Oklahoma City Public Schools Board of Education v. Dowell Brief Amicus Curiae Dekalb County Board of Education

Public Court Documents
June 1, 1990

Oklahoma City Public Schools Board of Education v. Dowell Brief Amicus Curiae Dekalb County Board of Education preview

Oklahoma City Public Schools Board of Education v. Dowell Brief of the Dekalb County Board of Education as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner

Cite this item

  • Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Oklahoma City Public Schools Board of Education v. Dowell Joint Appendix Vol. III, 1990. da41bf45-c09a-ee11-be36-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/c8fc6fab-2ada-494a-ab46-ff1759120e1a/oklahoma-city-public-schools-board-of-education-v-dowell-joint-appendix-vol-iii. Accessed April 29, 2025.

    Copied!

    No. 89-1080

In The

Supreme Court of the United States
October Term, 1989
—------------♦--------------

THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF OKLAHOMA CITY 
PUBLIC SCHOOLS, INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 

NO. 89, OKLAHOMA COUNTY, OKLAHOMA,

vs.
Petitioner,

ROBERT L. DOWELL, ET AL.,
Respondents.

--------------- «---------------
On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States 

Court Of Appeals For The Tenth Circuit
--------------- ♦---------------
JOINT APPENDIX 

VOLUME III 
--------------♦--------------

J u lius L. C h am bers *R onald  L. D ay
C h arles S tephen  R a lsto n  Suite 260

*N o rm a n  J. C h ach kin  6303 Waterford Blvd.
99 Hudson Street, 16th Hoor Oklahoma City, OK 73118 
New York, N.Y. 10013
(212) 219-1900

J a n ell M. B yrd  
1275 K Street, N.W.
Suite 301
Washington, D.C. 20005
(202) 682-1300

Attorneys For Respondents
"̂ Counsel of Record
(Additional Attorneys For 
Respondents Listed on 
Inside Cover)

(405) 842-5988
C h arles J . C ooper

■ it*'

M cG uire,  W o ods, B attle 
& B ooth

N.W. 
20006^

1627 Eye St 
, Washington
* (202) 857-T7'
Attorneys For

^Counsel of Rec rd
tioner

Petition For Certiorari Filed January 3, 1990 
Certiorari Granted March 26, 1990

COCKLE LAW BRIEF PRINTING CO., (800) 22S-6964 
OR CALL COLLECT (402) 342-2831

V



J o hn  W. W a lker  
J o hn  W. W a lk er , P.A.

1723 So. Broadway 
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501) 374-3758

L ew is B a r ber , J r .
B a r b e r / T  r a v io lia

1523 N.W. 23rd Street 
Oklahoma City, OK 73111
(405) 424-5201

Attorneys For Respondents



1

VOLUME I
Relevant Docket Entries...............................    1

Motion to Close Case............................................................ 29

Letter Opposing Motion (June 2, 1975)....................... .32

Opposition to Motion to Dismiss and Memo Brief
(June 30, 1975).............................  .34

Transcript of Proceedings at Hearing on Novem­
ber 18, 1975 .................. ..................................................... 38

Order Terminating Case (January 18, 1977)...............  174

Opinion of the United States District Court For 
the Western District of Oklahoma, 606 F. Supp.
1548 [1985].................       177

VOLUME II
Opinion of the United States Court of Appeals For

the Tenth Circuit, 795 F.2d 1516 [1986],............. 197

Final Pretrial Order (May 29, 1987) (Excluding
Witness and Exhibit Lists)............................................ 215

Excerpts from Transcript of Proceedings at Hearing 
Conducted June 15-24, 1987

Record, Volume II

William A.V. Clark ............... ............. .......................235

Finis Welch........................ .............. ......................... 262

Record, Volume III

Finis Welch (continued).............................................. 274

Belinda Biscoe...............................     305

Susan Hermes .......................      321

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page



Record, Volume IV

Susan Hermes (continued).........................................330

Clyde M use....................................................................334
John F in k ........................................................................344

Betty H il l .............................................     347

Maridyth McBee.................................  354
Vern M oore..................................................................  359
Betty Mason...........................  370

Record, Volume V

Betty Mason (continued).............................................375
Alonzo Owens, J r . ...........................................   379

Tommy B. W h ite ................................................... .. . 381

Carolyn Hughes............................................................389

Arthur W. Steller.........................    395
Karen Francis Leveridge............................................ 401
Odette M. Scobey....................................   402

Linda J. Johnson...........................    410
VOLUME III 

Record, Volume VI

Gary E. Bender..................................................   418

Robert A. Brow n.........................  424

Billie L. Oldham.........................     428

John J. Lane..............................................   430

Herbert J. Walberg. .............................     436

11

TABLE OF CONTENTS -  Continued
Page



Ill

Record, Volume VII

Robert L. Crain. .................... ............. .........................452

Yale Rabin. ................................................. . 463

Record, Volume VIII

John A. Finger, Jr................... ........................ .. 482

Mary Lee Taylor............... .......................................... 487

Gordon Foster.................... ....... ....................... .. 501

Record, Volume IX

Gordon Foster (continued) ....................................... 515

Clara Luper...................................................................516

Melvin Porter .......... ................ ...................... .......... 521

William Alfred Sampson.......................................... 524

Arthur S te ller............................................................ 531

Selected Exhibits Admitted Into Evidence at 
Hearing Conducted June 15-24, 1987

Record, Supplemental Volume I 
Plaintiff's Exhibit 48

Racial Composition of Elementary School Facul­
ties, 1972-73, 1984-85, 1985-86, 1 9 8 6 -8 7 ...............  539

Plaintiff's Exhibit 50
1984- 85 Elementary Enrollment and Faculty -
Percent Black........................... ...................... 543

Plaintiff's Exhibit 52
1985- 86 Elementary Enrollment and Faculty -
Percent Black.................................................... ........... 546

TABLE OF CONTENTS -  Continued
Page



IV

Plaintiff's Exhibit 54
1986-87 Elementary Enrollment and Faculty -  
Percent Black.................................................... . 549

Plaintiff's Exhibit 56
Minutes, December 10, 1984, School Board Meet­
ing....................... ....................... ..................... ............ . 552

Record, Supplemental Volume II 
Defendant's Exhibit 5D

Population Change in East Inner-City Tracts, 
1950-1980 .................................................... '................561

Defendant's Exhibit 5E
Black Population Turnover in East Inner-City 
Tracts .................................     562

Defendant's Exhibit 6
Population Growth/Change in Oklahoma City 563 

Defendant's Exhibit 10
Abstract, Clark, Residential Segregation in Ameri­
can Cities....................................................      566

Defendant's Exhibit 11
Oklahoma City Public Schools, Percent Black in 
Residential Zones ...............................................  568

Defendant's Exhibit 21
White Population in Oklahoma City SMSA, 
1970-1980 .............       571

Defendant's Exhibit 24
Black Population in Oklahoma City SMSA, 
1970-1980 .................         572

Defendant's Exhibit 38
School Districts in Comparably Sized SMSA's .. 573 

Defendant's Exhibit 40
Indices for Residential Zones ................... .. 576

TABLE OF CONTENTS -  Continued
Page



V

Defendant's Exhibit 45
Indices for All Schools.............................................578

Defendant's Exhibit 63
Racial Composition of Elementary Schools (K-4), 
1985-86..........................................................................  580

Defendant's Exhibit 67
Student Population by Race, 1970-1986........... 584

Defendant's Exhibit 76
Minutes, July 2, 1984 School Board Meeting.. .. 586 

Defendant's Exhibit 79
Minutes, November 19, 1984 School Board Meet­
ing.......................        602

Defendant's Exhibit 108
Majority-To-Minority Transfers.................................609

Defendant's Exhibit 119
Extracurricular Activities Report -  High Schools 611 

Defendant's Exhibit 120
Extracurricular Activities Report -  Middle 
Schools. ..........................      612

Defendant's Exhibit 140
Parental Organization Statistics...............     613

Defendant's Exhibit 142
Adopt-A-School Statistics.............................  614

Opinion of the United States District Court For 
the Western District Of Oklahoma, 677 F. Supp.
1503 [1987] (Reproduced in Petition for Writ of 
Certiorari at App. IB; not reproduced in Joint 
Appendix)

Opinion of the United States Court of Appeals For 
the Tenth Circuit, 890 F.2d 1483 (1989) (Repro­
duced in Petition For Writ of Certiorari at App.
1A [majority], 46A [dissent]; not reproduced in
Joint Appendix)

TABLE OF CONTENTS -  Continued
Page



RECORD, VOLUME VI



418

GARY E. BENDER 
* * *

[p. 831] Q. Do you serve on the Equity Committee?

A, Yes, I do. I'm chairman of the Equity Committee.

Q. How long have you been chairman?

A. Two years.

Q. Both years that it's been in operation?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Does the NAACP have representatives on the 
Equity Committee, to your knowledge?

A. Yes, sir, to my knowledge, three.

Q. Does the Urban League have representatives on 
the Equity Committee?

A. Yes, sir, to my knowledge, one.

Q. Would you explain for the court the type of 
things that the Equity Committee has looked at during 
these last two years?

A. What we've focused on is facilities and text­
books, various areas of building maintenance, areas that 
we felt that would be [p. 832] an equitable issue. Of 
course, sometimes if -  you run into if one bathroom leaks 
and the other bathroom leaks across town, that's an equi­
table issue.

But we have tried to make equity across the board so 
that each child is being taught the same material, have



419

the same textbooks, the same material, the same oppor­
tunity to learn.

Q. I'd like to direct your attention to defendant's 
Exhibit 107, which is in evidence, and may be in the book 
in front of you. That particular exhibit has already been 
admitted into evidence as a document containing mate­
rials concerning the activities and functioning of the 
Equity Committee.

While you were on the Equity Committee, and in 
doing this type of work did you make a determination as 
to the condition of the facilities in the northeast quadrant 
of the District as compared to other facilities throughout 
the Oklahoma City District?

A. Yes, we did.

Q. What were your findings?

A. It was surprising. We found that the building 
usage or the run-downness of the buildings were not in 
the northeast quadrant, but they were also in the -  there 
were more in the south, southeast part of town. The 
buildings in the northeast were fairly decent and compa­
rable to the buildings in the north part of town.

Q. Did the Equity Committee do any studies 
regarding the [p. 833] quality of teachers or the ability of 
teachers or the degrees that teachers held throughout the 
district?

A. Right. We asked for that. We came back and we 
asked for that. We felt that there may be a loophole that 
we were missing in equity if we didn't find out how the 
teachers were fairly educationally in breakdown, and we



420

did do that study, and the study is contained in this 
section here.

I would like to say that we did find out that teachers, 
across the board, were teaching and children were learn­
ing on a great -  on a large scale, and they were profes­
sionally involved across the district,

Q. Did the committee analyze the level of parental 
involvement at the various elementary schools?

A. Yes, sir, and this is where we're going to have to 
make the -  a more bite in the equity issue, in that we 
found that, even like in the Northeast Quadrant, if you 
had a school who had an active PTA and PTO, then the 
school was being supplied, the teachers were being sup­
plied with everything they needed, whereas, right down 
the street you had an inactive PTA, then there was an 
inequity situation right there in the same neighborhood. 
There's going to have to be more of a bite and an up­
build of the PTA and PTO in the school district across the 
board.

Q. Do you feel that as a result of the implementa­
tion of the neighborhood plan that the level of parental 
involvement in the [p. 834] district has increased?

MR. SHAW: Objection, Your Honor. Leading.

MR. DAY: I'm asking for an opinion.

THE COURT: Overruled.

Q. (BY MR. DAY) Let me restate my question.

A. Yes, sir.



421

Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether or not the 
level of parental involvement in the Oklahoma City 
schools has increased since the implementation of the K-4 
neighborhood plan?

A. We have found that some PTA's have flourished 
because of the neighborhood school program.

Q. Now, when the Equity Committee would find a 
defficiency [sic] in any school in the district, what would 
they do?

A. Well, a point in case, we found a very high 
defficiency [sic] in Telstar, and we were very concerned 
about the kids. They were disabled kids who were being 
-  didn't have the right facilities.

We immediately went back to the board -  well, to 
Elton Mathews and related our concerns to him, which 
they -  the district -  I mean the board, the administration 
got on it right away and corrected the errors.

And we found that throughout the two years, that 
when we find defficiencies [sic], such as termite damage, 
asbestos, or whatever, they were real helpful in respond­
ing to that immediately and didn't let it lag, just got right 
on it.

* * *

[p. 837] Q. What is your understanding of the 
purpose of the majority-to-minority transfers?

A. Well, my understanding there is that the parents 
have a right to have their child go anywhere they would 
like them to go.



422

Q. For what purpose, though? What is your under­
standing of the restriction?

A. To me it would be for convenience. At the time 
Cory was going to Quail Creek, he could come back in 
the first grade and go back to Village as a day care. We 
didn't trust him with a key, but -  and Candice was at 
Quail Creek. And so -  I'm sorry, Village.

Q. No, I didn't mean to interrupt you.

A. Oh, that's okay.

But -  so we felt, as a convenience, they would be in 
the same place, we are a close family, and to me it's just 
convenience. Wasn't anything -  that's why we opted that. 
We have that option.

*  *  *

[p. 840] Q. I believe you mentioned that buildings 
that have more active PTA's get more of something. 
Would you describe what it is they get?

A. Well, it could be pencils. If you have an active 
PTA and the teachers request -  if you're familiar with 
PTA, I'm sure you are -  the parents -  the teachers may 
request something from the PTA, then the PTA would 
respond to that need. If you didn't have an active PTA, 
you could go in and find, in a case in point, pencil 
sharpeners, each class would have one.

Q. Who is providing those pencil sharpeners?

A. The parents.

Q. The parents?



423

A. Right.

Q. And if the parents do not provide the pencil 
sharpeners or the PTA is not active, then I take it that it 
may be that the students will go without those pencil 
sharpeners?

A. No, they'll just go with less.
* * *

[p. 842] Q. Part of the dissatisfaction has based 
upon the notion that interaction occurred only once a 
year, wasn't it?

A. Right. But in some schools it occurred three 
yjtimes -  in actuality in numbers, sometimes one school, 

and that of King, had six occurences, three by letter and 
^'three by visit.

So some flourished while others didn't, and that's -  
that's our aim for this fall, to insure that that takes place.

Q. Why is the student interaction plan even neces­
sary?

A. Well, it's a balance. It's -  it's to help each child 
that is in the -  a child that's in another area know another 
child and become familiar with that child so when they 
get do [sic] a fifth-year school -  center that they would 
know each other.

Q. Why is that important?

A. Well, it's important for -  as they grow, they learn 
each other. They know the -  when they get to another 
school, they won't be so frightened, without having no



424

knowledge of individuals there. They'll know somebody, 
have a friend there, they'll have acquaintances there.

*  *  *

ROBERT A. BROWN

[p. 848] A. * * * Incidentally, as a reading specialist I 
was in the Chapter I Program.

I was an assistant principal at the Middle School level 
for two years, and then last year moved to principal at 
the elementary level.

Q. Where were you assigned immediately before 
your assignment at King?

A. I was at Moon Middle School. That's in the same 
area.

Q. Based on your educational background and 
experience, do you have an opinion, Mr. Brown, as to 
whether or not the racial composition of the schools 
affects the academic achievement of black students?

A. It does not.

Q. And would you tell the court why you hold that 
opinion?

A. I hold that opinion based on 17 years working 
with predominantly black students. 18 years I'd have to 
say now. And in that time what I have seen is that 
blackness is just another element that you consider in 
dealing with children. It does not predetermine or deter­
mine what's going to happen to them educationally. 
That's made up by the staff, by the teachers, by how you 
work with the children.

*  *  *



425

[p. 849] Q. Was there any particular reason why you 
wanted to be assigned to King Elementary?

A. I did not have a lot of -  a lot of input as to where 
I was assigned, but I was very pleased with the assign­
ment. It matches well with my experience.

The students, academically, at King need the kind of 
expertise that I have in the area of reading, and I think by 
-  you know, we were talking about that earlier just now. I 
think that, by applying that expertise and by working 
with that staff and by addressing those problems specifi­
cally, that I'm in the right spot. I think I'll do some good 
things for that school.

Q. Do you hold an opinion as to whether or not 
parental involvement in the child's educational process 
has an impact on academic achievement?

A. Certainly. It certainly does. Yes, it has an impact.

Q. Why?

A. The -  the child that we deal with at school goes 
home. If what we are doing is supported, is carried on, 
even, at the home, then you've -  you've got a better 
chance to effect any kind of chance you want to. The 
child's going to learn more.

I have a lot of parents that come in with concern 
about children, and they will ask what they can do at 
home, and they're given instructions and materials and 
things that they can use at home. They can certainly make 
an impact.

*  *  *



426

[p. 853] Q. At this point in time, Mr. Brown, do you 
favor the school board's Neighborhood Plan?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Why?

A. At my building, it's -  it's generated a strong 
sense of belonging, a strong sense of ownership among 
the children. It's -  it's developed a feeling about the 
school that I didn't see, or at least didn't see as much of 
in the days when they were transported all over the 
district.

In my building I've got parents who are in the build­
ing daily, and not just one or two, but several daily. I've 
got PTA participation by parents who walk over who 
would not be able to attend otherwise.

It enhances everything we do. The instructional pro­
gram has improved. The teachers are able to make quick 
contact. We have quite a few parents without telephones. 
I've got teachers that go by their homes and see them 
because they're right there [p. 854] in the area. I've got 
parents that we can send letters home to and they show 
up the next day.

To those of us that have been in the district a long 
time, parents participation is definitely up.

Q. Have you personally noted an increase in the 
level of parental involvement in the district since the 
Neighborhood Plan was implemented?

A. In those buildings where I've been working, yes.



427

Q. Have you noticed any change in the discipline 
problems of students since the implementation of the 
Neighborhood Plan?

A. There's a -  there's a quicker response from par­
ents in discipline problems. I don't have near the prob­
lems that we used to have in getting the parents to come 
in. It's -

You know, as we go through the year there are some 
kids that get in more trouble than other children, and I'm 
getting those parents up without exception. I couldn't say 
that in previous years. There were several people who I 
never saw.

Q. Does King have a viable PTA unit?

A. Yes, it does. It's very active.

Q, Do -  you mentioned earlier that those parents 
sometimes come to school and volunteer to do various 
things. Would you tell the court some specifics in that 
regard?

