diversify curricula, use culturally responsive resources, and build content and pedagogical knowledge so that educators might better create lessons and other opportunities to address a longstanding marginalization of Black histories in the American education system. The NCSS previously addressed concerns about “divisive concepts” laws that seek “to ban the teaching of such concepts as race, racism, white supremacy, equity, justice, and social-emotional learning, as well as to limit the teaching of content such as slavery, Black history, women’s suffrage, and civil rights.”

NCSS supports the teaching of Black histories in a manner that engages students in learning about the achievements, joy, perseverance, agency, and resilience of Black Americans. An attempt to block courses that fully portray the Black experience, such as the AP African American Studies course, places professional judgment boundaries on teachers’ freedom to teach  and denies students the right to learn rich, complex histories that allow for multiple perspectives and deep exploration of the successes and struggles in our collective history across cultures. Every student has the right to learn about Black histories and the Black experience, and every teacher has the right to teach Black histories and the Black experience without the fear of intimidation and retaliation.

NCSS continues to advocate for the inclusion of Black histories and contemporary issues across K-12 curricula and calls on all education officials to provide students with the right to learn about, and from, the experiences of Black Americans. NCSS strongly believes in the educational value of offering diverse learning experiences in schools. We believe all students deserve the opportunity to learn African American studies and should have access to courses that support their pursuit of higher education and the study of African American history and culture in all education settings and throughout life.

Why We Must Teach African American History

Why We Must Teach African American History

Marlene Munn-Joseph

Recent years have seen efforts to include African American history as part of the American cultural heritage in school curriculums nationwide. A few examples include an elective 2020 African American studies course in Texas for the 10th-12th grade, in 2018 the adoption of a curriculum entitled Developing Black Historical Consciousness in Kentucky’s Jefferson County Public Schools, and in 2005, an African American history course as a high school graduation requirement in the Philadelphia school district (Pew Trust, 2020). These efforts suggest that progress has been made in the century-long struggles of African American communities to include African American history in the mainstream narrative of American history. In this light, the controversy surrounding Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s administration’s decision to publicly censor parts of the College Board’s Advanced Placement (AP) African American Studies Curriculum and the College Board’s seemingly capitulation is puzzling. Including an AP African American studies curriculum in the College Board’s offering legitimizes the experiences and histories of African American communities. According to the College Board site, the curriculum has been in the making for over a decade. Respected scholars such as Henry Louis Gates and Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham have been part of the effort. However, the DeSantis administration’s attempt to censor aspects of the curriculum where they cite violates the provision of “principles of freedom” in newly passed laws (State Board of Education rule 6A-1.094124, and Florida laws including 1003.42, F.S., and House Bill 7.), and has little “educational value” demonstrates the cost of legitimation is an erasure of ideas and events that compete with the mainstream historical consciousness of American exceptionalism and harmony.

It is critical to recognize the importance of legitimizing African American studies as part of the American mainstream historical consciousness. E pluribus unum, out of many one, is a critical conceptual frame in American democracy rooted in two foundational ideas. (1) Citizenship and fundamental citizenship rights  are available to all regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, and gender. (2) Diverse groups can coexist as long as we respect the rights of one another.

Enacting a culturally pluralistic society requires constant negotiation on the following two questions. (1) What are our ideas about America? and (2) What does it mean to be an American. Dill and Hunter (2010) describe e pluribus unum as “the central and enduring conundrum of American democracy. How much plurality? What kind of unity? On whose terms?”

To answer the above two questions, we turn to our historical consciousness to make sense of our past and to inform our future. Our individual experiences and our interpretations of those experiences constitute our historical consciousness. The DeSantis administration’s new laws require a singular historical consciousness that does not allow for dialogue on these questions or the introduction of a Black historical consciousness about the past and present. The Florida Department of Education (FLDOE) Commissioner of Education, in a tweet, provided a one-page handout with a table listing six problematic areas that the state wanted expunged (out of 19 identified in their correspondence with the College Board over the 2022 calendar year) (Diaz, 2023). These areas explored the roots of institutional racism, contemporary African American resistance movements, and the involvement of marginalized communities. According to a FLDOE memo, these topics specifically violated Florida law because of “Instruction rule, 6A-1.094124, which requires that “instruction on required topics must be factual and objective and may not suppress or distort significant historical events” and in the same memo, FLDOE cited the material as conflicting with Florida law because it contained “discriminatory and historically fictional topics” (Meckler, 2023).

Labeling the topics of institutional racism and contemporary African American resistance movements as fictional does not allow Americans to have an informed conversation on what it means to be an American or the nature of American society past and present. The DeSantis administration is unwilling to have students engage in the historical process, engaging in intellectual debates to explore contentious interpretations of histories. They are using state power to discredit the work of credible scholars, deny the complexity of the lived experiences of African Americans in the United States, and they are trying to present a singular and inaccurate historical consciousness. The message it sends to all Americans is that the banned topics are not plausible and promote an uncritical examination of history and the DeSantis administration’s censorship undermines the ability of the youth of Florida to analyze, integrate, and form their own the historical consciousness.

Censoring these topics dismisses the necessity of Black historical consciousness. LaGarrett King (2017) argues that Black historical consciousness is essential because African American history includes critical events in its communities. For example, significant to African American history are traditions of Black liberation such as Juneteenth (among a few holidays celebrated as Emancipation holidays) and the loss of African American educators due to the Brown vs. Board of Education decision which led to the push for integrated schools by discriminatory school boards. Blatantly ignoring the histories of African American communities is intolerance.

The DeSantis administration is using the law to impose a false consensus on what they see as the “true” narrative of American history. The FLDOE’s correspondence with the College Board suggests that the AP African American studies curriculum pushed the boundaries of legitimation to far. The initial version of the African American studies pilot challenged the DeSantis administration and their supporters’ understanding of America’s historical consciousness by questioning the American collective identity and civic culture. The challenge to e pluribus unum continues. 

References

Diaz Jr. Manny [@SenMannyDiazJr](2023,Jan 20) Concerns found within College Board’s submitted AP African American Studies Course. [Image Attached] [Tweet] Twitter. twitter.com/SenMannyDiazJr/status/161656504876738560  

Dill, J.S., Hunter, J.D. (2010). Education and the Culture Wars. In: Hitlin, S., Vaisey, S. (eds) Handbook of the Sociology of Morality. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6896-8_15

King, LaGarrett. (2017). Black History is Not American History: Toward a Framework of Black Historical Consciousness. Social Education 84(6) , pp. 335–341

Meckler, Laura A. (2023, February 9). Florida details months of complaints about the AP African American studies course. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/02/09/florida-ap-african-american-studies-complaints-college-board/

Mercer, Marsha (2020, August) “Black History Instruction Gets New Emphasis in Many States” Pew Trusts. Retrieved from https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2020/08/20/black-history-instruction-gets-new-emphasis-in-many-states

The Failures of the Recovery from the Great Recession

The Failures of the Recovery from the Great Recession

Michael Meeropol and Jared Ragusett

When Barack Obama took over as President, there were fears that the United States was heading for a re-run of the Great Depression. The financial meltdown that became apparent during calendar year 2008 had sparked a dramatic recession – which has come to be known, with 20-20 hindsight, as the Great Recession. When Obama took office, the economy was hemorrhaging 700,000 jobs a month. The unemployment rate had climbed to 9 percent and was still increasing. Something had to be done.

Obama’s program passed the House and Senate in March of 2009. It was just enough to stop the bleeding and begin what turned out to be a painfully slow recovery. But because of a combination of Democratic timidity and Republican opposition, the size of the macroeconomic stimulation contained in the Recovery Act was much too small. In order to get the 60 votes needed to defeat a Republican filibuster, the Obama Administration had to pare back their proposed spending increases and tax cuts in order to satisfy the deficit hawks among the Democratic majority.

The result was a historically slow recovery which, the writers believe, was the reason the House flipped to the Republicans in 2010, the Senate flipped to the Republicans in 2014, and one of the reasons Donald Trump was elected President at the end of Obama’s two terms. This paper details the macroeconomic impact of the Obama Recovery program and compares several important macro-economic indicators from that recovery (2009-2017) to previous recoveries from recessions in the post-World War II era. The variables investigated include the ratio of investment to gross domestic product (GDP), the rate of growth of productivity, the ratio of consumption to GDP, the unemployment rate, the capacity utilization rate, the employment-to-population ratio, and the rate of growth of real GDP.

