# data[].attributes.body
The Puritans were members of a group that strictly relied on religion as one's education. During this time it was more common for boys to receive more education compared to the girls. Although they contributed to American history, schooling began to develop and change its ways for the better. Puritans would teach students the bible and made church a mandatory event. The puritans wanted loyal citizens to practice and worship their religion only. According to the article, “it was designed to prepare students for college and, ultimately, for the ministry, the law, and sometimes medicine.” This proves that there weren't many options for students and it limited them from truly developing and opening their minds to a proper education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Where U.S. Education Has Come From: Practices of the Early Settlers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Spread the loveUnderstanding the American school system of today requires understanding what it was built on. By looking at the history of the U.S. system of education, you get a better idea of what principles stand at its core and what characteristics have changed over time to produce the environment in which you work today.

# data[].attributes.body
Quakers were a group of Christian individuals who practiced equality, accepted education, and opposed violence and war. Although the Quakers were religious too, they definitely were more open to accepting other forms of education and females were attending as well. They supported women's rights and according to the article describes it as, “believed that spiritual, social, and intellectual growth are closely linked.” Despite the ideas developed by the puritans, the Quakers took their ideas and expanded them for more opportunities. Quakers were all about community, peace, and caring for the student process of development. The Quakers were all about simplicity, but they would say that there is God in every person.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Religious Society of Friends was originated by George Fox (1624-1691) during a period of political upheaval and social change in England. The established churches, Catholic and Anglican, were at a low ebb at this time, caught up in conflicts and preoccupied with forms and power struggles rather than religious witness. Neither provided much help to the victims of upheaval in a violent century, and so there were thousands of "seekers" who were looking for something that they could believe in and that would give meaning to their lives.

One such seeker, George Fox, after years of spiritual questioning, had a revelation on Pendle Hill, in the heart of England's Lake District. This revelation led to the birth of the Religious Society of Friends and has been at the heart of its life and witness ever since. From this revelation, George Fox derived his essential insight, which was that there is "that of God" in everyone, and that one can gain access to the God within through stillness and the practice of silence.

The belief that there is that of God in every person led as well to the Quaker practices of careful listening, compassion, non-violence, full equality of women, and social action in pursuit of social justice. Fox also believed that decisions in the religious community should be made by the "sense of the meeting," a spiritual step that seeks truth and is distinctive from consensus and voting, which seeks compromise or majority rule.

Quakers came to America very early in their history - the first Quakers came on preaching missions in 1656 to Maryland. Also, as a result of the persecution of Quakers in England, many friends emigrated to the American colonies. William Penn arrived in America in 1681 and founded Pennsylvania as the Holy Experiment, a colony governed on the ideals of the Religious Society of Friends.

Quakers first established schools in England to provide their children with a "guarded" education, one that protected the children from the influences of the larger society. When Friends arrived in America, they immediately founded schools to educate both boys and girls. Friends schools were founded in Philadelphia in the late 1600s. Believing that spiritual, social, and intellectual growth are closely linked, Friends have always stressed the importance of an education that supports the overall development of the child.
[Excerpted from What Does a Friends School Have to Offer? with permission from the Friends Council on Education]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Religious Society of Friends was originated by George Fox (1624-1691) during a period of political upheaval and social change in England. The established churches, Catholic and Anglican, were at a low ebb at this time, caught up in conflicts and preoccupied with forms and power struggles rather than religious witness.

# data[].attributes.body
The reconstruction era was a significant part of American history and lasted from Dec 8, 1863 – to Mar 31, 1877. This occurred after the American civil war and has significantly changed the course of life that we endure in today's society. During this time, 3 different amendments, the 13th, 14th, and 15th, were put in place in hopes to gain equality for African Americans. This time in history had an extreme amount of backlash but gives everyone a new perspective on life and education. Although these amendments were put in place, discrimination continued to exist. The reconstruction era consisted of enslaved people running for and winning political office and they fought for economic independence. It is evident that education has and will continue to develop.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In recent political debates over how to teach U.S. history, the subject of slavery has loomed large.

Long-documented omissions and misrepresentations in lessons have left students with incomplete understandings of the period. As some teachers have adopted new resources that center the experiences of Black Americans and trace slavery's impacts through to the present day, conservative politicians and pundits have pushed back against narratives that make these connections.

But a new report makes the case that the period immediately following the Civil War and the end of slavery is getting overlooked and distorted in history classes, too. And the consequences, it argues, are no less significant.

