Tag: Poverty

Unseen Fences: How Chicago Built Barriers Inside its Schools

Unseen Fences: How Chicago Built Barriers Inside its Schools

Emily Nicholson

Northern public schools are rarely ever centered in national narratives of segregation. Yet as Thomas Sugrue observes, “even in the absence of officially separate schools, northern public schools were nearly as segregated as those in the south.”[1] Chicago Illustrates this, despite the Jim Crow laws, the city developed a racially organized educational system that produced outcome identical to those segregated in southern districts.  The city’s officials celebrated equality while focusing on practices that isolated black students in overcrowded schools. The north was legally desegregated and was not pervasive but put into policies and structures of urban governance.

This paper argues that Chicago school segregation was intentional. It resulted from a coordinated system that connected housing discrimination, political resistance to integration, and targeted policies crafted to preserve racial separation in public schools. While Brown v. Board of Education outlawed segregation by law, Chicago political leaders, school administration, and networks maintained it through zoning, redlining, and administrative manipulation. Using both primary source, newspapers NAACP records, and a great use of historical scholarship, this paper shows how segregation in Chicago was enforced, defended, challenged, and exposed by the communities that it harmed.

Historiography

The historical context outlined above leads to several central research questions that guide this paper. First, how did local governments and school boards respond to the Brown v. Board of Education decision, and how did their policies influence the persistence of segregation in Chicago? Second, how did housing patterns and redlining contribute to the continued segregation of schools? Third, how did the racial dynamics of Chicago compare to those in other northern cities during the same period?

These questions have been explored by a range of scholars. Thomas Surgue’s Sweet Land of Liberty provides the framework for understanding northern segregation as a system put in the local government rather than state law. Sugrue argues that racism in the north was “structural, institutional, and spatial rather than legal, shaped through housing markets, zoning decisions, and administrative policy. His work shows that northern cities constructed segregation through networks of bureaucratic authority that were hard to challenge. Sugrue’s analysis supports the papers argument by demonstrating that segregation in Chicago was not accidental but maintained through everyday decisions.

Philip T.K. Daniel’s scholarship deepens this analysis of Chicago by showing how school officials resisted desegregation both before and after Brown v. Board. In his work A History of the Segregation-Discrimination Dilemma: The Chicago Experience, Daniel shows that Chicago public school leaders manipulated attendance boundaries, ignored overcrowding schools, and defended “neighborhood schools” as the way to preserve racial separation. Daniel highlights that “in the years since 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision, research have repeatedly noted that all black schools are regarded inferior.”[2] Underscoring the continuing of inequality despite federal mandates. Daniel’s findings reinforce these papers claim that Chicago’s system was made intentional, and the local officials played a high role in maintaining segregation.

Dionne Danns offers a different perspective by examining how students, parents, and community activists responded to the Chicago public school’s discriminatory practices. In Crossing Segregated Boundaries, her study of Chicago’s High School Students Movement, Danns argues that local activism was essential to expose segregation that officials tied to hide. She shows that black youth did not just fix inequalities of their schools but also developed campaigns, boycotts, sit-ins, which challenged Chicago Public School officials and reshaped the politics of education. Danns’ work supports the middle portion of this paper, it analyzes how community resistance forced Chicago’s segregation practices in a public view.

Paul Dimond’s Beyond Busing highlights how the court system struggled to confront segregation in northern cities because it did not connect with the law. Dimond argues that Chicago officials used zoning, optional areas, intact busing, and boundaries to maintain separation while avoiding the law. He highlights that, “the constant thread in the boards school operation was segregation, not neighborhood,”[3] showing that geographic justification was often a barrier for racial intent. Dimond’s analysis strengthens the argument that Chicago’s system was coordinated and on purpose, built through “normal” administrative decisions.

Jim Carl expands the scholarship into the time of Harold Washington, showing how political leadership shaped the educational reform. Carl argues that Washington believed in improving black schools not through desegregation but through resource equity and economic opportunities for black students. This perspective highlights how entrenched the early segregation policies were, reformers like Washington built a system that was made to disadvantage black communities. While Carl’s focus is later in the Papers period, his work provides the importance of how political structure preserved segregation for decades.

Regional and National Context

Chicago’s experience with segregation was both typical and different among the northern cities. Cities like Detroit, Philadelphia, and New York faced similar challenges. Chicago’s political machine created these challenges. As Danns explains in “Northern Desegregation: A Tale of Two Cities”, “Chicago was the earliest northern city to face Title VI complaint. Handling the complaint, and the political fallout that followed, left the HEW in a precarious situation. The Chicago debacle both showed HEW enforcement in the North and West and the HEW investigating smaller northern districts.”[4]  This shows how much political interest molded the cities’ approach to desegregation, and how federal authorities had a hard time holding the local systems responsible. The issue between the local power and federal power highlighted a broader national struggle for civil rights in the north, and a reminder that racial inequality was not only in one region but in the entire country. Chicago’s challenge highlights the issues of producing desegregation in areas where segregation was less by the law, and more by policies and politics.

Local policy and zoning decisions made segregation rise even more. In Beyond Busing, Paul R. Dimond says, “To relieve overcrowding in a recently annexed area with a racially mixed school to the northeast, the Board first built a school in a white part and then rejected the superintendent’s integrated zoning proposal to open new schools…. the constant thread in the Board’s school operations was segregation, not neighborhood.”3 These decisions show policy manipulation, rather than the illegal measures that maintained separation.

Dimond further emphasizes the pattern: “throughout the entire history of the school system, the proof revealed numerous manipulations and deviations from ‘normal’ geographic zoning criteria in residential ‘fringes’ and ‘pockets,’ including optional zones, discontinuous attendance areas, intact busing, other gerrymandering and school capacity targeted to house only one race; this proof raised the inference that the board chose ‘normal’ geographic zoning criteria in the large one-race areas of the city to reach the same segregated result.”3  These adjustments were hard but effective in strengthening segregation by making sure even when schools were open, the location, and resource issuing meant that black students and white students would have different education environments. The school board’s actions show a bigger strategy for protecting the status quo under the “neighborhood” schools and making it understandable that segregation was not an accident but a policy.

On the other hand, Carl highlights the policy solutions that are considered for promoting integration, other programs which attract a multiracial, mixed-income student body. Redraw district lines and place new schools to maximize integration… busing does not seem to be an issue in Chicago…it should be obviously metro wide, because the school system is 75 percent minority.” [5]. This approach shows the importance of system solutions that go beyond busing, and integration requires addressing the issue of racial segregation in schools. Carl’s argument suggests that busing itself created a lasting change. By changing district lines, it is not just about moving the children around, but to change the issues that reinforce segregation.

Understanding Chicago’s segregation requires comparing northern and southern practices. Unlike the south, where segregation was organized in law, northern segregation was de facto maintained through residential patterns, local policies, and bureaucratic practices. Sugrue explains, “in the south, racial segregation before Brown was not fundamentally intertwined with residential segregation.”1. This shows how urban geography and housing discrimination shaped educational inequality in northern cities. In Chicago, racial restrictive, reddling, confined black families to specific neighborhoods, and that decided which school the children could attend. This allowed northern officials to say that segregation was needed more than as a policy.

Southern districts did not rely on geographic attendance zones to enforce separation; “southern districts did not use geographic attendance zones to separate black and whites.”1. In contrast, northern cities like Chicago used zones and local governance to achieve smaller results. Danns notes, “while legal restrictions in the south led to complete segregation of races in schools, in many instances the north represented de facto segregation, which was carried out as a result of practice often leading to similar results”4. This highlights the different methods by segregation across regions, even after the legal mandates for integration. In the south, segregation was enforced by the law, making the racial boundaries clear and intentional.