The results of the comparisons are striking. Real GDP growth was slow through 2016. Investment incentives were severely damaged by the housing bubble during the years 1995-2005, followed by the housing bubble meltdown during the years 2005-2009. Thus, during the Obama recovery, housing investment barely budged, reducing the overall level of investment. This led to a miniscule productivity growth rate. Meanwhile, consumption spending which is the key incentive for the revival of investment during business cycle upswings rose slowly as well. It also took a long time for the unemployment rate to fall to its pre-recession level.

This disappointingly sluggish recovery was the culmination of a number of long run trends that had slowed the economy during the entire period since the early 1970’s including the long-term slowdown in GDP growth per capita since the early 1980s.

During the Obama recovery, the unemployment rate declined very slowly. Obama won re-election but up and down the ballot – including in many state legislatures and the House of Representatives beginning in 2010 – Republicans cashed in on the impatience of citizens with the slow pace of recovery. The economy did not get back to “normal” until 2016 but it was too late for the Democrats. Trump was able to ride to a razor thin victory in part on the strength of disappointment by many people who had voted for Obama – both rural whites in key states like Wisconsin and Michigan who switched to Trump, as well as Black voters whose turnout fell in Detroit, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Milwaukee with devastating electoral consequences for three crucial battleground states (Krogstad and Lopez, 2017).

When President Obama took office, all eyes were focused on the short-run challenge of the Great Recession. Here’s how his Council Of Economic Advisers stated it, a year later, in the Economic Report of the President, 2010:

“In December 2007, the American economy entered what at first seemed likely to be a mild recession. … [R]eal house prices (that is, house prices adjusted for inflation) had risen to unprecedented levels, almost doubling between 1997 and 2006. The rapid run-up in prices was accompanied by a residential construction boom and the proliferation of complex mortgages and mortgage-related financial assets. The fall of national house prices starting in early 2007, and the associated declines in the values of mortgage-backed and other related assets, led to a slowdown in the growth of consumer spending, increases in mortgage defaults and home foreclosures, significant strains on financial institutions, and reduced credit availability.

By early 2008, the economy was contracting. Employment fell by an average of 137,000 jobs per month over the first eight months of 2008. Real GDP rose only anemically from the third quarter of 2007 to the second quarter of 2008.

Then in September 2008, the character of the downturn worsened dramatically. The collapse of Lehman Brothers and the near-collapse of American International Group (AIG) led to a seizing up of financial markets and plummeting consumer and business confidence. Parts of the financial system froze, and assets once assumed to be completely safe, such as money-market mutual funds, became unstable and subject to runs. Credit spreads, a common indicator of credit market stress, spiked to unprecedented levels in the fall of 2008. The value of the stock market plunged 24 percent in September and October, and another 15 percent by the end of January. [O]ver the final four months of 2008 and the first month of 2009, the economy lost, on average, a staggering 544,000 jobs per month, the highest level of job loss since the demobilization at the end of World War II. Real GDP fell at an increasingly rapid pace: an annual rate of 2.7 percent in the third quarter of 2008, 5.4 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008, and 6.4 percent in the first quarter of 2009” (ERP, 2010: 26-27).

Here is how President Obama himself described the crisis that greeted him when he took office:

“Last January, (2009) years of irresponsible risk-taking and debt-fueled speculation—unchecked by sound oversight—led to the near-collapse of our financial system. We were losing an average of 700,000 jobs each month. Over the course of one year, $13 trillion of Americans’ household wealth had evaporated as stocks, pensions, and home values plummeted. Our gross domestic product was falling at the fastest rate in a quarter century. The flow of credit, vital to the functioning of businesses large and small, had ground to a halt. The fear among economists, from across the political spectrum, was that we could sink into a second Great Depression” (ERP, 3).

Later in the same message he noted that there were also long-term problems that his administration had to confront:

“At the same time, long before this crisis hit, middle-class families were under growing strain. For decades, Washington failed to address fundamental weaknesses in the economy: rising health care costs, growing dependence on foreign oil, an education system unable to prepare all of our children for the jobs of the future. In recent years, spending bills and tax cuts for the very wealthiest were approved without paying for any of it, leaving behind a mountain of debt. And while Wall Street gambled without regard for the consequences, Washington looked the other way.

As a result, the economy may have been working for some at the very top, but it was not working for all American families. Year after year, folks were forced to work longer hours, spend more time away from their loved ones, all while their incomes flat-lined and their sense of economic security evaporated. Growth in our country was neither sustained nor broadly shared. Instead of a prosperity powered by smart ideas and sound investments, growth was fueled in large part by a rapid rise in consumer borrowing and consumer spending” (ERP, 5-6).

The Council of Economic Advisers elaborated a bit more on these long-run problems:

“…even before the crisis, the economy faced significant long-term challenges. As a result, it was doing poorly at providing rising standards of living for the vast majority of Americans…Beginning around 1970, slower productivity growth and rising income inequality caused incomes for most families to grow only slowly. After a half-decade of higher growth in the 1990s, the real income of the typical American family actually fell between 2000 and 2006” (ERP, 28).

As to what had caused the increase in inequality and slower productivity growth over the long run, the Council members were silent. They did, however, identify a rising share of debt-financed consumption as the problem for the decade since 2000:

“The expansion of the 2000s was fueled in part by high consumption. [T]he share of GDP that takes the form of consumption has been on a generally upward trend for decades and reached unprecedented heights in the 2000s. The personal saving rate fell to exceptionally low levels, and trade deficits were large and persistent. A substantial amount of the remainder of GDP took the form of housing construction, which may have crowded out other kinds of investment. Such an expansion is not just unstable, as we have learned painfully over the past two years. It also contributes too little to increases in standards of living. Low investment in equipment and factories slows the growth of productivity and wages” (ERP, 29-30).

In order to assess whether the Obama Administration’s plan for recovery from the Great Recession was a success or failure, one must first explain how to judge success or failure. In the Economic Report of the President for 2017, Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers certainly argued that what they had done since January 2009 had been a great success. Here is how they argued:

“Over the two terms of the Obama Administration, the U.S. economy has made a remarkable recovery from the Great Recession. After peaking at 10.0 percent in October 2009, the unemployment rate has been cut by more than half to 4.6 percent as of November 2016 … Real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita recovered fully to its pre-crisis peak in the fourth quarter of 2013, … As of November 2016, the economy has added 14.8 million jobs over 74 months, the longest streak of total job growth on record. Since private-sector job growth turned positive in March 2010, U.S. businesses have added 15.6 million jobs. Real wage growth has been faster in the current business cycle than in any since the early 1970s” [ERP: 217: 21].

The forceful response of the federal government to the crisis in 2008 and 2009 helped stave off a potential second Great Depression by setting the U.S. economy on track to rebuild, reinvest, and recover. Everything the Obama Council of Economic Advisers marked in their 2017 report is correct. Their emphasis on the importance of both the fiscal stimulus of the Recovery Act, and the temporary payroll tax holiday is not misplaced. Unfortunately, because of the political constraints on big deficits and the almost universal opposition of the Congressional Republicans, the Obama Administration had to be content with a fiscal stimulus, despite being the largest in the post-World War II economy, turned out to be woefully insufficient.

What was left out of the Council of Economic Advisers’ celebration of the successes of the post 2009 recovery was a sense of how the post 2009 period – the period of recovery according to the National Bureau of Economic Research’s Business Cycle Dating Committee – compared with recoveries from previous recessions. In general, it is essential that such comparisons be made across the board so that we can judge whether a particular set of policies was successful or not. The economy did recover. By the time Obama left office in 2017, all economic indicators were significantly better than they were when he took office. If that is all the evidence that is needed, then every President from Truman to Obama, except Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush and Donald Trump, represents an economic success story.

However, if we are going to use the comparative analysis, we have to compare apples to apples. Our comparative data will cover the quarters of recovery — from the trough to the peak. We will compare the data for the recovery from the Great Recession with previous recoveries going back to the 1961-70 period. As always, we will use the quarters of recovery as identified by the NBER’s Business Cycle Dating Committee.

The next, and most significant question is: What are the standards of success? We have already indicated that the rate of growth of real GDP per capita is a crucial element of economic success. But growth has never been smooth. From the initial discovery back in 1819 that there is a “business cycle,” it has been apparent that economies organized by some variant of free-market capitalism grew by fits and starts surging forward in periods of growth, only to have them interrupted by what were called in the 19th century “crises.” Long run economic growth was powered by such surges of expansion. It is during these surges (officially called recoveries in the literature these days) that improvements in productivity occur for the most part because of high levels of private investment.