A. Yes. Not only the PTA members, but we have 
other parents as well, who will come into the building.

Because we're -  because we're neighborhood and 
they're [p. 855] able to just walk over in many cases, you 
know, two or three blocks. They come in and they stand 
in with classroom teachers. They work in a support room 
there. They come in and support us on fund raisers.

Our major fund raiser was run almost completely by 
parents this year, and, in this day and age of budgetary 
considerations, that's real handy.



428

They tutor children. They help the teacher get mate­
rial ready. It's not at all uncommon for the parents to be 
running off things for teachers, to be going from different 
-  room to room to bring things to them. Just they're 
involved in every way you can think of.

*  *  *

tp. 860] THE COURT: And what is that opin­
ion?

MR. SHAW: Your Honor, I would just like to 
note our continuing objection.

THE COURT: Yes, you have it.

THE WITNESS: I think that the Finger Plan
achieved the objective of creating a unitary district.

THE COURT: Do you have an opinion as to
whether or not the unitary system continued after the 
court released its jurisdiction in 1977 to and through the 
year 1985/6? Do you have an opinion?

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: And what's that opinion?

THE WITNESS: In my opinion, the unitary 
school system is still going. It's still in existence.

*  *  *

BILLIE LEANNE OLDHAM

[p. 863] Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether or 
not there has been an increase in the amount of parental 
involvement in the school since the adoption of the 
Neighborhood Plan?

A. Yes, I do.



429

Q. What is your opinion?

A. I feel like it's increased tremendously. I have 
spent a lot of time in the different buildings across the 
district helping them to organize their units, and I see a 
great increase in our parental involvement.

Q. Do you believe that if the Neighborhood Plan is 
allowed to continue that we will see additional increases 
in parental involvement?

A. Yes, I do, because each year -  when they first 
start, it's usually just a handful of parents, but then as 
they get going and the parents see that there is a real 
value, you know, they want to continue to be involved. So 
it will just continue to grow. Everybody wants to be 
involved in something that's exciting.

Q. In your opinion, if parents become involved in a 
PTA while their child are [sic] in grades K through four, 
would they be more likely to remain active in the PTA 
when their child attends grades five through twelve?

A. Yes, I feel like they would, because you're -  just 
like anything else, you are building a base.

*  *  *

[p. 868] Q. Do you -  have you attended any national 
PTA conventions?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. Do you have any knowledge about the trends in 
PTA participation nationally over the past decade or two?



430

A. Well, not really. Not as far as -  because I haven't 
been involved in capacities that I could answer that ques­
tion.

Q. Now, are you aware of the increasing participa­
tion of women in the work force over the past decade?

A. Yes.

Q. And does that include, to your knowledge, 
women who are the sole support of their families as a 
result of divorce or other family changes?

A. Yes.

Q. For those parents who have returned to the work 
force, would it be more difficult, in your opinion, for 
them to participate in PTA activities than if they were not 
in the work force?

A. It's more difficult maybe during the daytime, but 
a lot of people have flexible job schedules.

That's part of the PTA's job. As our society changes 
we, must make changes.

* * *

JOHN JOSEPH LANE

[p. 880] Q. And what inferences did you draw from 
your conversations?

A. In terms of the individuals, I found them compe­
tent, even enlightened, very well connected with national 
organizations and what was going on beyond Oklahoma. 
I would have to go so far as to say that, by any definition, 
they are professional individuals.

I would have to say that, as I listened to them, I 
gathered a picture of -  beginning to form a picture of a



431

very progressive kind of district, fair in its public state­
ment of policy. I found people very willing to be 
involved.

I sensed that the board was very hard working and 
willing, unlike what I have seen in other districts, frankly, 
to be very collaborative with the central office.

Without waxing too eloquent here, or attempting to 
be, I found, time and again, that their stated philosophy 
of establishing excellence is, in fact, a dream, but it's one 
that I think they're taking the steps to realize.

Q. Doctor -

A. They firmly believe that every child can learn.

Q. Doctor Lane, you have looked at a number of 
other school districts. How does Oklahoma City School 
District compare to those other districts?

[p. 881] A. In what regard?

Q. In implementing an effective schools program 
and in carrying out their instructional philosophy.

A. It compares very favorably. As I look -  as I 
personally have tried to, over the years, develop effective 
schools before it was in vogue to call them such, I have 
found that this district, laboring under tremendous fiscal 
constraints, has made giant strides.

In the area of communication with parents and 
among the staff themselves, I -  I've seen great progress.

In terms of leadership, emphasis on instruction, mon­
itoring closely the progress of the children, it's really 
already exemplary.



432

Q. Why did you then also conduct interviews?

A. Well, frankly, to get out into the field and see if 
what I read and what I heard was true.

Q. And how did you go about conducting these 
interviews?

A. I have already indicated that I had worked with 
the North Central, and I opted to -  to take that approach, 
that I would -  I had already read the documents, I have 
visited with key individuals. I would now, instead of 
visiting classrooms, I would visit individual school sites 
and interview with the principals.

* * *

[p. 885] Q. So no principals felt like they were being 
cut short or any favoritism shown; is that right?

A. That's correct.

Other kinds of questions in that regard dealt with 
central office support for the schools, and here I was 
looking for a kind of -  I can't even say the word measure, 
exactly -  but a soft measure.

Over the years, I've also noticed that schools can be 
excluded from connections, if I can put it that way, with 
the central office. The principal calls and there's no 
response. And I asked questions along those lines: "When 
you call the central office, are you met with courtesy? Do 
you feel that there is a response, that you will get sup­
port?"

I was looking for two things, as I have said, one for 
uniformity, but also, since the district says that it is an 
effective school district, support for the local school is, in



433

addition to the five correlates of school effectiveness that 
have been mentioned several times in testimony, school 
support is yet another one, and I found, once again, that 
all of the principals felt that when they called there was 
response and support.

In the same vein -

Yes.

*  Jfr Jfr

[p. 889] Q. Doctor Lane, did you also look at curric­
ulum?

A. Yes, I did, with two particular things in mind. 
One, of course, to see whether, in fact, the curriculum was 
uniform across the board, and the other a more concrete 
kind of thing. I've already referred to curriculum guides. 
I wanted to know whether, in fact, curriculum guides 
were available and were they being used.

I found that, in fact, the curriculum was uniform 
across the board, that curriculum guides were being used, 
but the principals, moreover, required lesson plans, and 
these lesson plans involved the curriculum guides.

*  *  *

[p. 891] Q. Doctor Lane, there's been lots of discus­
sion in the case about parental involvement.

In your professional opinion, how important is par­
ental involvement to a student's education?

A. The two principal agents in the education of a 
child are the teacher and the parent. Any program that



434

will bring the teacher and the parent closer together is a 
good program, it seems to me.

The parent gains better understanding of the school's 
objectives, the teacher's personal objectives, the teacher's 
perception of his or her child, and they are able, collab- 
oratively, to work for a better education for the child.

Furthermore, some experts have estimated that, 
though it's quality time, we hope, a child is in school 
about 13 percent of the time. 87 percent of the time, 
between roughly birth and age 18, is spent out in the 
community and with the family.

Anything that can augment the positive aspects of an 
education in that neighborhood and with the parent and 
the teacher is a positive thing and a good thing.

*  *  *

[p. 893] Q. So in every school there was some type 
of involvement of parents?

A. Some type of -  some type of involvement, with 
the exception of two schools. I can't quite recall which, 
but I do remember that there were two that didn't have 
the them, but the other 28 schools did.

Q. Was it your impression that this involvement 
had increased over the last two years?

A. It was the report of the principals that it had 
increased, and, in some instances, had increased dramati­
cally, some nothing that parent participation had moved 
from 13 to 30, 35 members, which is -  is quite an increase 
over a period, frankly, of just a few months.

Q. Did you also look at facilities?



435

A. Yes, I -  yes, I did. I didn't know until testimony 
yesterday that there was need for about 200 million dol­
lars in repairs, but, as a lay observer of that kind of thing, 
I can -  I can attest that there -  the buildings of many of 
them are in -  in serious need of, perhaps, some structural 
changes and improvements.

Nonetheless, I found that the schools were clean, well 
maintained, and, in accordance with both my inquiry 
about uniformity and about matters relating to school 
effectiveness, they provided safe environments.

[p. 894] Some principals did express concern about 
the presence of asbestos, and I understand that that's 
before the board and they understand that something 
needs to be done.

Q. But was it your general impression that there 
was uniformity among the schools regarding their facili­
ties?

A. As with finance, as with teachers, as with facili­
ties, the principals reported that, in fact, the district is 
financially strapped, if one suffers, we would all suffer. 
That, in fact, the formulas devised for allocation of 
resources were very scrupulously followed.

*  *  *

[p. 897] Q. In your professional opinion, and based 
on your observations throughout the district, is the effec­
tive schools program working here in Oklahoma City?

A. Yes, indeed it is. In addition to the five correlates 
that they have announced as characteristics of school 
effectiveness, more recent research has lengthened the list 
a bit to include the very kinds of things the district is



436

doing; namely, other hallmarks of an effective school are 
those which, in addition to the five that have been men­
tioned, strong instructional leadership through monitor­
ing, include also such areas as involvement of parents, 
collaboration between the central office and the site-level 
schools, support from the district office up and down the 
line, planning and communication, and these are in evi­
dence.

Q. Does the Neighborhood School Plan enhance an 
effective schools program, in your opinion?

A. Yes, it does, because a neighborhood school can 
insure greater parental involvement, and one of the hall­
marks of an effective school is parental involvement. 
Neighborhood schools perhaps can help in that -  in that 
regard.

Proximity means easy access, and that's very good, 
and the neighborhood school does help that.

Q. In your professional opinion, is a Neighborhood 
School Plan educationally beneficial?

A. Yes, it is.
*  *  *

HERBERT JOHN WALBERG

tp. 913] Q. Doctor Walberg, do you have an opinion 
as to whether or not the racial composition of a school 
has an effect on academic achievement?

A. Yes, I do. I think that racial composition of the 
school is irrelevant to how much children learn in school, 
and no particular racial composition, such as zero, ten, 
fifty, ninety, or a hundred makes important difference for 
how much children learn in school.



437

Q. What do you base this opinion upon?

[p. 914] A. May I consult my notes, Mr. Day?

Q. Certainly.

A. I base this opinion on a series of studies that 
have been done since 1966, the first of which was the -  
sometimes called the Coleman report. It was the survey 
of "equality of education opportunity," which was a 
study of some 600,000 elementary and secondary stu­
dents throughout the United States, carried out for the 
United States Congress.

There have been analyses of that survey, and they 
have indicated, collectively, no relationship of -  that is, 
black-for-black learning, how much black students learn 
in school to the racial composition of a school, or at least 
inconclusive results and a great deal of disagreement.

There have also been major compilations of smaller- 
scale studies, particularly various kinds of programs to 
change, either on a voluntary or a mandatory basis, the 
racial composition in cities and in metropolitan areas. 
Some of the reviewers of this have included Nancy Saint 
John Others.

I would say that perhaps the most important com­
pilation of this evidence was conducted by the National 
Institute of Education in 198—  1982, in which six investi­
gators who had experience in doing research on this 
particular question were brought together by the United 
States Department of Education to try to resolve this 
question. The results of the compilation indicated an 
inconsistent and a very small effect, very [p. 915] close to 
zero, such that some studies had had a positive -  a small



438

positive effect, some studies have had a negative effect, 
but in comparison with the kinds of things that I had 
talked to you about earlier, these nine factors, they were 
extremely inconsistent and had little impact on learning.

Followups on that, such as Dennis Cutty in 1983, who 
reviewed this whole compilation, and I'd like to quote 
what he said.

"The conclusion to be drawn from these 19 best 
studies is that desegregation has not significantly 
improved black achievement levels. What slight positive 
nonsignificant gains there were in the 19 studies, came 
from the 14 voluntary programs as the five mandatory 
programs^sj&wed collectively either no gain or an actual 
decline in academic achievement."

Now, this is the basis for my conclusions.

Q. In your opinion, will the fact that some students 
in Oklahoma City next year will be attending K-4 elemen­
tary schools that are not precisely racially balanced have 
any effect on the academic achievement of those students, 
either black or white?

A. I don't think it will have any effect at all.

Q. Doctor Walberg, do you have any opinions con­
cerning the academic benefits which neighborhood 
schools offer?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Would you tell us about those?

[p. 916] A. I mentioned the studies of parental 
involvement or what I call the curriculum of the home,



439

and in compiling studies, I have published a review of 
this literature of the studies that had been made through­
out the United States in the last 20 years and found that 
these studies had extremely good consequences for the 
academic learning of children.

Most of the studies -  the experimental -  that is to say, 
the randomized field trials in which some children were 
given special parental involvement programs, or the cur­
riculum of the home, special tutoring and close relation­
ships between the parents and students, indicated quite 
sizeable and consistent results.

In addition to that, I personally conducted a study in 
Chicago about a dozen years ago in an all-black area of 
the city of highly educationally disadvantaged students. I 
was asked to help plan the particular program and also to 
analyze the statistical test scores, and I also found in my 
own personal studies that there were quite strong and 
good effects.

* * *

[p. 918] Q. Have you reached any conclusions as to 
the educational offerings presently in the Oklahoma City 
School District?

A. Yes, I have. In my opinion, the school board 
goals and their plans are great aspirations. They have 
decided to have an urban thrust to strive to become a 
nationally-recognized model urban district.

They have a number of other goals which they've set 
forth for themselves, and most important of those is the 
general excellence in student achievement and learning.



440

They've tried to, among other goals, assure equity, 
pride, and success in the reassignment plan, create a 
positive teaching-learning environment, upgrade the 
instructional effectiveness of teachers and the instruc­
tional leadership of administrator. They have attempted 
to target financial resources to effectively achieve short 
term and long -  priorities and short range plans.

And finally, they have tried to build harmonious 
working relationships among the board, superintendent, 
employees, residents, and other interested parties.

[p. 919] I would say that they have set forth these 
goals and concentrated their efforts on that.

In addition, that's already been mentioned, they have 
mounted what I consider to be an extremely ambitious 
and successful school effectiveness program with the five 
major goals that have already been described. But, in 
addition to that, I consider the parental involvement pro­
grams highly -  have been increasing vastly, and they've 
also been very successful.

I would say, finally, that the school district has been 
extremely successful in trying to base what they do on 
educational research. They have a good -  excellent, I 
would say -  research facility. They've been collecting an 
immense amount of achievement date and putting a 
strong focus on trying to choose those kinds of programs 
that would help most effective in helping all the children 
with respect to their learning in the Oklahoma City Public 
Schools.

Q. Where do you see the school district headed?



441

A. I think that the school district, if it keeps these 
programs in place, and also can increase the -  make them 
more -  still even more widespread, -  and I think that they 
are near the national norms now. I think they've been 
increasing in the last couple of years, but I think that they 
can increase still further.

In particular, I think that it's cause for celebration, [p. 
920] having more PTA's and PTO's and increasing the 
membership, but I think that the school district can push 
things even further to get not only some parents in the 
school but more parents in the school.

And secondly, I think that we have the beginnings, 
although it's very valuable to raise funds, and I think that 
the school district is strapped for funds, but I think -  and 
the parents have been able to raise additional funds for 
the school, but I would like to see them doing even more 
than this in having what I would call more of this curricu­
lum of the home or parental involvement, such that some 
of the activities could be focused on more volunteering of 
parents in the schools, more tutoring -  voluntary tutoring 
in the schools, and having the teachers giving hints for 
the parents and various kinds of program activities that 
they can carry out at home, particularly involving home 
work and other kinds of activities that research has 
shown has been very conducive to learning and educa­
tional achievement.

Q. So I take it, Doctor Walberg, you are of the 
opinion that parental involvement does have an impact 
on student academic achievement?



442

A. It has an extremely consistent impact, and it also 
has a very large impact from the studies that have been 
made throughout the United States in the last 20 years.

Q. What conclusions did you reach based on your 
interviews [p. 921] with the PTA presidents?

A. The conclusions that I reached is that the major 
activities that they have been engaging in is raising 
money for the schools. They've also had a series of volun­
teer activities, such as book fairs of various kinds.

The other activities include some tutoring and some 
provisioning of information about what the school dis­
trict is trying to do and the unique characteristics of that 
particular school, as well as providing information about 
the personal requirements that teachers may have or 
what the teachers are trying to do with particular chil­
dren.

I also sensed from my interviews with the PTA presi­
dents and other representatives that they believe strongly 
in the value of parental involvement; that is to say that 
many of them believe that it -  and mentioned that it 
promotes learning; that it promotes a pride in the school, 
that it increases friendships of children and parents and 
parents with one another; that it is exceptionally good for 
discipline, because the parents can be very -  in close 
touch with the teachers.

They also mentioned that parents can support one 
another's efforts by knowing what other parents are 
doing in the school.



443

They also mentioned the fact that parental involve­
ment can promote more homework, which is very condu­
cive for additional learning.

Other conclusions that I made is that a number of the 
[p. 922] parents wanted to increase the membership in 
their school and also increase the scope of activities, 
particularly along the lines that I was suggesting earlier, 
not just raising funds, but more volunteers in the school 
and more parental involvement.

I also thought that it was interesting that in some 
cases grandparents were involved with the PTA. And so 
there was some sense of inter-generational continuity 
from one group to the other.

There were a number of other miscellaneous points 
that people mentioned about how they might send some 
of the children to camps, for example.

And then I also looked into the question and asked 
them about the -  whether they believe that, for those that 
were in the K-4 schools, whether distance was a factor in 
parental involvement, and I learned that they felt that it -  
when the parent is closer to the school, it minimizes the 
distance -  some of them view it as a safety factor. Some of 
them also mentioned the fact that it was much more 
practical, and that they could increase their -  that par­
ents, generally speaking, could be more involved in the 
school if they live closer by and it was easier for them to 
get there.

Those were my main conclusions.

*  *  *



444

[p. 927] Q. Do you draw any particular significance 
from this exhibit, doctor?

A. Yes. I have -  I can look at this exhibit and see 
that, although there are some exceptions, generally 
speaking the higher the percentage of students that have 
free lunch in the school, the lower the achievement levels, 
and the fewer the children that get free lunches, indicat­
ing higher socioeconomic status school, the higher the 
achievement levels within the school.

