Talk:Segregation academy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Segregation academies)
Jump to: navigation, search

Not just Virginia[edit]

  • May I suggest expanding this article to include information about parallel phenomena in the rest of the south? Here is one newspaper article about similar schools in Alabama [1] --Dystopos 23:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Done.--Alabamaboy 15:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Very Offensive Entry![edit]

This article implies that any private school started during this era was created as a haven for biggots, and that any person whose children attended such a school sent them there because they were biggots. This is not true and very offensive and insulting.

As one of those children, I know from first-hand experience exactly why I was sent to one of those schools. It had little to do with the race issues involved with desegregation. This was court-ordered desegregation that was imposed on the public school system over an extremely short period of time. In theory, mixing the racial and socioeconomic groups was a good idea. In practice, it created absolute havoc.

The sudden clash of the suburban whites with inner city blacks created many problems that were prominently covered in local newspapers and watched carefully by parents everywhere. Those who cared and could afford the cost, sent their children to safer schools. Of course, some were biggots, but most simply wanted a better education for their children.

There were violent attacks on students. The daughter of the police chief was raped in the bathroom with a plunger handle. We know this directly from the man himself. He had sent his daughter to public school to make an example for everyone else to send their children as well. This is how they were rewarded.

Children who had almost no interaction with minorities were suddenly immersed in "black studies." There was entirely too much emphasis on this type of thing. The text books included Malcom X and other "radicals" of the day in a very biased manner. No other races were featured in the texts. Children were told that their parents did not know what they were talking about and they should not listen to them. It all appeared to be a particularly sloppy job of social engineering.

The methods of transportation were chaotic. Children as young as five years old were placed on city buses (not school buses) with no chaperones or other adults caring for them. My mother rode some of these buses to see what was happening. She found a tiny little black girl crying in hysterics because she had no idea where she was going or what to do. Imagine putting such a small child on a public bus by herself. If given a choice, what parent allow this to happen?

These are but a few examples of the things that motivated parents to send their children to private schools. When the demand was recognized, many new schools were created. Many of them were created by churches since buildings already existed where classes could be held.

It was many years before the public school system settled down to something like normalcy, but it was never the same again. Academic standards faltered. Running in the halls and chewing gum were replaced with drugs and knives. I am very grateful that my parents cared enough about me to make sacrifices to send me to a private school. It could very well have saved my life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Virginiasurvivor (talkcontribs) 19:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not exist as a sounding board for anyone's personal opinion toward the morality of segregation, African American studies, or even the existence of private schools or to pass judgement upon any school's leadership, academics, or policies in the past or present. It does, however, exist to document facts, and the fact remains that during the time period of desegregation, many schools were established in the Southern U.S. with disproportionately high populations of white students. It was a phenomena that was observed and noted then, and the remains of these programs can still be observed today. Regarldess of how much it offends you, the fact still stands that this did occur, it was widespread, and it is worthy of being documented. Your offense would best be directed at those who implemented those programs rather than those who seek to document their existence for posterity. --Teliwhy (talk) 18:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Citations[edit]

I do not see any citations backing up the assertion that the liusted academies are segregation academies. I know they are, but that is not the point, we need citations for such assertions. If no citations are provided, I will remove the list of academies. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 14:34, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Calling a school a segregation academy is quite an accusation. And while I have no doubt that these are in fact segregation academies, for this article to be taken seriously, each school needs a citation. --N-k, 13:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
As this article talks about currently funcitoning educational institutions, I am removing all accusations without citations. This is very negative stuff and while I have no doubt it is true, that is not good enough for inclusion. Please find citations and re-add if you want them in here. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 17:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I think it would be quite difficult to find citations for this overwhelmingly obvious phenomenon, but I agree that citations and evidence should be here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drkeithphd (talkcontribs) 21:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I know it has been a long time since this discussion started, but I just filled in a couple of blanks with what I think are some good citations. The records still exist, but you're going to have to go to basement libraries or microfilm. I clicked through a couple of links and those schools' articles did have segregation academies in the text. I agree, I think we should be particularly keen to get good citations before the people with the memory die. It would also be a crime to let the schools whitewash (!) their pasts.
It might also be interesting to add a column for the year in which the school folded or the whites-only rule was abandoned. FWIW, I attended a white-only public school 1965-66; the school integrated the following year. Rhadow (talk) 00:53, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I spent a few hours adding citations where I could find them. There are still a few schools missing citations, but the article is in much better shape know. Billhpike (talk) 23:02, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

RfC[edit]

Light bulb iconBAn RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:16, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Seg Academy Neologism[edit]