This period-Reconstruction-marked an enormous advancement of, and backlash to, Black Americans' civil rights, political power, and economic standing. The passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments came with the promise of equal participation in American life. Formerly enslaved people ran for and won political office, built social and civic institutions, and fought for economic independence.

But that promise wasn't fulfilled. White politicians and communities mounted a fierce and violent opposition to this progress, both limiting legal rights and terrorizing Black communities.

The Ku Klux Klan formed during this period. States began to pass Jim Crow laws that codified segregation. The backlash to Reconstruction shaped the next century of history through to the Civil Rights Movement-and many historians and political scientists say that issues at the heart of the era, like voting rights and definitions of citizenship, are still central to modern politics.

But a sweeping new report from the Zinn Education Project, a progressive organization that provides lessons and professional development for teachers, finds that state standards muddy the significance of Reconstruction, omit key understandings, or in some cases, promote debunked historical narratives.

The report, written by a team of doctoral candidates and history researchers with an advisory panel of nearly 20 historians and social scientists, examines state standards and examples of district-level curricula. It also includes responses from a teacher survey on teaching Reconstruction.

This analysis takes a comprehensive look at how states handle the subject, offering state-by-state breakdowns as well as overall findings. The organization, which takes historian Howard Zinn's approach to teaching the past from the perspective of people whose stories have been marginalized or ignored in dominant narratives, also hopes it will serve as a call to action.

"If states had better standards about Reconstruction that emphasized Black agency and that revealed the white supremacist backlash that took down Reconstruction, that would provide more support for educators who want to teach the truth about this incredible time period that held immense promise," said Jesse Hagopian, a high school teacher in Seattle and an organizer with the Zinn Education Project.

"Instead, what's often taught around the country is that Reconstruction failed. A lot of textbooks and state standards ask students to analyze the failure of Reconstruction, without pointing out that it didn't just fail, it was attacked."

Muddy definitions, false narratives can confuse students

The report finds that many standards don't provide clear and consistent definitions of what Reconstruction was. Only one state-Massachusetts-mentions white supremacy as a cause of the backlash to the expansion of civil rights and Black political and economic power.

Just as some instructional materials on the Civil War still promote lost-cause narratives that cast the Confederacy in a positive light, some of the state standards that address Reconstruction promote skewed historical frameworks. More than 15 states ask students to evaluate whether Reconstruction was a success or a failure, a framing that the authors say casts the freedom and enfranchisement of formerly enslaved people as a "reckless" and ill-advised experiment.

"For most of the 20th century, white supremacists often cited 'failure' as an overarching inevitability of Reconstruction and a reason to deny Black people full citizenship in the decades that followed," the report reads.

And most states focus exclusively on Reconstruction's impact in the South, even though the expansion of voting rights and the prevalence of white mob violence had impacts outside of the Southern states.

The report also argues that states take too much of a "top-down" approach to teaching the era, focusing more on politics and policies than the grassroots organizing or accomplishments of Black Americans.

"This is an erstwhile problem in the way that we present history of all ages," said Jonathan Zimmerman, an education historian at the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education. Zimmerman, who was not involved in the writing of the report, said he agreed with the conclusion that Reconstruction is often poorly taught and that many lessons are still influenced by narratives rooted in white supremacy.

The omission of social history in Reconstruction is especially problematic, he said, because it disproportionately minimizes Black experience and agency in the era. It also obscures the reality of widespread extralegal violence, he said.

Even as the report calls for different state standards on Reconstruction, its authors remain ambivalent about the institution of state standards as a whole, and their connection to standardized testing.

"The [Zinn Education Project is] very much on the left, and standards have been coded as a conservative thing. So the report doesn't want to [deal] with that," Zimmerman said.

But in pointing out the failures in state standards, he argued, the report underscores their importance in setting instructional agendas. In order to have a standard of accuracy and rigor for teaching Reconstruction, "you need to have standards on teaching Reconstruction," Zimmerman said.

Changing standards is a heated political battle

Outside of the content concerns raised, the report also identifies one major logistical challenge to teaching Reconstruction: It generally falls at the very end, or the very beginning, of a school year.

Eighth grade courses generally cover the first "half" of U.S. History, from colonial America through to the end of the Civil War. Ninth grade courses pick up from there. Reconstruction, teachers said in the Zinn survey, can sometimes get lost in that transition.

