Abstract
A simple parent request unveiled a startling revelation: The principal of Bridgforth Elementary School segregated students by race. Her attempt to establish a culturally responsive framework was met with an Office of Civil Rights (OCR) complaint of racial discrimination. This case will examine the principal’s rationale for creating the framework, the parental complaint, the school community response, and two evidence-based options for increasing student outcomes for African American students and other ethnic minorities.
Case Narrative/Background
Historically, the Metropolitan Public School District (all names are pseudonyms), like many southern school systems in the nation during the era of Jim Crow laws, had its share of segregation in the education of its students. The Supreme Court’s landmark decision, Brown v. Board of Education, overturned segregation in public schools. More than seven decades after the desegregation ruling, public schools have become increasingly diverse
Although segregation is historically associated with the southern states, the GAO report found that in the 2020–2021 school year the highest percentage of segregation occurred in the northeastern and midwestern United States. The report cited two contributing factors for increased segregation: redlining and district succession. Redlining is a practice that limits where citizens can live based on socioeconomic status, and district succession is the practice of seceding, or breaking away, from a larger school district to form a new district. These practices have resulted in racially segregated neighborhoods where students attend neighborhood schools (Carrillo & Salhotra, 2022).
In the school year 2023–2024, a claim of racial segregation was leveled against the Metropolitan Public School District (MPSD), one of the United States’s fastest-growing school districts. The MPSD serves more than half a million students with the following demographic breakdown: 8.2% White, 59% Black, 6.8% Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander, 22.5% Hispanic/Latino, 0.5% American Indian or Alaska Native, 0% Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, and 3% Two or More Races. An MPSD school, Bridgforth Elementary, appeared in the spotlight concerning the education of its students, particularly its African American children. Founded in 1929, Bridgforth Elementary honors the legacy of its former principal of 30 years, Mrs. Amanda Bridgforth. The school was historically hailed as the district’s shining example of student success. However, its current principal, Dr. Tiffany Johnson, an African American educator, found herself in the middle of controversy when she was accused of racially segregating students at her school. The complaint was filed by Latisha Washington, an African American mother, after learning that her child and other African American students had been separated from peers of different races. Her lawyer, Shawanna Harris, filed a civil rights complaint against Bridgforth with the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) within the U.S. Department of Education. The complaint alleged that Bridgforth Elementary violated the civil rights of X Washington by fostering an environment that placed students in academic environments by race, color, or national origin. This action violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a federal law that “prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in any program or activity that receives Federal funds or other Federal financial assistance” (US Department of Health & Human Services, 2013, para. 1).
It all started with a simple inquiry. Washington, a former K–12 teacher for 5 years and parent volunteer, knew the teachers’ instructional practices at the school. Because she had worked closely with the instructional leaders and teachers, she could request a specific third-grade teacher for her child. Washington requested that her child be placed in the classroom of Connor McNeal, a teacher known for his innovative teaching practices and reading and math scores above the 75th percentile. The school secretary told Washington that her request was denied because McNeal did not teach in “the black room” of that grade level.
Upon hearing “the black room,” Ms. Washington recalled her experiences in a predominantly White elementary school in the suburbs of MPSD. In her elementary classes, students of color, primarily African American and Latino, were placed in classes with new or uncertified teachers. Meanwhile, their Caucasian and Asian peers were placed in gifted classes or classes with skilled teachers. Washington was determined not to allow this to happen to her child.
Washington immediately scheduled a meeting with Principal Johnson to discuss her concerns. The meeting was scheduled for the following week. While preparing for the meeting, Washington wrote down questions concerning this new placement. How was the information concerning the black room communicated to the parents, and how did she miss this communication? After a warm greeting, Washington discussed her concerns and posed her questions to Dr. Johnson. Johnson listened intently and then she answered Washington’s questions. She further explained that she decided to match as many students as possible with same-race teachers during their time in Bridgforth. Dr. Johnson learned about this culturally responsive practice while attending the National Association of Elementary School Principals in July 2022. During the conference, she attended many sessions on Equitable Outcomes, Diversity, Inclusion, and Cultural Responsiveness to educate herself on fostering equitable outcomes for students of color in her school. Evidence shows that students of color benefit academically when taught by a teacher of the same race, commonly called race matching. After reviewing the research on student–teacher matching and working collaboratively to design a framework with her leadership and instructional teams in 2022–2023, she began the Matched2Learn (M2L) initiative at Bridgforth in 2023–2024. This initiative matches students and teachers racially and ethnically, allowing students to be taught by teachers who look like them. Johnson also explained that student–teacher race matching is well documented by research on its positive effects on test scores, course grades, and high school graduation.