Still, advocacy groups were aware of the nationwide nature of this struggle. In a newspaper called “Key West Citizen” it says, “a stepped-up drive for greater racial integration in public schools, North and South is being prepared by “negro” groups in cities throughout the country.”  Resistance for integration could take extreme measures, including black children to travel long distances to go to segregated schools, while allowing white children to avoid those schools. In the newspaper “Robin Eagle” it notes, “colored children forced from the school they had previously attended and required to travel two miles to a segregated school…white children permitted to avoid attendance at the colored school on the premise that they have never been enrolled there.” [6] These examples show how resistance to integration represents a national pattern of inequality. Even though activist and civil rights groups fought for the educational justice, the local officials and white communities found ways to keep racial segregation. For black families, this meant their children were affected by physical and emotional burdens of segregation like, long commutes, bad facilities, and reminder of discrimination. On the other hand, white students received help from more funding and better-found schools. These differences show how racial inequality was within American education, as both northern and southern cities and their systems worked in several ways.

Understanding Chicago’s segregation requires comparing northern and southern practices. Unlike the south, where segregation was organized in law, northern segregation was de facto maintained through residential patterns, local policies, and bureaucratic practices. Sugrue explains, “in the South, racial segregation before Brown was not fundamentally intertwined with residential segregation.”1. This shows how urban geography and housing discrimination shaped educational inequality in northern cities. In Chicago, racial restrictive, reddling, confined black families to specific neighborhoods, and that decided which school the children could attend. This allowed northern officials to say that segregation was needed more than as a policy.

Southern districts did not rely on geographic attendance zones to enforce separation; “southern districts did not use geographic attendance zones to separate black and whites.”1 In contrast, northern cities like Chicago used zone and local governance to achieve smaller results. Danns notes, “while legal restrictions in the south led to complete segregation of races in schools, in many instances the north represented de facto segregation, which was carries out as a result of practice often leading to similar results”.4 This highlights the different methods by segregation across regions, even after the legal mandates for integration. In the South, segregation was enforced by the law, making the racial boundaries clear and intentional.

Yet the advocacy groups were aware of the nationwide nature of this struggle. In a newspaper called “Key West Citizen” it says, “a stepped-up drive for greater racial integration in public schools, North and South is being prepared by “negro” groups in cities throughout the country.” Resistance for integration could take extreme measure, including black children to travel long distances to go to segregated schools, while allowing white children to avoid those schools. These examples show how resistance to integration represents a national pattern of inequality. Even though activist and civil rights groups fought for educational justice, the local officials and white communities found ways to keep racial segregation. For black families, this meant their children were affected by physical and emotion burdens of segregation like, long commutes, bad facilities, and reminder of discrimination. On the other hand, white students received help from more funding and better-found schools. These differences show how racial inequality was within American education, as both northern and southern cities and their systems worked in several ways.

The policies that shaped Chicago schools in the 1950’s and 1960’s cannot be understood without looking at key figures such as Benjamin Willis and Harold Washington. Benjamin Willis, who was a superintendent of Chicago Public Schools from 1953 to 1966 and became known for his resistance to integration efforts. Willis’ administration relied on the construction of mobile classrooms, also known as “Willis wagons,” to deal with the overcrowding of Black schools. Other than reassigning students to nearby under-enrolled schools, Willis placed these classrooms in the yards of segregated schools. As Danns explains, Willis was seen by Chicagoans as the symbol of segregation as he gerrymandered school boundaries and used mobile classrooms (labeled Willis Wagons) to avoid desegregation.”4  . His refusal to implement desegregation measures made him a target of protest, including boycotts led by families and students.

On the other hand, Harold Washington, who would become Chicago’s first black mayor, represented a shift towards community-based reform and equality-based policies. Washington believed that equality in education required more than racial integration, but it needed structural investment in Black schools and economic opportunities for Black students. Jim Carl writes, Washington’s approach, “Washington would develop over the next thirty-three years, one that insisted on adequate resources for Black schools and economic opportunities for Black students rather than viewing school desegregation as the primary vehicle for educational improvement.”5 His leadership came from the earlier civil rights struggles of the 1950’s and 1960’s with the justice movements that came in the post-civil rights era.

How Chicago Built Segregation

Chicago’s experience in the mid-twentieth century provides an example of how racial segregation was maintained through policy then law.  In the postwar era, there was an increase in Chicago’s population. Daniel writes, “this increased the black school population in that period by 196 percent.”4. By the 1950’s, the Second Great Migration influenced these trends, with thousands of Black families arriving from the south every year. As Sugrue notes, “Blacks who migrated Northern held high expectations about education.” 1.   There was hope the northern schools would offer opportunities unavailable in the South. Chicago’s public schools soon became the site of racial conflict as overcrowding; limited resources, and administrative discrimination showed the limits of those expectations.

One of the features of Chicago’s educational system is the era of the “neighborhood schools” policy. On paper, this policy allowed students to attend schools near their homes, influencing the community. In practice, it was a powerful policy for preserving racial segregation. Sugrue explains, “in densely populated cities, schools often within a few blocks of one another, meaning that several schools might serve as “neighborhood”.”1. Because housing in Chicago was strictly segregated through redlining, racially restrictive areas, and de facto residential exclusion, neighborhood-based zoning meant that Black and white students were put into separate schools. This system allowed city officials to claim that segregation reflected residential patterns rather than intentional and avoiding the violation of Brown. A 1960 New York Times article called, “Fight on Floor now ruled out” by Anthony Lewis, revealed how Chicago officials publicly dismissed accusations of segregation while internally sustaining the practice. The article reported that school leaders insisted that racial imbalance merely reflected “neighborhood conditions” and that CPS policies were “not designed to separate the races,” even as Black schools operated far beyond capacity.”[7] This federal-level visibility shows that Chicago’s segregation was deliberate: officials framed their decisions as demographic realities, even though they consistently rejected integration measures that would have eased overcrowding in Black schools.

The consequences of these policies became visible by the 1960’s. Schools in Black neighorhoods were overcrowded, operating on double shifts or in temporary facilities. As Dionne Danns describes in Northern Desegregation: A Tale of Two Cities, she says, “before school desegregation, residential segregation, along with Chicago Public School (CPS) leaders’ administrative decisions to maintain neighbor-hood schools and avoid desegregation, led to segregated schools. Many Black segregated schools were historically under-resourced and overcrowded and had higher teacher turnover rates.”[8] The nearby white schools had empty classrooms and more modern facilities. This inequality sparked widespread community outrage, setting up the part for the educational protest that would define Chicago’s civil rights movement.

The roots of Chicago’s school segregation related to its housing policies. Redlining, the practice by which federal agencies and banks denied loans to Black homebuyers and systematically combined Black families to certain areas of the city’s south and west sides. These neighborhoods were often shown by housing stock, limited public investment, and overcrowding. Due to this policy, school attendance zones were aligned with neighborhood boundaries, these patterns of residential segregation were mirrored with the city’s schools. As historian Matthew Delmont explains in his book, Why Busing Failed, this dynamic drew the attention of federal authorities: “On July 4, 1965, after months of school protest and boycotts,  civil rights groups advocated in Chicago by filing a complaint with the U.S. Office of Education charging that Chicago’s Board of Education violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”[9] This reflected how much intertwined housing and education policies were factors of racial segregation. The connection between where families could live and where their children could attend school showed how racial inequality was brought through everyday administrative decisions, and molding opportunities for generations of black Chicagoans.

These systems, housing, zoning, and education helped maintain a racial hierarchy under local control. Even after federal courts and civil rights organizations pushed for compliance with Brown, Chicago’s officials argued that their schools reflect demographic reality rather than discriminatory intent. This argument shows how city planners, developers, and school administrators collaborated. School segregation was not a shift from southern style Jim Crow, but a defining feature of North governance.