Investment and productivity growth represent the “supply side” of economic growth. But investment actually does dual duties because it is the most dynamic element in aggregate demand. When it is rising rapidly (evidenced by a high ratio of investment to GDP) it stimulates an increase in aggregate demand. When that ratio falls, it causes slowdowns and even recessions. These swings in investment have ramifications via the multiplier effect on consumption, by far the largest contributor to the “demand side” of economic growth. While investment changes introduce the major dynamic into the system, it is the growth of consumption that sustains it. Sometimes, export surges can play an important role and during wartime government spending plays a major role as well.

Meanwhile, productivity growth is the process that enables economic growth. All investments both in physical and human capital increase the capacity of the economy to produce. To the extent that the investment utilizes the newest technology, it plays a major role in increasing productivity. An increase in productivity makes it possible for wages to increase without cutting into profits, and for profits to increase without depressing wages. Thus, a higher rate of productivity growth during a period of economic recovery indicates that the economy is doing well, whereas a slowdown in productivity growth indicates the opposite. Though journalists, politicians and the public usually see GDP growth as the key to an economy’s success, from an economists’ point of view the gold standard of success is a high rate of productivity growth – because that facilitates higher economic growth and a rising standard of living.

So the rate of growth of productivity and the ratio of investment to GDP are both extremely important indicators of economic success. For investment, the standard of success is whether there is a relatively high ratio to GDP, which would show investment playing a very positive role. A relatively low ratio to GDP shows that investment is failing to provide the important dynamic element. The ratio of consumption spending to GDP shows how a growth spurt is sustained.

Our final standards of success relate to how close our economy comes to meeting its potential during a period of expansion. The usual standard of success, and the one that often has important political ramifications, is the civilian unemployment rate. Unemployed resources represent a waste of potential. In this paper, we choose to use three variables representing three different ways to measure the closeness to potential experienced during a recovery: unemployment, capacity utilization and the employment to population ratio. Though unemployment is the one most quoted in the media, there has always been an argument within the economics profession about how much unemployment is “voluntary.” Voluntary unemployment is not a waste of potential as the individual making the decision is unwilling to commit that potential to employment.

To further complicate the idea that the civilian unemployment rate measures a waste of human resources, we have the argument introduced by Milton Friedman that there is a “natural” rate of unemployment. That concept has been joined by the idea that there is a “non-accelerating-inflation rate of unemployment” (or NAIRU). At either or both of these rates, which have never been precisely identified numerically and which have changed from time to time, one could argue that the economy is not wasting resources because rates of unemployment below either the “natural” rate or the NAIRU are unsustainable.

In order to avoid arguing about how much of measured unemployment is truly involuntary, we also present the capacity utilization rate. This is a true measure of deficiency of aggregate demand because except for some minimal downtime for either routine maintenance or re-tooling, excess capacity is a clear waste of economic resources. Finally, the employment to population ratio avoids the knotty issue of how many people without jobs are truly not in the labor force. It captures the discouraged workers who never get counted in official unemployment statistics while still underestimating the under-utilization of human resources because it fails to measure involuntary part-time work. We believe all three of these statistics can give us a sense of how close to optimum utilization of resources an economy comes during a period of expansion. We also note that the impact of government spending, as evidenced by the data, was insufficient to propel a vigorous recovery given the severity of the downturn and the deep dive in the investment to GDP (I/GP) ratio.

With this plan, we can now turn to actually measuring the recovery from the Great Recession against previous recoveries starting with the 1961-70 recovery. The quarters between the troughs (1961, 1970, 1975, 1982, 1991, and 2001) and peaks (1969, 1973, 1980, 1990, 2001, and 2007) provide our data for the comparisons with the recovery from the Great Recession. In order to avoid the impact of compounding over recoveries of different lengths, we utilize averages over the course of each recovery as the basis for comparisons.

To assess the recovery from the Great Recession, we begin in the second quarter of 2009, and end when Obama left the White House in the first quarter of 2017. Even though the recovery did not end until the Covid-19 pandemic threw the economy into a very deep recession in the second quarter of 2020, our job is to describe the economy during Obama’s administration. First look at the ratio of gross investment to GDP. The reason we use gross investment rather than net investment is because even though the depreciation part of gross investment does not involve any net increase in the capital stock, the capital bought to replace that part of the capital stock that is “wearing out” will fix the newest technology and thus contribute to economic growth. In addition, the spending to replace wearing out capital has a multiplier effect just like any other spending.

Taking every recovery going back to 1961, all recoveries showed an average I/GDP ratio above 17 percent except for the 1961-70 recovery where investment as a percentage of GDP was below that level. The recovery from the Great Recession was significantly lower than the previous recoveries averaging just over 16 percent.

But that does not fully capture the seriousness of the problem. When President Obama took office, the I/GDP ratio was 12.7 at the trough of the Great Recession. Unfortunately, unlike some earlier recessions (1974 and 1982 for example), when the ratio rebounded dramatically (reaching 17% in 1976 and over 20% in 1984). It took three years between 2009 and 2012 for the I/GDP ratio to reach 15.5%. It averaged only 16.2 percent of GDP for the entire period through 2017Q1 and in fact never broke 18% until after 2017. The reason for the sluggish recovery of investment is easy to see, the fall in residential housing investment that had been the proximate cause of the Great Recession. From a ratio of 6.6 % of GDP in 2006, housing investment plummeted to 2.6 % of GDP at the depth of the Great Recession and had slowly climbed only to 3.9 % of GDP by the end of President Obama’s second term. This ratio was lower than the previous nadir of residential investment as a percentage of GDP at the end of the 2001 recession (4.8%). If housing investment had just returned to that level, overall investment would have broken 18% significantly earlier.

Because investment is the driving force of the economy’s dynamic, we should expect that the sluggish recovery of the I/GDP ratio to have a significant impact on the rate of growth of productivity, the rate of growth of the economy, and the variables that measure how close to potential (sufficiency of aggregate demand) the economy is. Sure enough, the numbers bear this out. The rate of growth of productivity was most dramatic in the 1961-70 recovery, averaging over 3 percent per quarter. After disappointing numbers in the 1970s, the rate of growth of productivity averaged 2 percent or higher per quarter over the three recoveries beginning in 1982 – averaging 2.6 percent between 2001 and the end of 2007 which was the peak before the Great Recession. Unfortunately, the disappointing numbers from the 1970s returned with a dismal 1.1 percent average in productivity growth over the entire recovery period through the first quarter of 2017. That coupled with disappointing numbers for unemployment, (7.3 percent average) capacity utilization (75.8 percent average) and especially the employment-to-population ratio (58.9 percent average) combine to explain the disappointing overall per capita GDP growth.

Except for the recovery from the dot-com bubble recession (2001-2007), every recovery going back to the 1960s had experienced per capita GDP growth averaging 2.5 percent or better. But as the economy struggled to slowly rise from the trough of the Great Recession the rate of growth of per capita GDP averaged only 1.4 percent per quarter through 2017. That is even lower than the 1.9 percent in the 2001-2007 recovery.

The unemployment rate had been trending upwards since the 1961-1970 recovery, averaging over six percent per quarter beginning with the 1971-74 recovery until the recoveries of 1991-2000 and 2001-2007 where the rates were 5.5 percent and 5.3 percent respectively. Similarly capacity utilization has been trending down since the robust 86 plus percent in the 1961-70 period. After an upward move in the 1991-2000 recovery, it resumed its downward trajectory, ending up averaging the lowest since World War II over the recovery from the Great Recession. The same trend appears in the employment-to-population ratio, which jumped up to an average of 63 percent in the 1991-2000 recovery only to average 58.9 percent in the recovery since 2009.

This is where the insufficiency of the macro-economic stimuli engaged in by the Obama administration (and we repeat, we understand how they were politically constrained, especially after “the worst” of the Great Recession had passed and the economy was clearly in recovery) reveals itself. The extraordinary nature of the deep dive that occurred in investment and the growth of GDP called for a significantly bigger stimulus to aggregate demand than in previous periods. Government spending at levels similar to previous business cycle recoveries was not enough.

The only departure from previous government stimuli during recoveries was the increase in transfer payments. Unfortunately, this only has a multiplier effect through its impact on consumption but the data shows that the ratio of consumption to GDP was less than a half a percent higher than in the previous recovery. There is no question that the federal spending stimulus would have had to be much higher than it was for the recovery to have any hope of being as good as previous ones.