Washington appreciated the explanation but felt that it came too little too late. She countered that McNeal, who is Caucasian, had a 5-year history of producing above-average reading and math outcomes for all students, regardless of race and ethnicity. In addition, McNeal was known to make efforts to relate to and maintain high expectations for his students. Washington asked Dr. Johnson, “Other than being African American, what credentials did these teachers possess to qualify them to teach in an M2L classroom?” Dr. Johnson stated that these teachers were recently recruited from Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) to fill teacher vacancies from last year and to increase the number of minority teachers in the classroom. They were new to the profession, with at least 1 year of teaching experience. Johnson added that her faculty and staff understood and fully supported the M2L initiative and welcomed the racial representation fostered by the new teachers.
After hearing Dr. Johnson’s response, Washington was unappeased. How could placing students with novice minority teachers be better than placing students with an experienced, culturally responsive teacher like McNeal? Not receiving the desired response, Washington took her complaints to the district. Contrary to her expectations, the district supported Dr. Johnson and found no violation of its diversity, equity, and inclusion policy.
Ironically, the biggest supporters of Dr. Johnson were African American parents, who agreed with her decision to group all African American third-grade students in the M2L classes. Minority parents of Bridgforth students created Facebook groups and social media postings in support of Dr. Johnson with positive narratives opposing the allegations of racism. However, there was also social media harassment against the principal, which had become a serious safety concern at the school. One parent added that the police presence at the school was the result of such a baseless accusation. Another parent commented that Dr. Johnson’s personal experience of segregation in public school was one of her motivations for this unpopular decision; she felt that this was best for the Black children in her school since she did not want them to experience isolation in the learning environment in the midst of White students.
The parents felt the principal sought to create a nurturing and supportive environment for African American students. One social media post read in part, We join together to write this letter in support of Bridgforth principal, Dr. Tiffany Johnson . . . a news article wherein a parent alleged that Dr. Johnson was engaged in a practice of creating “black classes.” The reporting is one-sided, misleading, and inflammatory . . . Many of us have known the isolation of looking around in our classrooms and seeing no one who looks like us. It diminishes confidence and self-esteem. Therefore, Dr. Johnson’s M2L is a perfect program to protect Black children from feeling isolated while supporting their academic success.
Despite faculty, district, and parental support, Washington filed a civil rights complaint with the OCR. The OCR could not provide a statement about the case because the official investigation is underway. This 21st-century segregation allegation caught the community’s attention. The principal claimed that she was “building a community” and that Black students were grouped together so they would not feel isolated if placed in a White classroom. Mrs. Washington argued that her child should not be punished or isolated because of skin color and that this was an illegal practice on the part of the principal. Her lawyer asserted, “It doesn’t matter what her intentions were and what she was attempting to accomplish. She was essentially treating the black students differently from any other race or ethnic group of students.”
Case Analysis/Teaching Notes
Leaders considering ways to improve educational outcomes and close the opportunity gap for African Americans and other ethnic minorities have several evidence-based options. Two options are discussed below.
Option 1: Student–Teacher Race Matching
Research on matching students and teachers of the same race has appeared in publications since 2004 (Egalite, 2023). This practice also appears in the literature as own-race teachers or race-congruent teachers (Egalite et al., 2015); student–teacher race match (Harbatkin, 2021); teacher-race matching, race matching, racial pairing, ethnoracial matching, racial congruence (Egalite, 2023); and same-race teachers (Gershenson et al., 2017). The use of same-race teachers has empirical benefits. Minority teachers can serve as role models, advocates, mentors, and cultural liaisons for minority students (Egalite et al., 2015). Reading and math test scores have shown a positive statistical difference when the teacher and student are matched, especially among elementary African American and Latino students (Egalite, 2023; Egalite et al., 2015). Researchers found a minor but significant increase in student course grades due to matching (Harbatkin, 2021). Lower incidents of suspension and absenteeism, increased participation in advanced courses, gifted placement, and high school graduation have also been noted as benefits of student–teacher race matching (Egalite, 2023).