Resistance and Exposure

Chicago’s struggle with school segregation was not submissive. Legal challenges and community activism were tools in confronting inequalities. The NAACP Legal Defense Fund filed many lawsuits to challenge these policies and targeted the districts that violated the state’s education law. Parents and students organized boycotts and protests and wanted to draw attention to the injustices. Sugrue notes, “the stories of northern school boycotts are largely forgotten. Grassroots boycotts, led largely by mothers, inspired activists around the country to demand equal education”1.  The boycotts were not symbolic but strategic; community driven actions targeted at the system’s resistance to change. These movements represented an assertion of power from communities that had to be quiet by discriminatory policies. Parents, especially black mothers, soon became figures in these campaigns, using their voices, and organizing ways to demand responsibility from school boards and city officials. Their actions represented the change that would not come straight from the courtrooms, but from the people affected by injustice. The boycotts interrupted the normal school system and forced officials to listen to the demands for equal education. 

Danns emphasizes the range of activism during this period, writing in Chicago High School Students’ Movement for Quality Public Education: “in the early 1960’s, local and prominent civil rights organizations led a series of protests for school desegregation. These efforts included failed court cases, school boycotts, and sit-ins during superintendent Benjamin Willis administration, all which led to negligible school desegregation”[10]. Despite the limited success of these efforts, the activism of the 1960’s was important for exposing the morals of northern liberalism, and the continuing of racial inequalities outside the South. Student-led protests and communities organizing, not only challenged the policies of the Chicago Board of Education but also influenced the new generation for young people to see education as a main factor in the struggle for civil rights.

Legal tactics were critical in enforcing agreements. An article from the NAACP Evening Star writes, “on the basis of an Illinois statute which states that state-aid funds may be withheld from any school district that segregated based on race or color.” [11]The withholding of state funds applied pressure on resistant boards, showing that legal leverage could have consequences. When the board attempted to deny black students’ admission, the NAACP intervened.  In the newspaper “Evening Star”, They reported, “Although the board verbally refused to admit negro students and actually refused to do so when Illinois students applied for admission, when the board realized that the NAACP was going to file suit to withhold state-aid funds, word was sent to each student who had applied that they should report to morning classes.” [12]This shows how legal and financial pressure became one of the effective ways for enforcing desegregation. The threat of losing funds forced the school boards to work with the integration orders, highlighting the appeals were inadequate to undo the system of discrimination. The NAACP’s strategy displayed the importance of defense with legal enforcement, using the courts and states’ statutes to hold them accountable. This illustrated that the fight for educational equality required not only the protest, but also the legal base to secure that justice was to happen. This collaboration of legal action and grassroots mobilization reflects the strategy that raised both formal institutions and community power, showing the northern resistance to desegregation was far from being unchanged.

Long-Term Consequences

Chicago’s segregated schools had long-lasting effects on Black students, particularly through inequalities in the education system. Schools in Black neighborhoods were often overcrowded, underfunded, and provided fewer academic resources than their white counterparts. These disparities limited educational opportunities and shaped students’ futures. The lack of funding meant that schools could no longer afford placement courses, extracurricular programs, or even resources for classrooms, this shaped a gap in the quality of education between and black and white students. Black students in these kinds of environments were faced with educational disadvantages, but also less hope on their future.

Desegregation advocates sought to address both inequality and social integration. Danns explains, “Advocates of school desegregation looked to create integration by putting students of different races into the same schools. The larger goal was an end to inequality, but a by-product was that students would overcome their stereotypical ideas of one another, learn to see each other beyond race, and even create interracial friendships”4. While the ideal of desegregation included fostering social understanding, the reality of segregated neighborhoods and schools often hindered these outcomes. Even when legal policies aimed to desegregate schools, social and economic blockades continued to bring separation. Many white families moved to suburban districts to avoid integration. This created more classrooms to be racially diverse and left many of the urban schools attended by students of color.

The larger society influenced students’ experiences inside schools, despite efforts to create inclusive educational spaces. Danns explains, “In many ways, these schools were affected by the larger society; and tried as they might. Students often found it difficult to leave their individual, parental, or community views outside the school doors”9 Even when students developed friendships across racial and ethnic lines, segregated boundaries persisted: “Segregated boundaries remained in place even if individuals had made friends with people of other racial and ethnic groups”4. The ongoing influence of social norms and expectations meant that schools were not blinded by the racial tensions that existed outside their walls. While the teachers and administration may have tried to bring a more integrated environment, the racial hierarchies and prejudices in the community often influenced the students’ interactions. These hurdles were not always visible, but they shaped the actions within the school in fine ways. Despite the efforts at inclusion, the societal context of segregation remained challenging, and limited the integration and equality of education.

Beyond the social barriers, the practical issue of overcrowding continued to affect education. Carl highlights this concern, quoting Washington: “In interest, Washington stated that the issue ‘is not “busing,” it is freedom of choice. Parents must be allowed to move their children from overcrowded classrooms. The real issue is quality education for all’5. The focus on “freedom of choice” underscores that structural inequities, rather than simple policy failures, were central to the ongoing disparities in Chicago’s schools.

Overcrowding in urban schools was a deeper root to inequality. Black neighborhoods were often left with underfunded and overcrowded schools, while the white schools had smaller classes, and more resources. The expression of “freedom of choice” was meant to show that parents in marginalized communities should all have the same educational opportunity as the wealthier neighborhoods. However, this freedom was limited by residential segregation, unequal funding, and barriers that restricted many within the public school system.

The long-term impact of segregation extended beyond academics into the social and psychological lives of Black students. Segregation reinforced systemic racism and social divisions, contributing to limited upward mobility, economic inequality, and mistrust of institutions. Beyond the classroom, these affects shaped how the black students viewed themselves and where they stand in society. Psychologically, this often resulted in lower self-esteem and no academic motivation. Socially, segregation limited interactions between the different racial groups, and formed stereotypes. Overtime, these experiences came from a cycle in the issue of educational and government institutions, as black communities struggled with inequalities continuously.

  Black students were unprepared for the realities beyond their segregated neighborhoods, “Some Black participants faced a rude awakening about the world outside their high schools. Their false sense of security was quickly disrupted in the isolated college towns they moved to, where they met students who had never had access to the diversity they took for granted”9. This contrast between the relative diversity within segregated urban schools and the other environments illustrates how deeply segregation shaped expectations, socialization, and identity formation.

Even after desegregation policies were implemented, disparities persisted in access to quality education. Danns observes that, decades later, access to elite schools remained unequal: “After desegregation ended, the media paid attention to the decreasing spots available at the city’s top schools for Black and Latino students. In 2018, though Whites were only 10 percent of the Chicago Public Schools population, they had acquired 23 percent of the premium spots at the top city schools”7. This statistic underscores the enduring structural and systemic inequalities in the educational system. These inequalities show how racial privilege and access to resources favored by certain groups and disadvantaged others. Segregation has taken new ways, through economic and residential patterns rather than laws. This highlights the policy limitations, and brings out the need for more social, economic, and institutional change to achieve the goal of educational equality.

Segregation not only restricted access to academic resources but also had broader psychological consequences. By systematically limiting opportunities and reinforcing racial hierarchies, segregated schooling contributed to feelings of marginalization and diminished trust in public institutions. The experience of navigating a segregated school system often left Black students negotiating between a sense of pride in their communities and the constraints imposed by discriminatory policies. The lasting effects of these psychological scars were there long after segregation ended. The pain from decades of separation made it hard for many black families to believe in change that brought equality. Segregation was not an organized injustice, but also an emotional one; shaping how generations of students understood their worth, and connection to a system that let them down before.