This was the case for Seth Billingsley, an 8th and 9th grade U.S. History teacher in Baltimore, who was quoted in the report. In Maryland, 8th grade standards include Reconstruction at the end of the year. "I'll be completely honest, I did not get to it at all [last year], because the virtual learning environment made it really difficult," he said, in an interview with Education Week.

With his 9th graders this fall, he started the school year with Reconstruction. He and his students talked about what freedom meant to formerly enslaved people, that some of the promises of Reconstruction were fulfilled, and that there were then attempts to limit those new freedoms in the form of Black Codes, forced labor of prisoners, and the rise of Jim Crow laws.

Billingsley likes the district curriculum that Baltimore provides on Reconstruction, and has used pieces of it in his classes-like a lesson in which students analyze the rise of Jim Crow laws alongside a passage from "The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness" by legal scholar Michelle Alexander. He's tried to get students thinking about "echoes of this history in our current society," he said.

That's one of the recommendations put forth in the Zinn Education report: addressing the legacies of Reconstruction today.

The document comes with a host of other suggestions for states and districts, like including clear definitions in standards, emphasizing actions taken by African Americans, requiring students to study the Freedmen's Bureau, explicitly calling out white supremacy, and adjusting timelines so that Reconstruction doesn't fall into the gap between grades.

Understanding Reconstruction is especially important in this current political climate, Hagopian said, in which he sees echoes of the battles fought during the era.

"You can't understand the riots and insurrection and attacks on the Capitol on January 6th without understanding where white supremacist organizing came from," he said.

"When you see people carrying the Confederate flag through our nation's Capitol, you have to understand how the founding of the Ku Klux Klan in the wake of the Civil War was a reaction to the progress that was happening in Reconstruction."

But many parents and politicians don't want children taught that there is a throughline between those two events, or more broadly, that the effects of slavery and Reconstruction have any relevance in the present day.

In both Louisiana and Mississippi, battles are ongoing over revisions to state social studies standards that would change how the documents address historical oppression and discrimination. Members of the public have commented on draft standards in Louisiana, claiming that more attention to these issues would sow division among students.

Teachers may face less pushback-and foster more historical inquiry-if they provide students with information and context and then focus on what conclusions students can draw themselves, Zimmerman said. "For the report to say, connect the threat on civil rights during Reconstruction to attacks on civil rights today, I think this should be phrased in terms of a question and not an assertion."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What's the History of Reconstruction? In Many States, Students Don't Get the Whole Picture

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In recent political debates over how to teach U.S. history, the subject of slavery has loomed large. Long-documented omissions and misrepresentations in lessons have left students with incomplete understandings of the period. As some teachers have adopted new resources that center the experiences of Black Americans and trace slavery's impacts through to the present day, conservative politicians and pundits have pushed back against narratives that make these connections.

# data[].attributes.body
Booker T Washington was a very influential and controversial advocate for African Americans. He was raised as a slave and worked in mines during the time when African Americans were living in poverty, uneducated, and banned from voting. This is when his desire for equality and proper education sparked. Over time he found himself attending a formal school called the Hampton Institute. This led to the creation of one of the most prestigious African American institutes called Tuskegee. Washington advocated for African Americans but didn't believe in protests and disobeying the rules. He believed that people should obtain an education and acquire certain skills needed for society. From that point on, schools for African Americans developed all over.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Biographical Highlights Booker T. Washington (1856-1915) was one of the most influential (and controversial) African Americans in history. Raised the son of a slave mother, Washington was self-motivated and committed to his own education from a young age.

# data[].attributes.body
W.E.B. Du Bois was another developer of education and civil rights advocate. Just like Booker T. Washington, Du Bois felt strongly about equal rights, not compromise. However, du Bois believed that civil rights would be granted with protests and agitation. Du Bois opposed the “Atlanta Compromise,” articulated in a speech given in 1895 by Booker T. Washington. Although Washington and du Bois had different visions of gaining respect from the white population. Education was denied to so many African Americans during the slavery era and the development of schools and institutions was seen as a pathway to full citizenship and true freedom. These schools were very accepting for both men and women which is a symbol of positivee change. While washington believed in accepting the backlash and disrimination, de bois was more rational and urged immediate results.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the decades after Emancipation, African Americans continued to work for the betterment of their communities. Education, which had been denied to so many during the era of slavery, was seen as a pathway to full citizenship and true freedom.

Many schools were established in former slaves states specifically for the education of African American men and women. Among the educational institutions founded after the Civil War were colleges of the Atlanta University Center: Atlanta University - 1865 and Clark College - 1869 (now Clark Atlanta University), Morehouse College - 1867, Morris Brown College - 1881, Spelman College - 1881, and seminaries that would later be the foundation for the Interdenominational Theologial Center.