We contend that despite the laser-like focus of the Obama Administration on getting the economy moving again as symbolized by the Recovery Act’s unprecedented explicit efforts to use fiscal policy to induce a robust recovery (the Congressional Budget Office concluded that the Recovery Act provided a stimulus spending level of $739 billion), it did not come close to closing an aggregate demand shortfall that was estimated conservatively at $1.2 trillion.

It is also important to add that the Federal Reserve’s expansive monetary policy seemed to have no positive impact on investment, particularly the interest sensitive housing sector, given the free fall of the housing market after the collapse of the bubble – almost a textbook example of the simple argument that the Fed cannot push on a string.

Initially, the Recovery Act did what it was supposed to. The federal budget deficit ballooned to 9 percent of GDP in 2010 and the unemployment rate began to fall. But when the Recovery Act spending began to peter out, the Republicans who had taken control of the House in 2010 forced the Obama Administration to compromise and agree to a set of spending restraints knows as a “sequester.” The result was that the federal deficit, the major impetus to the economy when investment spending lags, fell so that by 2013 it was only a bit over 4 percent of GDP.

Thus, it took all the way to 2015 for the unemployment rate to get back to what it had been before the Great Recession. This long, laborious struggle by the economy just to get back to square one, no doubt due to the fact that the I/GDP ratio never achieved the peak it had reached in the previous four recoveries.

In this extraordinary period when the economy was attempting to dig itself out of the hole created by short-run financial meltdown and the bursting of a housing bubble that left residential investment way below recent levels for the entire course of the recovery, a much higher level of government stimulus would have been necessary. Obviously, the Obama Administration and its allies in Congress cannot be totally faulted for this because after 2010, Republicans were in control of the House of Representatives and after 2014, Republicans took control of the Senate as well. The Obama Administration did make efforts to get an infrastructure bill passed a number of times but the Republicans in Congress blocked them. Despite wholesale opposition, the Obama Administration was able to increase stimuli via a temporary suspension of two percent from the Payroll Tax. They were able to do this by delaying the automatic expiration date of the George W. Bush tax cuts, scheduled to sunset after 2010, for two years which got Congressional support for the payroll tax holiday and expansion of unemployment compensation. After 2013, some of those tax cuts were made permanent while the payroll tax holiday ended. Unfortunately, the initial proposal for the Recovery Act was much too low and in order to get 60 votes in the Senate to break a Republican filibuster against it, the initial proposal was cut back slightly.

The economy is not just numbers like GDP and Investment. Ultimately, the key to economic well-being is the real income of ordinary Americans. We believe that the statistic identified as the median income of year-round full-time workers is indicative. Beginning in the third quarter of 2009, by the first quarter of 2017, the weekly real earnings of workers over 16 had risen the grand total of 2.03% for an average of about .28% a year. These were significantly lower than in previous recoveries though it is fair to say, median income growth was very slow for the entire period after 1980.

With 20-20 hindsight, the initial bill should have had a section that called for spending the same amount again if after two years, the unemployment rate had not fallen substantially. Given that previous deep sharp recessions (1974, 1981-82) experienced strong rapid recoveries, such a provision might have been sold as “insurance” against such a sluggish recovery and might have passed. But of course, hindsight is always 20-20.

The unfortunate result of the fact that the recovery from the Great Recession was much too slow and that median incomes of ordinary Americans hardly budged during the recovery was the high level of dissatisfaction within large swaths of the American people. Though there are many reasons for the surprise victory of Donald J. Trump in the 2016 election, one element that clearly contributed to it was the failed recovery from the Great Recession.

References

ERP (2010). Economic report of the President. Council of Economic Advisers.

ERP (2017). Economic report of the President. Council of Economic Advisers.

Krogstad, J.M. & Lopez, M.H.  (2017, May 12). “Black voter turnout fell in 2016, even as a record number of Americans cast ballots.” Pew Research Center.

The Transformation of Regional Politics in Philadelphia

The Transformation of Regional Politics in Philadelphia

Kevin McCabe

The dawn of urbanization in the U.S. arrived in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, from which came rapid innovations in transportation and construction technology. The colonial legislation put in power by the founding fathers was tested immensely by the growing population of urban life. The necessities of sustaining an exponentially large and dense city seem evident at first glance: political, economic, and social representation, a stable job income for single or multi-family homes, access to public services, and affordable housing stock. Unfortunately, as one may notice by the pattern of urban decline as early as the 1950s, accomplishing such a feat is nearly impossible with the lack of quality political representation for marginalized members of the urban community.  Philadelphia, faced with the issues of urban decline, embarked on a project of urban renewal to revamp the public and private housing sector, introduce new forms of transportation for suburban commuters, and fix the educational landscape of the city. Similarly to other cities facing urban decline, the ‘City of Brotherly Love’ has seen countless projects or urban revitalization that historians, over time, began to view differently. Public Housing, Race, and Renewal by John F. Bauman (1987) indicates that historians viewed the solution to Philadelphia’s housing segregation, job discrimination, deindustrialization, and part of its economic decline issues through government intervention in the public housing sector. Carolyn T. Adams, author of From the Outside In (2014), exemplifies the shift of focus to local and federal intervention in Third-Sector organizations, and the lack thereof, in the startup of big industrial and transportation renewal. Similarly to Bauman, Adams refers to many of the solutions and ideas being created from a local level and being affected by public preference and federal policy. Lastly, The Problem of Jobs by Guian A. McKee (2010) takes a more positive outlook on urban renewal in Philadelphia, claiming that despite providing mixed results, the actions of a new form of Liberalism, local and federal policies, and initiatives slowed the progress of deindustrialization and moderated its effects.[1] Over the last 30 years, the scholarship on Philadelphian policies toward reshaping the historical city has changed dramatically from a focus on blaming federal policy, suburbanization and deindustrialization, the failure to provide adequate public housing and proper restructuring of the city’s inner-city blocks as the cause of economic decline and racial conflict. A newer approach to these issues is to take a city-wide approach to how local politicians and project professionals maneuvered a complex level of federal aid, Third-Sector organizations, and an angry white working class to achieve successes in some areas and failures in other neighborhoods.