Q. Which elementary school in the district had the 
lowest achievement scores, overall?

A. I believe that the Willard School, which is second 
-  numbered second, has the lowest achievement.

Q. And what is the achievement NCE for Willard?

A. It's 37.7.

Q. Now, what percent of the students attending 
Willard were receiving free lunch?

A. 81.1 percent.

Q. And what percent of the student body at Willard 
is black?

A. 6.6 percent.

Q. What percent is other minority?

A. That's 51.9 percent.

Q. And what is the percent white?

A. 41.5 percent.

[p. 928] Q. Now, do I understand correctly doctor, 
that the Willard School, which was only 6.6 percent black,



445

had, overall, scored lower on achievement tests than any 
of the schools in the district that are 90 percent or more 
black?

A. That's correct.

Q. I'd like to direct your attention at this time to 
Exhibit 184, which has also been received in evidence, 
and I'd like for you to identify an[d] explain that exhibit 
to the court.

A. Defendant's Exhibit 184 is entitled "Oklahoma 
City Public School's Third Grade Metropolitan Achieve- 
ment Test."

It shows, for two school years, the students' national 
percentile rank on read -  the reading and the mathema­
tics test on the Metropolitan Achievement Test. The two 
school years are 1985/86 and also 1986/1987.

Q. What significance do you find in this exhibit?

A. I find that when the total population of the 
school district is examined at the third-grade level where 
test scores were available, that there has been improve­
ment in achievement from 1985/86 to 1986/1987.

In the subject of reading, the percentile went from the 
43rd to the 45th, and in the subject of mathematics, the 
school district went from the 45th percentile to the 51st 
percentile, which is above the national average.

* * *

[p. 933] Q. (BY MR. DAY) Just briefly identify the 
exhibit for the court and explain it, please, sir.



446

A. This is entitled "Oklahoma City Public Schools 
third grade achievement results by race." It shows the 
mean normal curve equivalent score on the metropolitan 
achievement test for the two most recent school years, 
1980 -

I'm sorry, I have the wrong exhibit here.

It's third to fourth grade gains. I'm sorry. This is for 
the schools that are -  have more than 90 percent black 
students in them. Gives the names of the schools across, 
going from Creston Hills and including Dewev, Edwards, 
Garden Oaks, King, Longfellow, North Highland, Parker, 
Polk, and Truman.

It shows that the students in these black schools, 
predominantly black schools, are making substantial -  
have played substantial gains during this -  from third to 
fourth grade in the period 1986 to 1987. Eight of the ten 
are positive. One or two schools did not make such high 
gains, but [p. 934] they lost only slightly.

And, on average, if you look across all of them, you 
can find that there is a substantial gain since the institu­
tion of the K-4 Plan.

Q. Do you have an opinion as to what's responsible 
for the recent gains of black students?

A. I believe that the programs that I have described 
and have been described here in testimony in the last day 
or two are the reasons why students in these schools are 
gaining more than perhaps they have in the past.

Q. Do you believe that the neighborhood school 
program for grades K through four, in and of itself, in any 
way contributed to the gains made by black students?



447

A. I believe that it is one of the contributing factors.
Yes.

Q. And do you also believe that the level of paren­
tal involvement may affect these scores?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Doctor Walberg, did you direct the preparation 
of all of the graphs in Exhibit 185?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. Did you check the accuracy of the numbers?

A. Yes, I did.
*  *  *

[p. 942] Q. So the figures shown in the representa­
tion -  the bar graph representation for King and Garden 
Oaks are losses. They're not lesser gains. They're losses.

A. Well, perhaps I should clarify this. This is gains 
and losses, or, I should say, changes in general relative to 
normal progress in school.

So I could say that all the students were making 
gains in some sense, because they learned something 
during the course of the year. But eight of the schools 
made gains that were larger than those of the national 
average and two schools made gains that were less than 
the average gains made in the United States.

*  *  X-

[p. 944] Q. You are aware, aren't you, that in grades 
five through twelve the district carries out a mandatory 
busing program to maintain desegregation and racial bal­
ance?



448

A. Yes, I'm aware of that.

Q. So it's fair to say that an effective schools pro­
gram can be carried out in a desegregated setting, and 
even in the context of a mandatory plan?

A. That's correct.

Q. And is it also true that the factors you identified 
as most strongly associated with learning, to the extent 
that they are under the control of or can be affected by 
school system action can be provided or enhanced in 
desegregated schools or in a system carrying out a deseg­
regation plan?

A. Well, I need to say that it's possible to do these 
things at the same time, but I also need to remind myself, 
or to give a full answer, that if there are expenditures 
involved, such as monetary expenditures for effective 
schools or for transportation, or if the district has a finite 
amount of energy and attention that they can give to 
things, if they are doing two things simultaneously one 
can take away from the other.

So, while it's theoretically possible to do two, three, 
or four things simultaneously, we do have to consider the 
amount of resources that are expended on each activity as 
well as the benefits involved.

Q. Well, you're not saying, are you, that if you were 
con- [p. 945] suited by a school district that was carrying 
out a mandatory desegregation plan and wished to 
implement an effective schools program that you would 
suggest to them that they should dismantle their deseg­
regation plan in order to implement an effective schools 
program?



449

A. No, I would not do that. I think they have to 
simply assess the amount of energy, resources, financial 
resources that they have and come up with the thing 
that's in the best interest of the children.

Q. Now, you said you thought there would be no 
effect on achievement from attendance at any of the more 
than 90 percent black schools next year. Is that -

A. Yes, I think that was concerned with the question 
whether the racial percentage would have an effect one 
way or the other.

Q. And did you mean to suggest in that answer a 
comparison with attendance at a, perhaps, majority white 
school?

A. Yes. I think I was being asked to illustrate the 
point that racial composition of the school, in my opinion, 
does not have a consistent effect on how much black 
students learn.

Q. But isn't it correct to say it would be difficult to 
determine the impact of moving from a school of -  a more 
racially mixed school to one of these 90 percent black 
schools, for example, between the last year of the Finger 
Plan and the first year of the new student assignment 
plan, by looking at [p. 946] the test scores that have been 
made since then, because there were other changes in 
programs, such as the implementation of the effective 
schools program at the same time? I mean, we're never 
really going to be able to know for sure what was really 
happening, since the two changes occurred almost simul­
taneously in the district.



450

A. The two changes you are referring to are the 
reversion to the neighborhood schools at grades one 
through four and the effective schools program?

Q. Correct.

A. And I think I would mention, as well, the 
increased parental involvement at that point in time.

Q. Well, -

A. I think it's -  I think it's difficult to give the exact 
weight, but I do think that there's been considerable 
research on effective schools in terms of involvement that 
suggests that those things would be conducive to 
achievement, so that if achievement had, in fact, gone 
down, then I think that that would be quite surprising.

Q. But the fact that achievement has gone up would 
not be conclusive. I mean, it would be theoretically possi­
ble, for example, that for students assigned back to 
heavily black schools, if there was a negative effect on 
achievement of some dimensions, it might be outweighed 
by the positive effect of some parental involvement and 
effective schools program, the [p. 947] factors that you've 
mentioned.

A. Well, in my own opinion, I think that the paren­
tal involvement and effective schools would lead to 
higher achievement, and I say that on the basis of my 
school visits and the interviews and the other studies I 
have made also, since there have been so many studies of 
this throughout the United States.

So I don't think we can be absolutely certain of 
anything in educational research, but I think that there's -  
I would have very strong confidence that the parental



451

involvement and the effective schools would be the two 
major causes of improvement.

* * *

[p. 953] THE COURT: Did you find any dis­
crimination between whites and blacks in your study of 
the school system?

THE WITNESS: I did not.

THE COURT: Did you make a further study of 
whether or not this court should continue supervision of
the school district?

THE WITNESS: I had only thought of that 
question since you raised it the last day or two, Your 
Honor, -

MR. CHACHKIN: Excuse me, Your Honor. 
Respectfully, again I object to the somewhat different 
question than the court has previously asked. I believe 
and I think it's very clear that that is a decision for the 
court to make to a legal issue in the case, and I don't 
think this witness is qualified to make it.

THE COURT: Well, I disagree with you on that.

And I think I should at this point -  I haven't done it 
before, but it's been in the back of my mind.

The pretrial order, agreed to between the parties, 
paragraph 7 of the contentions of the defendant reads

*  *  *



RECORD, VOLUME VII



452

ROBERT L. CRAIN

[p. 971] Q. Have you reached any conclusion?

A. Yes. I think segregated schools are harmful from 
American standards, are harmful to black students 
because they would inhibit their learning as reflected in 
the standard achievement test scores, and it would inhibit 
their ability to finish high school and to finish college. It 
reduces, somewhat, their political participation. Gradu­
ates of segregated schools have worse employment pros­
pects.

You could also -  the evidence would also be that 
white graduates of segregated schools are somewhat -  
have somewhat more difficulty in interaction, friend­
ships, and conversation with blacks, and are somewhat 
more prejudiced.

I'd say those are the main factors that one should talk 
about.

Q. What is the basis for your conclusion that segre­
gated schools have harmful academic effects and desegre­
gated schools presumably do not?

A. Mainly, the META analysis that I did for -  origi­
nally for the Ford Foundation and the later one I did for 
the National Institute of Education. The later one sur­
veyed 93 different studies of desegregation achievement. 
Most of these were -  many of these were doctoral disser­
tations written by school principals and school adminis­
trators around the country about their own school 
districts, and I analyzed these studies and found a pat­
tern indicating that black students from segregated [p.



453

972] schools tended to score less well on standard 
achievement tests.

Q. Were the results of your analysis uniform?

A. No. there's a -  there's been a clear discrepancy, 
because about half of the studies done show a sort of 
clear positive effect of desegregation, and the other half 
show essentially no effect at all. Occasionally a study will 
actually show there are negative effects of desegregation.

Q. You're talking about effects on what students?

A. On black students. On black student achieve­
ment test scores.

Q. Did you study the effects on white students' test 
scores?

A. No, I didn't. That question was studied several 
years ago by several different people. They always found 
that white test scores were not affected by desegregation, 
and I think, as far as I know, all sociologists and psychol­
ogists think of that as essentially a closed issue. No-one 
has studied it for the last ten years.

Q. So you were studying then the effects of aca­
demic achievement on -  of desegregation on black stu­
dents only, -

A. That's right.

Q. -  and the results were not uniform?

A. That's right.
*  *  *

[p. 1003] Q. Doctor, -



454

A. Can you do this whole analysis a different way. 
what I've done here is to look at the same cohort as they 
move from one grade to another, but that means you're 
switching from one test to another.

A simpler method would be simply to look at the 
same grade and say, "This is a reasonably large school 
district. You wouldn't really expect the students who 
entered -  who were, say, thirteen years old to be terribly 
different from the students that are twelve years or the 
students who are fourteen years old at any one time. Let's 
simply look at all the students who were first graders in 
1984, all the students who were first graders in 1985, and 
students who were first graders in 1986.

Q. I was going to ask you about that, Doctor Crain. 
You have been talking about tracing cohorts through.

A. That's right.

Q. Now you're talking about comparing the first 
grade in one year with the first grade in another year, and 
then doing the same thing for other years.

A. That's right.

Q. For the grades rather?

[p. 1004] A. Yes, we're comparing grades. We're 
comparing different cohorts to each other.

If you do that, you get almost exactly the same pat­
tern. For example, the first grade gap in the fall of '84 was 
eleven points, in the fall of '85 was eleven -  the spring of 
'84 was eleven points, spring of '85 was eleven points, 
spring of '86 was fifteen points. The gap had gotten 
worse.



455

That's also true for the second grade, that's also true 
for the third grade. There's no difference in the fourth 
grade. It's also true for the fifth grade.

On the other hand, in the upper grades, six through 
eleventh, the gap got worse in 1986 in only two cases and 
got better in four cases. So, you see the same pattern 
again in the upper grades. There is improvement in the 
gap, declining. In lower grades the gap -  the lower 
grades, the gap has gotten worse.

Now, this is not very strong evidence that Oklahoma 
City is following the national trend in which segregation 
is more harmful to achievement. I would expect that to be 
the case, but this is really not very strong evidence, 
because it's the first year of the plan, and students were 
moved around, teachers were moved around, and you 
would expect some amount of disruption.

// The best I can say is that certainly the new effective 
\  schools program that I've read some literature about is 

(working [p. 1005] in the upper grades better than it is the 
/ lower grades, and there's no evidence here that -  that -  at 

/ least I would not interpret this as giving any evidence at 
/ all to indicate that students are doing better because 

they're in a neighborhood school. You would have to say 
the students are doing worse. Maybe they'll do better in 
some future year, but they're not doing better not. 
They're doing worse.

Q. Doctor, you've indicated that the time which has 
passed between the implementation of the plan and now 
makes it difficult to do a definitive analysis and reach 
definitive conclusions.



456

A. Uh-huh.

Q. Would that be -  is that your experience in other 
situations?

A. Yes. I have worked with achievement tests in a 
number of studies, and I've studied desegregation plans. 
You do want some time for things to settle down, and 
especially you don't want to compare two different tests. 
It's always very difficult. Well, you just don't want to do 
it. You can't do it most of the time.

* * *

[p. 1008] A. * * * If that's the case, then I would 
summarize these results as follows: They indicate that 
black families who live in racially mixed and predomi­
nantly white neighborhoods have children who score 
higher on tests than black families who live in the ghetto, 
and I would be absolutely astonished if that were not the 
case, and it has absolutely nothing to do with riding a 
bus.

This research is absolutely indefensible. No social 
scientist in the country would accept this as competent 
research. You have to control, you have to match students 
on their background characteristics and on previous abil­
ity, and every study that possibly could be published 
does that. You just have to do that, and this doesn't do it.

*  *  *

[p. 1011] Q. In your view, does this provision offset 
the damages that you have described?

A. No.

Q. Why not?



457

A. They simply -  they simply operate at -  it's a way 
of operating a segregated school system by inviting the 
black families to participate in the process of creating 
segregation so that it can have a sense of democracy 
about it. But it's not -

Q. What do you mean by that?

A. I mean, in a society where blacks have grown up 
treated unequally and been separated from whites, it 
would be astonishing to expect very many blacks to 
volunteer for the frightening experience of sending their 
child across town to an all-white school. It's -  it's a 
burden, it's a lost less efficient that having bus that shows 
up to take all the kids, you have to separate your child 
from all his friends, and you have to run this risk of 
dealing with these whites on the other side of town. You 
can't expect black families to be willing to risk that.

Consequently, I think anyone who draws a plan 
which puts this provision in knows that only a tiny 
percentage will take advantage of it, and that most stu­
dents will remain in segregated schools.

*  *  *

[p. 1019] Q. Doctor Crain, one more area of inquiry.

Do you advocate the same -  Do you reach the same 
conclusions with respect to desegregation when it comes 
to choices regarding higher education?

A. No.

Q. Why not?

A. I think black colleges -  I think it's a big mistake 
on the part of the Federal Government to -  to press for



458

the total desegregation of black colleges, and 1 think the 
Federal Government learned that lesson and, in fact, has 
backed away from that position.

In a situation where college attendance is voluntary, 
there are some black students who would be very uncom­
fortable in a desegregated or predominantly white college 
and for whom a black college would provide a good 
educational opportunity for them.

* *  *

[p. 1028] Q. My question to you is this: In your 
opinion, -  I'm not concerned about someone else's opin­
ion -  is an urban community like Oklahoma City, through 
the implementation of a court-ordered desegregation 
plan, capable of eliminating residential segregation by 
itself?

A. Well, the school district wouldn't do it without 
the help of the City Planning Department, the zoning 
board, and all the -  I mean, if the rest of the city wants 
the school system -  if the rest of the city wants residential 
segregation, the school system is going to be swimming 
upstream. But if you put together a concerted effort over 
the next 50 years of -

I've written -

Q. Well, I think you -

A. -  on exactly the things the school district could 
do to create residential integration, -

Q. I think you've answered my question.

A. Oh.



459

[p. 1029] Q. You've told me that, standing alone, a 
school district such as Oklahoma City cannot do that.

A. Okay.

Q. There must be significant effort from all other 
governmental entities in the community; correct?

A. That's right.

Q. And, in fact, do you know of any court-ordered 
desegregation plan in an urban community similar to 
Oklahoma City which has successfully eliminated resi­
dential segregation in that community?

A. I don't know any school district which has elimi­
nated all residential segregation, however, I have been 
quite surprised in this research that I've done with 
Dianna Pierce and others about the impact in the change.

*  *  *

[p. 1066] Q. * * * would you agree that parental 
involvement in the schools has a significant impact on 
black academic achievement?

A. Yes.

Q. You mentioned the effective schools program, 
and I think [p. 1067] you indicated you didn't think that 
we have had time in Oklahoma City to see the results of 
that; is that correct?

A. Well, I don't know whether you have or not.

Q. Well, what did you testify on direct? Have you 
analyzed Oklahoma City's effective schools program?

A. No.



460

Q. So you don't now what impact it's having on 
academic achievement, do you?

A. No.

Q. Are you aware that this school district has a 
bilingual program?

A. I would -  I would assume -  I assumed it had
one.

Q. Don't you think that can have a positive effect on 
achievement?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, we've been talking about achievement. 
Let's switch gears now and talk about the success of black 
students in adult life.

Would you agree with me that, besides racial balance 
in the school, there are a number of factors which can 
have a positive effect on black adult achievement?

A. Yes.

Q. What are those things?

A. Uhm, -

Q. Occupational training?

[p. 1068] A. Yes.

Q. Personal Character?

A. Yes.

Q. Socioeconomic status?

A. Yes.



461

Q. Parental support again?

A. Yes,

Q. There are a number of factors; right?

A. Yes. Yes.

Q. And, would you agree that blacks can achieve 
and become successful when these factors come into play 
even though they attend schools that are not racially 
balanced?

A. Yes.
*  *  *

[p. 1078] Q. * * * do I understand you correctly that 
when all factors remain constant that the racial balance of 
the school doesn't have an impact on black academic 
achievement?

A. I'll agree with that.
*  *  54-

[p. 1093] Q. Well, can you think of any activity
outside of school that would have a positive effect on 
blacks?

A. Sure. Playing games on the same team.

Q. Okay. Anything else?

A. Being in Boy Scouts together.

Q. Anything else?

Q. Okay.

A. Going to after-school tutoring together.



462

A. Going to church together, or Sunday School, I 
mean. Not church. Those are things that come to mind.

Q. So you will admit that there are interactions 
between black students and white students outside of the 
classroom which, in your opinion, are beneficial to the 
blacks?

A. Yes.

Q. And allow them to become socially acceptable 
when they -  when they get out of school.

A. Let me just re— I don't know quite what you 
mean by socially acceptable. You mean they've learned 
how to act so they're socially acceptable to white people? 
Is that what you meant?