W.E.B. Du Bois was an important figure in the development of African-American education and the philosophy of the 20th century freedom movement. A Fisk Univeristy and Harvard educated historian and sociologist, Du Bois joined the faculty of Atlanta University in 1897. He distinguished himself and the programs at AU by conducting rigorous sociological studies, hosted conferences, and published extensively about the impact of slavery and class on the oppression of black people. While at Atlanta University, Du Bois penned his seminal work, The Souls of Black Folks, which laid bare the impact of slavery and race on American society. He also founded and edited the journal, Phylon: The Atlanta University Review of Race and Culture.

Du Bois did much to earn his reputation as a leading educator, and a radical spokesperson for African-Americans. Du Bois opposed the "Atlanta Compromise," articulated in a speech given in 1895 by Booker T. Washington, founder of Tuskegee Institute. This compromise traded the good behavior of Southern blacks for basic educational and economic freedoms from whites. DuBois felt strongly that blacks should be fighting for equal rights, not compromise.

Du Bois may be best known for the concept of the "talented tenth." He believed that full citizenship and equal rights for African Americans would be brought about through the efforts of an intellectual elite; for this reason, he was an advocate of a broad liberal arts education at the college level. This was in direct opposition to Washington's emphasis on industrial education.

Du Bois was a founder of the Niagara Movement, a collective of civil rights activists who drew up a statement of principles opposed to the Atlanta Compromise. Also he was a founder of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and edited its journal, Crisis, for many years.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
W.E.B. Du Bois and the Rise of Black Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this 150th anniversary year of the Emancipation Proclamation and the 50th anniversary year of the March on Washington, interest in black political activity during the Civil War and the Civil Rights Movement is at a high point. What may not be included in these celebrations is the constant struggle, and triumphs, of African-Americans in the intervening years.

# data[].attributes.body
In 1865, the thirteenth amendment finally put an end to slavery. In 1868, the fourteenth amendment granted citizenship to the newly freed slaves. In 1870, the 15th amendment guaranteed the right to vote regardless of race. These years are very significant and act as stepping stones toward African Americans obtaining rights and protection. Despite these Amendments, African Americans were often treated differently than whites in many parts of the country, especially in the South. Blacks and whites were told not to use the same public facilities. In 1892, an African American man named Homer Plessy made a brave choice to refuse to give up his seat to a white man on a train. Plessy fought his arrest and the case went all the way to the supreme court. This became a 1954 Supreme Court case that ruled racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional. These events led to the development of  “separate, but equal.”This was a turning point in history for African Americans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Plessy Decision

Although the Declaration of Independence stated that "All men are created equal," due to the institution of slavery, this statement was not to be grounded in law in the United States until after the Civil War (and, arguably, not completely fulfilled for many years thereafter). In 1865, the Thirteenth Amendment was ratified and finally put an end to slavery. Moreover, the Fourteenth Amendment (1868) strengthened the legal rights of newly freed slaves by stating, among other things, that no state shall deprive anyone of either "due process of law" or of the "equal protection of the law." Finally, the Fifteenth Amendment (1870) further strengthened the legal rights of newly freed slaves by prohibiting states from denying anyone the right to vote due to race.

Despite these Amendments, African Americans were often treated differently than whites in many parts of the country, especially in the South. In fact, many state legislatures enacted laws that led to the legally mandated segregation of the races. In other words, the laws of many states decreed that blacks and whites could not use the same public facilities, ride the same buses, attend the same schools, etc. These laws came to be known as Jim Crow laws. Although many people felt that these laws were unjust, it was not until the 1890s that they were directly challenged in court. In 1892, an African-American man named Homer Plessy refused to give up his seat to a white man on a train in New Orleans, as he was required to do by Louisiana state law. For this action he was arrested. Plessy, contending that the Louisiana law separating blacks from whites on trains violated the "equal protection clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, decided to fight his arrest in court. By 1896, his case had made it all the way to the United States Supreme Court. By a vote of 8-1, the Supreme Court ruled against Plessy. In the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, Justice Henry Billings Brown, writing the majority opinion, stated that:

"The object of the [Fourteenth] amendment was undoubtedly to enforce the equality of the two races before the law, but in the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to endorse social, as distinguished from political, equality. . . If one race be inferior to the other socially, the Constitution of the United States cannot put them upon the same plane."