A noteworthy benefit of matching is the role of expectations in student achievement and motivation. According to research, Caucasian teachers assess African American students less favorably and have lower expectations than African American teachers. Because students tend to meet the expectations of their teachers, low teacher expectations become a self-fulfilling prophecy (Harbatkin, 2021). African American teachers are more likely to have a favorable opinion of African American students and have higher expectations for them, positively affecting student motivation and expectations (Gershenson et al., 2017). According to Gershenson et al. (2017), assigning “a black teacher with higher expectations could lead a student to modify his expectations, which could likewise affect investments and long-run educational attainment” (p. 36).
Although student–teacher race matching has benefits, teachers who do not share the student’s background can support the success of students of color. According to Au (2009), “Although teachers who share their students’ cultural backgrounds may have an advantage in establishing positive relationships and providing students with effective instruction, other teachers can learn to adjust their teaching to become more effective” (p. 180).
An example of the successful execution of culturally responsive pedagogy (CRP) with same-race or teachers of color is HBCUs. For more than 180 years, America’s HBCUs have provided educational opportunities to African Americans. After the Civil War, HBCUs created “pathways to education, employment, and empowerment” for those denied education during enslavement and segregation (Byrd, 2021, para. 5). Thus, HBCUs have a long history of retaining and graduating “low-income, academically underprepared students at higher rates than expected,” though doing so with limited resources (Anderson et al., 2020, p. 6). Students who often need to prepare for the rigors of post-secondary education have been successfully educated and matriculated to advanced degrees due to the practices of HBCUs. Anderson et al. (2020) provide a document that details lessons learned from HBCUs for K–12 educators. Those best practices include (a) the cultivation of nurturing support systems, like “intrusive advising,” in which advisors actively motivate students to seek help when needed and advocate for their success; (b) the incorporation of African American culture and identity into school culture and curriculum; and (c) the creation of a culture of high expectations while dismantling the “belief gap,” which refers to what students believe versus what others believe they can achieve (Anderson et al., 2020, p. 5). Becoming Collegiate Academy in Jacksonville, Florida, is an HBCU-inspired elementary school that models the three best practices above (Jackson, 2022).
Option 2: Develop Cultural Competence in School Leadership and Teachers
Leaders may develop cultural competence by adopting a culturally responsive framework, such as culturally responsive school leadership (Khalifa, 2018; Khalifa et al., 2016; Toldson, 2016). The term culturally responsive school leadership (CRSL) was coined by Khalifa et al. (2016) in a comprehensive synthesis of the literature on “leadership, social justice, culturally relevant schooling, and students/communities of color” (p. 1272). A culturally responsive (CR) leader clearly articulates a vision for and works to ensure an equitable education for marginalized students, such as African Americans, Latinos, American Indians, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and Indigenous peoples (Horsford et al., 2011; Khalifa, 2018; Khalifa et al., 2016; Santamaria & Santamaria, 2016). Although educational literature represents CRSL in several terms, such as culturally relevant leadership (Horsford et al., 2011), culturally responsive principals (Khalifa, 2018), culturally responsive leadership (Madhlangobe & Gordon, 2012), and culturally sustaining leadership (Santamaria & Santamaria, 2016), the work of CRSL is consistent across all terms. CRSL seeks to elevate academic achievement through culturally relevant systems and reduce the achievement gaps between ethnic minorities and their White peers. Those systems and indicants are routinely monitored and measured through the use of school data (Horsford et al., 2011; Khalifa, 2018; Khalifa et al., 2016; Santamaria & Santamaria, 2016), which supports the fine-tuning of culturally responsive practices—their consistent implementation and sustainability.
Khalifa et al. (2016) attributed four leadership behaviors to CRSL: (a) critical self-reflection, (b) the development of culturally responsive teachers and curricula, (c) the promotion of inclusive contexts, and (d) the engagement of broader community contexts. The summaries below describe each leadership behavior.