Q. Well, that was a poor choice of words on my 
part.

The point I was trying to make is, as a result of this 
interaction, they could better socialize with whites when 
they become adults.

A. Yes, it would be helpful.
H* Jfr Jfr

[p. 1097] Q. So all other factors that determine black 
adult success will be favorably impacted by virtue of 
busing the children between grades five and twelve?

A. That's correct.

Q. And there will be positive benefits sustained and 
received by those children at those grade levels?

A. That's right. I believe that's true. Yes.



463

Q, You also testified that, in your opinion, black -  
all-black colleges are okay.

A. Yes.

Q. And they produce some -  some black scholars.

A. Sure.

Q. But you made the distinction that those are dif­
ferent from elementary schools because it's not manda­
tory to go to a black college. Is that what you said?

A. Yes. It's not mandatory to go to college at all.

Q. But it is mandatory to go to school.

A. That's right.

Q. Are you aware that in Oklahoma City it is not 
mandatory to got to a black elementary school?

A. Oh, yes. I know that.
*  *  *

YALE RABIN

[p. 1125] THE COURT: Wait, w hat's the 
number?

MR. CHACHKIN: Plaintiff's exhibit number 60.

THE COURT: 60?

MR. CHACHKIN: With the overlay, plaintiff's 
exhibit 58-A, over it.

Q. (BY MR. CHACHKIN:) Would you describe what 
this map is?

A. This map is the distribution of black population 
by block, 1970.



464

If I may, I think I should explain the notion of block 
so that it's clearly understood what the distinction is 
between a block and a tract.

A census tract is the largest, most conventional unit 
of data gathering which the census bureau uses, but each 
tract is divided, depending on whether it's in a rural or 
an urban area. If it's in a rural area, a tract is subdivided 
into what are called an enumeration district, an enumera­
tion district literally being the area that's covered during 
the census by a single enumerator.

In Urban areas, the census tract is divided into 
blocks, and blocks are -  generally correspond to city, 
individual city blocks, that is, an area of land bounded by 
four streets, or three streets and a railroad, or a river, but 
there are clearly evident boundaries to the block itself.

[p. 1126] So we're talking about a great many subdi­
visions within a census tract. There may be as many as 
100 or 200 blocks within an individual census tract. So 
that this provides a far more precise indication of where 
people live within the tract than one which deals with the 
tract in aggregate.

Q. So that's -

A. So that this map then shows that distribution, 
population by race, by block, for 1970, with the color 
designations being precisely the same as they were on the 
1960 map.

Q. And this map was prepared under your supervi­
sion?

A. Yes, it was.



465

A. I have. Yes.

Q. Are you satisfied with the work done by your 
graduate student?

A. I am.

Q. Would you briefly describe the distribution of 
black population in 1970 as shown on the map?

A. Yes. As the map indicates/ there has been a j prv 
substantial increase in the area in which blacks livm and 

\ evidence of some dispersal of blacks to areas of the city in 
which they did not live before.

C Most of the direction in which that change has taken 
place has been to the north and east, but there are some 

/ evidence of small changes that are taking place else- 
' where.

Q. And have you checked it for accuracy?

[p. 1127] It may not be visible, but there are blocks in 
the southwest that now begin to show up as having more 
than ten percent black population in 1970.

But predominantly the growth is from the areas 
which were black in 1950. They have expanded in size, 
and that expansion has taken place largely to the north.

And the other changejhat I ..would note that's taken 
place is that there is also an increase in the intensity, that 
is. the degree to which the larger black areas are black. 
That is, one
what I will call the central

Q. I believe it's been referred to as the northeast 
quadrant.



466

A. The northeast quadrant. And I don't know how 
the area further east is characterized, but both of them 
show more extensive areas in 1970 which are over 90 
percent black than in 1960,

Q. I believe you said a moment ago that there was a 
change from 1950. The comparisons that you have been 
making are between 1960 and 1970 on these maps.

A. The earlier map was of 1960. This map is of 1970.

My reference to 1950 earlier was to some of the tract 
data which I looked at, and that -  that information is not 
reflected on these maps.

Q. Let me change the exhibit to reflect the 1980 
map.

Mr. Rabin, we have now placed on the easel under­
neath the [p. 1128] same overlay, which is plaintiff's 
exhibit 58-A, a map identified as plaintiff's exhibit 62. Do 
you recognize that map?

A. I do. Yes. This is the map of the distribution of 
black population by block for 1980. And, again, it uses 
the same color indications that were used on the 1960 and 
1970 maps.

Q. And this map was also prepared under your 
supervision?

A. It was. Yes.

Q. And have you reviewed it for accuracy?

A. I have.

Q. And you are satisfied with the work that your 
student did?



467

A. I am. Yes.

Q. Is it an accurate reflection of the census informa­
tion?

A. It is.

MR. CHACHKIN: Your Honor, at this time the 
plaintiff's would move the admission into evidence of 
exhibits 58, 58-A, which is the overlay, 60, and 62.

THE COURT: 58-A?

MR. CHACHKIN: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And this is 60 -

MR. CHACHKIN: 60 and 62.

THE COURT: You've got 60, 60-A, and 58-A, and
62?

MR. CHACHKIN: No, there's only one A. It's 58, 
58-A, 60, and 62.

MR. DAY: No objection.

[p. 1129] THE COURT: Then let the record show 
these exhibits are all received in evidence.

Q. (By Mr. Chachkin) have you reached any conclu­
sions about the pattern or population movement in Okla­
homa City from 1960 to 1980 based on your review of the 
census materials, Mr. Rabin?

A. I have. Yes.

Q. Could you describe or state your conclusions?

A. I can, yes, but I would like, if I can, to go back 
also ten years, and, frankly, I did that in response to



468

reading Doctor Clark's deposition, and since he had 
looked at the population change beginning in 1950, I 
thought it would be appropriate if I went back and 
looked also, and so that I can include, in some or these 
conclusions that I've reached, what those changes have 
been. _

If we go back to 1950, we can see that the black / 
population in Oklahoma City has increased by two-and-1 
three-quarters times between 1950 and 1980. The concern \ 
trated areas in which blacks live have also increased over 
that period of time in both size and intensity, and I think I 
that might be best illustrated by looking at some of the j 
changes which have taken place at the tract level. '

If we take, as a reasonable indicator of concentration,
-  I don't think anybody would question the fact that a 
tract that was 75 percent or more black is a concentrated. 
black tract. In [p. 1130] 1950 there was one such tract.( 
That was tract~297~In~T960, thereCwenTspTto 
were 75 percent or more black.

In 1950, the tract that was 75 percent or more black 
included 24.9
quarter of all blacks who lived in Oklahoma City in 
195071 ~ ’ “  ~ ~

THE COURT: 19-when?

THE WITNESS: In 1950, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Yes.

A. -  Less than a quarter of them lived in census 
tracts which were 75 percent or more black. In 1960, that 
had increased to 69-and-a-half percent of all blacks.. In 
1970, that had increased to 73.3 percent.



469

THE COURT: 73-point-what?

THE WITNESS: 73.3 percent.

A. And in 1980, -

THE COURT: How many tracts increased?

THE WITNESS: Oh, I was just giving the popula­
tion. I'll go through the tracts if you like.

THE COURT: All right. Excuse me.

A. In 1980, that dropped back to 60.8 percent.

Now, spatially, which is a major concern if we're 
dealing with the desegregation of schools whose loca­
tions are fixed by where they were built, the area of 
concentration has increased very substantially.

As I indicated, there was one such tract in '50, there 
[p. 1131] were six such tracts in 1960, there were 13 such 
tracts in 1970, and there were 16 tracts in 1980 which 
were 75 percent or more black.

Q. (By Mr. Chachkin) Now, did the tracts that were 
concentrated black, to use your term, that had more than 
75 percent black population in them, always included the 
original tracts, or did they -  the makeup of the group of 
tracts meeting -

A. By "the original tracts," I'm not quite sure.

Q. We start out with the single tract in 1950. Did 
that tract remain concentrated through 1980?

A. Yes. Yes. All of the tracts, I believe, from each 
previous decade are included in the group which has 
expanded during the succeeding decade.



470

Q. And you referred to the proportion of the popu­
lation, of the black population living in Oklahoma City.

Are the boundaries of the city and the school district 
coterminous?

A. They're not, as far as I know.

Q. And do the boundaries of the -  the boundaries of 
the city include some of the areas between the portions of 
the school district shown on the overlay?

A. I believe they do, but the boundary of the city is 
not shown on any of these maps. The tracts which I have 
named, though, are all included within the city.

[p. 1132] Q. Now, Mr. Rabin, you said you had read 
Doctor Clark's deposition. Are you aware that Doctor 
Clark testified in this case?

A. I am. Yes.

Q. Have you also read the transcript of his testi­
mony last week?

A. I have. Yes. —.

Q. Do you recall his reference to 17 percent of the 
total black population in the concentrated area of black 
residences in Oklahoma City?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Do you know what area Doctor Clark was refer­
ring to?

A. Well, it was that reference, frankly, which led to 
this analysis, because the impression one gets from read­
ing the transcript, because the comment is made in a



471

rather out-of-context way, is that, at present, 17 percent of 
blacks live in the concentrated area, when, to the best I 
can figure, what he was actually referring to was the area 
in 1950, the single tract in 1950 in which, I think -

Let me see if I can find the figure.

Not the single tract. Excuse me. It was -

I've got it straight.

In 1980, in 1980, 16.9 percent of the black population 
of Oklahoma City lived in the six tracts in which they 
were concentrated in 1960.

I

[p. 1133] Q. And is that the same area of concentra­
tion that you have defined for 1980?

A. Oh, no. I mean, the -  what was the area of 
concentration in 1960 is not the area of concentration in 
1980.

I traced through all of the years the transition which 
had taken place in those tracts, but it's quite clear that the 
area of concentration itself has changed, and it's mislead­
ing to refer, in each successive decade, to the same six 
tracts as the area of concentration. That area was only the 
area of concentration in 1960.

THE COURT: Let me ask you, did you say the 
concentration was in 16 tracts or 6?

THE WITNESS: In 1960 -

THE COURT: '80. 1980.

THE WITNESS: In 1980, in 16 tracts.

THE COURT: 16. All right. That's what I thought.



472

THE WITNESS: Yes. One-six. In 1960, in six
tracts.

THE COURT: Yes.

THE WITNESS: If you'd like, I can read -

THE COURT: The population that you're talking 
about, the concentration, and 16 blocks is what percent­
age?

THE WITNESS: No, these are tracts, Your Honor. 
In 1950, 24 -

THE COURT: No, no. I've got that.

THE WITNESS: Yes.

[p. 1134] THE COURT: I'm not clear on 1980.

THE WITNESS: In 1980. there were 16 census 
tracts housing 60.8 percent -

THE COURT: Of all -

THE WITNESS: -  of all blacks in Oklahoma City.

THE COURT: How much? 60?

THE WITNESS: 60.8 percent of all blacks in 
homa City in tracts which were 75 percent or more

THE COURT: Go ahead. I'm through.

A. The -  it's also, I think, important that the actual' 
numbers have increased very substantially. In 1950, there 
were only 5,236 blacks living in this concentrated area.Jn 
1980, there are 35,691 blacks living -

THE COURT: In 1980 there was what?



473

THE WITNESS: In 1980, 35,691 blacks lived in 
the 75-percent-or-more tracts.

THE COURT: In 1950 it was 5,000?

THE WITNESS: That's right. 5,236.

A. And the proportion of blacks in 1980 is about 
two-and-a-half times as great as it was in 1950 living in 
those areas.

Q. (By Mr. Chachkin) And, again, just so I'm clear, 
the area of concentration in 1980 continues to include 
within it or to subsume the areas of concentration in 
previous decades.

A. That's true.

Q. Do you know if the area of concentration in 1980, 
as [p. 1135] you've defined it, in the northeast quadrant, 
includes the area within which most of the schools that 
are now more than 90 percent black, the elementary 
schools, are located?

A. Yes, it does.

MR. CHACHKIN: Thank you very much.

CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. DAY:

Q. Mr. Rabin, as I understand it, sir, you have a 
Bachelor's Degree in Architecture; is that correct?

A. It's a Graduate Degree. Yes. At that time, a Bach­
elor's Degree, just as a Bachelor of Law at that time, was 
a graduate -  I guess you're a little young for that. But,



474

before degree escalation and they started giving attorneys 
JD's for what they gave them Bachelor's Degrees for 
before, they also gave Architects and Planners Graduate 
Bachelor's Degree.

Q. So what do you hold, Doctorate in Architecture?

A. No, no, no, no, no, no.

Q. Master's?

A. No. I have a Bachelor of Architecture. That's 
correct.

Q. Do you hold any postgraduate degrees?

A. I do not. No.

Q. And you are not a geographer?

A. No.

Q. And you're not a demographer?

A. That's quite true.

[p. 1136] Q. And you're not a desegregation plan­
ner, are you?

A. I don't know what that means. I have taken part 
in desegregation planning, but I don't know that there is 
such a -

Q. You don't hold yourself out as an expert in 
desegregation planning or preparing desegregation 
plans?

A. No.

Q. Do you have your vitae in front of you?



475

A. I do. Yes. I think so somewhere.

Q. As you were testifying, we were going over that, 
and I note that on 37 separate occasions that you had 
consulted or done work for the NAACP or the legal 
defense fund; is that correct?

A. I couldn't tell you. I -

Q. Does that sound about right to you?

A. I have no idea.

Q. Well, I don't think it's necessary for you to count 
them. It's in evidence.

But would you agree that you do a substantial 
amount of work for the NAACP legal defense fund?

A. I did, during the late 60's, a lot of work for them.

Q. Did you testify for the NAACP legal defense 
fund in desegregation litigation in the 1960's?

A. I did. Yes.
*  *  *

[p. 1153] Q. * * * is that an accurate statement of 
what was happening in those tracts over time?

A. I assume that it is. I mean, I -

Q. Mr. Rabin, are you aware that -

You've read the court's 1963 decision, have you not?

A. Parts of it. Yes. I have not read it all.

Q. Where the judge talked about the state-com­
pelled system of desegregation?



476

A. Yes. Yes.

Q. And do you recall the court identifying the 
schools that were segregated at that point?

A. Yes.

Q. And those schools lie within those tracts on that 
exhibit, do they not, sir?

A. I believe they do. Yes.

Q. And, of course, if you read that decision, you're 
aware of the court's mentioning the Shelley V Kraemer 
decision which outlaws restrictive covenants?

A. I don't recall that. No.

Q. You don't recall that?

Well, can you understand why Doctor Clark concen­
trated on these tracts, the tracts that were identified as 
being the [p. 1154] segregated area as of 1963?

A. I'm afraid I don't.

Q. You don't.

A. No.

Q. Well, in 1963, none of these other 16 tracts 
you've been referring to, except for these, were predomi­
nantly black, were they?

A. That's correct.

Q. All of that movement and growth has taken 
place since 1960, has it not?

A. That's true.



477

Q. You're not aware of any action taken by the 
Oklahoma City Board of Education, are you, after this 
court entered its order in 1963, which caused or com­
pelled blacks to be concentrated in these 16 tracts that 
you're talking about, are you?

A. Well, but there was a lot of public action. I mean, 
in tracts -  the highway had enormous impacts in 29 and 
38.

Q. I understand,

A. There was urban renewal in 26, 29, and 30. Peo­
ple did not simply get up and move.

Q. But my question was, Mr. Rabin, -

A. Many, many people were moved.

Q. My question, Mr. Rabin, was with regard to the 
actions of the Oklahoma City Board of Education. Are 
you aware of any action that the board took, after this 
Court entered its decree [p. 1155] in 1963, which com­
pelled blacks to live in those tracts or any of the other 16 
which you've identified as predominantly black?

A. I'm not. No. No. '

Q. Okay. And I'm certain, as an expert in this area, 
you're familiar with the laws that have been passed 
across this country tearing down the past governmental 
barriers of discrimination, are you not, sir?

A. I'm familiar with the laws that have been passed. 
I'm certainly not familiar with them tearing down the 
barriers of past discrimination. They've outlawed many 
of the past discriminatory practices.



478

Q. They provide remedies for it, don't they?

A. And they have provided remedies. Yes.

Q. What factors do you believe determine where 
blacks in Oklahoma City live today?

Maybe I can go over these with you.

Would you agree with me that the preferences of 
black people, in part, are responsible for where they 
choose to live?

A. In some part.

Q. All right.

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. For example, the blacks that have moved 
out into these other areas that you showed ten percent or 
less, -

A. Uh-Huh.

Q. -  that's most likely due to their preferences, is it
not?

[p. 1156] A. I would assume so. Yes.

Q. And would you agree with me that their socio­
economic level would play a part in where they decide to 
move to?

A. It would play a significant part in whether they 
could move to begin with.

Q. Yes. And also where they elect to move; right?

A. That's true.



479

Q. You said that you had seen no evidence that 
blacks within this area here had relocated.

A. Well, I -  that's not what I said. I said it was not 
possible to determine, from the census data, whether a 
person living in a formerly all white tract, a black person 
living in a formerly all white tract, came there from an 
inner-city tract in Oklahoma City, or whether that person 
came from Los Angeles or Denver or Philadelphia, The 
census doesn't tell us that.

Q. Did plaintiff's counsel show you defendant's 
exhibit number 7?

A. No. No, I -

Q. That has been admitted into evidence,
Mr. Rabin, -

A. Uh-huh.

Q. -  As a map showing the relocation of black fami­
lies from the northeast quadrant into other areas in the 
district. This particular map shows families with kinder­
garten children in school year 74/75 who, by 75/76, 
relocated.

A. Uh-huh.

[p. 1157] Q. And each line here has a number at the 
base, and that shows the number of families that actually 
relocated from this area out into these various areas.

A. I see. Any -  Is there a total somewhere?

Q. You can add them up here.

A. Well, it looks like, -  except for the two large 
arrows in the center, it looks like something substantially



480

under a hundred out of a population of many, many 
thousands.

Q. But doesn't this show to you that black children 
and families living in the Oklahoma City district have, in 
fact, left this northeast quadrant and moved out into 
other areas in the community.

A. I have no doubt that that took place.

Q. You said you had -  you didn't have any evi­
dence.

A. I said -  Mr. Day, I -  I said one could not tell from 
the census, that's all, and one cannot tell.

Q. But one can tell from the evidence, can't they?

A. Yes, or something like this.

Q. Now, this exhibit -

Let me back up just a moment.