It may be too late to mention this. But, Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a forum to increase the usage of a neologism. For more information, please see WP:NEO. Discussion on this article goes back 8 years. None of the sources cited at the time used the term "segregation academy." In my research, it appears there are several years between the original Wikipedia article and the first reliable source to use the term- that is, news articles. Recent news articles have picked up the term, usually with scare_quotes. Essentially, the term is apparently a neologism; the genesis of which seems to be a Wikipedia article- which is inappropriate.Verdad (talk) 17:39, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Your belief that "segregation academies" is a neologism suggests that your research has been insufficient to acquaint you with an extensive literature on the subject going back decades. A basic search on JSTOR, for example, returns a long list of scholarly articles that starts this way:
  • "Segregation Academies and State Action," The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 82, No. 7 (Jun., 1973), pp. 1436-1461
  • "The Segregation Academy and the Law," Anthony M. Champagne, The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 42, No. 1 (Winter, 1973), pp. 58-66
  • "The South's New Segregation Academies," John C. Walder, Allen D. Cleveland, The Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 53, No. 4 (Dec., 1971), pp. 234-235, 238-239
  • "More than Segregation Academies: The Growing Protestant Fundamentalist Schools," Virginia Davis Nordin, William Lloyd Turner, The Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 61, No. 6 (Feb., 1980), pp. 391-394
  • "White Freedom Schools: The White Academy Movement in Eastern North Carolina, 1954-1973," Christopher Myers, The North Carolina Historical Review, Vol. 81, No. 4 (OCTOBER 2004), pp. 393-425
Etc. PRRfan (talk) 03:23, 8 May 2014 (UTC)


Yeah. Just checked JSTOR. Thanks!

What is your opinion about scare quotes?Verdad (talk) 04:31, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? PRRfan (talk) 13:46, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
From WP article, "Enclosing a word or phrase in quotes can also convey a neutral attitude on the part of the writer, while distancing the writer from the terminology in question. The quotes are used to call attention to a neologism, special terminology (jargon), or a slang usage, or to indicate words or phrases that are descriptive but unusual, colloquial, folksy, startling, humorous, or metaphoric. They may indicate special terminology that should be identified for accuracy's sake as someone else's, for example if a term (particularly a controversial term) pre-dates the writer or represents the views of someone else."
Most sources use quotation marks when discussing seg academies. Is this what might be referred to as distancing? Verdad (talk) 06:19, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
"Most sources use quotation marks when discussing seg academies"[citation needed]. What the quotes mean in each case where they appear will depend on context. Why don't you give specific examples of quotes that worry you? Also, it's ridiculous to assert that "most sources" use them. Did you count? Do you have any idea how many sources use them or don't? You're just making stuff up.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:08, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Past tense in lead sentence[edit]

It seems to me that we're better off using the historical present ("A segregation academy is..") rather than the past tense here. There are still segregation academies. See here and here for contemporary examples.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:24, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I prefer the future tense. "A segregation academy will be whatever alf says it is." (Queue rimshot) ;) --Verdad (talk) 03:02, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Unicited assertions[edit]

I have reverted an edit by Red Slash that contained two uncited assertions:

  1. "Segregation academies were private schools...", an assertion that is, in fact, the previous point of discussion on this very Talk page.
  2. "...it is often difficult to determine whether modern-day private schools deliberately cater chiefly to white students or simply offer their programs to wealthier families."

PRRfan (talk) 01:52, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Point taken on the first one; we should probably put "was or is". As for the difficulty in determining if a school is racist on purpose--I mean, nowhere on the Carroll Academy website will you find either an ode to segregation or a non-white student, which means... is it intentionally segregationalist? Or only money-hungry (and only white families in the area are rich enough to pay)? Or neither--maybe the school is desperately trying to recruit people of any and all ethnicities, but only white people keep showing up. (Which you and I both know is probably not the case, but...) Red Slash 02:05, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
I hear you; still, it's an assertion that's not necessarily self-evident. We ought to be able to find a cite saying it. PRRfan (talk) 02:10, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Should be findable... Red Slash 02:48, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
It is probably more descriptive to describe segregation academies in the past tense, were. The schools that still exist are no longer segregation academies as the term applied in the twentieth century. If they exist today, AND their student body does not reflect the make up of the local population, it is not the result of law. Rhadow (talk) 15:03, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

"were or are"[edit]

Red Slash, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "were or are". Are you suggesting that no one really knows whether segregation academies still exist? PRRfan (talk) 00:07, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I suppose I am, PRRfan. Unless I'm (as I often am) mistaken, there aren't really a lot of (or any?) reliable sources stating that there are any places still which are actively segregationalist. Red Slash 02:48, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess you're right. Still, I fear "were or are" is a bit confusing, not that I can think of a better way to put it right now. PRRfan (talk) 03:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

De jure and de facto[edit]

This article has a long and rich history. Its content has settled with consensus, even if each line is not supported by reference. Changes need either to be self-evident, supported by talk on this page, or supported by citation. I reverted some changes this morning that met none of those criteria.