The structural and social consequences of segregation were deeply intertwined. Overcrowded and underfunded schools have diminished educational outcomes, which in turn limit economic and social mobility. Social and psychological barriers reinforced these disparities, creating a cycle that affected multiple generations. Yet the activism, legal challenges, and community efforts described earlier demonstrate that Black families actively resisted these constraints, fighting for opportunities and equality. Their fight not only challenged the system’s injustice, but also laid a foundation for more civil rights reforms, and influencing future movements.

By examining Chicago’s segregation in the context of broader northern and national trends, it becomes clear that local policies and governance played an outsized role in shaping Black students’ experiences. While southern segregation was often codified in law, northern segregation relied on policy, zoning, and administrative practices to achieve similar results. The long-term impact on Chicago’s Black communities reflects the consequences of these forms of institutionalized racism, emphasizing the importance of both historical understanding and ongoing policy reform.

Conclusion

Chicago’s school segregation was not accidental or demographic, it was a product of housing, political and administrative decisions designed to preserve racial separation. The city’s leaders made a system that mirrored the thinking behind Jim Crow Laws and its legal framework, making northern segregation more challenging to see. Through policies made in bureaucratic language, Chicago Public Schools and city officials made sure that children got unequal education for decades.

The legacy of Chicago’s segregation exposes the character of educational inequality. Although activists, parents, and students fought to expose the challenges and the discrimination they created in the mid-twentieth century to continue to shape educational output today. Understanding the intentional design behind Chicago’s segregation is essential to understanding the persistence racial inequalities that defines American schooling. It is also a call to action reformers today to confront the historical and structural forces that have made these disparities. The fight for equitable education is not just about addressing the present-day inequalities but also dismantling the policies and systems that were built with the purpose of maintaining racial separation. The struggle for equality in education remains unfinished, and by acknowledging the choices that lead to the situation can be broken down by structures that continue to limit opportunities for future generations.

References

Primary Sources

Evening Star. (Washington, DC), Oct. 23, 1963. https://www.loc.gov/item/sn83045462/1963-10-23/ed-1/.

Evening Star. (Washington, DC), Oct. 22, 1963. https://www.loc.gov/item/sn83045462/1963-10-22/ed-1/.

Evening Star. (Washington, DC), Sep. 8, 1962. https://www.loc.gov/item/sn83045462/1962-09-08/ed-1/.

Naacp Legal Defense and Educational Fund. NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Records: Subject File, -1968; Schools; and States; Illinois; School desegregation reports, 1952 to 1956, undated. – 1956, 1952. Manuscript/Mixed Material. https://www.loc.gov/item/mss6557001591/.

The Robbins eagle. (Robbins, IL), Sep. 10, 1960. https://www.loc.gov/item/sn2008060212/1960-09-10/ed-1/.

The Key West citizen. (Key West, FL), Jul. 9, 1963. https://www.loc.gov/item/sn83016244/1963-07-09/ed-1/.

Secondary Sources

Carl, Jim. “Harold Washington and Chicago’s Schools between Civil Rights and the Decline of the New Deal Consensus, 1955-1987.” History of Education Quarterly 41, no. 3 (2001): 311–43. http://www.jstor.org/stable/369199.

Dionne Danns. 2020. Crossing Segregated Boundaries: Remembering Chicago School Desegregation. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press. https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=a82738b5-aa61-339b-aa8a-3251c243ea76.

Danns, Dionne. “Chicago High School Students’ Movement for Quality Public Education, 1966-1971.” The Journal of African American History 88, no. 2 (2003): 138–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3559062.

Danns, Dionne. “Northern Desegregation: A Tale of Two Cities.” History of Education Quarterly 51, no. 1 (2011): 77–104. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25799376.

Matthew F. Delmont; Why Busing Failed: Race, Media, and the National Resistance to School Desegregation

Philip T. K. Daniel. “A History of the Segregation-Discrimination Dilemma: The Chicago Experience.” Phylon (1960-) 41, no. 2 (1980): 126–36. https://doi.org/10.2307/274966.

Philip T. K. Daniel. “A History of Discrimination against Black Students in Chicago Secondary Schools.” History of Education Quarterly 20, no. 2 (1980): 147–62. https://doi.org/10.2307/367909.

Paul R. Dimond. 2005. Beyond Busing: Reflections on Urban Segregation, the Courts, and Equal Opportunity. [Pok. ed.]. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=76925a4a-743d-3059-9192-179013cceb31.

Thomas J. Sugrue. Sweet Land of Liberty: The Forgotten struggle for Civil Right in the North. Random House: NY.

[1] Thomas J. Sugrue, Sweet Land of Liberty: The Forgotten Struggle for Civil Rights in the North (New York: Random House, 2008),

[2] Philip T. K. Daniel, “A History of the Segregation-Discrimination Dilemma: The Chicago Experience,” Phylon 41, no. 2 (1980): 126–36.

[3]Paul R. Dimond, Beyond Busing: Reflections on Urban Segregation, the Courts, and Equal Opportunity (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005)

  1. [4]Dionne Danns, Crossing Segregated Boundaries: Remembering Chicago School Desegregation (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2020)

[5] Jim Carl, “Harold Washington and Chicago’s Schools between Civil Rights and the Decline of the New Deal Consensus, 1955–1987,” History of Education Quarterly 41, no. 3 (2001): 311–43.

[6] The Robbins Eagle (Robbins, IL), September 10, 1960,

[7]   The New York Times, “Fight on the Floor Ruled out,” July 27, 1960, 1.

[8] Dionne Danns, “Northern Desegregation: A Tale of Two Cities,” History of Education Quarterly 51, no. 1 (2011): 77–104.

[9] Matthew F. Delmont, Why Busing Failed: Race, Media, and the National Resistance to School Desegregation (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2016).

[10] Dionne Danns, “Chicago High School Students’ Movement for Quality Public Education, 1966–1971,” Journal of African American History 88, no. 2 (2003): 138–50.

[11] NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Subject File: Schools; States; Illinois; School Desegregation Reports, 1952–1956, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress,

[12] Evening Star (Washington, DC), September 8, 1962,

The Systemic Failures of the Flint Water Crisis

The Systemic Failures of the Flint Water Crisis

Ava Byzewski

In Anna Clark’s The Poisoned City: Flint’s Water and American Urban Tragedy, the Flint, Michigan water crisis began as a result of the combination of historical, political, and social circumstances. Clark’s perspective focuses on the injustices and failures that made the conditions for the crisis to occur and continue. Clark’s analysis identifies important causes of the crisis such as, systematic negligence, environmental racism, government incompetence, and the economic decline of the city of Flint. Clark examines the interconnectedness of these factors that paints a picture of how this crisis unfolded. 

Prior to Flint’s water crisis the city’s economic slump and increasing disinvestment cultivated an environment for the crisis to occur. Flint became the center for auto manufacturing for General Motors, which was responsible for the city’s growth in population. Unfortunately, Flint’s economy was destroyed by deindustrialization in the late 20th century which led to General Motors shutting down many of its plants in Flint. This led to mass unemployment and an abrupt decline in the city’s population due to the massive white flight out of Flint. According to Clark, Flint’s tax base shrunk exponentially during this economic downturn making it almost impossible for the city to maintain its infrastructure. In fact, “Flint’s infrastructure was in a death spiral. The water rates were expensive because the pipes were bad because vacancy rates were high because the city had been shrinking for so long” (Clark 36). People who could not afford to leave the city were being crushed by the added expense that came from others leaving. Flint’s pipes (which had been put in at the beginning of the 20th century) were some of the oldest in the nation. This put the city at risk and state authorities’ enforcement of emergency management put financial restraint before the welfare of the city’s population, worsening Flint’s already dire situation. This continued disinvestment was revealed during the crisis according to Clark, “the disparities in the water traced a pattern of inequality and disinvestment that was decades in the making. The whole city was exposed to toxic water– and so were commuters and other visitors– but the people who had it worst lived in the poorer, more decayed neighborhoods. And they tended to be black.” (Clark 43). The residents of Flint that were black  were treated differently by the government compared to the wealthier, predominantly white residents. This economic decline coupled with the systematic negligence creates a deeper understanding of the decisions that played into the water crisis. 