While we were talking about 5-D, did you note this 
footnote that said the proportion of total Oklahoma City 
black population living in these tracts, 1950 was 82 per­
cent, in 1960 was 84 percent, and in 1980 was 16.8 per­
cent?

A. Yes. I determined those things on my own.
*  *  *

[p. 1159] buying homes. What the census tells us, the 
census asks a sample of people in each tract, first of all, 
whether they lived in the same house -  whether they 
were living in the same house as they did five years 
previously. If the answer to that question is "no," it then



481

follows up with questions about whether their previous 
house was in the same city, in the same country.

* * *

Q. So this 42-percent turnover is not significant to
you.

A. No. It would be significant, and I'm sure, know­
ing how careful Doctor Clark is, that if the data had 
indicated that these moves represented some substantial 
distance from where these people had earlier lived, he 
would have told us that.

Q. Mr. Rabin, how many of the 16 tracts which you 
identified earlier in your testimony are actually located in 
the Oklahoma City School District? Those are the 16 
tracts that contain 75 percent, I think, of the black popula­
tion in 1980.

A. I cannot answer that. I can give you the numbers 
of those tracts.

*  * *



RECORD, VOLUME VIII



482

JOHN A. FINGER, JR.

[p. 1191] But it's also true about these achievement 
tests. The scales aren't uniform. It's easier to gain at the 
lower level -  lower part of the scale than it is the higher 
part because the items are easier.

So, in addition to the comments that were made 
yesterday about the -  the norms on the tests which make 
it difficult to make year-to-year comparisons, I just noted 
that, also. Lots of schools are using these tests, but it's 
very difficult to know what to do with the results.

We all know that socioeconomic status is correlated 
with the test results, and sometimes I think the problem 
is that the tests are better at measuring socioeconomic 
status than they are at measuring achievement.

Q. So would -  would you try to draw conclusions 
about the effectiveness of a program alteration that was 
made in the last year or two on the basis of -

A. I don't believe it's possible to draw conclusions 
like that.

MR. CHACHKIN: Thank You. You may cross­
examine.



483

CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. DAY:
* * *

[p. 1192] Q. Would you agree with me that no com­
pulsory desegregation plan is designed to operate for­
ever?

A. You're question is, is a compulsory desegrega­
tion plan designed to last forever?

My answer to that question is, "No."
*  *  *

tp. 1196] Q. Doctor Finger, would you agree with 
me that, when one is designing a compulsory desegrega­
tion plan, and particularly talking about pairing and clus­
tering schools and busing children to and from those 
schools, that it's important to take the age of the child 
into consideration when formulating the plan?

A. Yes.

Q. And when you originally prepared the -  your 
plan, which is called the finger plan, and it was approved 
by the court in 1972, you recommended exempting kin­
dergarten students from busing, did you not?

I'm -  I'm not quite sure exactly what my recommen­
dation was. I've been trying to recall.

I believe that what recommended was that -  an 
option be given, that the -  either children could -  either 
kindergarten children would be bussed or not, and it 
might depend upon the circumstances, whether it was an 
all-day kindergarten or a part-day kindergarten.

*  *  *



484

tp. 1198] Q. You're aware, of course, that in 1971 
that the percent of black students in the district was 23 
percent and that by 1985 it had increased to 39 percent, 
and that, on the other hand, white student population in 
'71 was 76.6 percent and by 1985 it dropped to 49.6 
percent?

A. Yes.

Q. So we had -  after the Finger Plan was imple­
mented, we had a situation where the percent of black 
population within the student body was rising and the 
percent of white population was dropping.

A. Yes.

Q. And, in light of that change over time and demo­
graphic changes, do you feel that it would have been 
equitable to modify the plan to equalize the burden?

A. Well, I would have -  I would have expected that 
-  that the original plan would have been quite exten­
sively modified. I -  I didn't expect to find the fifth-grade 
centers still in existence. They were, I thought, something 
that was put in as kind of temporary thing.

I guess I would have expected to find that the fifth- 
grade centers had been incorporated into -  into middle 
schools, and I was really surprised when I find that the 
fifth-grade centers [p. 1199] are being kept and moved 
out of the minority neighborhoods where they were origi­
nally put to provide some equity for the minority stu­
dents. I was surprised about that, and I would have

>pened that -  that people 
didn't anticipate, that they -  that our cities would become



485

more minority, that the birth rates would change, that the 
number of children -  number of white children in cities 
would change. A lot of things have happened since 1972. 
The world today is not the same as it was in 1972, and -  
and very drastic changes have taken place, and I -  I know 
it's been very difficult for the school board and the school 
department to contend with all of these differences that 
occurred, and -  and I can see that these decisions are 
really tough. But -

So the question is, did I think they should have 
provided more equity, well, I would have thought they 
would have been looking for ways to make the whole 
system work more efficiently, so people would be more 
satisfied with it, so people would say, "Oh, our schools in 
Oklahoma are good? We're running good schools. We 
want to go to those schools." But I guess what happened 
was that the changes came about so fast people just 
couldn't do all those things.

*  *  *

[p. 1201] Q. Have you had the opportunity to 
review the stipulations and contention of the parties in 
the pretrial order?

A. Well, I -  I'm not sure. Try me, Mr. Day. I may 
have.

Q. Well, let me try to simplify this, Doctor Finger.

In other words, are you aware that in the plaintiffs' 
contentions in this case, that they are acknowledging the 
[p. 1202] problems that the stand-alone concept created? 
Are you aware of that?

A. Yes, I am. I criticized them a little bit for that. 
* * *



486

[p. 1207] Q. * * * Now, do you see any schools that 
are going to be 90 percent or more white next year on that 
page?

A. No.

Q. Do you see any schools that are going to be 90 
percent or more white on page two of that exhibit?

A. No.

Q. So would you agree that there are no racially, as 
you put it, segregated white schools in Oklahoma City?

A. Elementary Schools. You had just asked me 
about Middle Schools and High Schools.

Q. No, those were Elementary Schools.

A. Yes, I know. I just wanted to clarify that.

Q. Okay.

A. When you said "Schools," and they talk about 
Elementary Schools there. My comment had to do with 
where these Elementary Schools get assigned at the -

Q. Okay.

A. -  Junior High -  at the Middle-School and High- 
School level.

Q. But do I understand you correctly that, in your 
mind and in your opinion, there will be no racially segre­
gated white Elementary Schools next year?

A. Well -  well, I just want to call your attention to 
the fact that we've changed the rules a little bit.

Q. How have we changed the rules?



487

tp. 1208] A, Well, we had been talking about percent 
black, and there will -  now we're talking about percent 
minority. So we just need to make it clear, there will be -  
there will be a lot of schools in -  in Oklahoma City next 
year that have less than ten percent black students in 
them, but there won't be any schools that have less than 
ten percent minority in them. So we should just be sure 
that we're talking about the same thing.

Q. Well, I understand what you're saying, and I 
appreciate it, and I happen to agree with it.

But my question, Doctor Finger, to you was that there 
will be no segregated white Elementary Schools next 
year.

Q. There will be no schools that have less than ten 
percent minority, but there will be schools that have less 
than ten percent black. How you label these as segregated 
or not is what the words mean, and segregated has 
always been a difficult word.

*  *

MARY LEE TAYLOR

tp. 1216] MR. CHACHKIN: Your Honor, we 
offer Doctor Taylor as an expert witness in social psychol­
ogy and the study of race relations and racial attitudes.

THE COURT: Let the record show that Ms. Tay­
lor is qualified in the subjects mentioned by counsel as an 
expert.

*  *  *

[p. 1225] A. * * * But I think the important point is 
that the -  the Finger Plan did not eradicate the impact of 
the earlier official discrimination; it merely suspended it



488

by separating the schools from the residential situation. 
And now that the schools are linked again to housing, we 
have, again, the impact of the earlier official discrimina­
tion in the schools.

Q. But you -  you did say that you were aware that 
there had been some shifts in the distribution of black 
population; is that correct?

A. Yes. I know that the black population has 
declined in some particular areas. I also know that black 
residents of Oklahoma City have moved into areas that 
formerly were entirely white, were virtually entirely 
white.

It seems to me an important point here is that the 
reciprocal change has not occurred. White residents of 
Oklahoma City have not moved into the area that was 
historically, traditionally black, and so the primary signif­
icance of the movement we've seen is that there are fewer 
black residents in the black residential area than there 
would have been had there not been some movement into 
white areas.

*  *  *

[p. 1229] Where Doctor Clark and I disagree is in our 
view of the genesis of the economic and -  economic 
factors and preferences. He sees them, as I understand 
him, as incidental individual matters, and I think this 
view suffers from taking -  from having a limited perspec­
tive on the impact of discrimination over time.

In fact, I think that economic resources and prefer­
ences are proximate causes of residential segregation, but 
they are also effects of past officially-produced residential



489

segregation. In that sense, they're intervening links. They 
help to explain why the black residential area, once it was 
created through official segregation, continues to exist 
even in the absence of continuing official action.

I think your question here is an important question 
because, once the black residential area in Oklahoma City 
was created, there are only -  in fact, only two ways in 
which it could show fundamental change. One of those 
ways is if, indeed, there were a complete abandonment of 
the community, and I think this is unlikely to happen, 
and it's unlikely to happen, in part, because of the bar­
riers to residential mobility among black Americans that I 
just described. For that abandonment to take place, there 
would have to -  residential mobility would have to be a 
viable option for all [p. 1230] black residents, and I don't 
believe it is.

Q. Is there -  I'm sorry, you said there are only -  so 
that's -  so that would be one of the ways?

A. That's right. One of the ways in which there 
could be fundamental change in the black community 
would be -  would be for it to be abandoned.

The other fundamental change that might take place, 
in theory, is that white residents might move in. I think 
there's a lot of evidence that that is not likely to happen. 
We know that it hasn't happened.

Survey data shows that white adults are very sensi­
tive to racial proportions, they are typically unwilling to 
go into situations where they will be in the racial minor­
ity.



490

Survey data was gathered late in the 1970's indicat­
ing that 84 percent of whites said they would not move 
into a neighborhood that had a bear majority of black 
residents, and the researchers that analyzed that data 
estimated that no whites in their sample would have 
agreed to move into an area that was virtually 100 per­
cent black.

This kind of conclusion is congruent with other opin­
ion, national opinion poll data. In my own data, white 
college students said they would not move into a pre­
dominantly black neighborhood even if the home 
involved was equal in its physical accommodations to 
what they could acquire elsewhere.

This unwillingness of whites to move into a predomi­
nantly [p. 1231] black area is often, in fact, taken as a 
given and used as the explanation for racial transition. 
It's assumed that whites will find the -  find being in a 
minority so aversive that, once they fear they may some 
day be the minority in a transitional neighborhood, they 
will move.

I might add that the poll data shows that whites are 
more reluctant to move into a neighborhood within a 
given proportion of black residents than they are to stay 
in a neighborhood that attains that proportion of black 
residents. So most of the data that I rely on is conserva­
tive in some sense. I mean, it -  as applied to the situation 
of whites potentially moving into a black area, we have to 
raise the percentages even more, although you can't raise 
-  you can't really -  there's already a ceiling effect.

With all -  with all this evidence that white -  white 
residents are not going to move into historically black



491

areas, it's very difficult to see where -  how some transi­
tion to a racially mixed neighborhood would ever begin 
or continue.

Q. And when you were talking about the -  what 
you referred to as the perpetuation of segregation phe­
nomenon, I understood you to suggest that what Doctor 
Clark regarded as preference was tied to a history of 
official discrimination and segregation.

Is that also true of the -  the white aversion that 
you've described to moving into established black neigh­
borhoods?

[p. 1232] A. Yes, I think there's a lot of evidence that 
white attitudes about desegregation are, in fact, shaped 
by the history of segregation that those whites have been 
exposed to.

There's a well-documented phenomenon, called the 
fait accompli phenomenon in the literature. Public opin­
ion shifts to follow existing policy, to accept existing 
policy as it continues, and public opinion, in fact, changes 
when policies and leaders change.

This can be a force for progressive transition, but in 
places like Oklahoma City, where the black neighborhood 
was created by state action, the involvement of public 
officials, the fait accompli phenomenon implies that 
white avoidance of desegregation would be particularly 
great for that reason. In other words, the official segrega­
tion encourages attitudes that segregated -  segregation is 
appropriate, justified, that it's undesirable, in fact, -  
would be undesirable for whites to live in predominantly 
black neighborhoods.



492

Attitudes then are, in part, shaped by the institu­
tional history, the history of official discrimination, and 
then, of course, those attitudes have an impact on future 
policy, they feed back in making it more and more diffi­
cult to change policy in the future.

The -  we've certainly seen, in the case of segregated 
schools, that there was considerable white attitudinal 
resistment -  resistance to change from segregated to 
desegregated [p. 1233] schools, and it took a lot of official 
action and continuing official action to remedy that.

*  *  *

Q. (BY MR. CHACHKIN) Doctor Taylor, I think 
when we broke you were discussing the extent to which 
white attitudes are tied to a background of official dis­
crimination.

A. That's right. I had talked about the fait accompli 
effect and the fact that I believe white attitudes are, in 
fact, shaped by the history of discrimination.

I might note, in addition, this is another place where 
Doctor William Clark and I agree about some of the facts 
and do not share our perspective on those facts. We -  we 
are in agreement that white preferences are a factor that 
will -  that -  a factor involved in explaining why whites 
have not moved into the predominantly black residential 
area a [sic] in Oklahoma City.

[p. 1234] Where we disagree, I believe, is that Doctor 
Clark apparently sees those preferences as individual, 
incidental factors. I see those preference as being shaped 
by the history of discrimination in the area.



493

Q. Now, earlier, when you were talking about fac­
tors that limited residential mobility of blacks to leave the 
established black area, I asked you about the impact upon 
that of the years during which the Finger Plan was in 
effect here.

Let me ask you the same question with respect to 
white racial attitudes which you've said are heavily influ­
enced by past discrimination.

What was the impact of the elimination of the current 
effects of that discrimination as the school enrollments, at 
least, during the time that the Finger Plan was in effect, 
did that -  would that have been something that would 
have changed attitudes?

A. Well, of course, to my knowledge, we don't have 
evidence on -  about the impact of the Finger Plan period 
on white attitudes in Oklahoma City. One would hope 
that it changed white attitudes about school desegrega­
tion to some extent.

It evidently did not change white attitudes about 
residential segregation enough that we have seen any 
tendency for white residents of Oklahoma City to move 
into that predominantly black area, and -  and I think that 
that is not surprising, in fact, given the long duration of 
the official discrimination [p. 1235] that preceded the 
Finger Plan.

Also, it seems to me that the Finger Plan itself 
acknowledged that there were limits to the sort of over­
night change that could be created in white attitudes in 
the sense that the schools in the black residential area 
were made fifth-grade centers. My understanding of that



494

is that it was anticipated that the white community would 
be more receptive to the plan if, indeed, the children at 
the younger grades were not assigned to those schools in 
the historically black area.

So in the Finger Plan itself there seems to have been 
some accommodation, some acceptance, if you will, of the 
limits of overnight attitude change among whites.

And you might notice -  I've seen the data on requests 
for -  the recent data on requests for school transfer, and, 
here again, we do not see large numbers of white parents 
requesting transfers for their children that might be trans- 
fered [sic] into predominantly black schools. Again, 
there's no evidence there of an accute [sic], positive 
impact of the Finger Plan history on white attitudes.

Q. You're talking about the exhibits that were pre­
sented regarding majority-to-minority transfers?

A. That's right.

Q. Let me ask you, in conclusion, if you could, just 
to briefly summarize again your overall view of the con­
nection between the racial composition of schools in the 
northeast [p. 1236] quadrant today and the various kinds 
of discrimination that existed in Oklahoma City in the 
past and particularly prior to 1972 when the Finger Plan 
was ordered into effect.

A. To summarize, in 1965 the court noted that the 
segregated schools and residential area were a product of 
official discrimination. I believe that the segregation in 
the residential area has continued to show that impact of 
official discrimination. It's continued to show that



495

impact, in part, because of the barriers to black residen­
tial mobility out of the area, -  I talked about that -  in part 
because of white avoidance that itself was shaped by that 
institutional history.

During the -  during the Finger Plan, in fact, the 
impact of that earlier official discrimination on the 
schools was interrupted, but now that the link between 
housing and schools has been resumed, in my view the 
impact of the earlier official discrimination is now 
reflected in the schools, as well.

Now, I think that the black children whose families 
have moved into what were formerly all-white areas will 
benefit from the desegregated school experience they 
receive.

I'm -  I think it's fortunate that there are not more 
black children left in the predominantly black residential 
area to experience the segregated schooling that they will 
receive, because I think that those children in the 98 and 
99 percent black schools in the -  in the historic black 
residential area will suffer the same harms of the segre­
gated schooling that [p. 1237] they had suffered before 
the Finger Plan was implemented, and I think it's a good 
thing that there are not more of them, that the mobility 
that's existed has moved some black children out of the 
area. But I think the number of children remaining in the 
area is too large. It's too large a number to be paying the 
price for official discrimination.

MR. CHACHKIN: Thank you, Doctor Taylor.



496

CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. DAY:

Q. Doctor Taylor, when were you first contacted 
about testifying in this case?

A. I believe in mid-March.

Q. There past year?

A. That's right.

Q. When was your first trip to Oklahoma City in 
connection with this case?

A. This week. This week.

Q. This past week?

A. That's right.

Q. And when did you come in?

A. I -  I actually spent a few days in the western part 
of Oklahoma. Flew into Oklahoma City on Friday, trav­
eled out to the western part of Oklahoma for a couple of 
days, and came back here on Sunday. Uh-huh.

Q. Doctor Taylor, it sounds to me from listening to 
your [p. 1238] testimony that you have reviewed a sub­
stantial amount of the evidence in this case; is that cor­
rect?

A. I have -  I have certainly reviewed some of the 
evidence in this case. Yes.

Q. And including prior case decisions and things of 
that nature?



497

A. Yes.

Q. You've reviewed the K-4 Plan, the Finger Plan, 
and those sorts of things; correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Based upon your educational background and 
your experience and your review of the facts in this case, 
you don't feel that the Oklahoma City Board of Education 
adopted this neighborhood plan with the intent to dis­
criminate against blacks do you?

A. I have no evidence of that at all. I did not mean 
to suggest it.

Q. Well, in fact, when you gave us your deposition 
approximately one month ago under oath you told us 
that you found no evidence of intentional race discrimi­
nation; isn't that true?

