Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

57-2 7 Factual . « M SOUTH! n\T (1/i VOL Hi NO- 10 u '>«l News ' *SN3HiV -L. 1 Objective the region —tV /m, APRIL, 1965 Few Boards Have Received Approval of Compliance Plans » F ew Southern state and local school boards have received federal approval of their plans for compliance with the new federal aid regulations issued under the 1 Civil Rights Act of 1964. School officials in several states have complained that the vagueness of 1 the new federal policies has ham pered compliance efforts. Through April 5, the U.S. Office of Education had approved in the South only the “Statements of Compliance” signed by the state boards of Arkansas and North Carolina, and the compli ance plans from 39 school districts—33 all-white districts in Arkansas, one dis trict in Florida, and five districts in Georgia. Three-fourths of the South’s 2,950 school districts have agreed to comply. In This Issue Monthly Reports Alabama 1 Arkansas 2 Florida 6 Georgia 3 Louisiana 12 Mississippi 9 North Carolina 11 South Carolina 14 ( Tennessee 4 Texas 5 Virginia 1 Washington 1 Special Articles The Region 1 SERS Gets New Grant 1 Missouri 5 Books and the Issue 16 VIRGINIA Court Limits Grants to Use As Supplement \ SPECIAL RICHMON THREE-judge federt court held on March 10 the A Virginia’s tuition grants laws ?°t unconstitutional on their fac “ u t that grants cannot lawfully b Used to provide the whole or th Skater part of the cost of open jj on of a segregated school. (Gri] n v. State Board of Education.) The court said that in order to avoi Eruption of classes this year, the rui ?*» w °uld not go into effect until aft< Ju «e, 1965. Attorneys for the Negro plaintif “ild they would appeal the ruling. Ten private school systems are d: .^fiy affected. Spokesmen for the sy: said the schools would operai • ext year without the grants, if neces (See Schoolmen.) ■ J,? 16 special court—consisting < q. ge Albert V. Bryan of the Fourt *' our E of Appeals and Distrii g ges Walter E. Hoffman and John I in i? er dr —summed up its Vus manner: Three Points Vpen consideration of the Virginia ‘■bat .tuition grant laws, we hold: (1) the’ f 6y are no * unconstitutional on lint- . e, as fostering forbidden race a W fT?i^ ons ’ (2) that the grants may y b>e used in a private, segre- .w ’ n °n-sectarian school if t hey do onsttiute the preponderant Anan iy support of the schools, but (3) if 316 P a * d hj the govern- Will' T* authorities knowing the funds tg e used to provide the whole or ti otl gr , eater P art of the cost of opera- - each f segregated school, as it is in ^ u ° Private schools described e complaint, then such disburse- (See GRANTS, Page 7) Education officials in one state, Ala bama, have been warned that they must act “immediately” to comply with the rights law or face the loss of fed eral school aid. The Alabama State Board of Education has refused to sign a federal compliance statement, but State Supt. of Education Austin R. Meadows submitted the required state ment to the U.S. Office of Education. At least 107 of the state’s 118 districts signed the forms or submitted desegre gation plans. ‘Grave Concern’ The U.S. Commissioner of Education, Francis Keppel, wrote Meadows a let ter on April 2 expressing “grave con cern as to whether this office can con tinue legally to provide funds to your department under the several programs which we administer.” Keppel said the state superintendent’s statement “could only come about from the most serious misunderstanding and misreading of the requirements of the act.” “As you know,” Keppel added, “virtually all the public-school districts of Alabama are still operated on a segregated basis/’ However, Keppel has agreed to ac cept, as “good faith” effort to comply, the statements signed by 170 of Geor gia’s 196 school districts. Another 21 Georgia districts have submitted plans for compliance. Keppel sent a telegram to Gov. Carl Sanders after the governor became angry over the misunderstand ing about compliance statements. Georgia educators had thought they had only to sign the certificates to comply with the rights law. Federal officials then announced that only “totally desegregated” districts were eligible to sign. Gov. Sanders telephoned President Johnson, Commissioner Keppel and other federal officials. “I think it’s a pretty ridiculous situation when people send out forms, and then say they’re worthless,” the governor said. Later, on March 26, the U.S. Commis sioner of Education sent Gov. Sanders the telegram accepting the statements. Keppel said that in some instances, ad ditional information would be needed. Georgia’s state school superintendent, Dr. Claude Purcell, has sought to ob tain specific and official guidelines from the government on what school dis tricts must do to comply with the law and to qualify for federal funds. He was unsuccessful, as were other South ern educators, who conferred in Chicago with federal officials about the law. Variations Noted Purcell said the U.S. Office of Ed ucation was reluctant to