One thing that is self-evident is the title of the article. It is one topic in a large and complicated field of study, I hope we can cover Segregation academies thoroughly and fairly here. It is not appropriate to make this a coatrack article. While de facto segregation may have increased in recent years (I heard a story about it on NPR yesterday), it is not the topic of this article. In that same radio piece was a description of public school district creation with the same effect of segregation, and the legal fights that ensued. That would make a fine topic for an article; it's not the subject of this one.

As a matter of housekeeping, WP doesn't like red links inserted on purpose, so I removed the wikilink to Bolingbrook. Recent additions to the list all have reliable sources, This school should be no different. Rhadow (talk) 10:28, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

What copyright violations?[edit]

The deletions made by Diannaa -- and now hidden -- seem to include the list of schools, which has been developed over a number of years by WP editors, including citations. The overall list, as a general matter, has been published in federal court proceedings. Insofar as the format may be protected but the content not, and this article had its own, there is no reason under copyright to delete or hide this content. Rhadow (talk) 12:54, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Many states[edit]

North Carolina is missing, curiously, from the list. Rhadow (talk) 14:20, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

The list seems exceedingly small. Memphis alone had many, but none made this list.Jacona (talk) 00:18, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Jacona -- Insofar as this is a controversial article, we should be careful to have a reliable source before we add a school that was started specifically to facilitate segregation. We will offend people when we add a private school that just happened to be started between 1954 and about 1971. Rhadow (talk) 00:27, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

I would never advocate adding unsourced content, Rhadow. For many of these schools good sources will not exist. Many will however. This list is a tiny fraction of such schools.Jacona (talk) 01:02, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello Jacona -- Court documents are rich in facts. Here is a great reference [2]. Check the addenda sections. Once you have a school name, some periodical will mention it. Those may require a look at microfilm. Rhadow (talk) 01:50, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Although I did not mention any Memphis School by name, many of them (the large, successful ones that are still around) have had articles created in the last couple of days! Another one is on the tip of my tongue, it no longer exists, maybe something along the lines of "White Station Christian Academy". Thanks to many editors for their efforts!Jacona (talk) 12:21, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Another one I've thought of, Desoto County Academy in Olive Branch, Mississippi. I know it's history, but I haven't found a source yet. Perhaps Rhadow or User:Billhpike might have one? Jacona (talk) 17:50, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
I’ve found references that hint at Desoto Academy’s discriminatory history, but nothing was explicit enough for me to add it to the list. Billhpike (talk) 19:47, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Schools missing[edit]

The list given here is missing about 30 schools included in en:Category:Segregation academies. deisenbe (talk) 10:12, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello deisenbe -- It's a big POV problem to publish the list of former segregation academies in the mainspace without an explanation that that it is history. Therefore, as far as I am concerned, no new school gets added to the table in segregation academies without a reference, else it will upset someone and get tagged. If you disagree, please respond.
Charter schools and school vouchers are a different matter. They can get a wikilink, but need no deep discussion in this article. Rhadow (talk) 11:54, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

My edits reverted[edit]

The opening of the article said in the first sentence “were or are”. I changed that to “are”, because many of them (the majority?) still exist. The article explains soon that none open today discriminate racially.

This was immediately changed by @Rhadow to “were”. I think that is a distortion. If the schools are being put in en:Category:Segregation academies (not “Former segregation academies”) they exist in the present.

I added under See also a link to Charter schools, which share with the segregation academies the idea of taking students out of regular schools and putting them in different ones with different administrations and different funding. With no explanation, @JaconaFrere immediately deleted it. deisenbe (talk) 11:25, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello deisenbe -- I believe that my edit to were is fair. Read the rest of the lede. The segregation academy is a thing of the past. It is no longer legal. Today, we have school vouchers and charter schools and gerrymandering and private schools with high tuition as problems, but not segregation academies. Rhadow (talk) 11:43, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

deisenbe, I'm sorry you take offense with my edit. Perhaps I could have given more explanation, but edit captions are short. While WP:Seealso does not specifically say categories must be excluded, it does says we shouldn't link things that are already in the article, and one of the categories you linked is already in the article, where it should be, as a category. I think it would be very appropriate to place a section about charters in the article, perhaps you could work on that? Thanks! Jacona (talk) 11:58, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
deisenbe, Rhadow, I think we can all agree that while segregated schools are at least technically illegal, we still have many schools in the South and elsewhere that are very segregated. Interestingly enough, did you know that New York City reportedly has the most segregated schools in the United States? [3]. Reading the Segregation academy article you'd think it was purely a southern thing. Jacona (talk) 12:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
New York "wins" at the state level as well. See [4].Jacona (talk) 12:06, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Jacona -- De jure segregation of public schools was made illegal in 1954 with Brown. De jure segregation of private schools was made illegal in 1976 with Runyon. I propose that this article conclude in 1976. There is most certainly a need for articles that describe de facto segregation since then. Your New York article would fit there. Insofar as we are discussing this on a talk page, I think it's okay to discuss the relation of christian schools to segregation. The rule for segregation academies was that they were non-denominational. Look closely at the history and you will discover that many transmogrified into so-called christian schools when segregation was outlawed. It will take some tip-toeing to write it well, but it needs to be written. Today, we find that large school districts are being carved into smaller ones -- small districts that are predominantly one group or another. There are plenty of legal cases on that. See School integration in the United States. Rhadow (talk) 12:23, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