A. I probably said I knew of no evidence. I stand by 
that. I know of no evidence of intentional -  of intent to 
discriminate by the current school board.

Q. Yes. Okay. And I'm specifically referring to in the 
adoption of the 1984 K-4 Plan; okay?

A. Uh-huh.
*  *  *

[p. 1241] Q. * * * based on your experience, you do 
agree that the extent to which responsible blacks are 
hired in top administrative positions over time can very 
well have an impact on the institutional racism concept 
that you've told us about.

A. I think it can. Yes.



498

Q. And would you tell the court how the placing of 
qualified blacks in upper echelon positions can have an 
impact on institutional racism?

A. I think that, in general, placing black individuals 
in positions of institutional responsibility, for one thing, 
sends out a message that that kind of position is appro­
priate and attainable.

It can -  although it does not necessarily -  it can also 
represent -  bring about changes in institutional policy. 
There are all kinds of examples where, indeed, the incor- 
pora- [p. 1242] tion of minority groups -  blacks, other 
racial minorities, women -  has brought about a change in 
the policy of institutions, and there are also a lot of 
examples where that incorporation has not brought about 
a change in the policy of the institutions. So I think that's 
by no means guaranteed, but it's a possibility.

Q. Well, it's more likely to help than not help, isn't 
it?

A. I think I would agree that -  to that. Yes. Uh-huh.

Q. In your preparations for testifying in this case, 
were you told or did you read any information which 
showed that presently in Oklahoma City that there's a 
black man on the board of education that holds the posi­
tion of vice-president?

A. I did know that there was a black man with the 
board of education. Yes.

Q. And did you know that there was a responsible 
black person. Mr. Vern Moore, filling the position of 
executive director of personnel?



499

Q. Were you aware that one of the assistant super­
intendents in the district is black, Doctor Betty Mason?

A. No, I've not known about the racial composition 
of the assistant -  of the superintendent's staff.

Q. So I guess you weren't aware that as early as '71 
and '72 and '-3 and '-4 that the Oklahoma City Board of 
Education placed responsible black individuals in upper 
echelon admini- [p. 1243] strative positions?

A. I simply had not looked at data bearing on that 
issue.

A. I don't think I have known that until now.

*  34- *

[p. 1245] Q. Now, if, Doctor Taylor, children in 
Oklahoma City have been bussed continuously for thir­
teen years into that area and without the result of increas­
ing the white population in that area, would you agree 
with me that a school board, through the implementation 
of a desegregation plan alone, cannot bring about change 
to eliminate that residential segregation?

A. I would anticipate that there would have to be a 
number of institutional -  official policies in addition to a 
school desegregation plan in order to substantially 
change an established black residential area that devel­
oped through official discrimination.

Q. And when you're talking about additional poli­
cies, you're talking about policies by other governmental 
agencies besides the board of education, aren't you?

A. Yes.



500

[p. 1246] Q. Now, do you have an opinion, if the 
court ordered the continued busing of children into that 
area, if that, alone, even if it were done indefinitely or in 
perpetuity, could integrate that area?

A. Resident -  you mean residentially integrated 
that area?

Q. Yes.

A. I would not anticipate that a school desegrega­
tion plan, alone, would bring about total residential 
desegregation of an area that had been earmarked a black 
area during the years of official discrimination.

Q. And if I understood your testimony, you're tell­
ing us that there are a variety of factors, aside from action 
by the Oklahoma City Board of Education, which have 
had an impact on the patterns of residential segregation 
in this community over time?

A. Yes.
*  *  *

[p. 1255] Q. Well, the point I was trying to make, 
Doctor Taylor, is that in light of the M-to-M transfer 
option, if a parent so desires, they're not compelled to 
send their children to predominantly black schools in 
Oklahoma City today.

A. I understand that -  that there is a formal opening 
for parents to enroll their students in schools outside the 
neighborhood and that some black parents have used that 
opportunity.

Q. So those parents are not compelled to keep their 
kids in predominantly black schools, are they?



501

A. Those parents are not.
*  *  *

GORDON FOSTER

[p. 1265] A. * * * The inequitable part that I would 
perceive at the introduction of the plan was the fact that 
all of the first-grade -  or the fifth-grade centers who were 
in the black community and the white students, grades 
one through four, were able to stay in their home base 
schools for those first four years. Ordinarily when we do 
a plan we attempt to randomize that so that neither racial 
group will feel that they're being overburdened in terms 
of the grade level of which their children are sent away 
from their home base school.

In this particular plan, what happened was all the 
fifth-grade centers were in the black community, and all 
the one-through-four centers were in the predominantly 
non-black community. So, in a sense, that didn't really 
remove the racial identifiability of those schools, because 
everybody knew that fifth-grade centers were formerly 
black schools, and so that the -  the fact that they were 
black schools carried over, I think, to some extent over 
that plan. So there was, I believe, some inequality at that 
point.

[p. 1266] Now, as the Stand-alone feature of the plan, 
of the so-called Finger Plan, developed those schools that 
were terminated as Stand-alone Schools over the period 
of the Finger Plan, I agree with the testimony by Doctor 
Muse and others that this would have tended to discrimi­
nate or be unequal -  not discriminate, necessarily -  but 
be unequal to black parents and children because, as a 
Stand-alone School was changed, -  this has already been 
described in testimony quite a bit formerly -  but as



502

Stand-alone Schools were changed, the black students 
who had been assigned for the first four years to those 
schools had to be bussed further distances because the -  
the schools which were really available were further 
away from the northeast quadrant.

Q. Let me interrupt you for just a moment. I believe 
you said -  I want to see if you meant to say -  I think you 
used the word "terminated." Are you referring to the 
introduction or the termination of Stand-alone Schools?

A. I'm talking about the schools that were closed 
after the plan was started that were Stand-alone Schools 
and then, because of racial differences, got to the point 
where they -

I'm sorry. Well, some were terminated, yes, in the 
70's. I can't remember the exact figures, but I believe the 
Finger Plan started with something like nine or ten 
Stand-alone Schools. And when these schools reverted 
back to the K-4 or K-5 status, then the black children who 
were attending those [p. 1267] had reassigned to other 
predominantly non-black schools.

I'm sorry if I misspoke. I can't pick up the thread of 
your question.

The other problem that concerned Doctor Muse and 
the black community was the fact that this Stand-alone 
feature also contributed to lesser and lesser enrollment in 
the black schools, and there was imminent danger of their 
falling below the necessary enrollment to continue as 
functional elementary attendance centers, and so the 
black community was continually in jeopardy of losing 
the schools in their area in the northeast quadrant.



503

Q. Have you analyzed the -  the results of the 1985 
Student Assignment Plan adopted by the school district?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether the dis­
trict is being operated as a desegregated school system 
under that plan?

A. I do.

Q. And would you tell the court what your opinion 
is and the basis for that opinion.

MR. DAY: Excuse me, counsel.

Your Honor, I believe that calls for a legal conclusion 
for which this witness is not qualified.

MR. CHACHKIN: Your Honor, I think if the 
witness doesn't understand the question he can indicate 
that.

THE COURT: Yes. Overruled.

[p. 1269] A. * * * Now, if you look at the current 
year, 1986/87, the ten highest percentage black schools in 
enrollment, of course, averaged 99 percent black. The 
faculty assigned to these ten highest percentage black 
schools in enrollment came out at 48 percent black.

So what we had was, in two years after the introduc­
tion of the '85 plan to go back to neighborhood schools, 
the faculty also increased in the highest black schools 17 
percent black.

By contrast with that -  and you get an idea of the 
disparity if you look at the ten lowest percentage black



504

schools in enrollment in 1984/85 before the plan. Their 
enrollment averaged approximately 20 percent black. The 
faculty assigned to those schools was 24 percent black, 
which is about six percent beneath the black schools, and 
the next two years, for the current year, 1986/87, the ten 
lowest percentage black schools in enrollment dropped 
from 20 percent black to six percent, and the faculty 
assigned also dropped from 24 down to 20, which means 
that, essentially, that under the 1985 plan implementa­
tion, the blacker schools in enrollment became much 
blacker in percentage black faculty, while in the schools 
with the least black enrollment, the faculty becomes [p. 
1270] less black.

Q. Are those findings consistent, in your opinion, 
with the operation of a desegregated school system?

A. No.

Q. Andy why not? What -  what are the conditions 
that -

A. Well, one of the factors which makes you deseg­
regated or segregated is your faculty assignment or your 
faculty composition in each school as well as your stu­
dent assignment or your student enrollment, and, to the 
extent that faculty becomes -  a school is racially identifia­
ble by virtue of its faculty assignment, then this further 
makes the school segregated or desegregated. And I'm 
simply saying that there was a trend, since 1985, for this 
to become more of a problem.

*  *  *

[p. 1275] Q. And again, I just want to be sure it's 
clear for the record, you're satisfied that the exhibits



505

accurately reflect the date from the sources that are iden­
tified in the exhibits.

A. Yes. I checked those.

Q. And you received those exhibits from counsel?

A. Yes.

*  *  *

Q. (BY MR. CHACHKIN) Now, Doctor Foster, you -  
in describing the last four of those exhibits that dealt with 
faculty, you talked about patterns of assignment.

You've been here through the defendant's testimony 
concerning the new board policy in administrative pro­
cedure concerning faculty assignments and affirmative 
action goals at [p. 1276] individual schools; is that cor­
rect?

A. Yes.

Q. What's your opinion concerning the new policy 
and procedure in light of -  how is that going to affect the 
patterns that you've noted in your own analysis?

A. In my opinion, if these are followed out in a 
fairly short time, they should be productive to the extent 
that all schools would -  would be in line.

Pardon me a second while I get my file.

According to the policy in the affirmative action plan, 
my understanding is that their goal -  which is a goal and 
it's not a quota or anything -  is based on having 36.9 
percent black, and then assignment -  and evidently both 
assignment and employment would be based on that,



506

with a leeway of plus or minus ten percent in terms of 
compliance.

I'd just simply like to comment that I think the 
assignment part will be a little more difficult, because 
their labor force right now at the elementary level, for 
example, is only around 30 percent, or a little less, black, 
which means that you have a gap there of about seven 
percent, which makes getting the schools in compliance a 
little more difficult.

Other than that, I think if the personnel services as 
the board adopted the policy signs off on all transfers and 
employment and they won't approve them unless they're 
in line with the goals that are outlined in the policy, it 
should work [p. 1277] out.

It's not that far off as it is right at the moment, but 
there are trends and discrepancies that have been obvious 
the last couple of years.

*  X- *

[p. 1278] A. All right. I prepared an initial draft of a 
plan which was finished about the 15th of April, and this 
had both plan A and plan B in it, and, since we were 
under time constraints, I simply did this in longhand and 
sent a copy to New York, and I understand it was then 
transferred to — a copy was sent to Oklahoma City.

The major purposes of the plan as requested by the 
plaintiffs were to be more equitable in terms of the bur­
den of busing; to desegregate all of the eleven predomi­
nantly black schools, the ones that were 90 percent, if that 
was feasible; and to eliminate the stand-alone schools, in 
terms of the concept of stand-alone schools, as much as



507

possible, that feature of the finger plan that seemed to 
have difficulty.

Then I set out certain criteria to be followed, which 
are contained in the desegregation proposal, which is 
plaintiffs' Exhibit 57. Those include the usual type of 
criteria that you make for developing a plan.

For example, "A" says that kindergarten students 
would not be included in re-assignments. "B" says that 
the six elementary schools located in the discontiguous 
Arcadia and Star Spencer areas would not be involved in 
student reassignments. An attempt to would be made to 
treat reassignment and transportation of students at dif­
ferent grade levels equitable.

Long-accepted techniques for desegregation would 
be [p. 1279] utilized, including pairing and clustering, 
which, or course, would involve transportation.

That the grade structures in the plan would be based 
on an even split, which was either K-2 or K-3 and -4, or 
with the schools that were not reassigned would be left as 
K-4 schools. So, in other words, all schools would be 
somewhere within the framework of a K-4 situation 
except some of them would be only two grades and 
kindergarten.

Another criterion was that I would not attempt to do 
anything about closing schools, although it appears that 
there is capacity enough in the district to probably close 
some more schools. I considered this a problem that was 
-  I should not be involved in. That's a board decision, 
and we would simply take the seven schools that were 
originally proposed, originally eight, because Edgemere



508

was in the original list, and operate on the basis that 
those would be closed, and that was it as far as closing.

And then transportation should be minimized as 
much as possible, which is always a part of a plan, and it 
should be -  in terms of time and distance, should be 
feasible, that is, in legal language of the court, it 
shouldn't be so far or so long as to be detrimental to the 
student's health or educational well-being.

Okay, then with those criteria, and understanding the 
purpose of the plan, I developed the first draft, which I 
said [p. 1280] was in longhand.

Shortly after this, I think about a week later, I 
received from the plaintiffs' attorney three suggestions 
for my consideration in the final planning. One was that 
Zone 910-B, which is a noncontiguous zone to Columbus, 
be reassigned back to Rockwood. This zone contained -  
it's really a subzone -  contained 32 black students as of 
last year, 14 non-black, and 13 kindergarten. And the 
suggestion was that if you paired or grouped Columbus 
the way it was set up, you would be sending black 
children, predominantly black children -  I want you to 
understand it's a mixture, because 32 black and 14 non­
black is not all black -  but you would be sending a group 
of predominantly black students to a black school in a 
grouping situation.

Then another suggestion was that the Coolidge-Polk 
Fair be changed to Coolidge and Edwards, and the sug­
gestion -  the reason for that was that you would save 
them approximately a mile in terms of transportation, 
because if you look at the northeast quadrant, the Polk



509

School is about a mile or so north of Edwards, and this 
would make the pairing a little closer.

And then, if you did that, you would have to change 
the grouping of Lee, Wheeler, and Edwards, which was in 
the original document, to Lee, Wheeler, and Polk. So I 
took those under advisement.

Then in April 29th, 30th, and March -  or May the 1st, 
I [p. 1281] came out to Oklahoma City for the second time 
-  I'd been here earlier for three days -  to specifically 
check the time and distance of these clusters, which I did, 
and I have a complete record of each cluster in plan A, 
and most of them in -  the longer ones in plan B, in terms 
of how I got from one school to the other and what the 
mileage was and what the travel time between the two 
schools was, and I will talk about that later when I 
discuss the transportation called for by the plan.

While I was here and went from one of these schools 
to the other and looked again at the distances, I decided 
that the suggested change from Coolidge-Polk to Cool- 
idge-Edwards, which, of course, also involved the Lee- 
Wheeler-Edwards cluster in the first plan, was a reason­
able one, and I went with that in my revised plan.

In the meantime, the decision -  about that time. I 
don't know the exact date. -  The decision was made not 
to close Edgemere, and the first draft of the plan had 
been based on closing Edgemere. So we had to readjust 
the figures for that.

What this involved, in keeping Edgemere open, was 
to change the Monroe-Putnam Heights-Horace Mann 
cluster, which was in the first plan, to a pairing between



510

Monroe and Edgemere, and in both plans A and B this 
left Putnam Heights and Horace Mann, K-to-four schools 
and no reassignments in either one.

Then these changes were made, and on May 5th, I 
believe, [p. 1282] the second draft was completed, and 
somewhere around -  by June the 12th, I had made a final 
and revised check of all these figures of the second draft. 
I had corrected the mistakes in them, and there were 
some in terms of the closing numbers, and I'd added, I 
think, three or four pages of explanation.

*  *  *

[p. 1298] What happens under the consummation of 
plan A in terms of totals, you start with eleven black 
schools with a one-to-four enrollment of 2,445 blacks, 
which represents 46 percent of the district total in grades 
one through four, and that's a fairly heavy concentration 
in a segregated school. You reduce this under plan A to 
one black school with a one-four enrollment of 315 
pupils, and that is Parker.

So what you're left with is that only six percent of the 
black children in grades one through four are still in 
virtually all-black schools.

You also, by plan A, desegregate Western Village 
from 67 percent black to 45 percent black.

You desegregate North Highland from 90 to 49 per­
cent.

Edgemere, which essentially is close to being racially 
non-identifiable already, is put in better racial balance 
from 53 to 36.



511

And Wilson, which was included originally for rea­
sons I mentioned about Edgemere, is changed from 51 to
29.

In the Northeast Quadrant, you had eight black 
schools which were 99 percent or more. They're now, 
under plan A, 26 to 49 percent black.

*  *  *

[p. 1312] Q. Would you tell us what that estimate is?

A. The continuing costs I estimate, using the 
board's figures for cost items, only using 85 buses instead 
of 125, would be $982,712.

The initial cost -  and it all depends on the accounting 
figures you use, but I think it's unfair to say that it costs 
five million dollars the first year, because I realize if you 
go out and buy the buses, you have to either borrow five 
million dollars, or whatever it costs, or have the money in 
the till, and the common way to do this, though, is to 
amortize it, as they've done in continuing costs. And all 
I'm saying is you do -  if you buy all new buses with cash, 
or however you do it, you do have a start-up figure 
which would be their figure of 5,400,000. By my way of 
reckoning, reduced from 125 to 85 buses, which would be 
a factor of .68, which would run you out around three- 
and-a-half million, something like that.

In any event, the only difference, if you amortized 
the costs with the first year instead of counting the lump 
sum, you would have routing costs initially of something 
like 13,500, which is in their figures, and I can understand 
that. Except for that, -



512

Well, the routing costs go on year to year, according 
to their figures, but they also have the first year -  well, 
the figures are changed, but initially they had $910 for 
recruitment, training, and drug testing of new drivers. I 
[p. 1313] think that's a -  certainly a legitimate cost, and 
they've included that in their other figures for the second 
revised document.

So, essentially, what we're talking about is continuing 
costs using board figures, with a different number of 
buses, or $983,000 a year, roughly, and the first year costs, 
without the new buses, would be $1,060,000. You can 
treat the costs of the new buses any way the district does 
that. I don't know how they -  how they operate that.

*  *  *

[p. 1351] Q. * * * weren't you surprised when I told 
you there were no 90 percent white schools in Oklahoma 
City?

A. I can't remember. I might have been.

Q. Question on page -

[p. 1352] A. But I agree that there aren't any. I mean, 
I've sat through the testimony several times.

*  *  *

[p. 1367] Q. You don't feel that they are more sus­
ceptible -  you know, they're not fully developed.

A. I don't feel anything at all to that extent. I think 
that young children, in many cases, weather the busing 
much better than some of the older children.