A number of cost-cutting measures that put financial savings over public health were the core of Flint’s water crisis. The decision to change Flint’s water source from the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department (DWSD) to the Flint River was primarily financial. Flint’s water rates were among the highest in the country, which posed a significant burden given that “42 percent of residents lived below the federal poverty level” (Clark 15). Due to Flint’s decreasing population and unstable financial situation, fewer ratepayers could afford the water infrastructure, creating further pressure on the economy. Clark describes how corrosion inhibitors are a common treatment that stops lead from leaking into drinking water and these inhibitors were not mandated by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). Clark mentioned, “the city said again that the water met all safety requirements and that it was continually monitoring for potential power problems… But in fact, there was a problem. A serious one. New water treatment programs did not include corrosion control” (Clark 33). As a result of the corrosive water from the Flint river, the lead pipes in the city of Flint began to deteriorate leading to the introduction of hazardous quantities of lead into the water. After the switch to the Flint river the locals noticed a difference in the water quality right away. One example of the noticeable difference in particular Clark mentions is LeAnne Walters as she described the water as “coming out of the faucet looking like urine” and she shared the frustration of rashes and hair loss in her children” (Clark 65). Despite the complaints, state officials reassured local residents that the water was safe to drink. Clark argues that these decisions and reactions were representative of government neglect and incompetence. 

One of Clark’s most important arguments of her analysis was the examination of environmental racism and how it influenced and exacerbated the crisis and the response. Clark uses Flint as an example of the effects of a marginalized community of Black and low-income residents that suffered from systematic neglect. Clark argues that this led to government officials’ dismissive attitude and lack of response to residents’ complaints. The practice of redlining by General Motors in Flint when providing housing for their employees. General Motors constructed homes and sold them to their employees; however, these homes were for white employees. In fact, “Racially restrictive covenants-an agreement, written into deeds, to keep people out based on race-were strictly enforced both in GM neighborhoods and throughout Flint” (Clark 45-46). This left the Black residents of Flint in the less desirable areas of Flint “And, in this self-fulfilling spiral, their houses generated less money in property taxes, which meant fewer resources to invest in school and infrastructure” (Clark 61). Many of the White residents left Flint after the shut down of most of the General Motors plants; this left many houses abandoned and without proper care the pipes were left to corrode. With disinvestment of these neighborhoods this left the Black residents of Flint more vulnerable. Additionally, the lack of urgency to support these deteriorating neighborhoods created a lack of accountability and transparency towards Flint residents. State officials originally dismissed reports by Flint residents of the inadequate water conditions that Clark refers to as “systematic disregard” for Black communities. Clark mentions how “between 1999 and 2004, black children across the country were 1.6 times more likely to test positive for lead than white children, and nearly three times more likely to have very high blood lead levels” showing the disregard for black communities (Clark 98). The human catastrophe of the crisis led to several health issues especially among children who were exposed to toxic levels of lead. This highlights how the lack of information and transparency left the residents of Flint exposed to toxic levels of lead. The structural racism that hampered Black citizens of Flint access to information and resources that could have reduced these health effects and or avoided the disaster. Flint’s environmental racism intensified Flint’s water crisis through the disregard for its community and discriminatory practices. 

In Clark’s analysis of the Flint water crisis, she combines historical, political, and social circumstances that intensified the emergency. Through the combination of Flint’s economic downturn, cost cutting measures, and environmental racism through discriminatory practices that led to this catastrophe. Clark draws attention to the human cost of the crisis and its widespread ramifications. Serving as a warning about the repercussions of putting cheap policy in place over the health and welfare of the general public. 

The Flint Water Crisis is historically significant because it exemplifies the consequences of systematic negligence, environmental racism, and the prioritization of cost cutting over public health. It demonstrates how historical patterns of segregation, deindustrialization, and government disinvestment can set the stage for a public health catastrophe. As residents and scientists worked together to expose the truth when authorities failed them, the crisis underscores the importance of civic accountability and grassroots activism. Flint’s narrative serves as a prism through which we may analyze broader patterns of injustice in American history and society.

   The patterns in the Flint water crisis relate to historical practices like redlining and industrial decline to contemporary concerns like environmental justice, infrastructure decay, and systematic inequality, which would be appropriate to teach in secondary schools. It encourages critical thought on civic duty, race, class, and the function of government. Students would be able to comprehend what transpired in Flint and are better equipped to challenge the choices made by people in authority and recognize the importance of their voices in a democratic society. 

References

Clark, Anna. The Poisoned City: Flint’s Water and the American Urban Tragedy. Henry Holt and Company, 2018.

Book Review – The Poverty Paradox: Understanding Economic Hardship Amid American Prosperity

Book Review of The Poverty Paradox: Understanding Economic Hardship Amid American Prosperity, by Mark Robert Rank, 2023.  New York: Oxford University Press.  Cloth, 175 pages.

Reviewed by Thomas Hansen, Ph.D.

We educators at all levels are facing huge changes in the classroom—and some new and startling realities.  Namely, we are dealing with students who are homeless, hungry, abandoned, and poor.  Not only do we need to help students in K-12 schools with a wider variety of needs than in the past, we also need to help prepare teacher candidates and novice teachers with the tools and tolerance to help students who have a myriad of problems.

Backing up just a bit, we need to look at how these students got to our schoolroom door.  Where did they come from? Are they migrants? Are they native students?  How can there be so much poverty out there?

This technical discussion of why some people are poor in the richest country of the world will provide several theories for you to consider.  The author is an expert researcher and author on social welfare, poverty, and inequality.  Professor Rank proposes five major reasons or factors as to why people are poor.

Rank shows the historical context in which poverty has blossomed in our nation and has targeted certain persons, races, neighborhoods, and parts of the country.  He talks about patterns.  He provides in-depth explanation of each of the factors driving poverty.

You will have to read this technical account of the situation and digest the graphs and charts making it clear that poverty is a much greater problem than just a few poor people out there.  Rank provides a great deal of information about how we got to where we are.

Rank reminds us that it is popular in America to think of poverty in terms of the behaviors and actions of the individual.  People often erroneously assume it is the individual causing all the poverty in our country.  It is the laziness of a few.  It is the refusal to try harder. 

Many such stupid beliefs stand in the way of solving the issue of poverty in America.

Looking at the history, and the system, and the pattern of poverty is essential.  It takes an understanding of all such aspects—and more—to come to a comprehension that is informed by all the research and stories of the poor.

I recommend this book to professors of social work, economics, political science, and counselors helping the homeless—and others suffering from the grasp of poverty.  Educators and street helpers, also, can get a lot out of this advanced discussion of poverty in a rich nation. 

We all need to develop our own take on this complicated web of causes and continuity in this thing called poverty.  We all want to help those suffering.  We all want to figure it out quickly and get to work changing the world.  However, solving the poverty problem with one attempt cannot achieve much. 

It is over time that we will need to consider the information out there and attempt to digest a complicated landscape of data and tendencies.  Through books such as this one, we may begin to figure out the blueprint.

As with most of my reviews, I do not wish to provide all the key facts here but give you hints, categories, and classes of content.  Your reading of the book to get your own understanding is of course crucial. 