Public Housing, Race, and Renewal by John F. Bauman focuses on those who debated, promoted, and shaped Philadelphia’s public housing and urban development policies, and how the local and national shift of focus from public housing to rebuilding the city turned a desegregation project into a reinforcement of public housing poverty stereotypes as a federally-funded welfare program. Bauman, having written his book in 1987, comprises the oldest historical outlook of the three books being analyzed in this historiography study. Therefore, both Adams and McKee draw from elements of Bauman’s argument and other authors of his time to build a comprehensive outlook on the complexity of undertaking complete urban reform in one of the oldest and historically significant cities in the U.S. Bauman utilizes the terms professionals and communitarians to describe the progressive outlook of urban leaders during the middle of urban slum expansion in the 1920s. Adams’ and McKee’s central focus on the privatization of industry follows the pattern of slowing progressivism in mid-19th century Philadelphia. Bauman wrote of the tendencies of the federal government, and how the ideas around poverty-stricken areas led to the failure of public housing as a program for economic mobility: “…the federal government’s rigid funding formula for public housing construction, as well as its strict guidelines for tenant selection and tenant retention, begged the question of public housing’s mission. Was public housing to provide good housing for the working class, or was the program to build modern asylums where the poor could learn habits of thrift and cleanliness?”[2] A few ideas are present in Bauman’s argument that hold merit for future scholarship on Philadelphia’s inner city. Particularly, how government funding, despite having the intention of fixing blighted neighborhoods, ends up exacerbating the issue by being too strict with rules, regulations, and the location of the project. Bauman goes even further to state that the racial composition of a project was made to conform to the prevailing composition of the surrounding neighborhood.[3] Essentially, public housing was the same as black housing in inner-city Philadelphia. As public housing became more attached in name to the characteristics of the poor, the politically right-leaning citizens of Philadelphia lost hope that public housing would help people in poverty learn habits of thrift and cleanliness. One would also argue that the idea that public housing would help the poor learn good habits solely based on the architecture itself perpetuates the notion that all people in black-majority neighborhoods promote a culture of poverty. The hopes of architects and city planners were quickly dashed as public opinion on public housing became politicized- it was no longer a rehabilitation program, but a public welfare program for housing the city’s worst residents. Bauman also takes note of the war-spawned conservatism that swept the nation during WWII, a pattern of decentralized federal housing policy that would become a staple in how local Philadelphian officials would carry out construction projects in the future.[4] Federal funding would be provided for projects, but only constructed by private enterprises. This foreshadows the states’ use of nonprofits to accomplish construction projects more efficiently than traditional means of project approval depicted in From the Outside In. The bullish conservative real estate established for new housing projects, and the use of subdivision in existing housing to create an artificially lower demand for low-income and public housing meant that Washington and the city Housing Authority were: “… sacrificing the goals of good housing and defense to the particular interests of the homebuilding and real estate industries.”[5] The pattern imposed by the federal and state governments is private and public organizational appeasement, an act that helped speed up the development process of housing and urban renewal at the expense of ill-planned resident displacement and the diminishment of government authority over the real estate market and urban planning. Even when projects were underway, residency was determined by the current racial composition of the neighborhood. Bauman, noticing the injustice in urban housing planning, stated: “Crassly denying the new housing to low-income black slum residents reeked of injustice… Blacks were being forced to make more than their share of the sacrifice.”[6] Historians’ views on urban redevelopment in Philadelphia have not changed from Bauman’s to Adams’ interpretation- despite good intentions, the fears of black slum encroachment barred minorities from economic mobility by transforming a creative, community-building public housing movement into a cookie-cutter asylum for the poor. As the Housing Act of 1954 rolled around, the idea of city rebuilding became synonymous with economic revitalization.[7] Forced by the realities of the failures of massive elevator towers to fix the city’s housing issues, planners had to decide what locations would be best for a project’s success, zoning certain areas as unsalvageable (black zones), and blighted neighborhoods as buffer zones.[8] This is a form of redlining that reinforced segregated city patterns, instead of fixing the economic and social disparity between residents that are only blocks apart. Furthermore, it further ostracized inner-city black residents from society. Bauman claims that “Only a massive infusion of local, state, and federal money into housing and blight removal could make city neighborhoods ripe again for private investment.”[9] City politicians took their eyes off a lack of housing in certain areas to transform areas to be more appealing to white commuters and future residents, as only 21 percent of displaced families found satisfactory housing; in the eyes of a Philadelphian politician, urban renewal meant black removal.[10] Slum clearance continued, even though public housing became a welfare program: “… at the end of the decade, [the public housing program] remained demoralized and directionless.”[11] Federal housing policy established a framework for a decentralized program of low-income housing that favored white residents and suburban commuters to attract a larger visitor economy, at the expense of inner-city residents. Bauman shows how the government built and bureaucratically managed complexes that contrasted too starkly with American housing norms- how too much government involvement can create complexity in the rebuilding process when housing authorities have to adhere to a changing political climate.[12] Adam’s book works to recount that moving too far in the opposite direction- losing control over infrastructure oversight- was a step in the right direction to starting larger projects, that despite being rarely beneficial to inner-city residents, were economically beneficial to the Philadelphian region as a whole.

Adams’ From the Outside In contradicts Bauman’s belief that Philadelphian urban renewal was a total failure, despite the shortcomings of public housing. Bauman set up Adam’s argument, relating most of the failures in the public housing sector with a shift in ideology that indicated both left and right-leaning political participants supported government intervention and federal funding, and that the division of party lines lies along the direction of the money in the public and private sectors. To set up her perspective of a new form of regionalism, Adams first had to argue against the premise that suburbs have turned their back on central cities.[13] A common assumption made by Bauman that Adams looks to unravel is that suburbanites, as a result of suburbanization, deindustrialization, and the policies of the state and federal government ruined the city’s economy and have made no effort to revitalize it. In fact, over the last 15 years of redevelopment, which would put it squarely in between the publication dates of Bauman’s and Adams’ books, suburbanites have recognized the critical role the city plays in economic functions. De facto regionalism, through the use of Third-Sector organizations, blurs the lines between public and private sectors in American civic life. [14] City managers now turn to private investors to help finance Philadelphian’s transportation system. A new issue has arisen in urban politics- whether these nonprofits, volunteer organizations, research institutions, (etc.), should be used solely to save money and avoid the regulations set by the city and federal government. By using these organizations and providing them with federal aid, they have control over the equal distribution of services and have more authority than state legislation as to where, how, and why a project will be played out. In Bauman’s book, one sees the federal government’s intervention forcing the hand of city planners to change the location of public housing depending on local reception and federal funding. As Adams depicts, the opinion of the urban resident no longer matters, as these non-profits do not need to adhere to the public will or make press releases on the findings and undergoing of the project. While describing the thought process of local politicians at the time, Adams states: “Politicians generally prefer to distribute dollars and services more broadly. It is virtually impossible for the city council to agree to target development dollars in only a few locations because that shortchanges other areas.”[15] Essentially, the agreement behind using Third-Sector organizations is that some people will benefit, while others will suffer from economic, social, and physical displacement. Therefore, the government focuses its efforts on redeveloping one area, a way for suburbanites to slowly change the city without considering the lives of the inhabitants and their organizations’ effects. For example, the Vine Street Expressway, “…offers a classic example of infrastructure that serves the region’s interests at the expense of city dwellers who live nearby… the initial proposal for eight lanes… would have eliminated a Catholic church and school that served as crucial institutions to Chinatown.”[16] One may see a parallel between Bauman and Adams, as the issue of where public housing should be located meant that they were placed in predominantly black neighborhoods, further segregating the minorities that live in public housing and worsening the issue of cramped neighborhoods. Similarly, the issue of where to locate transportation services for commuters fell on black neighborhoods that were seen as ‘unsalvageable’, despite them being a product of a failed distribution of public services. Overall, Adams wanted to indicate how intergovernmental authorities carry out their responsibility for transportation systems that link the city to the suburbs across municipal boundaries, and the inequality present when relying on Third-Sector organizations to carry out the job of the federal and state governments.[17] Adams also alludes to the new centers of gravity within Philadelphia, and how the responsibility of building major districts and developing entirely new districts plays out in the private and public sectors. As the number of organizations grew, the power of the mayor diminished. Government and nonprofit organizations are almost equal in terms of political standing. Revitalizing Philadelphia meant two things- establishing a successful visitor and commuter economy, and reshaping the educational landscape. The City’s 1960 Comprehensive Plan addressed where certain public services should be placed, as well as transportation services and the estimated amount of jobs that should be accomplished by 1980.[18] As Third-Sectors got involved, however, the Plan fell apart and instead the ‘Building Our Strengths’ city plan was enacted, a ratification of existing racial and infrastructure trends in Philadelphia. It contains a compendium of various different projects, ideas, and locations, without offering a comprehensive goal. Third-Sector organizations were hard for even the mayor to control, as their professional positions put them at the forefront of decision-making. As one will see, there are many successes and failures produced by these Third-Sector organizations, most of the failures attributed to poor planning for future usage of the project. In terms of educational attainment, inner-city school districts serve children that are from impoverished or immigrant homes, which means property tax bases cannot produce enough revenue to support schools. A high academic need and weak local tax base meant that, in the 70s and 80s, there was a large downward spiral for urban school districts nationally, from which this pattern the Philadelphia School District reflected. As a result, the government had to intervene and take over: “The most striking change in U.S. education governance in the last forty years has been the growth of centralized state control.”[19] If a school was labeled as distressed, it could legally be taken over by the state. Suburbanites and city dwellers alike saw budgetary shortfalls that are a result of a funding formula incapable of accounting for the city’s high educational costs; restructuring the delivery of education to emphasize competition and mimic market patterns would increase consumer choice. The government was providing EMOs to the worst performing schools, which allowed private management of public schools, but after the failure of EMOs, Philadelphia backed the Charter school movement. Unlike public schools, profit-making businesses play a sizable role in the aspects of charter operations.[20] To make private schools and charter schools more popular, Philadelphia incorporated a portfolio model of pedagogy, where empowered teachers have direct oversight over their students, and parents were given more freedom of choice as to where their child attended school. Portfolio models, however, tended to, “… expand the geographic focus of local school leaders because locals find themselves soliciting support from many outsiders beyond their traditional and local political allies.”[21] Regionalism is seeping into Philadelphia’s educational system, and as Bauman and Adams both clearly indicate, the intersection of local and national politics became an issue when infrastructure was not being built with an image of the future, the ‘bigger picture’, or not being built at all. The charter operators shifted enrollments out of residential neighborhoods and into buildings in the center of the city. Although this is both better economically for the success of charter schools, as there were more students available in the area, the current pattern of location weakened the historical links between public schools and surrounding neighborhoods.[22] Adams and Bauman both highlight the importance of schools in fostering a community and in both cases, residential neighborhoods suffered because of the poor housing quality surrounding these schools. Public housing ended up being placed in areas with the worst housing, often disconnected from the school system after a more conservative voting base blocked public housing and low-income housing in the more affluent neighborhoods. Charter school locations ended up in two positions- either filled to its max capacity with non-caucasian students or filled to less than half-capacity with white students. Charter schools and public housing followed the same path of reinforcing residential segregation patterns, and as both Bauman and Adams write, the educational system is only getting worse as it is privatized; the state lost direct oversight over their students, and the government made no attempt to create a comprehensive plan to rebuild the city with its poverty-stricken residents in mind. Adams does not dislike the use of Third-Sector organizations to accomplish bigger projects faster and cheaper but takes note that city and state governments are channeling dollars into organizational fields where the recipients use those public resources to compete rather than cooperate with one another.[23] Lodging, such as displacement and the need for new residential buildings and the refurbishment of old buildings, made the process more difficult because the well-being for the future of locals’ residency depended on the layout of the city. Despite this, politicians were pushing reliance on the Third Sector anyway. A high level of public funding does not align the Third Sector with government objectives, even if Philadelphia had a comprehensive plan. Instead, public officials only put limited requirements for projects to get them approved faster. The policy around these projects favored competition between the organizations to produce greater efficiency, which then led to competition between the projects post-construction, such as with the charter school movement. Competition fosters organizational isolation- to fix this, Adams indicated a few ways the federal and state governments can navigate the current path of private and public enterprise. Adams states: “City officials should work to induce greater sectoral coherence and concern for serving Philadelphians, to see that the city gains the greatest possible benefit from its concentration of tax-exempt institutions.”[24] Bauman’s book shows how historians of the time witnessed federal funding and building requirements, as well as public opinion on the project, as an obstacle to public housing and urban renewal’s success. Similarly, Adams shows how a move in the opposite direction, a form of laissez-faire economic regionalism, also posed issues because of an emphasis on capitalistic competition that contradicted the government’s goal of urban renewal and a lower inner-city poverty rate. The influx of suburban money bolstered the economy of Philadelphia, which disproves Bauman’s scapegoating of suburbanization as the main cause of an economic decline in Philadelphia, but the oversight in fixing Philadelphia’s racially segregated housing meant that the new projects were being built over the worst areas. Philadelphian low-income neighborhoods were bulldozed and rarely were residents fairly compensated.

