 |
  |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
THEORY:
WHY DESEGREGATION DISAPPOINTED US
Desegregation policy since the 1960s moved races closer together physically, but not psychologically. Desegregation did not provide for the necessary joint productive activity among the races. Physical proximity is necessary, but not sufficient, and will not help students see and feel the world in the same ways across races.
Gordon Allport’s "contact" theory provided much of the theoretical rationale for the early work on improving race relations, post-Brown.
“Prejudice…may be reduced by equal status contact between majority and minority groups in the pursuit of common goals. The effect is greatly enhanced if this contact is sanctioned by institutional supports…and if it is of a sort that leads to the perception of common interests and common humanity between members of the two groups.” (Allport, 1954:281).
Allport did not, and with few exceptions (e.g., Slavin 1994, 1985) social scientists have still not perceived the conditions that create "equal status," and the "perception of common interests and humanity," namely, working and talking together over a shared task of mutual interest. Had we done so, desegregation’s effects might have been sharply improved. Merely pouring diverse students into the same school will not lead to perceptions of common humanity. That requires working and talking together. School- and classroom-based joint productive activity among diverse students has almost never been provided by desegregation plans.
Five Standards pedagogy does provide those conditions, and the result
is more harmony and higher student achievement. Numerous studies have
applied this pedagogy successfully, as described in the following article:
"Research Evidence: Five Standards for Effective
Pedagogy
and Student Outcomes — Technical Report No. G1"