The lone dissenter, Justice John Marshal Harlan, interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment another way, stated, "Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens." Justice Harlan's dissent would become a rallying cry for those in later generations that wished to declare segregation unconstitutional.

Sadly, as a result of the Plessy decision, in the early twentieth century the Supreme Court continued to uphold the legality of Jim Crow laws and other forms of racial discrimination. In the case of Cumming v. Richmond (Ga.) County Board of Education (1899), for instance, the Court refused to issue an injunction preventing a school board from spending tax money on a white high school when the same school board voted to close down a black high school for financial reasons. Moreover, in Gong Lum v. Rice (1927), the Court upheld a school's decision to bar a person of Chinese descent from a "white" school.

The Road to Brown

(Note: Some of the case information is from Patterson, James T. Brown v. Board of Education: A Civil Rights Milestone and Its Troubled Legacy. Oxford University Press; New York, 2001.)

Early Cases

Despite the Supreme Court's ruling in Plessy and similar cases, many people continued to press for the abolition of Jim Crow and other racially discriminatory laws. One particular organization that fought for racial equality was the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) founded in 1909. For about the first 20 years of its existence, it tried to persuade Congress and other legislative bodies to enact laws that would protect African Americans from lynchings and other racist actions. Beginning in the 1930s, though, the NAACP's Legal Defense and Education Fund began to turn to the courts to try to make progress in overcoming legally sanctioned discrimination. From 1935 to 1938, the legal arm of the NAACP was headed by Charles Hamilton Houston. Houston, together with Thurgood Marshall, devised a strategy to attack Jim Crow laws by striking at them where they were perhaps weakest-in the field of education. Although Marshall played a crucial role in all of the cases listed below, Houston was the head of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund while Murray v. Maryland and Missouri ex rel Gaines v. Canada were decided. After Houston returned to private practice in 1938, Marshall became head of the Fund and used it to argue the cases of Sweat v. Painter and McLaurin v. Oklahoma Board of Regents of Higher Education.

Pearson v. Murray (Md. 1936)

Disappointed that the University of Maryland School of Law was rejecting black applicants solely because of their race, beginning in 1933 Thurgood Marshall (who was himself rejected from this law school because of its racial acceptance policies) decided to challenge this practice in the Maryland court system. Before a Baltimore City Court in 1935, Marshall argued that Donald Gaines Murray was just as qualified as white applicants to attend the University of Maryland's School of Law and that it was solely due to his race that he was rejected. Furthermore, he argued that since the "black" law schools which Murray would otherwise have to attend were nowhere near the same academic caliber as the University's law school, the University was violating the principle of "separate but equal." Moreover, Marshall argued that the disparities between the "white" and "black" law schools were so great that the only remedy would be to allow students like Murray to attend the University's law school. The Baltimore City Court agreed and the University then appealed to the Maryland Court of Appeals. In 1936, the Court of Appeals also ruled in favor of Murray and ordered the law school to admit him. Two years later, Murray graduated.

Missouri ex rel Gaines v. Canada (1938)

Beginning in 1936, the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund decided to take on the case of Lloyd Gaines, a graduate student of Lincoln University (an all-black college) who applied to the University of Missouri Law School but was denied because of his race. The State of Missouri gave Gaines the option of either attending an all-black law school that it would build (Missouri did not have any all-black law schools at this time) or having Missouri help to pay for him to attend a law school in a neighboring state. Gaines rejected both of these options, and, employing the services of Thurgood Marshall and the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, he decided to sue the state in order to attend the University of Missouri's law school. By 1938, his case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, and, in December of that year, the Court sided with him. The six-member majority stated that since a "black" law school did not currently exist in the State of Missouri, the "equal protection clause" required the state to provide, within its boundaries, a legal education for Gaines. In other words, since the state provided legal education for white students, it could not send black students, like Gaines, to school in another state.

Sweat v. Painter (1950)

Encouraged by their victory in Gaines' case, the NAACP continued to attack legally sanctioned racial discrimination in higher education. In 1946, an African American man named Heman Sweat applied to the University of Texas' "white" law school. Hoping that it would not have to admit Sweat to the "white" law school if a "black" school already existed, elsewhere on the University's campus, the state hastily set up an underfunded "black" law school. At this point, Sweat employed the services of Thurgood Marshall and the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund and sued to be admitted to the University's "white" law school. He argued that the education that he was receiving in the "black" law school was not of the same academic caliber as the education that he would be receiving if he attended the "white" law school. When the case reached the U.S. Supreme Court in 1950, the Court unanimously agreed with him, citing as its reason the blatant inequalities between the University's law school (the school for whites) and the hastily erected school for blacks. In other words, the "black" law school was "separate," but not "equal." Like the Murray case, the Court found the only appropriate remedy for this situation was to admit Sweat to the University's law school.