Critical Self-Reflection and Implicit Bias
A culturally responsive school (CRS) leader critically examines their values, assumptions, and biases (Khalifa et al., 2016). When examining one’s biases, the CRS leader considers those below the consciousness’s surface. These implicit biases are the unconscious, automatic preferences we hold toward those whose identities differ from our own in race, gender, sexual orientation, culture, or other social identities. According to implicit bias tests, people favor their identities or those valued by culture, even when they claim no preference (Fiarman, 2016; Warikoo et al., 2016). Because these biases are unconscious, we are not aware of how our biases influence our behaviors. Nor are we aware of how we may perpetuate inequality due to those biases (Fiarman, 2016; Wormeli, 2016).
When reflecting on one’s biases regarding race and ethnicity, implicit racial biases, or implicit racial associations, are unconscious associations based on racial identity (Warikoo et al., 2016)? The literature is replete with studies that describe the degree to which students of color, especially African American and Latino students, are victims of implicit bias. Students of color are disproportionately disciplined, underachievers on standardized exams, overrepresented in special education, and underrepresented in gifted education compared with their Caucasian peers (Anderson et al., 2020; Monroe, 2016). Wright et al. (2017) argue that the underrepresentation of students of color in gifted education, Advanced Placement courses, or International Baccalaureate Programs is due to bias, ignorance, or indifference. Wright et al. (2017) define ignorance as a fluid construct, not merely the lack of knowledge, “but rather a mental state perpetuated by choice and/or circumstance” (p. 47). Gaining knowledge resolves ignorance. Conversely, indifference is apathy, “a psychological situation centered on a lack of compassion, sympathy, empathy, or concern” (Wright et al., 2017, p. 47). If unchecked, individuals with indifference will remain distant from the reality of bias in education (Wright et al., 2017).
Implicit racial bias is not limited to interracial associations. Bias may also be intra-racial. According to Johnson (2014), “[I]mplicit bias is not limited to European American educators toward students of color. Results of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) have indicated a “strong automatic preference for European Americans compared to African Americans by African Americans” (para. 3). Johnson (2014) terms this phenomenon “black-on-black bias” (para. 8). He continues by stating, The politics of respectability (behaving and dressing in a way that is acceptable to European Americans) . . . affirms the inferiority and unattractiveness of black culture. And it contributes to the formation of implicit biases that lead black people to prefer white people over their own. (Johnson, 2014, para. 13)
Regardless of the source, implicit racial bias likely contributes to the persistent and pervasive inequity witnessed in classrooms (Warikoo et al., 2016). Ignorance, indifference, and bias limit opportunities for students of color due to deficit views of their behavior and intelligence (Johnson, 2014; Wright et al., 2017). The CRS leader reflects upon their own biases and supports their teachers’ critical self-reflection and professional development (Glickman et al., 2018; Toldson, 2016).
The Development of Culturally Responsive Teachers and Curricula
The CRS leader navigates the diverse context to ensure equity for all students. Within a culture of high expectations, the CRS leader ensures the engagement of students’ culture, language, and communities to develop culturally responsive teachers, pedagogy, and curriculum. Thus, CRSL oversees the implementation of culturally responsive practices and policies throughout the school (Horsford et al., 2011; Khalifa, 2018; Khalifa et al., 2016; Santamaria & Santamaria, 2016).
CRP aims to close the achievement gap for culturally and linguistically diverse students by incorporating students’ cultural backgrounds, experiences, and interests into instruction, thus promoting engagement, enrichment, and scholarship (Au, 2009; Glickman et al., 2018; Toldson, 2016). Using CRP, the teacher views students’ cultural heritage and funds of knowledge as assets and incorporates them into teaching and learning. The teacher creates a caring environment by treating students, families, and communities with respect and dignity. They also foster a collaborative and cooperative learning environment where students engage in open dialogue and problem-solving strategies. The teacher accepts responsibility for the academic success of all students and supports students’ learning with high expectations, a “failure is not an option” attitude (Au, 2009; Glickman et al., 2018).