Q. Well, let me -  let's change the subject.



513

Are you aware, Doctor Foster, of any compulsory 
desegregation plans in the United States which exempt 
first and second graders from compulsory busing?

A. I think in the testimony this week somebody said 
that Dallas now exempts first and second grades, maybe 
third. I can't remember. But -

Q. I'm asking for your opinion.

A. Well, I don't know. As a matter of fact, I worked 
as a witness in the Dallas case, but that's happened since 
I was there, and I haven't seen the latest revision.

Q. You were -

A. I mentioned in my deposition that there were 
two that I understood, but I didn't know for a fact. One of 
them, I think was Tuscaloosa, Alabama, and the other one 
was probably Richmond County, Georgia.

[p. 1377] Q. Well, let's look at Quail Creek.

A. All right.

Q. That's the first pair in the northwest area. You 
show six percent black, and it was actually 13.1 percent 
black; is that what you find there on Exhibit 64?

A. That's right. And both figures would be racially- 
identifiable white. Or non-black, I'm sorry.

Q. Okay. Let's talk about the cluster involving Gate- 
wood, Hawthorne, and Wilson. It's cluster four on page
12.

A. All right.



514

Q. Now, there you have -  you're not clustering 
these schools with a 90 percent or more blacks school, are 
you?

A. No.

Q. And two of these schools, Gatewood, which is 29 
percent black, and Wilson, which is 51 percent black, fall 
within your own definition of non-racially-identifiable 
schools; is that correct?

A. That's correct.
*  * *



RECORD, VOLUME IX



515

GORDON FOSTER

[p. 1387] Q. So if the faculty at any school then is 
between 26 percent and 46 percent black, the Board's in 
compliance with its affirmative action policy.

A. That's right.

Q. You indicated, I believe, that you thought the 
goal set by the Board was rather high, in that the goal 
was 36.9 or -8, or whatever you said, and actually, at the 
elementary level, there were only -

What percent black teachers?

A. Well, I think it's around 30 percent, but I didn't -  
I don't believe I said it was rather high. I just said it was a 
little more difficult to get into compliance if your goal is 
six or seven percentage points higher than the actual 
number of teachers.

Q. Well, do you feel that's an admirable goal, I 
mean, to set it higher than the number of teachers you 
have -

tp. 1388] A. I have no problem with that.

Q. -  for the purpose of recruiting minority teachers 
into the district?

A. Right.

*  *  *

Q. Now, in your preparations for this case and your 
review of all of the evidence and considering all of the 
testimony you heard while you were sitting in court over 
the last seven days, you have seen or heard nothing



516

which would indicate to you that the faculty assignments 
for 85/86 and 86/87 resulted from an intent to discrimi­
nate on the part of the Board of Education.

A. I wouldn't say so. No.

[p. 1389] Q. You wouldn't say so what?

A. That it had a tendency to discriminate. They 
simply slid a little during that period, and, as I see it, the 
Board is now getting them back into shape.

Q. But do I understand you correctly that in your 
opinion the Board took no action that discriminated 
against the faculty to bring this about?

A. I would say so, yes, that they didn't.
*  *  *

CLARA LUPER

[p. 1403] Q. Did you observe any harmful effects of 
busing on your child?

A. Of course not. My child was excited about riding 
the bus, because it's something about riding a bus that's 
exciting. Now, those of you that have never walked to 
school cannot understand what I'm talking about. It's a 
matter of learning even while you're riding a bus. Shelley 
read signs, and what have you. Yes.

Q. Did she suffer any negative academic effects 
from riding the bus?

A. She has just received a letter from her Superin­
tendent of Schools, Doctor Steller, in which he congratu­
lated her for her academic achievement on her test.

She is now participating in a program known as JIM 
at Northwest Classen, and most of all, she participated



517

recently in a pageant with teenagers from 13 to 17, and on 
July the 19th, she will be going to the Virgin Islands, 
where she will represent the State of Oklahoma.

Not only that, in the sixth grade, under her teacher 
that she loved so dearly, she won the History Fair and 
became the only student in the Oklahoma City School 
System to represent Oklahoma in Washington DC at the 
History Fair.

*  *  *

[p. 1412] One ol [sic] them is that there were burdens 
on black students under the Finger Plan, that is, dispro­
portionate burdens of busing.

Are you aware of those disproportions in busing?

A. Yes, I am aware that there were more blacks 
bussed than whites.

*  *  *

Q. (BY MR. SHAW) And what was your view of 
the equity of those burdens, or the distribution of those 
burdens?

A. Well, I felt that if it was okay for black children 
to be bussed, it was certainly okay for whites, because, to 
me, that's -  what's good for the goose is good for the 
gander.

Q. Well, in light of that, do you think that the school 
board's proffered reason for the -  for going to the Neigh­
borhood School Assignment Plan, that is, leaving the 
burden of busing on black children, justifies -

A. No, I -  no, I don't.



518

Q. Why not?

A. In the first place, if we are talking about reliev­
ing the [p. 1413] burden of children, then I feel that the 
Board of Education should have looked at the reasons 
and tried to find -

Just like you do when you go to the hospital, some­
thing is wrong with your hand, you don't work with 
anything but the hand.

And if the problem was busing, then I -  and this is 
certainly my thinking -  I thought that the Board of Edu­
cation should have done some studies and should have 
done some extra work on how -  what kind of plan they 
could work out where both races of children would have 
the opportunity to bus.

Q. Now, Mrs. Luper, one of the other reasons that 
they proffered in support of the plan is that there were 
benefits of neighborhood schools, and, in particular, that 
the neighborhood school assignment plan would help 
academic achievement, -  you've spoken to that already, I 
believe -  and it would increase PTA/PTO involvement.

Do those reasons, in your view, justify the implemen­
tation of their plan?

A. I was invited as a guest at the Longfellow PTA 
meeting last year. There were eight parents there.

I went to Jefferson Middle School, and some tech­
niques had changed. For example -

Q. When did you go to Jefferson?

A. I went to Jefferson early last year. Probably Octo­
ber. I don't know. During the last school year.



519

[p. 1414] I noticed -  I mean, at Jefferson Middle 
School, they sent out invitations to the parents about 
open house and PTA, or PT -  PTA.

I went to Jefferson on open house, like hundreds of 
other people, to see about their kids. That's the number 
one. While we were there, the PTA representatives were 
in the halls, and we paid our membership dues.

But since that day, I have not received one letter or 
one note stating that there would be another PTA meet­
ing. I have been -

Q. I take it then that you are listed somewhere as a 
PTA member though.

A. Oh, I'm a PTA member, not only there, but some 
other schools.

I have a granddaughter in Harrison School, and I 
think they have a very effective PTA. But it's mixed in 
with school activities.

The same way mine is at John Marshall. We took out 
PTA memberships at open house, which was an advan­
tage.

Q. Was that done prior to the implementation of -

A. Yes, we have always done that, so we've always 
had large memberships.

At Edwards Addition, I've been told by Mrs. Hunter, 
who had some children there, that -

MS. JONES: Objection, Your Honor. That's
hearsay.



520

[p. 1415] THE WITNESS: Oh, okay. You're right. 

THE COURT: She's through now. Go ahead.

Q. (BY MR. SHAW) Now, during the presentation 
of the school board's case, the school board put on a 
number of black school board employees, and counsel for 
the school board would ask them, "As a black person, do 
you think the school districts plan is discriminatory?" 
And they said "No," And -  or whether the school district 
was unitary, and they said "No."

Are you aware of the various positions taken in the 
black community on the Neighborhood School Assign­
ment Plan?

A. Yes, I am.

Q. What is your understanding of those positions?

A. Once again, those positions are based on who 
you're talking to. Throughout history, we have had peo­
ple that have always been able to correct -  to protect their 
interests.

I noticed with a great deal of interest the employees 
of the Board of Education that were -  that have testified 
here, but I have also noticed that those employees have 
never been involved in anything in this city to change 
conditions of black people. Now, I've noticed that, and 
that's really important.

The attitude of people in this community, first, was 
neighborhood schools. There were a lot of people that did 
not understand that their children were going back to 
predominantly an all-black school.

>4- * *



521

MELVIN PORTER

[p. 1431] Q. Senator Porter, the school district has 
proffered a number of reasons that they have imple­
mented the Neighborhood School Assign Plan grades K 
through four. I want to just take you through those rea­
sons and ask you a few questions about them.

One is that they will relieve the burdens on black 
school children. In your view, does that justify the imple­
mentation of the Neighborhood School Plan?

A. No.

Q. Why not?

A. Well, black children have basically always had a 
burden. When they talk about the burden of busing, I 
think that it's unfair to put the entire burden of busing on 
the shoulders of the black youngster.

I cannot believe that this school board cannot come 
up with a plan that would call for the integration of a 
total system. They're dealing with less students than 
they've ever dealt with before. They certainly have the 
same tax base that they have had from the inception to 
generate funds and support their school system. There 
does not appear to be any reason that they could not -  to 
say that busing, itself, is a burden appears to be a rather 
ridiculous argument.

I don't know of black parents that are up in arms and 
alarmed about the busing. Of course, many people would 
like to [p. 1432] take the line of least resistance and say, 
"I've got my boy walking across the street to school." But 
my children were bussed, and it was not that much of a 
burden.



522

We have never had, in this community, any hue and 
cry in any organizational meeting or structure from black 
parents who were screaming out the busing issue. I think 
that has been blown completely out of proportion.

Q. Well, there were people in the black community 
who are concerned about a one-way plan, -

A. Yes.

Q. -  Weren't there?

A. Of course.

Q. And there were people concerned about the 
threat of school closings than the black community?

A. Of course. And let me address that issue.

In almost every single community in this state where 
integration has taken place, the black schools, partic­
ularly in the smaller cities, McAlister, Lawton, Muskogee, 
Okmulgee, many of these are areas of the state, have 
closed.

Now, what does that do? That hurts that community. 
I'm talking about the black community. You don't have an 
educational facility there. The buildings are dilapidated. 
They're either sold off, they're -  they're used for commu­
nity centers, and then shortly they're completely aban­
doned altogether.

[p. 1433] That's the feeling in the black community 
here in Oklahoma City. We don't want to see schools 
closed. We want to see schools kept open, and the -  the 
threat of the present plan to the black community was 
that these schools, in fact, would close unless we



523

accepted that plan, and that was -  that was of great 
concern.

Q. Senator Porter, the school board has said that 
there are benefits to neighborhood schools, one of the 
benefits they proffer is that there will be increased aca­
demic performance on the part of students who are not 
bussed.

Do you think that that rationale justifies the imple­
mentation of the K through four neighborhood school 
assignment plan?

A. I do not. I think it -  rather, I think it indicates 
that, you know, a good teacher ought to be able to teach 
students whether they are bussed or whether they are not 
bussed.

Are they saying that because a child gets up 30 
minutes earlier or an hour earlier that their learning 
process has slowed down?

Children are bussed in the Mid-Del School System, 
they are bussed in the Edmond City School System, 
they're bussed in Putnum City. I see big yellow buses 
running all over this county. Are they saying because 
those students are bussed they can't learn? I can't believe 
that that has any validity to it at all.

[p. 1434] Q. What about the rationale that PTA/PTO 
involvement will increase? Does that justify implementa­
tion of the Neighborhood School Assignment Plan in 
grades one through four?



524

A. Well, I don't think it does. As a matter of fact, 
from what I have been told by people within the Okla­
homa City School System, I'm talking about their person­
nel, PTA's functioned when this plan -  when Judge 
Bohanon's decision initially was put into play, it func­
tioned very well.

For example, at -  I believe it's the Edwards School 
where -  where I lived, and I lived in the Edwards Addi­
tion. In talking with Mr. Cudjoe, who was the principal of 
that school, he indicated to me that they had very wide- 
range participation. White families were coming into the 
black area, for several reasons, from what we were told.

They were coming, number one, to see whether or 
not there were the proper tools and equipment and 
teachers there to teach their children.

Number two, they were coming because they wanted 
to make sure that their children were safe in, quote, an 
all-black community environment, and indicated that 
their participation was somewhat greater than that of the 
participation of the black parent, because the black parent 
did not have some of those fears.

*  *  *

WILLIAM ALFRED SAMPSON

[p. 1454] Q. And, for the record only, Doctor Samp­
son, you are a black sociologist; is that correct?

A. I am black and I am a sociologist.

Q. All right. Thank you.

Specifically, have you studied the factors which 
impact on academic achievement for children, partic­
ularly minority children?



525

A. I've -  yes.

Q. In your professional opinion, and given your 
training, experience, and research studies, what do you 
think are the best predictors of academic achievement in 
children?

A. Well, there's a simple answer and a complicated 
answer.

The simple answer is that the single best predictor of 
academic achievement is some measure of socioeconomic 
status.

The complicated answer is that -  has to do with the 
reality that we don't always measure socioeconomic sta­
tus correctly.

There are two major bodies of thought on academic 
achievement and effective schooling. One is labled [sic], 
sort of loosely, the effective schools research, which 
essentially says that things that go on in schools deter­
mine academic achievement, and that the things that 
occur outside of school, particularly with respect to fam­
ily background, and for sociologists that would include 
socioeconomic status, don't have much impact on the 
quality of education. That research also rejects the [p. 
1455] notion that race has much of an impact at all on the 
quality of education.

The second body of research is more family based 
and talks about those variables or qualities of the family 
that have an impact on education and, to some degree, 
rejects the notion that what goes on the [sic] school is 
completely responsible.



526

So, at first glance, these two major bodies of thought 
on the question conflict, and both suggest that socio­
economic status is -  is not all that important.

The reason that they end up suggesting that is that 
the sociologists and economists have measured socio­
economic status in the most convenient way; that is we've 
used education, occupation, and income because they're 
quantifiable.

But the reality is that a better measure has to do with 
many of the same kinds of variables about which Mr. 
Porter just spoke, and it turns out that research tends to 
indicate that kids who do best in schools are middle class 
students, though they may be poor; that is, that class is 
not as closely tied to income as we might have imagined, 
and a middle class family is a family in which there is 
strong authority, there's strong discipline, there's strict 
monitoring of the child's use of time and space, there's 
consistent praise for jobs well done, there's consistent 
parent-child interaction. And it turns out that those quali­
ties can exist and have historically existed across the 
economic spectrum.

[p. 1456] So when you define class that way, though 
it's more difficult to measure when you do it that way, 
when you define class that way it turns out that a class is 
an absolutely crucial variable in predicting achievement, 
and certainly much more important than -  than race.

Q. In fact, Doctor Sampson, I think those types of 
values you're discussing were things that both Mrs. 
Luper and Senator Porter pointed out in their own back­
ground.



527

A. Yes. Precisely.

Q. And you stated that these values are not really 
linked to income; is that right?

A. It's certainly easier to maintain them if you have 
more money, but it's obviously not impossible. If that 
were the case, then no generation of Americans would 
have ever gotten out of poverty, and generation after 
generation of Americans have gotten out of poverty. One 
of the basic reasons for that is, to a considerable degree, 
those that got out maintained those values.

And if you look, for example, -  I'm beginning some 
research that looks at why a group of six all-black paro­
chial schools in Chicago are so successful. The high 
school dropout rate in Chicago public schools is 65 per­
cent. These six schools send 80 to 90 percent of their kids 
to college, and they're serving the same population.

Q. And did I understand you to say that those are 
all black?

[p. 1457] A. All black.

Q. Parochial schools?

A. Hundred percent black. And only about half of 
the students who go to those schools are Catholic. Many 
of them aren't.

And so we're beginning to look at what those schools 
are doing that -  that produces that kind of achievement 
that the public schools in Chicago aren't doing, and there 
are several things.



528

One is it turns out that those schools have those 
characteristics that are most often associated with effec­
tive schools, the so-called effective schools; that is, they 
have less tracking rather than more, they have a strong 
principal, that their teachers have a great deal of access to 
outside-of-classroom materials, there's more emphasis 
upon the teaching of social studies rather than on math. 
All of those are characteristics.

If you look at the Ron Edmonds, Larry LaZant work 
on effective schools over the years, the characteristics of 
effective schools, and it turns out -  by the way, strong 
discipline -  and it turns out that those parochial schools 
have all of those things.

In addition to that, there's some self-selection that 
goes on. They tend to bring in these middle class families 
that are, in fact, poor, because those families want their 
kids to [p. 1458] get that kind of education, but those are 
precisely the kinds of families who would work well in 
any school system.

Q. Now, are those six parochial schools affluent 
schools?

A. No, they're all very poor. They're all in -  in very 
poor black communities.

Q. So do I understand you to say that this set of 
values which is a good predictor of academic success 
does not depend on economic lines; is that correct?

A. No, it does not.

Q. Does it depend on racial lines?



529

A. Not at all. And to argue -  I would suggest that to 
argue that it does is a racist argument.

Q. I guess my question, Doctor Sampson, is: In your 
opinion, do black students need to be in a classroom with 
white students to learn effectively?

A. Not if learning is what you're talking about. It 
has nothing to do with learning. If you were to go to 
Chicago and talk to these -  or Milwaukee or a variety of 
other cities where these parochial schools are doing quite 
well and ask those little black kids, who are going off to 
Harvard and Yale and wherever they are going off to next 
fall, how concerned they are with integration, they would 
tell you "not at all." The school has worked very well for 
them.

*  *  *

[p. 1461] Q. How does education fit into diminish­
ing or totally ridding the society of that disparity?

A. Well, if you look, the average black female col­
lege graduate earns 105 percent of what her white coun­
terpart earns. That means that black female college 
graduates are earning more than white female college 
graduates.

The average black male college graduate earns about 
84, 85 percent of what his white counterpart earns. That 
suggests that there is some discrimination in -  in the 
marketplace.

But we're talking about college graduates; that is, 
both black and white have the same credentials, and there 
is somehow a discrepancy in payment and/or promotion.



530

Q. Would you be concerned about students being 
harmed in a classroom that was 90 percent or more black 
if there was an effective schools program?

A. If -  if the purpose of the schools is education, 
then the answer is "no."

Q. And, in your opinion, what is the purpose of 
public schools?

A. I always thought it was education.
*  *  *

[p. 1468] Q. Now, I'm talking about -  my question 
is, is intentional segregation of public schools harmful?

A. My answer is, I [sic] doesn't have to be.

Q. Is it ever, though?

A. Anywhere at any point in time throughout his­
tory?

Q. Can you answer my question?

A. Not the way it's stated.

Q. Okay. Fine.

You indicated that you believe that the argument that 
-  and correct me if I misunderstood this. I may have. That 
the argument of success depends on racial lines, or some­
thing to that effect there, is a racist argument.