McLaurin v. Oklahoma Board of Regents of Higher Education (1950)

In 1949, the University of Oklahoma admitted George McLaurin, an African American, to its doctoral program. However, it required him to sit apart from the rest of his class, eat at a separate time and table from white students, etc. McLaurin, stating that these actions were both unusual and resulting in adverse effects on his academic pursuits, sued to put an end to these practices. McLaurin employed Thurgood Marshall and the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund to argue his case, a case which eventually went to the U.S. Supreme Court. In an opinion delivered on the same day as the decision in Sweat, the Court stated that the University's actions concerning McLaurin were adversely affecting his ability to learn and ordered that they cease immediately.

Brown v. Board of Education (1954, 1955)

The case that came to be known as Brown v. Board of Education was actually the name given to five separate cases that were heard by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the issue of segregation in public schools. These cases were Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Briggs v. Elliot, Davis v. Board of Education of Prince Edward County (VA.), Bolling v. Sharpe, and Gebhart v. Ethel. While the facts of each case are different, the main issue in each was the constitutionality of state-sponsored segregation in public schools. Once again, Thurgood Marshall and the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund handled these cases.

Although it acknowledged some of the plaintiffs'/plaintiffs claims, a three-judge panel at the U.S. District Court that heard the cases ruled in favor of the school boards. The plaintiffs then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

When the cases came before the Supreme Court in 1952, the Court consolidated all five cases under the name of Brown v. Board of Education. Marshall personally argued the case before the Court. Although he raised a variety of legal issues on appeal, the most common one was that separate school systems for blacks and whites were inherently unequal, and thus violate the "equal protection clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, relying on sociological tests, such as the one performed by social scientist Kenneth Clark, and other data, he also argued that segregated school systems had a tendency to make black children feel inferior to white children, and thus such a system should not be legally permissible.

Meeting to decide the case, the Justices of the Supreme Court realized that they were deeply divided over the issues raised. While most wanted to reverse Plessy and declare segregation in public schools to be unconstitutional, they had various reasons for doing so. Unable to come to a solution by June 1953 (the end of the Court's 1952-1953 term), the Court decided to rehear the case in December 1953. During the intervening months, however, Chief Justice Fred Vinson died and was replaced by Gov. Earl Warren of California. After the case was reheard in 1953, Chief Justice Warren was able to do something that his predecessor had not-i.e. bring all of the Justices to agree to support a unanimous decision declaring segregation in public schools unconstitutional. On May 14, 1954, he delivered the opinion of the Court, stating that "We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. . ."

Expecting opposition to its ruling, especially in the southern states, the Supreme Court did not immediately try to give direction for the implementation of its ruling. Rather, it asked the attorney generals of all states with laws permitting segregation in their public schools to submit plans for how to proceed with desegregation. After still more hearings before the Court concerning the matter of desegregation, on May 31, 1955, the Justices handed down a plan for how it was to proceed; desegregation was to proceed with "all deliberate speed." Although it would be many years before all segregated school systems were to be desegregated, Brown and Brown II (as the Courts plan for how to desegregate schools came to be called) were responsible for getting the process underway.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History - Brown v. Board of Education Re-enactment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Plessy Decision Although the Declaration of Independence stated that "All men are created equal," due to the institution of slavery, this statement was not to be grounded in law in the United States until after the Civil War (and, arguably, not completely fulfilled for many years thereafter).

# data[].attributes.body
In the southern states, the supreme court did not try to give any sort of direction for the implementation of its ruling. According to the article, “After still more hearings before the Court concerning the matter of desegregation, on May 31, 1955, the Justices handed down a plan for how it was to proceed; desegregation was to proceed with "all deliberate speed.” Brown II was very important because they were responsible for officially getting the process of desegrigation started.The court determined that the seperate but equal policy itself is unequal. This case was the last stepping stone for allowing equality in regards to getting an education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
[ This is an abridged version of the document.]
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka I, May 17, 1954
Segregation of white and Negro children in the public schools of a State solely on the basis of race, pursuant to state laws permitting or requiring such segregation, denies to Negro children the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment - even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors of white and Negro schools may be equal. (a) The history of the Fourteenth Amendment is inconclusive as to its intended effect on public education. (b) The question presented in these cases must be determined not on the basis of conditions existing when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, but in the light of the full development of public education and its present place in American life throughout the Nation. (c) Where a State has undertaken to provide an opportunity for an education in its public schools, such an opportunity is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms. (d) Segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race deprives children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal. (e) The "separate but equal" doctrine adopted in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537, has no place in the field of public education. (f) The cases are restored to the docket for further argument on specified questions relating to the forms of the decrees.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN delivered the opinion of the Court.