            McKee’s The Problem of Jobs contained elements from both Bauman’s and Adams’ work but stood out for its usage of larger, national issues put into context for the rise of Liberalism, a continuation of unemployment issues, and a lack of racial equality in Philadelphia. As opposed to the other books, McKee emphasizes the need for jobs, specifically how  left-leaning political participants’ support of government intervention in the economy persisted at the local level even as national ideologies swayed in the other direction.[25] McKee begins his book after World War II and ends in the 1970s, a timeframe that just overlaps with Bauman’s book and finishes where Adams starts. McKee presents the history of the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation (PIDC), a quasi-public organization that added about 68,000 jobs between 1959 and 1970, and the projects it had undertaken to promote racial equality and prevent further segregation in the city. The placement of McKee’s book at the end of this historiography study, despite taking place in between Bauman and Adams, is not a mistake. McKee’s book indicates the transformation of federal and local policy to reflect the involvement of Third Sector organizations: “These local policy initiatives engaged with and, in some cases, relied on the resources and incentives provided by federal programs, but they remained projects of the local state- of liberal policymakers and activists who constructed public, private, and community-based institutions that sought to address the city’s loss of industrial jobs.”[26] Bauman’s book introduces the concept of using private goals to accomplish public services- McKee takes this and identifies the various projects undertaken to accomplish the Philadelphia Plan and Model Cities program, the first of which to include non-profits to shorten construction periods and bring in more jobs at a rapid rate. McKee is also innovative in his contribution to how Philadelphia’s job-focused programs paralleled racial tracks; the projects that failed generally ignored the social component of industrial decline and racial discrimination in the Philadelphian industry. Specifically, how PIDC’s tendency to work in isolation from those most dramatically affected by economic change led to more suffrage on the part of Philadelphia’s black population.[27] Black-run projects, which both Bauman and Adams failed to allude to, were vulnerable to the real estate market and fluctuations in federal support as a result of changing market conditions. Public action by a hostile white working-class privileged a focus on cultural factors in urban renewal over the need for a long-term plan for fixing structural economic concerns in the city.[28] PIDC and the Philadelphia Plan lost momentum as Liberalism lost its momentum- the national concern for the War on Poverty offered opinionated white city residents a way to lay out their concerns for undergoing an urban renewal project in already affluent neighborhoods. The focus, they believed, should be on the city’s worst slums. Unfortunately, this meant continuing the residential divide of the city’s black population, or in the worst cases, complete displacement and removal. McKee’s analysis of the direct effect of the War on Poverty in the slums of Philadelphia draws parallels to Bauman’s foundation of placing public and low-income housing in economically advantaged neighborhoods. Simply, government intervention focused on white appeasement without the realization of the importance of black economic and social participation in Philadelphia’s inner city. While Bauman is pessimistic about the future, however, McKee focuses on the PIDC’s victory in slowing the progress of deindustrialization and moderating its effects.[29] McKee brings to the table a level of optimism unseen in Bauman’s perspective, while Adams adheres to a methodology of unbiased analysis of the city’s and Third Sector organizations’ urban renewal agenda and necessary racial progressivism. McKee and Adams acknowledge the local and federal politicians’ complete disconnection between economic decline and racial inequality. McKee, however, claims that local public policy can still have a wide effect on the rate of economic change independent of racial matters.[30] Adams believes that economic decline is synonymous with racial inequality, dictating a change in the historical perspective that inequality should be at the forefront of urban redevelopment programs. McKee also addresses racial matters continuously throughout the book, which differs from Bauman’s and Adams’ use of dedicated chapters advocating the involvement of racial matters in shaping Philadelphia’s urban renewal process. For example, McKee noted the shortfalls of the liberal agenda in embracing civil rights, and how the lack of black political representation in city-building meant the expansion of industry was inaccessible to inner-city residents: “… the interaction of job discrimination and industrial decline in Philadelphia had placed African Americans at a severed disadvantage in the local labor market…nonwhite men held a disproportionate share of low-wage, low-scale jobs… only 8.7 percent of [African Americans held] professional and technical jobs…”[31] Black residents, according to McKee, act solely out of response to economic crisis in Philadelphia, making it apparent that black political participants focused on creating jobs, without realizing that the jobs being made were hard for the average inner-city black resident to attain. McKee ends his book with the Model Cities program, a shift from a focus on the renewal of Philadelphia’s manufacturing industry to the services industry: “… the PIDC had slowed but not reversed the decline of Philadelphia’s manufacturing sector during the 1960s and that the base of the national economy had begun to shift from manufacturing to services. This led both city and… PIDC to question whether the nonprofit corporation should continue to focus exclusively on industrial development or expand its operations into services.”[32] A large part of Adams’ book lies in the development of these service institutions; McKee takes note of the availability of land for future industrial uses, and Adams picks up with the various service projects conducted on that land. McKee’s analysis of the bifurcation of local and federal policy is hopeful, at the very least, that Liberalism will overtake the agendas of status-quo residential ‘segregationists’ for a more inclusive economical base in Philadelphia.

The last 30 years have witnessed scholarship on Philadelphian inner-city politics change to include the active participation of suburbanites, the rise of Progressivism and Liberalism, and the inclusion of the black struggle for economic and social participation. At the same time, Bauman, McKee, and Adams all take note of the large number of contradictions that come into play when federal and local policy intersect. Bauman’s Public Housing, Race, and Renewal follows the issue of national political ideologies in the context of war-spawned conservatism, and how the failure of public housing led to a reliance on private sectors to provide housing for those in need. Private interests, however, do not always align with the public; housing was built but did not always reach a level of adequacy that modern homes have. Adams’ From the Outside In shows how the move towards private sector construction and subsequent failure led to a new form of regionalism based on Third Sector organizations’ involvement. To blur the lines between private and public sectors and circumnavigate the general public’s opinion on whether the project should be built in the first place, Philadelphia’s mayors utilized a growing medium of regionalism. McKee’s The Problem of Jobs takes into consideration this shift and depicts the transformation in ideology to include Liberalism, similar but not exact to Bauman’s interpretation of the definition of Progressivism in Philadelphian local politics. While Bauman remains pessimistic about the future of public housing and urban renewal, McKee exemplifies a shift in public opinion to focus on the positives of urban renewal, with some constructive criticism concerning how race should be considered in the application of the process; Adams represents a politically unbiased retelling of events, with many points as to how city politicians should carry construction projects in the future. All three books, however, fully understand that economic decline was tied to racial inequality and that the power of the state and Third Sector organizations are necessary to have a significant effect on the character of economic and racial progress.