put detailed compliance criteria in writing because this would establish a rigid “hard line” formula for every system. The school desegregation problem varies with each section of the country and each district, Purcell noted, and federal officials believe each system should be judged on its own merits. Although North Carolina was the first in the South to have the federal government approve the statement signed by its State Board of Education, the state superintendent of public in struction advised the 171 local school districts to delay signing their pledges until he received clearer guidelines from Washington. Dr. Charles Carroll issued his advice on March 12 after 60 units already had signed. Magazine Prints Memo The nearest thing to official instruc tions appeared in the Saturday Review of March 20, 1965 (pages 60-61, 76-79). The magazine reprinted a memoran dum prepared by G. W. Foster Jr., professor of law at the University of Wisconsin and a consultant to the Of fice of Education. The Saturday Re view editors wrote an introduction, ex plaining the status of the Foster memo: “Aware of the complex responsibility assigned to it, the Office of Education has moved with its own version of ‘all deliberate speed.’ To date it has been more notable for its caution than for its accomplishment in providing specific direction to school authorities faced with the necessities of radical change under Title VI. “There are, to be sure, good reasons for caution. An official statement of well-defined standards for desegrega tion would almost certainly be inter preted as an acceptable minimum, and (See COMPLIANCE, Page 10) WASHINGTON REPORT Office Begins Reviewing Thousands of Assurances ALABAMA Alabamians Get Warning From U. S. Commissioner WASHINGTON he U. S. Office of Education began in March to review thousands of assurances of non discrimination filed by Southern and border school districts and state education agencies under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Officials reported at the end of the month that favorable action had been completed on the first few compbfmce forms. Four court - ordered desegregation plans submitted by Southern districts were “found acceptable” by U.S. Com missioner of Education Francis Keppel. They came from Brevard County, Fla., and three Georgia districts — Atlanta, Bibb County and Muscogee County. Statements of compliance from nine state departments of education—includ ing Missouri, North Carolina and seven Northern and Western states—were ac cepted by the Office of Education. Also approved were statements of compli ance from four state library agencies, including those of Alabama and North Carolina. Another 13 states filed acceptable as surances of compliance (Form HEW- 441) in behalf of state-operated educa tion agencies receiving direct federal assistance. This list included, from the Southern and border region, state de partments in Arkansas and Maryland. Officials reported that some sort of compliance action has been taken by all 50 state education agencies, though the assurances from some Southern states are expected to receive close scrutiny to determine whether they meet requirements of the Civil Rights Act. By the end of March, compliances had been received from a total of 12,748 local school districts, including 1,729 in the 11 Southern states and 1,673 in the six-state border region. More than 400 districts submitted voluntary desegregation plans to com ply with Title VI, and 74 districts sent court orders. Assurances of nondiscrimination were also filed by more than 1,700 of the na tion’s 2,100 colleges and universities. Allan Lesser, director of the Title VI compliance program in the Office of Education, said “several dozen” volun tary desegregation plans had been re viewed and were close to approval by the Commissioner of Education. In Negotiation “A great many other voluntary de segregation plans are in negotiation,” Lesser said, “and we have asked for additional information on many of the assurances (Form HEW-441). we have received.” Lesser said the “most complete” plans were getting priority attention, while efforts were made to obtain added facts on doubtful compliance forms. All but three or four of the state edu cation agency plans “will be cleared up (See THOUSANDS, Page 16) MONTGOMERY labama state education offi cials were warned April 2 that they must act “immediately” to comply with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or face the loss of millions of dollars in federal school assistance funds. In a strongly worded letter to Ala bama State Supt. of Education Austin R. Meadows, the U.S. Commissioner of Education expressed “grave concern as to whether this office can continue legally to provide funds to your de partment under the several programs which we administer.” Commissioner Francis Keppel told Meadows that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which bars federal aid to segregated state and local activities, “makes it clear that the operation of segregated schools—a dual school sys tem for white