These cases come to us from the States of Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and Delaware. They are premised on different facts and different local conditions, but a common legal question justifies their consideration together in this consolidated opinion.

In each of the cases, minors of the Negro race, through their legal representatives, seek the aid of the courts in obtaining admission to the public schools of their community on a nonsegregated basis. In each instance, they had been denied admission to schools attended by white children under laws requiring or permitting segregation according to race. This segregation was alleged to deprive the plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment. In each of the cases other than the Delaware case, a three-judge federal district court denied relief to the plaintiffs on the so-called "separate but equal" doctrine announced by this Court in Plessy v. Fergson, 163 U.S. 537. Under that doctrine, equality of treatment is accorded when the races are provided substantially equal facilities, even though these facilities be separate....

The plaintiffs contend that segregated public schools are not "equal" and cannot be made "equal," and that hence they are deprived of the equal protection of the laws. ...

In the instant cases ... there are findings below that the Negro and white schools involved have been equalized, or are being equalized, with respect to buildings, curricula, qualifications and salaries of teachers, and other "tangible" factors. Our decision, therefore, cannot turn on merely a comparison of these tangible factors in the Negro and white schools involved in each of the cases. We must look instead to the effect of segregation itself on public education.

In approaching this problem, we cannot turn the clock back to 1868, when the Amendment was adopted, or even to 1896, when Plessy v. Ferguson was written. We must consider public education in the light of its full development and its present place in American life throughout the Nation. Only in this way can it be determined if segregation in public schools deprives these plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws.

Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.

We come then to the question presented: Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? We believe that it does.

In Sweatt v. Painter, supra, in finding that a segregated law school for Negroes could not provide them equal educational opportunities, this Court relied in large part on "those qualities which are incapable of objective measurement but which make for greatness in a law school." In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, supra, the Court, in requiring that a Negro admitted to a white graduate school be treated like all other students, again resorted to intangible considerations: "... his ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession." Such considerations apply with added force to children in grade and high schools. To separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone. The effect of this separation on their educational opportunities was well stated by a finding in the Kansas case by a court which nevertheless felt compelled to rule against the Negro plaintiffs: Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law, for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the negro group. A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to learn. Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to [retard] the educational and mental development of negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would receive in a racial[ly] integrated school system. Whatever may have been the extent of psychological knowledge at the time of Plessy v. Ferguson, this finding is amply supported by modern authority. Any language in Plessy v. Ferguson contrary to this finding is rejected.

We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. This disposition makes unnecessary any discussion whether such segregation also violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Because these are class actions, because of the wide applicability of this decision, and because of the great variety of local conditions, the formulation of decrees in these cases presents problems of considerable complexity. On reargument, the consideration of appropriate relief was necessarily subordinated to the primary question - the constitutionality of segregation in public education. We have now announced that such segregation is a denial of the equal protection of the laws. In order that we may have the full assistance of the parties in formulating decrees, the cases will be restored to the docket. ...

It is so ordered.
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka II, May 31, 1955
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN delivered the opinion of the Court.

These cases were decided on May 17, 1954. The opinions of that date, declaring the fundamental principle that racial discrimination in public education is unconstitutional, are incorporated herein by reference. All provisions of federal, state, or local law requiring or permitting such discrimination must yield to this principle. There remains for consideration the manner in which relief is to be accorded. ...

Full implementation of these constitutional principles may require solution of varied local school problems. School authorities have the primary responsibility for elucidating, assessing, and solving these problems; courts will have to consider whether the action of school authorities constitutes good faith implementation of the governing constitutional principles. Because of their proximity to local conditions and the possible need for further hearings, the courts which originally heard these cases can best perform this judicial appraisal. Accordingly, we believe it appropriate to remand the cases to those courts.