I would recommend you obtain a copy of this book for both your personal and professional libraries.  You have both, don’t you?

Book Review-Homeless Outreach and Housing First: Lessons Learned

Book Review of Homeless Outreach and Housing First: Lessons Learned, by Jay S. Levy, 2012.  Ann Arbor, MI: Loving Healing Press.  Paper, 36 pages.

Reviewed by Thomas Hansen, Ph.D.

Jay S. Levy has written an excellent book for aldermen, social workers, counselors, taxpayers, nurses, street helpers, and many others to read.  It is excellent because of how it gets the reader into the topic and provides clear definitions and examples.  *See the two articles below for more explanation of this important topic, housing first.

This book looks like a workbook, actually.  It is a thinner paperback, and it is a brief and clear guide about not only providing outreach to get people ready to be housed but also moving ahead with the well-known strategy of using “housing first.”  Housing first is the successful—but underused—process of getting persons indoors right away in the move to solve homelessness.  Rather than making people jump through a dozen hoops, plus half-way houses and shelters, plus appropriate counseling, housing first gets the person stable housing so that all of the other pieces can fall into place.

The phenomenon of housing first, developed by Stefancic and Tsemberis, is highly successful, but more expensive than approaches which pick and choose from the homeless person’s needs.  Books and articles by those two experts are easy to locate through a quick search.

It costs more because in housing first somebody has to pay the rent for the ex-homeless person to be housed—typically in an apartment.  The documentation is very clear.  The successes are great.  It is a longer-term solution.  Housing first allows the newly-indoors individual to save money by having a refrigerator to keep leftovers, a place to keep any needed medication, a place to be safe from attack and danger and murder.

Housing first provides—very importantly—a secure dwelling for sleep and safety.  Therefore, Housing first is a lifesaver.  This should be simple to understand.

The book’s clarity and brevity are both plusses.  The book can be read easily in one sitting and therefore it is perfect for weekend retreats with board members and others who need to come to a quick understanding of how housing first works as the key element to successful placement of persons into the indoors. 

Also helpful is the way Levy brings together three different pieces to provide context, definitions, and an example of an individual who “makes it” despite his challenges of addiction, homelessness, and depression.  It is a good and quick reference—clear explanation—of the world of housing first.

Part One is an article about hope and ethics.  Part Two is the first housing first process used by the author, Jay S; Levy.  Part Three is an interview with someone who was helped by Levy’s intervention.

The author is a social worker who tells of the quality of the housing first strategy and his own growth—not just that of the individuals he helps.  It is an inspiring book, and the author is an encouraging and prayerful professional.  Levy has written not only about homeless first strategies but also about the pretreatment necessary for the system to work.  This is a piece of the puzzle people need to know more about.

As an educator, I recommend this book highly and hope all persons helping the homeless will read it, study it, and reflect on it.  I admire professionals who can write clearly and well, explaining, using illustrations, and making their point succinctly.  Great information here, and easy to understand and utilize.  

As an educator with a Jesuit background, I am forever reflecting on my own ideas and decisions, thinking about how I could have done things better… how I can communicate better, and how I can help the unhoused with their challenges more effectively.  I grew from reading this book.  

The book is good background reading and important to get onto your bookshelf to be loaned to others.  The book would also be great for professional development classes, retreats, fundraising, and other uses.  I encourage everyone to read it soon. 

For further reading:

Levy, J. S. (1998, Fall). “Homeless Outreach: On the Road to Pretreatment Alternatives.  Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 81(4), pp. 360-368.

Levy, J. S., (2011, July). “The Case for Housing First: Moral, Fiscal, and Quality of Life Reasons for Ending Chronic Homelessness.  Recovering the Self: A Journal of Hope and Healing, III(3), pp. 45-51.

Book Review: Legacies of the War on Poverty

Legacies of the War on Poverty

edited by Martha J. Bailey & Sheldon Danziger.

Bailey and Danziger assemble here ten papers on the history of the war on poverty, covering its beginnings with JFK to the current great recession creating and disabling the poor in our country. They write the first chapter, explaining how Lyndon B. Johnson took up the torch and planned to eradicate poverty in the USA. They show the origin of many charitable programs, from food stamps to unemployment benefits, and they make it clear the numbers of poor persons in this land have not been small.

The book has more than one use, as it provides in-depth explanations of the origin of programs and the political connections related to funding, legislation, and public perspectives on spending. From
the point of view of historical developments, public policy, and political processes, the book could be not only good background reading for teachers but also very helpful for developing or enriching social science units in the classroom.

What led up to and exploded in 2008 and 2009 is profiled clearly here… great background reading for educators, to say the least.

The readings in the rest of the edition are also helpful, though some include rather technical terminology and concepts from fields such as economics. The text would lend itself well to use in graduate courses or longer summer classes on developing either teacher understanding of the current
recession or on creating more informative units on social science topics in the classroom.

The second part of the book includes four readings on increasing human capital, employment, and earnings. Here, four topics in education are discussed: the origins and impacts of Head Start; K-12 education battles; access to higher education; and workforce development. The third part of the book includes: the safety net for families with children; the safety net for the elderly; and the origins and impact of housing programs for families. The last section covers improvements in access to medical care and health.

These last two chapters on medical care and health are very important as a connection to on Obamacare (and its history), current events, and political processes. Like the other chapters in the
book, these two can provide teachers with one solid reference when designing materials and questions for students to ponder. Much of the data here can be used not only for teachers to come to a better understanding of what has been done to help disadvantaged persons in this nation but also for teachers to design and enrich units related to all of the Social Science Goals within the Illinois Learning Standards.

I would suggest that the themes and data in the book relate to specific strands within the Social Science Goals. Based on the information in this book, I would propose the book includes insights and data helpful specifically related to units addressing these strands in the Illinois Social Science Goals: 14.A, 14.B, 14.C; 14.D; 14.F; 15.A.c; 15.A.d.; 15.E; 16.C.b (US); 16.E.b; 17.C.a; 18.A; 18.B; and 18.C.

These two specific benchmarks could be impacted also, given the global interdependence of economies: 16.C.5b (W) and 16.C.5c (W). We could also impact benchmarks related to the environment, how it contributes to the current poverty in our nation, and ways to remedy the problems: 17.C.5b and 17.D.5. In addition, it would be interesting to look at how the book could be
used as a basis to locate other materials for designing units related to communicating about poverty, politics, social policy, hunger, unemployment, social change, and poverty.

There are cultural and other connections to be made from the materials in this book. To do so, we could impact possibly these specific benchmarks within the Illinois Fine Arts Goals: 26.A.5; 27.A.4b; 27.B.4b; and 27.B.5.

These are only a few suggestions; I would suggest there are more connections, including across subjects. As examples, links could be shown between the above information, plus the various strands and benchmarks suggested, to help impact other learning areas. For districts interested in knowing, they would be possibly impacting these particular Illinois Foreign Language benchmarks: 29.D.5; 29.E.5; 30.A.5a; and 30.A.5c.

To summarize, I would recommend the book for use in various graduate courses and professional development sessions of some length for teachers. I suggest the book is helpful for both developing teacher understanding of the current recession and on creating more informed units on social
science topics in the classroom. Teachers will clearly make their own connections to different strands, benchmarks and subject. The above is simply an attempt on my part to call attention to some possible interesting uses for this detailed text.

Although the text has some dense passages with technical terms and ideas, it is enlightening to read such great detail about poverty and ways it has been addressed in the USA in the last several decades.

