Author: Derek Lee

I believe that the teachers’ strike in New York during 1968 was stemmed solely from the unwarranted opposition to any strides to improve the academic situation for minorities. An early example of this was the unnecessary backlash and deliberate sabotage of the Educational Park project. In the early 1960’s many civil rights and integration activists persistently pushed the notion of Educational Park to city hall. They believed by creating a college-like campus with the state of the art resources and labs, it could help promote the intellectual advancement of their students. An argument for this plan was that instead of dispersing limited resources to many small schools, the city could heavily invest in a shared community campus and have these luxurious resources focused on one school. White parents in eastern Brooklyn strongly opposed this strictly stating that they opposed the busing of their children to outside neighborhoods they deemed to be dangerous. From reading the arguments white parents stated in opposition of Educational Park, it is quite obvious that the educational aspect of schooling was not the highest priority. The highest priority for these parents were to keep their schools highly concentrated with white students and to keep their children out of “dangerous” neighborhoods.

Throughout this time period, many minority students also received unwarranted abuse while attending their assigned schools. On their way to school, students, parents, and busing advocates were all pelted with eggs and were called “niggers”. The other white students themselves ostracized the black students being bused into their school. For many black and latino families, the main priority was to simply receive equal educational opportunities as their white counterparts. With repeated unwarranted racism and abuse, the idea of the community controlled schools was created. Many of those who advocated for this strongly urged to allow the community to dictate schools in the children’s’ and community’s best interests. However, though liberal, many of the teachers in the United Federation of Teachers opposed this idea. They believed that implementing this kind of program would undo the many benefits and changes they fought so hard to gain.

I believe the idea of community controlled schools is where liberal school reformists started to split in their ideology and mission. After being granted an experimental district to test out new schooling organizations, teacher discontent quickly ensued. Teachers started resigning, accusing the governing board of the experimental district of ignoring their views. Discontent grew even further when Rhody McCoy was selected as unit administrator who was not listed as an approved personnel to fill the position. McCoy hired teachers and principals not on the approved lists. He also regularly made decisions that seemed arbitrary and contrary to his directives. Soon, in May 1968, 13 teachers were fired due to their undermining of the community control program. 350 more teachers striked in support for the 13 terminated teachers, only to meet the same fate; McCoy dismissed all 350 teachers. I believe that the root to these conflicts was due to the early opposition to integration efforts. So when given the opportunity to run a program they saw fit, community control advocates did so at the expense of the teachers in the experimental district.

As a student that has experienced both the New York City Public School system as well as the standardized examination to be admitted to a specialized high school, I felt very attached to the subject of elite school admissions. In his article “Paths to Legislation or Litigation for Educational Privilege: New York and San Francisco Compared” Floyd M. Hammack gives a comparison of the history of admissions at exclusive public high schools. Hammock states that “all educational credentials have not been created equal, nor do all citizens have equal access to educational opportunities. Race, gender, ethnicity, social class, and other background factors remain important in the process of attaining educational credentials” (372). The crux of this statement has been a reoccurring theme in our class discussion. Historically, at elite and better funded institutions have always been able to exclude students of a certain social class and race. Intentional or not, these numbers can speak for themselves when considering the demographics of admitted students. Despite the undeniable truth behind these numbers and statistics, I can’t help but dispute the generalization this idea creates on the students that are admitted to elite institutions. There are just too many individual stories to allow a blanket statement to be continually used when referring to student segregation and exclusion. When it came to the SHSAT for admissions, it has become a matter of learning to take a test rather than using prior academic merit as a criteria for admissions. However, I do believe this process is as unbiased as admissions can get from my understanding of school policy.

One example, is that through this test, a student regardless of their grade can still be admitted thanks to the score they receive. Unlike other schools that may take GPA and other academic factors into account, a student that is near failing can get admitted so long as they score above the cutoff for a desired high school. I knew a student in my middle school that did poorly in school but put everything into the SHSAT and was able to attend a specialized high school despite his middle school grades. I also know another student that was economically disadvantaged and used to study from SHSAT workbooks while helping at his family’s restaurant after school. I don’t deny the results of the specialized high school admissions is lopsided, but I do believe that the problem lies not on the SHSAT admissions test itself. Rather, students should be exposed more to what these high schools can offer them. I believe that when a student knows what is being offered, the desire to attend alone, should be enough to earn them a spot in the school.

One thing that changed my idea on school policy was the concept of “White Values” and “Black Values”. Prior to this reading I was not aware that these concepts were an actual cause for concern in schools nor did I know the teacher employment were based on this as well. White values were essentially the idea of teaching students in a way that promoted competition and individual success. Many educators and teachers in New York City felt the pressure of using this ideology to prepare students for the “white world”. “Black Values” on the other hand was more community focused and promoted cooperation and cultural legitimacy of the black poor. I think it was very interesting to read that teachers were removed and replaced based on these set of values. Again, this is another passage that portrays the complexity of school policy and the struggle in making more representative schools.