and Negro pupils—con stitutes discrimination which is pro hibited by law.” The Alabama State Board of Edu cation has refused to sign a statement that it is complying with Title VI, but submitted the statement of compliance required by the Office of Education. Keppel said Meadows’ statement “could only come about from the most serious misunderstanding and misread ing of the requirements of the act.” “As you know,” Keppel wrote, “virtually all the public-school districts of Alabama are still operated on a segregated basis. “Unless this situation is changed in these districts, they will not be eligible to participate in the vocational educa tion program, the National Defense Education Act, the program of school assistance to federally affected areas, or any other federally assisted pro gram.” Alabama schools would receive al most $27.5 millions in federal funds from the Office of Education in the fiscal year starting next July 1, ac- (See U. S., Page 8) SERS Gets Ford Grant for New Program O outhern Education Reporting ^ Service has received a two- year grant of $456,000 from the Ford Foundation to support a new program that will begin on July 1. C. A. McKnight, chairman of the SERS Board of Directors and editor of the Charlotte (N.C.) Observer, an nounced that the Nashville-based agency will focus its attention on cre ative experiments to improve educa tion for the culturally disadvantaged in the 17 Southern and border states. Since its founding in 1954, SERS has collected and disseminated information on developments in education arising from the United States Supreme Court decision declaring compulsory segrega tion of the races in the public schools to be unconstitutional. The SERS poli cies of factual, objective reporting and non-advocacy will remain in effect, McKnight said. In tracing the broad outlines of the new program, McKnight explained that details will be decided at a meeting of the SERS Board of Directors next month. Major emphasis will be placed on a periodical ft> replace the monthly Southern School News, the last issue of which will appear in June. Other phases of SERS operations also will be affected. The annual summary of statistics on school desegregation will continue, but in abbreviated form. SERS no longer will microfilm the an nual additions to its library, which contains more than one million items on race relations in the United States. Some 60 libraries, located throughout the country, have purchased the micro film, which is complete for the decade 1954-64. Law Reporter After July 1, SERS will have no further responsibility for Race Rela tions Law Reporter, for which it has performed business management func tions since 1959. The publication is edited in the Law School of Vanderbilt University, which has received from the Ford Foundation a direct grant to support the publication for two more years. The new grant for SERS was made to George Peabody College for Teach ers, which has acted as fiscal agent for the project from the beginning. “The original purposes of Southern Education Reporting Service have been accomplished,” McKnight said in an nouncing the new program. “Some de segregation has taken place in every state in the South, and the patterns of future compliance are fairly well established. However, many of the Southern states are moving into a new era of positive action to improve the education of their culturally disad vantaged children. New Dimension “The story no longer is one of com pliance and non-compliance with the Supreme Court decision. Some areas of the South are taking positive, creative approaches to education for the dis advantaged. There is a whole new di mension that is not being reported, and this may prove to be the most impor tant part of the whole story of South ern education in this generation. “The South, along with the rest of the nation, is on the threshold of a great new venture in education—the provision of maximum educational op portunity for all disadvantaged chil dren, white and Negro. Desegregation is a prelude to solution to the problem of equal educational opportunity. As the process of desegregation has spread through the Southern and border states, the realization has grown that more than desegregation is necessary to give culturally deprived children the kind of education they require to be come useful, productive individuals and citizens. New Approaches “The private foundations have been the pioneers in stimulating new ap proaches to educating children who in the past have been neglected. The fed eral government has sponsored research and experimental programs in the field, as have state and local governments and community groups. “From this concentration of effort, which is certain to increase, impor tant breakthroughs are to be expected. Professional educators and concerned laymen alike will need quick, accurate, objective, comprehensive information about developments. At present no central source for such information exists. The purpose of the new SERS program is to meet this need in the Southern and border states.”