Teaching racial inequality in the educational and infrastructural fields is important for closing the social and economic gap that has developed since the removal of the institution of slavery. When teaching in West Windsor South, I noticed that students were hyper aware of their social classes. The very topic of racial disparity was often talked about in the 12th grade Social Justice class I helped out in, and each and every student noted how important it was to be actively thinking about solutions to solve the issues our predecessors have created. The books listed in this historiography study are a good start to help students understand the gravity of the situation and the attempts previously made to solve the issue, especially when the authors’ research delves into the closest city to them, Philadelphia.

References:

Adams, Carolyn Teich. From the Outside In: Suburban Elites, Third Sector Organizations, and the Reshaping of Philadelphia. Ithaca, New York: Cornell Univ. Press, 2014.

Bauman, John F. Public Housing, Race, and Renewal. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Temple University Press, 1987.

McKee, Guian A. The Problem of Jobs: Liberalism, Race, and Deindustrialization in Philadelphia. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 2018.

[1] Guian A. McKee, The Problem of Jobs: Liberalism, Race, and Deindustrialization in Philadelphia (Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 2018), 67.

[2] John F. Bauman, Public Housing, Race, and Renewal (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Temple University Press, 1987), 40.

[3] Bauman, Public Housing, 47.

[4] Bauman, Public Housing, 56.

[5] Bauman, Public Housing, 64.

[6] Bauman, Public Housing, 68.

[7] Bauman, Public Housing, 139.

[8] Bauman, Public Housing, 147.

[9] Bauman, Public Housing, 148.

[10] Bauman, Public Housing, 148-150.

[11] Bauman, Public Housing, 200.

[12] Bauman, Public Housing, 208.

[13] Carolyn Teich Adams, From the Outside In: Suburban Elites, Third Sector Organizations, and the Reshaping of Philadelphia (Ithaca, New York: Cornell Univ. Press, 2014), 2.

[14] Adams, From the Outside In, 9.

[15] Adams, From the Outside In, 21.

[16] Adams, From the Outside In, 29.

[17] Adams, From the Outside In, 49.

[18] Adams, From the Outside In, 81.

[19] Adams, From the Outside In, 84.

[20] Adams, From the Outside In, 87-88.

[21] Adams, From the Outside In, 93.

[22] Adams, From the Outside In, 104.

[23] Adams, From the Outside In, 173.

[24]  Adams, From the Outside In, 181

[25] Guian McKee, The Problem of Jobs: Liberalism, Race, and Deindustrialization in Philadelphia (Chicago, Illinois: TheUniversity of Chicago Press, 2018), 4.

[26] McKee, The Problem of Jobs, 12.

[27] McKee, The Problem of Jobs, 81.

[28] McKee, The Problem of Jobs, 111.

[29] McKee, The Problem of Jobs, 67.

[30] McKee, The Problem of Jobs, 76.

[31] McKee, The Problem of Jobs, 119.

[32] McKee, The Problem of Jobs, 251.

Bartolomé de Las Casas: Defender of the Indians

Bartolomé de Las Casas: Defender of the Indians

Dan La Botz

Reprinted with permission from NewPolitics.

Figure 1: Theodore de Bry’s illustrations to Las Casas’ Brief Account of the Conquest of the Indies.

Bartolomé de las Casas was born in 1484 in Seville, to a French immigrant merchant family that had helped to found the city. One biographer believes his family were conversos, that is, Jews who had converted to Catholicism. As a child, in 1493 he happened to witness Christopher Columbus’ return from his first voyage to the Americas to Seville with seven Indians and parrots that were put on display. Queen Isabella ordered the Indians to be returned to their native land.

Bartolomé’s father, Pedro de las Casas, joined Columbus on his second voyage and brought home to Seville as a present for his son Bartolomé an Indian. In 1502 Pedro took Bartolomé with him on the expedition of Nicolás de Ovando to conquer and colonize Española (in English the island of Hispaniola, today made up of the Dominican Republic and Haiti). Bartolomé conducted slave raids on the Taino people (who were virtually annihilated by the Spaniards) and was rewarded with land and became the owner of a hacienda as well as slaves. In 1506 he returned to the University of Salamanca, where he had previously studied, and then traveled to Rome where he was ordained, becoming a priest in 1507.

When in 1510 Dominican friars led by Pedro de Córdoba arrived in Santo Domingo, they were horrified at the Spaniards’ treatment of the Indians, the massacres, the brutality of slavery, and the intense exploitation of the natives and they denounced it. Las Casas rejected the Dominicans’ criticism and defended the encomienda system by which Spaniards distributed laborers to the conquerors.

In 1513, Las Casas joined the expeditions of Diego Velázquez de Cuéllar and Pánfilo de Narváez to conquer Cuba, acting as chaplain. He witnessed horrifying murders and torturers of the indigenous people. Once again, he received a reward, this time of gold and slaves. For a year he lived as both colonist and priest. Then in 1514, while studying the Book of Ecclesiasticus, he came across a passage that called his beliefs into question. It read:

If one sacrifices from what has been wrongfully obtained, the offering is blemished; the gifts of the lawless are not acceptable. … Like one who kills a son before his father’s eyes is the man who offers sacrifice from the property of the poor. The bread of the needy is the life of the poor; whoever deprives them of it is a man of blood.

Reading this passage — and no doubt meditating on the horrors that he had both participated in and witnessed — Las Casas suddenly decided to break with his past. He gave up his haciendas, his encomienda, his slaves. He began to encourage others Spaniards to do the same, but of course they refused and they resented him.,Las Casas then traveled to Spain to take his case to King Ferdinand, and he succeeded in having one meeting with him, but then the monarch died in 1516. Many of the other higher-ups in the Spanish state and Church, such the Bishop of Burgos, Juan Rodríguez de Fonseca, who controlled the Crown’s business in the Americas, were themselves encomenderos who profited from the labor of the indigenous and they rejected Las Casas’ appeals to protect the Indians. Fearing that the entire population of the Indies, the Caribbean islands, might be annihilated, Las Casas wrote his Memorial de Remedios para las Indias (Memorandum on Remedies for the Indies) to be presented to the regents who now rules, calling for a moratorium on all Indian labor to protect the indigenous people and allow the recuperation of their populations.

Convinced by Las Casas’ argument that the Indians needed to be protected, one of the regents, Cardinal Ximenes Cisneros, put the Carmelite monks in charge of the Indies. Las Cases himself was given the official title and position of “Protector of the Indians. Under pressure from Las Casas, in 1542 King Charles V promulgated the New Laws to protect the Indians from exploitation. 

King Carlos V, concerned about conditions in the Spanish American colonies decided to organize a debate between the two principal intellectuals on opposite sides of the question. Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda, claimed that the indigenous people of the Americas were barbarians: ignorant, unlettered, and unreasoning, incapable of learning anything except the simplest tasks. The Spaniards, he argued, being superior in intelligence and morality, had the right to make war on them and conquer them. The Indians were, he said, incapable of governing themselves. He argued that they were sunk in depravity, worshiping idols and engaging in human sacrifice. He quoted the Bible and other authorities to argue that in ancient times such people had been justly exterminated or enslaved. Natural law, he averred, dictated that the Spaniards, superior in intelligence and morality, should govern them.

In response, Las Casas either refuted Sepúlveda’s arguments, such as the claim that the indigenous Americans were ignorant and incapable of governing themselves, by providing evidence of their intelligence and self-government, or he argued, as in the case of idolatry and human sacrifice, that these practices had to be seen as demonstrating their religious inclination, their attempts to worship God. Las Casas denied the Spaniards’ right to ever invade, occupy, conquer, and subject the indigenous. He argued that the Spaniards’ wars against the Indians were unjust and therefore enslavement of the Indians was illegal and wrong, since only the captives of a just war could be enslaved.