In fashioning and effectuating the decrees, the courts will be guided by equitable principles. Traditionally, equity has been characterized by a practical flexibility in shaping its remedies and by a facility for adjusting and reconciling public and private needs. These cases call for the exercise of these traditional attributes of equity power. At stake is the personal interest of the plaintiffs in admission to public schools as soon as practicable on a nondiscriminatory basis. To effectuate this interest may call for elimination of a variety of obstacles in making the transition to school systems operated in accordance with the constitutional principles set forth in our May 17, 1954, decision. Courts of equity may properly take into account the public interest in the elimination of such obstacles in a systematic and effective manner. But it should go without saying that the vitality of these constitutional principles cannot be allowed to yield simply because of disagreement with them.

While giving weight to these public and private considerations, the courts will require that the defendants make a prompt and reasonable start toward full compliance with our May 17, 1954, ruling. Once such a start has been made, the courts may find that additional time is necessary to carry out the ruling in an effective manner. The burden rests upon the defendants to establish that such time is necessary in the public interest and is consistent with good faith compliance at the earliest practicable date. To that end, the courts may consider problems related to administration, arising from the physical condition of the school plant, the school transportation system, personnel, revision of school districts and attendance areas into compact units to achieve a system of determining admission to the public schools on a nonracial basis, and revision of local laws and regulations which may be necessary in solving the foregoing problems. They will also consider the adequacy of any plans the defendants may propose to meet these problems and to effectuate a transition to a racially nondiscriminatory school system. During this period of transition, the courts will retain jurisdiction of these cases. ...

It is so ordered.

Sources:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0347_0483_ZS.html and
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0349_0294_ZO.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka I and II

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is an abridged version of the document.] Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka I, May 17, 1954 Segregation of white and Negro children in the public schools of a State solely on the basis of race, pursuant to state laws permitting or requiring such segregation, denies to Negro children the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment - even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors of white and Negro schools may be equal.

# data[].attributes.body
Little rock nine was a vital event in history that led to the creation of equal opportunity in American education. The little rock nine consisted of 9 black students,  Ernest Green, Minnijean Brown, Elizabeth Eckford, Thelma Mothershed, Melba Pattillo, Gloria Ray, Terrence Roberts, Jefferson Thomas, and Carlotta Walls. These brave individuals wanted to put the case of Brown v. The Board of Education to the test by enrolling in a formerly all-white Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, in September 1957. They challenged racial segregation based off their devotion to the series of events that occur. The 9 students were harassed and threatened by white students. African American history is vital to understanding America's history and the way that education evolved. These events inspired African Americans to stand up for themselves and work hard to put an end to racism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
National Museum of African American History and Culture

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 1954 the United States Supreme Court ruled that segregated schools were illegal. The case, Brown v. The Board of Education, has become iconic for Americans because it marked the formal beginning of the end of segregation.

But the gears of change grind slowly. It wasn't until September 1957 when nine teens would become symbols, much like the landmark decision we know as Brown v. The Board of Education, of all that was in store for our nation in the years to come.

The "Little Rock Nine," as the nine teens came to be known, were to be the first African American students to enter Little Rock's Central High School. Three years earlier, following the Supreme Court ruling, the Little Rock school board pledged to voluntarily desegregate its schools. This idea was explosive for the community and, like much of the South, it was fraught with anger and bitterness.

On September 2, 1957 the night prior to what was to be the teens' first day in Central High classrooms, Arkansas governor Orval Faubus ordered the state's National Guard to block their entrance. Faubus said it was for the safety of the nine students.

On September 4, just 24 hours after a federal judge ordered the Little Rock Nine to begin attending Central High immediately, a belligerent mob, along with the National Guard, again prevented the teens from entering the school.

Sixteen days later a federal judge ordered the National Guard removed. Once again on September 23, the Little Rock Nine attempted to enter the school. Though escorted by Little Rock police into a side door, another angry crowd gathered and tried to rush into Central High. Fearing for the lives of the nine students, school officials sent the teens home. They did, however, manage to attend classes for about three hours.

Finally, 52 years ago today, on September 25, 1957, following a plea from Little Rock's mayor, Woodrow Mann, President Dwight Eisenhower federalized the National Guard and sent U.S. Army troops to the scene. Personally guarded by soldiers from the National Guard soldiers and the Army's 101st Airborne, the Little Rock Nine began regular class attendance at Central High.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The "Little Rock Nine," as the nine teens came to be known, were to be the first African American students to enter Little Rock's Central High School. Three years earlier, following the Supreme Court ruling, the Little Rock school board pledged to voluntarily desegregate its schools.

# data[].attributes.body
kelsey