How Far Have We Come? New Book Looks at School Segregation in Connecticut

The Children in Room E-4: American Education on Trial, by Susan Eaton, is a compelling book that tells the story of Sheff v. O’Neill, Connecticut’s ongoing school desegregation case, through the experience of one classroom in Hartford, the nation’s second poorest city. Eaton, a former reporter for the Hartford Courant and former Assistant Director of the Harvard Civil Rights Project, introduces readers to Jeremy, a bright fourth grader at Simpson-Waverly Elementary School, an award-winning, ninety-nine percent minority school in Hartford, his dedicated and tireless teacher, Lois Luddy, and the rest of Jeremy’s classmates.

The author had set out to ask James Thompson, Simpson-Waverly’s principal, if and how his success can be replicated, but her inquiry shifted to a larger question: “Is what politicians call ‘school reform’- the contemporary, bipartisan goal of quantifiable standards and better test scores - a just, effective replacement for Brown’s and Sheff’s requisite integration and equal opportunity?”

Engaging Narrative

By weaving together in one engaging narrative the history of segregation in Hartford, the trial and aftermath of the Sheff case, and the experience of the children in one classroom, Eaton demonstrates convincingly that even the most enthusiastic and effective teacher and principal cannot erase the effects of persistent segregation. Although this is a story about Hartford, Connecticut, it has national implications. Connecticut’s response to the Sheff decision and the effects on these children are a microcosm of how this country has handled school segregation.

America retreated from desegregation efforts fairly soon after desegregation was attempted. Only 20 years after Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court weakened the power of the federal courts to combat segregation, limiting its role to enforcing only intentional, and not de facto, segregation. As a result, American schools have been steadily re-segregating since the 1980’s. Instead of confronting this disturbing phenomenon, politicians are content instead to simply demand higher test scores and “standards” in segregated schools.

Isolation and Poverty

Eaton demonstrates that Connecticut is a prime example of this country’s inability to confront segregation effectively. The author vividly describes the Sheff trial and the stunning victory for the plaintiffs at the Connecticut Supreme Court. In 1996, Chief Justice Ellen Peters concluded that, whether intentional or “unorchestrated,” “students in Hartford suffer daily from the devastating effects that racial and ethnic isolation, as well as poverty, have had on their education.” Noting that the federal courts provided no relief for this injury, Justice Peters concluded that segregation violated the students’ state constitutional right to substantially equal educational opportunity.

Although the court found that segregation was a grievous constitutional violation, Eaton recounts the lack of political will that has hampered any attempts at achieving a comprehensive remedy. Then-Governor John Rowland’s response to the decision was the creation of a panel that, for the most part, studiously avoided discussing racial segregation. In the end, the panel came up with fifteen recommendations, including: “improving teaching and learning” “encouraging parental involvement” and “enhancing a sense of community.” The last recommendation, and the least, according to Sheff attorney John Brittain, was “reducing racial isolation.”

The Sheff lawyers experienced more frustration in their attempts to enforce compliance with the Sheff decision. Ultimately, in the face of an unsympathetic judge, the plaintiffs’ best course was to enter into a consent decree involving the creation of magnet schools that would allow at least a portion of Hartford’s children to attend schools that were not racially isolated. Eaton writes that the dedicated lawyers for the plaintiffs continue to fight to this day to enforce the landmark ruling.

“Reducing racial isolation” for Ms. Luddy’s students translated to a field trip to a school in the wealthy suburb of Marlborough. The children in this mostly white school learned everything from Spanish to ecology, played outside at recess twice-a-day, and had mini-courses on Friday afternoons like cooking and the history of lacrosse. On the way to Marlborough, Ms. Luddy’s children, who never go outside and have no playground, marveled at seeing, for the first time, the Connecticut River. One child asked Ms. Luddy if they were going to a “white school.” Later, Ms. Luddy expressed disbelief that in the year 2000, it was still foreign for her students to see white children.

Narrowed World, Narrowed Curriculum

The author’s description of this visit highlighted the narrow world in which the children in Hartford must live; a narrow world that desegregation would necessarily expand. However, instead of integration, these children suffer through mandates to “improve education” that further narrow their educational experience. As their curriculum must not deviate from those subjects on state tests, social studies and science are rarely taught. Instead of hands-on activities to learn math concepts like probability, the children are forced to complete worksheets and suffer through constant “pre-tests” and drills. When they left Simpson-Waverly, less than a handful of Ms Luddy’s students were able to attend the magnet schools created in response to the Sheff decree. For most of these children, the promise of Sheff has yet to be realized.

Early in the book, the author described how segregated communities in the Hartford area were consciously constructed through overt housing discrimination and more subtle zoning rules designed to exclude those with limited means. In her afterword, Eaton explores possible remedies for segregation. The author looks to the successful examples of housing integration and inter-district cooperation, acknowledging that despite these successes, integration faces strong opposition. One of the Sheff lawyers pointed out the irony of calling desegregation efforts “social engineering.” “This entire region has been socially engineered. Saying that we’re the social engineers implies that segregation is natural.” The Children in Room E-4 demonstrates that segregation is not only unnatural, but unhealthy for the survival of our children and our democracy.

Prepared by Wendy Lecker, April 11, 2007

Wendy Lecker is an education advocate in Connecticut and is a regular contributor to the Access Network's News Analysis