Book Review – Aporophobia: Why We Reject the Poor Instead of Helping Them

Aporophobia: Why We Reject the Poor Instead of Helping Them

by Adela Cortina

The author is a professor emerita of ethics and political philosophy and paints a broad sweep of a picture here including both the history and politics of what people think of the poor. Cortina speaks to the changes in this country—President Biden welcoming the poor immigrants in—and the ongoing nightmares—such as the Haitians who were chased by guards on horseback.

All is not well in the land of the poor, which Cortina explains, is pretty much every land. The notion that immigrants bring lots of problems but certainly nothing of value to offer is an important theme in the book.

Since the days of the “undeserving poor” and the various battles against poverty (none have really succeeded in conquering it) persons who find themselves trapped in poverty have been in the news. Every day, we hear about what the poor are doing, what the homeless are up to, and what the people
out there without jobs and money are (supposedly) doing to destroy our nation.

Currently, just within Chicago, we have over 60,000 (native) homeless, over 20,000 new migrants who are homeless, and all the numbers are up, up, up. There are over 16,000 homeless students who attend Chicago Public Schools. There are over 50,000 children in Illinois.

These ideas of this big (and growing) part of the world population are strong in the media and the sources and causes of the views and opinions about this burgeoning sector of the US (and world) population. Without giving away all of the book’s content, I must say, I do not like to tell readers all the most important parts and facts and conclusions of a book. Rather, I
leave the discovery and discussion to the reader to find, consider, and ponder.

What this text does is provide an interesting outline of where our fear of the poor comes from… a clear understanding of the Greek root words used to come up with a term for this fear, and an ethical framework for understanding all of this.

Now, it is up to the reader, the educator, the social worker, and the taxpayer to make sense of the outline, the map, provided here, and develop a better understanding of oneself as we venture out
into the street to help the poor.

Book Review: In Levittown’s Shadow: Poverty in America’s Wealthiest Postwar Suburb

In Levittown’s Shadow: Poverty in America’s Wealthiest Postwar Suburb

by Tim Keogh

There is a familiar narrative about American suburbs: after 1945, white residents left cities for leafy, affluent subdivisions and the better life they seemed to embody. In Levittown’s Shadow tells us
there is more to this story, offering an eye opening account of diverse, poor residents living and working in those same neighborhoods. Tim Keogh shows how public policies produced both suburban plenty and deprivation—and why ignoring suburban poverty doomed efforts to reduce inequality. Keogh focuses on the suburbs of Long Island, home to Levittown, often considered the archetypal suburb. Here military contracts subsidized well-paid employment like welding airplanes or filing paperwork, while weak labor laws impoverished suburbanites who mowed lawns, built houses, scrubbed kitchen floors, and stocked supermarket shelves. Federal mortgage programs helped some families buy orderly single-family homes and enter the middle class but also underwrote landlord efforts to cram poor families into suburban attics, basements, and sheds.

Keogh explores how policymakers ignored suburban inequality, addressing housing segregation between cities and suburbs rather than suburbanites’ demands for decent jobs, housing, and schools. By turning our attention to the suburban poor, Keogh reveals poverty wasn’t just an urban problem but a suburban one, too. In Levittown’s Shadow deepens our understanding of suburbia’s history—and points us toward more effective ways to combat poverty today.

Promoting Student Discussion Using Prompts and the Rule of THREE

Promoting Student Discussion Using Prompts and the Rule of THREE

Alan Singer

We have all experienced the frustration of asking a class and question and being greeted by silence. Students either didn’t understand what we were asking, didn’t know the answer, or no one was prepared to risk themselves by answering. Even when someone answers, it is often difficult to promote more general discussion. I find the most effective way to engage students in examining a topic together is by providing them with material to respond to, such as a chart, graph, image, map, or text with specific questions to answer before discussion begins. I try to organize questions from simple to more complex, from identifying information to forming opinions. While students are writing, I circulate around the room, identifying students with different points of view that I can call on to open discussion. Then I deploy what I call the rule of THREE, twice. What does it say? Where is the evidence in the text? What do you think? I will ask two students to answer and a third student, “Which of the two do you agree with more and why?” After that I open discussion to the full class, generally with good results.

Aim: What were the underlying causes of the Great Irish Famine (1845-1852)?

Instructions: Read the selection below, examine the political cartoon, and answer questions 1-6.

  1. According to the author, how would France and England have responded to “blight and famine” if they had occurred in those countries?
  2. Why does the author dismiss English claims that famine relief was too costly?
  3. How was the world made aware of conditions in Ireland?
  4. What does the author propose as the solution to what was taking place in Ireland?
  5. Does the cartoonist agree or disagree with the author? Explain.
  6. In your opinion, was the author writing as a political activist or a historian? Explain.

“If blight and famine fell upon the South of France, the whole common revenue of the kingdom would certainly be largely employed in setting the people to labour upon works of public utility; in purchasing and storing for sale, at a cheap rate, such quantities of foreign corn as might be needed, until the season of distress should pass over, and another harvest should come. If Yorkshire and Lancashire had sustained a little calamity in England, there is no doubt such measures as these would have been taken promptly and liberally. And we know that the English Government is not slow to borrow money for great public objects, when it suits

Source: Punch, 1849

British policy so to do. They borrowed twenty million sterling to give away to their slaveholding colonists for a mischievous whim . . . It will be easy to appreciate the feelings which then prevailed in the two islands — in Ireland, a vague and dim sense that we were somehow robbed; in England, a still more vague and blundering idea, that an impudent beggar was demanding their money, with a scowl in his eye and a threat upon his tongue . . . In addition to the proceeds of the new Poor law, Parliament appropriated a further sum of £50,000, to be applied in giving work in some absolutely pauper districts where there was no hope of ever raising rates to repay it. £50,000 was just the sum which was that same year voted out of the English and Irish revenue to improve the buildings of the British Museum . . . In this year (1847) it was that the Irish famine began to be a world’s wonder, and men’s hearts were moved in the uttermost ends of the earth by the recital of its horrors. The London Illustrated News began to be adorned with engravings of tottering windowless hovels in Skibbereen, and elsewhere, with naked wretches dying on a truss of wet straw; and the constant language of English ministers and members of Parliament created the impression abroad that Ireland was in need of alms, and nothing but alms; whereas Irishmen themselves uniformly protested that what they required was a repeal of the Union, so that the English might cease to devour their substance.”

Instructions: Working with your team, examine the six statements below. Which statement or statements come closest to your understanding of the underlying cause of the Great Irish Famine? Select a representative to present your teams views to the class.

A. “The time has not yet arrived at which any man can with confidence say, that he fully appreciates the nature and the bearings of that great event which will long be inseparably associated with the year just departed.  Yet we think that we may render some service to the public by attempting thus early to review, with the calm temper of a future generation, the history of the great Irish famine of 1847.  Unless we are much deceived, posterity will trace up to that famine the commencement of a salutary revolution in the habits of a nation long singularly unfortunate, and will acknowledge that on this, as on many other occasions, Supreme Wisdom has educed perm-anent good out of transient evil.” – Charles Trevelyan, Assistant Secretary to the Treasury, 1848

B. “The poorer Irish are the most easily contented and the most truly happy of any peasantry I have ever seen. They are faithful, generous, warm-hearted, fearless and reckless. They smile in peace over a handful of bad potatoes and devoutly thank God who provides it.” – E. Newman, Notes on Irish Natural History (1840).

C. “The Irish poor are the cause of their own misery. The potato crop encourages, from childhood, habits of laziness, negligence and waste. No other crop produces such an abundance of food on the same amount of ground, requires so little skill and labor, and leaves so large a portion of the laborer’s time unoccupied, as the potato. These are great temptations. It requires thought and energy to overcome them. When the Irish go to England or America, they earn their keep.”  – The Plough (1846).

