White Racial Framing Related to Public School Financing.
| Author | Fitzgerald, Terence |
| Position | Forum on Public Policy |
INTRODUCTION
Nineteenth Century American realist William Dean Howells observed, "Inequality is as dear to the American heart as liberty itself." Researchers have made the argument that the quintessential nature of inequality is distinct within the foundation of one of the country's oldest civic institutions--public education (Bell, 2004; Darling-Hammond, 2010; Fitzgerald, 2009; Kozol, 2012; McCarthy, 1990; Wiggan, 2007). In a 2014 "Dear Colleague" letter, The U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights (OCR) highlighted racial inequalities that continue to persist in public education. The letter reminds readers that enacted federal legislation alone is not enough to ensure financial equity for students of color in public education. Reliance upon laws that are not fully enforced is argued to be an unacceptable practice. The letter goes on to state the negative outcomes for Black students resulting from funding inequities. In addition the letter noted the, "Intradistrict and interdistrict funding disparities often mirror differences in the racial and socioeconomic demographics of schools, particularly when adjusted to take into consideration regional wage variations and extra costs often associated with educating low-income children, English language learners, and students with disabilities. These disparities are often a result of funding systems that allocate less state and local funds to high-poverty schools that frequently have more students of color, which can often be traced to a reliance on property tax revenue for school funding" (OCR, 2013, p.5). Finally, the letter advocated for public schools to seek an end to unlawful financial discrimination practices in racially diverse school systems.
It can be contended that the historical landscape of public education is awash with inequality related to race, class, and gender. * Blacks in the United States have had a complicated and extensive history with issues of education inequality as evidenced by the Jim Crow era (1876-1965). Throughout this period, legal segregation denied Black school-age children equal access to public schools attended by White children. Spirited legal actions addressing the matter did not begin until the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled for dismantling "de jure" segregation in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954). Importantly, at the time, Chief Justice Earl Warren noted that, "... 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." (3) Notwithstanding the landmark decision, standards for educational rights were limited. (4) Further, Brown has not been interpreted as including protections for U.S. citizens regarding educational funding inequalities. This issue has adversely and persistently affected Black students since the 20th century.
Prominent race and legal scholars, such as Derrick Bell (1980), Joe Feagin (2001, 2010), and Albert Memmi (1965), would undoubtedly maintain that the overall stance of the courts, as noted in Brown, is impossible to achieve. Each has demonstrated that U.S. systems and institutions are fundamentally designed to only benefit the majority (Whites), while simultaneously denying opportunities and resources to those occupying "inferior positions" within a majority constructed and maintained racial hierarchy. Feagin's (2001, 2010) explanation of the White Racial Frame explains not only why, but also how, these institutions were created and maintained.
The "Frame" is comprised of the justification of principles rooted within U.S. slavery and colonial expansion, and the succeeding effects experienced by people of color, who have been historically exposed to racism and institutional oppression. Feagin argues the development of a "Master Frame" has endured since the 17th century. It serves as an embodiment of racialized information that functions to interpret and influence perceptions regarding marginalized people of color. Whites subconsciously take on shared racialized perceptions of Blacks that create false realities that ultimately benefit themselves. White Racial Frame theorists suggest that the American forefathers constructed the Frame in order to maintain the ability of Whites to advance dominance and authority over marginalized peoples. Therefore, people marginalized and deceptively deemed as subhuman have been hindered or expressly barred from gaining access to privilege and resources allocated solely to Whites.
Additionally, the White Racial Frame draws attention to the set of systematized racialized ideas and categorizations (e.g., racial stereotypes) that prompt strong emotions in non-Blacks. Thus, these internally generated emotions not only have the ability to impel engagement in both overt and covert forms of racial discrimination (e.g., policies and procedures), but also serve to ignite physical and emotional acts of extremism.
Importantly, the White Racial Frame maintains that all people, in particular non-Blacks, exist with internal "transgenerational" stereotypes and racialized perceptions regarding people of color. When non-Blacks are visually, auditorily, or physically in contact with Blacks, stereotypes and perceptions are evident through acts of discrimination and marginalization. Julius Lester has argued that, "When a group idealizes itself as the apotheosis of humanity, it automatically creates an Other, a Them" (Lester, 2000, p. 107).
Arguably, through the lens of the White Racial Frame, systems and institutional policies enacted to address issues of inequality fundamentally avoid reaching "true" justice. Addressing the topic of injustice within public school finance is argued by the majority to be prejudicial.
It is important to note that the premise of the Frame argues that not only is the issue of race and racism a defining characteristic of all facets of American society, but it also has the ability to potentially promote an array of elicit forms of subordination within traditional institutions, processes, and policies regarding race, gender, class, and sexuality. Therefore, through the analysis of racism both through a historical and contemporary standpoint, the White Racial Frame allows for an examination regarding the seemingly raceneutral system within the current public education finance apportionment systems.
In agreement, others scholars maintain that gains achieved through Brown, "were offered to the extent that they were not seen (or exacted) as a major disruption to a 'normal" way of life for the majority of Whites (DeCuir & Dixon, 2004)." Specifically, Bell (1980) postulated that White initiatives only seek racial justice as long as the course of action serves the interests of Whites (economic, social, and etc.). (5) Overall, many critical race scholars like Bell concede that White power and privilege, in addition to the existence of racial barriers confronted by people of color, are both maintained through constitutional protections and laws. These are further reflected in the outcomes of a historical and contemporary critique of public school financial apportionment mechanisms.
CONCEPTIAL FRAMEWORK
In 1963, the United Nations International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination sought to dismantle the "dissemination of ideas of racial superiority and organizations that promote racial discrimination" (Feagin, 2010, p.196). In 1994, 31 years later, the United States finally ratified the amendment. By signing the declaration, the United States agreed to, alongside other nations, to take "all necessary measures for speedily eliminating racial discrimination in all its forms and manifestations" (Hellenic Resources Institute, 1995).
Regardless of the public commitment to eradicate racial discrimination, systems and institutions in the United States are currently in place that facilitate the existence of discrimination. Clearly overt racial segregation is not commonplace compared to previous generations, but racial discrimination and oppression exist to this day through covert practices in spaces such as public education (Fitzgerald, 2009). Today, many Americans publicly cast-off and diminish arguments pertaining to racism. But many scholars argue that traditional and easily identifiable forms of oppression have been interchanged for newer systems of covert and institutionally systemic forms of oppression (Bonilla-Silva, 2003; Feagin, 2001). The rationale for the discriminatory oppressive treatment of Blacks can be quantified in sociologist Joe Feagin's model--the "White Racial Frame." Utilization of the model allows for the manifestation of deeper racial patterns of exclusion that have historically prevailed and avoided scrutiny at any level. This theoretical approach is relevant and runs contrary to the notion the United States currently exists in a post-racial framework due to the 2008 election of the nation's first U.S. Black president.
FUNDING POLICIES & MECHANISMS
Prior to applying the relevant theoretical framework needed to contextualize the argument, basic distributional mechanisms and legislative policies must be understood. Further, the allocation of funds to public schools is complex. For the purpose of this article, the use of local taxation will be primarily discussed. Within this reliance on local tax revenue, it is essential to understand that each states has a constitution that not only establishes a structure for public schools, but also charges their respective state legislature with the duty to provide funding. The language within funding mandates varies between states, and thus each state has created and operates a separate financially functioning system (Sciarra, 2009). Consequently, each state's legislature has authorization and control over its public schools. Under state...
To continue reading
Request your trialCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