The establishment of law and actual practice did not coincide. For instance, while Brown ruling was in 1954, it was nearly 20 years later that public schools integrated in some states. Similarly, all segregation academies did not conclude their business as such with Runyon. A cut-off date of 1976 would be disingenious, and far too restrictive.Jacona (talk) 12:30, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Jacona -- Okay, I agree. That's why I said, carefully, made illegal, not ended. To my knowledge no segregation academies were founded after 1973. Many folded soon after 1976. For example Rock Hill Academy folded in 1979. Yes, many remained predominantly white for years after that. For example, Parklane Academy was still predominantly white when Britney Spears attended in 1995. The story about de jure segregation basically ends in 1976, even if the hangover lasted after that. The fight changed its nature and I believe the topic should be taken up in a new article.
The whole Segregation academy article, by virtue of the definition, ignores the hundreds of schools established before 1954 that had restrictive entrance policies. That's another topic. Rhadow (talk) 12:54, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I’m sorry, @JaconaFrere, I missed the link in the article. You’re right.
Is there any doubt that charter schools and vouchers reduced support for public schools? As it is now, it reads like it’s debatable. deisenbe (talk) 13:09, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
  • deisenbe asked, Is there any doubt that charter schools and vouchers reduced support for public schools? I would say that as a matter of current debate, there is. It would be a POV violation to write otherwise. You may disagree. Rhadow (talk) 13:24, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
  • deisenbe -- Please look again at the PBS reference. There are two subjects interviewed, Crew and Lynn. And I would argue that school tuition grants, vouchers, and charter schools are three descriptions of the same thing: public funds being used to support other than public schools. Please reconsider your failed verification tag. Rhadow (talk) 13:33, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Naming convention in this article[edit]

It strikes me that the name of the school as it existed in the period 1954-1976 is the logical name to include in this article. If a wikilink points to an article with a new name for a school, fine. The point of this article is to describe history. Shame is is not the intent, even if it is a byproduct. Rhadow (talk) 13:42, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Now fully cited[edit]

After a few hours of work today, I was able to find citations for every school on the list. Let's not add any new schools to the list unless we also have a citation to go with them. Billhpike (talk) 01:43, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

TODO: reconcile with category[edit]

I think there are some schools in Category:Segregation academies that are not listed here. Most of the schools in the category have citations in the article, so they should be easy to add to this list. Billhpike (talk) 01:53, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

The Mississippi Association of Independent Schools has a list of its charter members on its website [5]. Benton County Educational Foundation, Ashland, MS Central Holmes Academy, Lexington, MS Claiborne Educational Foundation, Lorman, MS Copiah Educational Foundation, Crystal Springs, MS Council School Foundation, Jackson, MS Cruger-Tchula Academy, Cruger, MS East Holmes Academy, West, MS Forrest County School Foundation, Hattiesburg, MS Harrison County Private School, Gulfport, MS Indianola Educational Foundation, Indianola, MS Jefferson Davis Academy, Meridian, MS Lamar School, Meridian, MS Pillow Academy, Greenwood, MS Quitman Educational Foundation, Marks, MS Rebul Academy, Learned, MS Sharkey-Issaquena Academy, Rolling Fork, MS Shaw Educational Foundation, Shaw, MS Walnut Hills School, Vicksburg, MS

It also has a list of all its current members. These schools are not subject to Blaine amendment provisions. They get no state schoolbooks for example. They are not subject to oversight of the science curriculum, either. Rhadow (talk) 20:34, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Another historical list [6]] ‘’Coffey v. State Educational Finance Commission,[7] [296 F. Supp. 1389 ]‘’(S.D. Miss. 1969)

Ordering of states[edit]

In a general list, alphabetical is a logical ordering. In the context of this article, Virginia should be first. It was the first state to formulate a government response to Brown. It was the first to establish segregation academies. It established the model the other states mostly followed. Before we divide up the regions of Virginia, see whether it follows a chronological narrative. Otherwise, it just confuses the reader. My two cents. Rhadow (talk) 17:01, 17 November 2017 (UTC)