D. “No destruction of a city or attack on a castle ever approached the horror and dislocation to the slaughters done in Ireland by government policies and the principles of political economy. The Almighty sent the potato blight, but the English created the famine.” – John Mitchel, The Last Conquest of Ireland (1861).

E. “Famine seems to be the last, the most dreadful resource of nature. The power of population growth is much greater than to the power of the earth to provide all people with enough food to survive. Because of this, premature death must visit the human race. The vices of mankind are active contributors to depopulation. They come before the great army of destruction and often complete the dreadful work. But if human vices fail in this war of extermination, epidemics, pestilence, and plague advance in terrific array, and sweep off their thousands and tens of thousands. Should success be still incomplete, gigantic inevitable famine stalks in the rear, and with one mighty blow levels the population.”  – Thomas Robert Malthus, Essay on the Principle of Population (1798).

F. “The cause of poverty in Ireland lies in the existing social conditions. The land is divided into small units for rental. This causes sharp competition between tenant farmers. It prevents farmers from investing in improving their farms.” – Friedrich Engels, The Condition of the Working Class in England (1845).

Engaging Students with Poverty in Mind: Practical Strategies for Raising Achievement

Engaging Students with Poverty in Mind: Practical Strategies for Raising Achievement, by Eric Jensen (Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development)

Review by Thomas Hansen

Eric Jensen provides good hints and strategies for dealing with the special and difficult problems our poorer students bring to the classroom.  The number of students living in poverty has grown exponentially, yet many educators are not aware of the realities.  Jensen shows a good understanding of some of the difficulties and challenges students face, and he uses a research basis in this text.

Published in 2013, this book paints a bleak picture of a bleak nation.  I am sure Jensen had NO idea there would be worse days, COVID-19, and a burgeoning homeless population in this country.  Fresh after the New Great Depression, this book was timeless then—and is timeless now.

This text appeared years ago but is still relevant because the number of persons on the streets has risen, a huge number of families rely on food stamps and free lunches, and the homes of many families have been boarded up for a number of years, with most people not able to afford a house and the original occupants of those dwellings now living with relatives, in shelters, or in their cars. 

A huge challenge today is how to afford a place to live.  Struggling families can tell you this.  Housing is expensive.  In many cities, very few people have any interest at all in providing affordable homes or apartments for poorer people to live in.  You can count on one hand the cities that have actually addressed the problem of “where to put the poor people.

The question remains:  “How do we begin to help students who face the stressors of hunger, despair, and stigma each day?”  It is important to serve and protect the students now, while they are poor, and deal with housing and other services later.  But how do we teach them?  Feed them?  Encourage them?

Jensen includes the data from research on these students, starting with health and nutrition issues and ranging to the stress levels and daily hassles students face.  These and five other areas constitute the seven types of challenges facing students living in poverty, though I would suggest many of our students, in addition to teachers and teacher candidates, face many of these same difficulties.   Jensen calls these “the seven engagement factors,” and the other ones are: vocabulary; effort and energy; mind-set; cognitive capacity; and relationships.

Jensen bases his approach here more on the stressors facing poor students and less on technical information about the poverty numbers and facts out there.  For that technical data, we would have to go to other sources. 

Jensen proposes “five rules for engagement” for teachers to employ in the classroom as a means of getting poorer students involved: upgrade your attitude; build relationships & respect; get buy-in; embrace clarity; and show your passion.  Though I think these are good to use with any student, they seem to make sense in dealing with students who face the hassles and challenges of living with poverty on a daily basis, a seemingly unrelenting set of difficulties.  Clarity is important, for example, because students living in poverty are often hungry and tired, and they need straightforward definitions and examples, in addition to encouragement and a positive learning environment.

Jensen acknowledges hunger and stress and the power they hold over students.  He reminds us that students should be treated with dignity, and that they are the reason we have a job.  The students are the future of our country, Jensen reminds us, not prison inmates. 

Students living in poverty, especially, come to school wondering if someone there cares about them, wondering if they are important.  They may have difficulty concentrating, and difficulty feeling that the school day may offer something interesting and relevant in a world that may have forgotten them, they may feel.  Younger people, especially, have trouble making sense of a world in which there is so much hunger.                

I can think of some other texts from years ago that are still relevant.  If Jensen’s older book is to be used in a topics class on dealing with poverty issues or other such use, including professional development meetings or retreats, I would definitely recommend one or more additional texts—both of them older/older editions fine—with more specific information on poverty be included.  One good additional text would be: Poverty in America: A Handbook, Third Edition, 2013, by John Iceland.  

Another good text would be: Someplace Like America: Tales from the New Great Depression, Updated Edition, 2013, by Dale Maharidge, Photographs by Michael S. Williamson.  These could both provide more of the technical information not included in the Jensen text.

To summarize, I recommend this text because of the good teaching strategies and scenarios included.  I think most of what Jensen includes is good information for working with any student, and certainly any student facing stressful situations. 

Health Care Off the Books: Poverty, Illness, and Strategies for Survival in Urban America

Health Care Off the Books:  Poverty, Illness, and Strategies for Survival in Urban America, by Danielle T. Raudenbush, (Oakland: University of California Press).

Review by Thomas Hansen

Teachers of social studies—and all teachers interested in social justice—can make good use of this text as either a good reference for their personal library or a good research source for students in secondary school courses to read and consult.  There is a great deal of good information here about healthcare and healthcare policies in the US.  The book is written in accessible language and does not appear to have any offensive passages.

Danielle T. Raudenbush explains the ways in which poor urban dwellers in a project navigate the challenging world of health care, some with insurance, some without.  Raudenbush shows us there are three different levels of approaches to getting the needed pills, bandages, and even medical equipment whether patients follow the formal approach to getting their healthcare—or not.

The author makes it clear there is a consistent and reliable informal network of helpers for poor persons to get pretty much whatever they need on the streets.  Raudenbush acknowledges this particular qualitative study, done over time, focuses very much on healthcare issues and does not address food, money, rides, or other items very much. 

The author shows us there are those three different approaches, first formal: going to doctor appointments, buying medication and/or using insurance to do so, and then taking all of the medication/following all the doctor’s orders, and convalescing as directed.  There is also informal—and this is the one that seems to be of most interest to the author.

A second approach is “informal” and it involves using local resources and persons in the process of purchasing or trading for the pills, bartering for the pills, lending other needed medical supplies and goods, or purchasing these items from a helper in the project.  It is very interesting how the author is able to get so much information, and she has established very good rapport, it seems, with the residents of the project.  Like her subjects in the study, the author is African-American, and this connection helps her to get the trust of the people she interviews.  She also conducts focus groups with the residents.

A third approach—she calls it the “hybrid” one, shows local and formal together.  The author reveals how much the residents of the project bend rules, make important connections, share resources, and make use of the people who serve as “helpers” in that community.  Doctors and other medical personnel are also involved in the hybrid approach in various ways—and in the informal approach too.

Helpers provide the backbone for the poor to get access to so many services, and to food, and to medication, and even to walkers and wheelchairs.  Often heard among the homeless, also, are these kinds of questions:

  • Who is giving away winter coats?
  • Who has free dinner tonight?
  • Is there any place with decent sack lunches by my spot where I stay now?
  • Where can I get some gloves and underwear on a Sunday?
  • How do I find that lady who has the phone chargers for sale?

In addition to these questions, helpers often have to deal with others—such as ones dealing with social security application rules, where to get free aspirin, how to get disability checks, how to find a good dentist who takes XY or Z insurance, and other needed information.  As in this book, one will find out the streets have helpers who are constantly assisting those in need—and who are well-known among the street networks. 

Informal networks and devoted helpers are an integral part for many residents of that project.  The author does a great job of show how complex the relationships can be.