Can White students benefit from the culturally responsive curriculum? The National Center for Education Statistics reported that in Fall 2017, of the 50.7 million U.S. students enrolled in public elementary and secondary schools, 48% (24.1 million) were White, 15% (7.7 million) were Black, 27% (13.6 million) were Hispanic, about 5% (2.8 million) were Asian/Pacific Islander, 1% (500,000) were American Indian/Alaska Native, and 4% (2 million) were of Two or More Races (Hussar et al., 2020, pp. 32–33). As the majority of the students were Whites, it is only apropos to include them in the culturally responsive teaching practices. Despite the changing demographics of U.S. elementary and secondary schools, teachers and students must establish relationships in a collaborative environment to make culturally responsive teaching and learning more accessible. By doing so, educators can ensure that all students, including those who are Whites, can benefit from these practices and achieve academic success (Whittier, 2020).
The Promotion of Inclusive Contexts
CRS leaders promote a welcoming and inclusive climate within the school (Khalifa et al., 2016). Thompson (2021) states, “Promoting inclusion within the school context, CRSL opposes exclusionary practices that further marginalize diverse students. Thus, Indigenous culture and social capital are acknowledged, employed, and celebrated” (p. 6). Inclusive contexts include instructional and disciplinary practices. Inclusive instructional practices are culturally responsive and honor the student’s social capital. Inclusive behavioral practices mitigate disparities in discipline due to race and ethnicity. The CRS leader ensures the school and personnel act to build student and familial relationships, honor student identity and voice, and acknowledge the values of its students within inclusive contexts (Horsford et al., 2011; Khalifa, 2018; Khalifa et al., 2016).
The Engagement of Broader Community Contexts
Finally, the CRS leader advocates for equity and form coalitions to resist all forms of oppression (Glickman et al., 2018; Horsford et al., 2011; Khalifa, 2018; Khalifa et al., 2016; Santamaria & Santamaria, 2016). These coalitions include parents, families, and community members (Glickman et al., 2018; Khalifa et al., 2016; Toldson, 2016). The CRS leader has an asset-based view of parents of color. Parents are viewed as “essential partners” and “cultural mentors” in the school community, whereby parents’ cultural expertise and home funds of knowledge are valued and used to shape their children’s educational experiences (Glickman et al., 2018, p. 427; Rall & Holman, 2021, p. 186). Thus, parents are welcomed into the school and treated with respect and dignity (Glickman et al., 2018; Khalifa et al., 2016; Rall & Holman, 2021).
The respect and care afforded to parents and families influence the quality of familial engagement. According to Rall and Holman (2021), “[When] interpersonal and systemic racism goes unrecognized and unchecked in schools, it obstructs family–school communication and partnership among families of color” (p. 186). Thus, schools should mitigate barriers and patterns of racism that restrict parental partnerships and involvement (Glickman et al., 2018; Rall & Holman, 2021). When building school–parent partnerships, the CRS leader provides information and resources. Parents are given strategies on how to support students’ learning at home, descriptions of course content and learning objectives, workshops on child development, information on community services, updates on students’ progress between report periods, and opportunities for volunteerism and advocacy in educational policy and practices (Rall & Holman, 2021; Toldson, 2016). In short, parental contributions are welcomed, honored, and supported.
Beyond the family unit, the CRS leader forms collaborative partnerships with the community members to develop an understanding of the students and their families (Khalifa et al., 2016). In addition, partnerships with agencies and programs serve the needs of the broader school community (Glickman et al., 2018).
Questions to Consider
The authors did not intentionally mention the gender of the child. What would be the perspective of the child’s education if the gender were boy or girl?
What are the conscious and unconscious biases among the educational leaders participating in this group discussion? Take the Harvard Implicit Association Test (IAT), https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html, and discuss the results.
On a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), how would you rate Dr. Johnson’s (a) vision, (b) communication, (c) M2L plan, and (d) implementation? Be prepared to discuss the rating and rationale.
Segregation versus Integration. Some parents opt to separate their students in the debate on the best way to educate African American students. In contrast, other parents advocate for inclusion in integrated spaces. The parents who choose to segregate their children into African American-controlled schools do so to offer their children a safe, nurturing, and supportive environment in which to succeed and advance the larger struggle for civil rights (Burkholder, 2021). Parents who promote integration do so to support learning spaces that look more like the world. Wells et al. (2016) state, “[As] the nation becomes more racially and ethnically complex, our schools should reflect that diversity and tap into the benefits of these more diverse schools to better educate all our students for the twenty-first century” (p. 4). Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of segregation and integration.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
