Andrea Smith
Short Policy Paper smia21@uga.edu University of Georgia

Introduction
During the period of transition from the twentieth to the twenty-first century, American public schools found themselves faced with continued challenges in the efforts to equalize access to educational opportunities for African American children. This period of transition was the result of actions that began nearly half a century earlier. On May 17, 1954, the United States Supreme Court rendered its decision in the case of Brown v. Board of Education. Reactions to the decision were varied and touched a range of emotions among nearly all citizens of the United States. For some, Brown was heralded as the triumph over legal barriers to better educational opportunities for racial/ethnic and minority students. Yet, for others, it endangered a way of life that in the eyes of some, ensured “separate but equal” under Plessy vs. Ferguson (1898). Whatever the perspective, Brown meant a departure from past rules and values. It meant change.
Problem
In “Public Education in the Twentieth Century and Beyond: High Hopes, Broken Promises, and an Uncertain Future,” Nieto (2005) outlines key legislation over the past seventy-five years in U.S. education that has aided in leveling the educational outcomes for minority students. After the ruling in Brown vs. Board of Education (1954), policies aimed at providing equal opportunities to racial/ ethnic and minority groups began to emerge. As such, changes in population in terms of race, ethnicity, social class, and other differences helped to form the educational experiences of all students in U.S. public schools along with how we view, design, and implement educational policy. This, according to Nieto (2005) has laid the groundwork for thwarted attempts to live up to Horace Mann’s ideal of education as the “great equalizer.” What is interesting to note is whether the idea of school as a “great equalizer” meant equal opportunities or equal outcomes.
Analysis
Nieto (2005) argues that U.S. public education has drifted from democratic ideals of equity due to racism which she describes as engrained in the fabric and system of the American society. Multiple theories are also analyzed in an effort to explain past and present thinking regarding the underachievement of minority students. Accordingly, Nieto (2005) does elaborate on the hopes of equity, through education legislation, which has been used to level the playing field for minority groups.
Solutions to Educational Equity
It is interesting to note that key equal educational policy such as the Elementary and Secondary Act (1965) aimed to provide equal opportunities for various racial/ ethnic and minority groups. This was the first time in history that the federal government displayed its commitment to educational equity. Critics would argue that a major weakness of ESEA; however, was that it relied heavily on providing additional resources to economically disadvantaged/ minority schools without much impact on academic achievement. So, the question still remained, did this policy ensure educational opportunities or outcomes?
Nieto (2005) did a great job in providing readers with an understanding of segregation not just as a black-white issue, but a multi-racial/ethnic manifestation of the struggle for equal education. The history of bilingual education and multicultural education all illustrated further struggles for civil rights that were also addressed in ESEA and other bilingual and multicultural policies. Not only were students different racially, but linguistically which further complicated how best to serve such students. The Lau remedies used to address bilingual education were intended to be immediate and set the stage for the controversial approach to teaching English Language Learners (ELLs). However, competing ideologies as to how ELLs learn and achieve academically are still up for debate. Essentially, the achievement gap dispute continues with not just a concern for African American students, but Hispanic and culturally diverse students as well.
To this end, genetic and cultural inferiority, economic and social reproduction theories, and cultural incompatibility theory are just a few of the prominent theories which Nieto (2005) uses to outline competing theories that have been used over time to explain the minority achievement gap. This, in my view, can be seen in various educational policies which were aimed to provide a cause for this growing issue of underachievement. Some of the perceived sources of minority underachievement such as poor mothering, sorting, and culturally incompatible teaching, still permeate current thoughts and practices in education. Interestingly, the theories mentioned in the article such as genetic and cultural inferiority can be seen in our use of terms such as “at risk” or “disadvantaged” to categorize many minority students today. Such theories place the blame for underachievement on personal and cultural characteristics of the students rather than macro level processes (social, economic, racial) that have served to further inequities within the education system. An issue in my view which allows the government to avoid addressing social policy issues which impact student achievement.
Conclusion
To this end, what are the solutions to the issues raised by Nieto (2005)? While past policy has attempted to address issues such as unequal education and educational opportunities for various racial and ethnic groups, there is still space for policy to address growing inequities which still plague U.S. schools. Attempts such as Brown, ESEA, and other policies aimed at addressing inequities have provided a framework from which to work, but have not fully found a platform from which to stand against institutional inequities that plague education.
Nieto’s (2005) conclusion is appropriately titled in that the ideal of equality is full of uncertainties even in this new millennium. Current educational policies still struggle with how to best educate minority students. Present views on social, let alone educational policy, are constantly met with public fear and distrust and for this reason, the equal education rhetoric is still an ongoing battle; a battle that cannot be won unless policymakers, parents, and the public work together to address the institutional and structural barriers that continue to hamper educational equity.

References
Nieto, S. (2005). Public Education in the Twentieth Century and Beyond: High Hopes, Broken Promises, and an Uncertain Future. Harvard Educational Review, 76 (1).
Urban, Wayne and Jennings Wagoner, Jr. (1996). American Education: A History (4th edition). New York, NY: Routledge.