De Las Casas and Sepúlveda Debate Treatment of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas

Theologian Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda

“The servitude contracted in a just war is legal, and the booty acquired becomes the rightful possession of the victor. But concerning these barbarians, the plight of the Indians defeated by Spanish arms in formally declared war is very different from the circumstances of those who, through prudence or fear, delivered themselves to the authority of the Christians. Just as in the former case the victorious prince may determine, according to his will and right and bearing the public good in mind, the fate of the vanquished, in the latter both civil laws and jus gentium (international law) would rule unjust to deprive the natives of their goods and to reduce them to slavery; it is, however, licit to keep them as stipendiaries and tributaries as befitting their nature and condition.” “The nature of their governance over the barbarians must be such that the latter will not be given, through the granting of a degree of freedom unwarranted by their nature and condition, the opportunity to return to their primitive and evil ways; on the other hand, they must not be oppressed with harsh rule and servile treatment, for, tired of servitude and indignity, they may attempt to break the yoke to the peril of the Spaniards.”

Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas

“Among our Indians of the western and southern shores (granting that we call them barbarians and that they are barbarians) there are important kingdoms, large numbers of people who live settled lives in a society, great cities, kings, judges, laws, persons who engage in commerce, buying, selling, lending, and the other contracts of the law of nations . . . Reverend Doctor Sepúlveda has spoken wrongly and viciously against peoples like these, either out of malice or ignorance . . . and therefore, has falsely and perhaps irreparably slandered them before the entire world? From the fact that the Indians are barbarians it does not necessarily follow that they are incapable of government and have to be ruled by others, except to be taught about the Catholic faith and to be admitted to the sacraments. They are not ignorant, inhuman, or bestial. Rather, long before they heard the word Spaniard they had properly organized states, wisely ordered by excellent laws, religion and custom . . . Since, therefore, every nation by the eternal law has a ruler or prince, it is wrong for one nation to attack another under pretext of being superior in wisdom or to overthrow other kingdoms. For it acts contrary to the eternal law, as we read in Proverbs . . .  ‘This is not an act of wisdom, but of great injustice and a lying excuse for plundering others.”

Questions:

  1. What term does Sepúlveda use to describe the indigenous people of the Americas?
  2. According to Sepúlveda, when are slavery and “booty” justified?
  3. What does Sepúlveda recommend for governance in the Americas?
  4. What evidence does De Las Casas offer to refute claims made by Sepúlveda?
  5. If you were in the audience during this debate, what questions would you ask them?
  6. Whose position do you agree with more? Why?

The Edible Primary Source: Food as a Medium to Teach History

The Edible Primary Source: Food as a Medium to Teach History

Steven Jenkins

Whether it is a book, a quote, a painting or a picture, students are meant to study history through and from these meanings. While they each have validity and all have importance, some of these sources lack the relatability needed to encourage engagement in a students mind. Primary sources can be static. Stuck in the time period they were written and while their implication and effects ripple into the present they remain stuck in the time they were made, orated or created. However, what if educators used living mediums to illustrate historical processes. That is a medium that is used physically by people in the past with continual uses today. That medium, as the title suggests, is food.

            Food is somewhat of an easy to miss primary source. It is understandable of course because when comparing the constitution and a tomato, one packs an obvious greater historical punch. However, by considering primary sources as only a physical creation by a human who wrote, spoke or drew, the possibilities are limited. While the United States constitution has evolved beyond the bounds of the time it was created and has become the “living document” described in many classrooms today, so has the tomato.  So has any food. This essay will demonstrate how food is a living document to be adopted in the classroom. Food can be used in the classroom as a method of showing historical change, a method of instilling culturally responsive education into the curriculum as well as being an applicable mode of analysis to any historical period.

            Food history is first and foremost about a process. Food must be grown of course. It starts with a seed, the tending of young livestock, and reproduction for generations to provide for us. It is part of the story of humankind itself. The development of agriculture, that idea so central to understanding ancient civilizations like Mesopotamia or Egypt, has been neglected in education in post-Paleolithic age discussions. Humans have created the ability to grow their own sources of food and changed environments through irrigation, terraforming landscapes and breeding plants and animals for more desirable characteristics. Humans then harvest and process those items and create a dish using those ingredients. It is a quite profound process that still is practiced everyday whether the ingredients are sourced by the cook or not. More than that, humans have assigned meaning to our food. Humans have created cultures that have holidays that revolve around crop rotations and harvests. Humans have created dishes that are synonymous with certain cultures. People that come from the same ethnic or cultural background can share similarities beyond their geographical locations because of food. In the classroom, this is a pertinent example of the values that education wishes to attain generated through food.

            Food in education is a necessary mode to encourage multicultural thought and culturally sensitive pedagogies. Each student comes from diverse backgrounds and lived experiences. Honoring these is a great goal in education. As stated by Wiley-Blackwell about Culturally Responsive Teaching, “Culturally competent teachers are committed to learning about their students’ cultural resources, or funds of knowledge” (Wiley-Blackwell 1).  Food history can facilitate this. Having students research, explore and learn about foods or dishes that are part of their culture allow them to critically engage with the history that has made their diverse identities. They bring their knowledge and combine it with historical records, thus, bringing their culture as a source of learning for the entire class and the teacher. They get to educate their classmates and teachers about themselves and their history.

            Another issue that makes food history a great medium is its applicability. No matter the time period, individuals responded to the conditions of their time by changing their gastronomy. This can be represented in the classroom as evidence of the social changes that occur in various periods of history. For example, if a class is engaging in the topic of enslavement in America, food history can show the conditions of enslavement as well as perseverance of enslaved Africans. This can be done through okra. Okra, a crop originating in west Africa that has become synonymous with southern cooking in America, which has its roots in enslavement. Enslaved Africans taken from the continent brought with them okra seeds. Evidenced by the unfamiliarity with the crop by early European sources in Brazil, okra was seemingly foreign to them leading to the possibility that Africans resisted slavery by bringing okra seeds as contraband (Sousa & Raizad, 2020). Beyond that, okra was repeatedly described in the personal gardens of slaves and used as a form of medicine, syncretized religious practices as well as sustenance in the face of horrible malnutrition (Eisnach & Covey, 2019). In the post-civil war era, okra expanded outside of the plantations and became part of some of the first examples of enterprising formerly enslaved persons in the form of soul cooking. Some of the first sold cookbooks created by former slaves include okra in the form of gumbo and other dishes.  One of those cookbooks is titled What Mrs. Fisher knows about old southern cooking, soups, pickles, preserves, etc. This cookbook describes various methods of cooking with okra gained from Fisher’s experiences as a former slave (Fisher, 1881). Fisher had essentially used the abject horror of slavery as a means of self-enterprise, exemplifying the importance of food culture for formerly enslaved persons. Okra became part of a series of navigations of enslaved africans against the institutions of slavery. From its arrival in America okra was a matter of resistance. This is a historical case that could be added to curricula to show the nature of life in enslavement as well as the agency of enslaved persons in the Americas.

            There are plenty of other examples that could be listed out in which food can be used as a medium of examining historical periods however the importance is implementation in the classroom. The concept of food history can be used in countless ways. As described prior food is a process. A process that mirrors human growth and development. It informs the way people react to their social constraints. Those social constraints and events that form the unique cultures of each and every student in the classroom. Food history is an opportunity for culturally relevant pedagogies where students center food as a manner to present their identities. Food history is finally a manner of applicability. It is an aspect of the historical record that is forever present and forever important to the historical process for the individuals that experienced it. It is thus that teachers must examine food as a primary source in itself. A primary source that bends time to become a fountain of educational possibilities.

References

Eisnach, D., & Covey, H. (2019). Slave Gardens in the Antebellum South: The Resolve of a Tormented People. Southern Quarterly, 57(1), 11-23. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/slave-gardens-antebellum\-south-resolve-tormented/ docview/2553031701/se-2?accountid=10216.y

Fisher, A. & Katherine Golden Bitting Collection On Gastronomy. (1881) What Mrs. Fisher knows about old southern cooking, soups, pickles, preserves, etc. San Francisco: Women’s Co-operative Printing Office. Retrieved from the Library of Congress. Retrieved from https://www.loc.gov/item/08023680/.

Sousa, E., & Raizad, M. (2020). Contributions of African Crops to American Culture and Beyond: The Slave Trade and Other Journeys of Resilient Peoples and Crops. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 4. Retrieved from https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2020.586340/full

Wiley-Blackwell. (2022) Multimodal Literacies: Fertile Ground for Equity, Inclusion, and Connection. Reading Teacher, 75(5), 603–609.