Did you understand the position of the plaintiffs in 
this case to be that black people cannot be successful at 
anything if they are in an all-black environments [sic], 
that there's no way they can be successful?



531

A. I don't have a real understanding of what the 
plaintiffs are up to. I'm asked to come and testify about 
what I know, and that's what I did. That is, I haven't 
discussed with the plaintiffs what their positions are.

Q. You also indicated that black students have -  
don't have to be in classes to learn -

A. No, they don't have to be -

Q. -  with white children -

A. That's right.
*  *  *

ARTHUR STELLER

[p. 1482] Q. Doctor Steller, do you have an opinion 
with respect to what impact the implementation of Doc­
tor Foster's proposal would have on the degree of paren­
tal involvement that we have in the district at this point 
in time?

A. Yes, in a variety of ways.

Q. Would you state those opinions, please.

A. One would be in -  there was no -  seemingly no 
consideration taken in the Foster plans, A or B, to -  and I 
think that was a question that you asked Doctor Foster 
yesterday -  relative to bilingual students.

There are advisory committees for bilingual pro­
grams. It would be possible for many families, they 
would have youngsters in two different schools, and by 
having youngsters, not just many parents would have 
youngsters in two different schools, but in the bilingual 
situation it would be an additional hardship because they 
would have two sets of meetings to go for -  to go to



532

attend for bilingual parent meetings, which is a very 
strong component of our bilingual program. Not only is 
that somewhat of a scheduling difficulty, it's an addi­
tional burden upon bilingual parents to have attend two 
separate meetings [p. 1483] for the purposes of the bilin­
gual.

The same thing is true with chapter I students. We 
have a chapter I program where one part of the program 
is a parent program, and parents attend meetings, advi­
sory meetings, and meetings on how to be a parent and 
how to reinforce what the school is doing. And a chapter 
I family could have a youngster in two different schools 
and, therefore, have to attend double the number of 
meetings. Obviously, many parents would not choose to 
do that.

The same thing is true for parents in special educa­
tion, where they have -  would have, perhaps, a youngster 
in more than one special education program in two differ­
ent schools.

There's the requirements, due to federal regulations, 
of IEP's, for instance, that require going to the school, 
meeting with school staff.

It's the opinion of our special education department 
and staff that the involvement of parents in chapter I and 
bilingual programs and special education would drop off 
heavily because of all those requirements, simply the 
number of meetings, the transportation, the mileage back 
and forth between the two skills, some parents in those 
programs do not have transportation to get them there. 
So that would create an additional burden. The same



533

burden is felt by any parent, whether they have a young­
ster in any of those programs.

But they would have membership in -  or hopeful 
they would [p. 1484] have membership, we try to encour­
age membership -  in more than one PTA if they had more 
than one youngster. That would be double the dues, 
double the PTA meetings, double the fund raisers, double 
all the activities involved in PTA organizations. And by 
putting that additional burden on parents, as a practical 
matter, they simply would not choose to participate in 
double the number of activities.

So that I think there would be a -  well, I'm sure that 
there would be a great drop off in PTA membership and 
involvement in those organizations, and general parental 
involvement, however you define it, in schools.

*  *  *

[p. 1496] A. * * * Basically, the bottom line is that 
under the Foster proposal there would be 632 fewer stu­
dents eligible for chapter I under plan A, that's 21 percent 
fewer students eligible for remedial math and reading 
help under plan A, and 710 fewer students, or 24 percent 
fewer under Foster plan B, which is somewhat ironic. You 
know, when -  what we would have then would be fewer 
students participating in bilingual programs, a hardship 
on special education programs, and fewer students that 
would be eligible to participate in chapter I programs.

*  *  *

[p. 1500] Q. Doctor Steller, do you have an opinion, 
based upon conferring with your Cabinet Members and 
Key Administrative staff, with respect to the total cost to



534

implement plan A in the first year? And by "total cost/' I 
mean total transportation and all the other financial 
aspects that you have just been discussing.

A. Yes, I do.

Q. And what is that opinion?

A. The total cost -  which would include virtually 
everything that I've discussed, and perhaps a couple of 
other minor points -  but the first-year cost of plan A 
would be $7,402,913.50.

Q. What would be the cost of operation under plan 
A for each year after the first year?

A. All right. After the first year the cost goes down. 
It's $1,678,958.50.

*  *  *

[p. 1502] A. * * * One of the first things, if we were 
talking about implementing plan A or plan B, Foster's 
plan A or plan B , at this point in the year, or at any year 
after April 10th, and -

MR. DAY: Do you need some more water?

THE WITNESS: Excuse me. I need some more 
something.

A. -  Any point after April 10th when we were con­
sidering school closings, here's what we would be look­
ing at.

In terms of school closings, one high school, one 
middle school, one middle school alternative school, 20 
elementary [p. 1503] schools, for a total of 2.5 million 
dollars.



535

Now, of course, closing schools would make us go 
back and redo everything else in the fdster plans. But that 
is something that -  I mean, if you have to pay for it, you 
have to pay for it some way. So that would be 2.5 million 
dollars from closing schools.

Renegotiate union contracts, a million dollars. That 
would not be a very easy task, but that's on the list.

Eliminate supplemental salaries for teachers in mid­
dle school and high school, which means coaches, band, 
vocal music, things like that. That would be $600,000.

Q. Excuse me, when you said "renegotiate the 
union contract," cost of a million dollars, were you saying 
that you would attempt to undertake negotiations with 
the teachers union to try to get them to take less money?

A. That's true. You said "Try to get them to take less 
money." That would be very much the case.

Q. Sorry to interrupt you. I'm sorry.

A. That would not be easy, obviously, to accom­
plish, but, given the constraints, that might be something 
that we would decide to do.

Reduce purchase of instructional supplies and equip­
ment by the tune of $350,000.

Reduce Maintenance positions $350,000.

Further reduction of campus police positions,
$ 200, 000.

[p. 1504] Reduce clerical, instructional aides and sec­
retarial positions, 1.5 million dollars.



536

Reduce more custodial positions and supplies, like 
custodial supplies, $600,000.

Drop more administrative positions, $200,000.

Reduce substitute teacher allocations, $500,000.

Reduce vehicle and garage expenses, a hundred 
thousand dollars. Now, that one we would probably drop 
off the list, because if we're going to add between 85 and 
125 more buses, we would not be able to reduce that 
figure.

Reduce school d istrict textbook expenditures
$ 200, 000.

Eliminate district's contribution to teacher retire­
ment, which means we'd have to renegotiate that with 
teachers, and that would be 2.7 million dollars.

Reduce ten more central office, principal and assis­
tant principal administrative positions and reassign those 
individuals to teaching positions. That would be 
$150,000.

Then we also said at the bottom that we would file 
for bankruptcy, apply for governmental loans, and adopt 
an early release program for students.

Now, this figure, the figures that I gave, add up to 
more than the cost of either plan A or plan B, but they're 
the kinds of things that would have to be done to pay for 
either plan A or Plan B.

Q. Do you believe it would have an effect on the 
effective [p. 1505] schools program presently being imple­
mented in the district?



537

A. It would have an effect on virtually every part of 
the program. I think simply making those kind of cuts, in 
and of themselves, discounting the negative impact that 
Foster's plan would have on parents in the community, 
but simply implementing those kinds of cuts, people 
would leave the district, period. I mean, forget what kind 
of organizational grade-level plan we'd have, people 
would simply leave the district if we had to implement 
that kind of additional cuts.

Q. Doctor Steller, during the defendant's case, sev­
eral witnesses referred to action taken by other govern­
mental agencies. For example, the City Planning 
Commission, the City Housing Authority and the Inter­
state Highway Authorities.

My question to you, sir, is whether or not the Okla­
homa City Board of Education consults or is consulted by 
any of these organizations before they take any action 
with respect to the location of public housing, zoning 
ordinances, or location of interstate highways.

A. In the two years that I have been here, I have 
never seen any correspondence or any -  any reference 
from any of those Governmental agencies. We have no 
liaison function, except in the most informal sense, with 
any of those agencies.

*  *  *

[p. 1518] Q. Does the district receive Chapter II 
funds?

A. Yes.

Q. And you have discretion, a wide area of discre­
tion in which to use those funds; isn't that correct?



538

A. Yes, and we're currently using those funds, for 
the last two years, in effective schools measures.

Q. But those funds are available for any program 
that was in existence prior to the Education Consolida­
tion Act of 1981; isn't that true?

A. They are used -  there are some restrictions, but 
they're funds that basically the school district can deter­
mine.

However, if we took those funds away from the 
effective schools program, obviously that would effect all 
students in all elementary schools, and that would seem­
ingly be counterproductive to what the district's all
about.

Q. Those funds would be available to provide com­
pensatory services to children reassigned as a result of a 
desegregation plan?

A. They would be, however, as I stated, they would 
be have -  you would have to take those funds away from 
what they're currently being expended for, and that is an 
effective schools program.

*  * *



RECORD, SUPPLEMENTAL VOLUME I



539

PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 48
Racial Composition of Elementary School Faculties/ 

1972-73, 1984-85, 1985-86, 1986-87

1972-73 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87
% Black % Black % Black % Black

Adams 21 16 18 14
Arcadia 17 32 18 20
Arthur 20 23 20 15
Bodine 20 26 23 23
Britton 17 38 22 24
Buchanan 17 24 17 10
Burbank 18 63
Cleveland 19
Columbus 16 16 21 27
Coolidge 19 17 17 18
Creston Hills 28 48 57 43
Culbertson 20
Davis 18 36 22 17
Dewey 21 15 48 42
Dunbar 25 29 36
Edgemere 19 35 26 39
Edison 37
Edwards 15 48 65 70
Eugene Field 18 32 16 17
Fillmore 23 19 23 25
Garden Oaks 39 48 40 50
Garfield 22
Gatewood 24 29 34 27



540

Green Pastures
Harrison
Hawthorne
Hayes
Henry
Heronville
Hillcrest
Horace Mann
Johnson
Kaiser
King
Lafayette
Lee
Lincoln
Linwood
Lone Star
Longfellow
Madison
Mark Twain
Mayfair
McKinley
Monroe
Nichols Hills
North Highland
Oakridge
Page
Page-Woodson
Parker
Parmelee
Pierce
Polk

1972-73 1984-85
% Black % Black

18 36
18 43
23 40
16 29
22
21 22
16 23
20 36
15 13
23 32

30
25 29
25 14
21 55
17 8
22
20 16
19 25
18 16
23
25
21 24
27
19 34
20 40
31

32
22 29
21 23
17 19
19 32

1985-86 
% Black

1986-87 
% Black

39 38
37 41
36 29

27 29
17 18
38 33
15 15
35 31
26 43
22 22
14 18
49 64

9 10

31 38
13 17
24 35

20 27

39 38
33 26

44 46
22 21
17 10
43 46



541

Prairie Queen 
Putnam Heights 
Quail Creek 
Rancho Village 
Ridgeview 
Riverside 
Rockwood 
Ross
Sequoyah
Shidler
Shields Heights 
Southern Hills 
Spencer 
Stand Watie 
Star
Stonegate
Sunset
Telstar
Truman
Tyler
Valley Brook 
Van Buren 
West N ich ols 
Hills
Western Village 
Westwood 
Wheeler 
Willard

1972-73 
% Black

1984-85 
% Black

26 15
14 20
20 24
23 18
20 22
24 49
18 21
19
21 29
20 32
18 27
22 27
18 43
17 17
29 31
21 20
27
17 45
32 42
31
18
22 24

21 22
13 19
15 40
17 22
27 35

1985-86
% Black

1986-87
% Black

11 17
31 31
30 30

0 0
24 29

26 36

27 24
39 35
26 30
27 22
36 30
16 19
27 31
20 24

56 65
33 44

11 22

38 17
14 23
38 38
35 27
25 21



542

1972-73 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87
% Black % Black % Black % Black

Willow Brook 24 34 44 42
Wilson 21 23 17 21
Woodson 44

[NO.
SCHOOLS] 82 69 65 64

[AVERAGE %
BLACK] 21% 29% 27% 28%

[RANGE] 13%-44% 8%-63% 0%-65% Q%-70%

^Source: PX 29 (Exhibit 2(a) to Defendants' Answers to Plain­
tiffs' First Interrogatories on Remand).

Fifth-grade centers omitted for 1985-86 and 1986-87 school 
years because of non-comparable grade structure of Hoover.



543

PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT 50
1984-85 Elementary Enrollment 
and Faculty -  Percent Black*

School

Faculty 
1984-85 
% Black

Enrl. 
1984-85 
% Black

Burbank 63 35.4
Lincoln 55 36.9
Riverside 49 13.6
Edwards ■ 48 29.7
Creston Hills 48 41.4
Garden Oaks 48 36.9
Telstar 45 68.3
Harrison 43 45.8
Spencer 43 65.5
Truman 42 27.6
Oakridge 40 49.7
Hawthorne 40 28.4
Westwood 40 21.0
Britton 38 40.6
Davis 36 45.9
Horace Mann 36 28.8
Willard 35 21.2
Edgemere 35 51.8
Willow Brook 34 62.7
North Highland 34 46.5
Arcadia 32 34.6



544

School

Faculty 
1984-85 
% Black

Enrl. 
1984-85 
% Black

Eugene Field 32 34.9
Polk 32 31.6
Kaiser 32 37.8
Shidler 32 30.7
Star 31 54.0
King 30 43.2
Gatewood 29 44.9
Lafayette 29 40.3
Sequoyah 29 36.3
Parker 29 72.3
Hayes 29 25.7
Shields Heights 27 25.5
Southern Hills 27 35.4
Bodine 26 36.0
Madison 25 23.6
Quail Creek 24 31.0
Monroe 24 33.5
Van Buren 24 23.3
Buchanan 24 27.0
Arthur 23 20.2
Hillcrest 23 37.5
Parmelee 23 38.6
Wilson 23 29.0
Heronville 22 25.7
Ridgeview 22 30.6
West Nichols Hills 22 35.1
Wheeler 22 23.2
Rockwood 21 35.4
Putnam Heights 20 45.8



545

School

Faculty 
1984-85 
% Black

Enrl. 
1984-85 
% Black

Stonegate 20 42.2
Fillmore 19 29.6
Western Village 19 52.0
Pierce 19 28.2
Rancho Village 18 20.7
Stand Watie 17 22.5
Coolidge 17 27.6
Longfellow 16 32.2
Mark Twain 16 33.5
Adams 16 26.7
Columbus 16 16.9
Prairie Queen 15 25.9
Dewey 15 33.5
Lee 14 21.5
Johnson 13 57.4
Linwood 8 17.5

Ŝource: PX 25 (Exhibit 1(b) to Defendants' Answers to Plain­
tiffs' First Interrogatories on Remand), PX 29 (Exhibit 2(a) to 
Defendants' Answers to Plaintiffs' First Interrogatories on 
Remand)



546

PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 52
1985-86 Elementary Enrollment 
and Faculty -  Percent Black*

School

Faculty 
1985-86 
% Black

Enrl. 
1985-86 
% Black

Edwards 65 99.3
Creston Hills 57 98.8
Telstar 56 58.2
Lincoln 49 97.5
Dewey 48 97.1
Parker 44 97.3
Willow Brook 44 46.4
Polk 43 97.7
Garden Oaks 40 98.8
North Highland 39 96.3
Shidler 39 37.1
Harrison 39 43.9
Westwood 38 24.2
West Nichols Hills 38 21.3
Horace Mann 38 33.1
Hawthorne 37 15.6
Hayes 36 10.9
Spencer 36 71.1
Kaiser 35 12.8
Wheeler 35 9.7



547

School

Faculty 
1985-86 
% Black

Enrl. 
1985-86 
% Black

Gatewood 34 32.3
Oakridge 33 45.6
Truman 33 99.3
Putnam Heights 31 30.3
Longfellow 31 99.3
Quail Creek 30 15.8
Southern Hills 27 7.6
Star 17 54.6
Heronville 27 12.2
Sequoyah 27 16.9
Rockwood 26 35.0
Shields Heights 26 3.7
King 26 99.5
Edgemere 26 53.5
Willard 25 4.9
Mark Twain 24 9.8
Ridgeview 24 18.6
Bodine 23 34.5
Fillmore 23 9.3
Britton 22 37.3
Davis 22 8.4
Parmelee 22 6.3
Lafayette 22 1.8
Columbus 21 15.5
Stonegate 20 33.2
Monroe 20 21.4
Arthur 20 6.3
Adams 18 8.3
Arcadia 18 30.3
Coolidge 17 7.5



548

School

Faculty 
1985-86 
% Black

Enrl. 
1985-86 
% Black

Pierce 17 17.8
Wilson 17 31.6
Buchanan 17 8.2
Hillcrest 17 5.1
Eugene Field 16 32.2
Stand Watie 16 28.8
Johnson 15 31.4
Western Village 14 65.0
Lee 14 7.9
Madison 13 10.7
Prairie Queen 11 6.1
Van Buren 11 8.8
Linwood 9 9.3
Rancho Village 0 6.1

’‘'Source: PX 25 (Exhibit 1(b) to Defendants' Answers to Plain­
tiffs' First Interrogatories on Remand), PX 29 (Exhibit 2(a) to 
Defendants' Answers to Plaintiffs' First Interrogatories on 
Remand)



549

PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 54
1986-87 Elementary Enrollment 
and Faculty -  Percent Black*

School

Faculty 
1986-87 
% Black

Enrl. 
1986-87 
% Black

Edwards 70 99.5
Telstar 65 59.7
Lincoln 64 99.3
Garden Oaks 50 98.3
Polk 46 98.8
Parker 46 96.9
Truman 44 99.7
King 43 98.9
Creston Hills 43 99.0
Dewey 42 98.4
Willow Brook 42 51.5
Hawthorne 41 19.2
Edgemere 39 51.3
Longfellow 38 99.1
Westwood 38 20.0
Harrison 38 49.4
North Highland 38 97.5
Rockwood 36 41.5
Shidler 35 37.1
Mark Twain 35 9.7
Horace Mann 33 35.2
Putnam Heights 31 34.8
Kaiser 31 18.1



550

School

Faculty 
1986-87 
% Black

Enrl. 
1986-87 
% Black

Star 31 61.4
Shields Heights 30 3.9
Quail Creek 30 13.1
Spencer 30 76.3
Heronville 29 8.9
Ridgeview 29 17.1
Hayes 29 11.2
Monroe 27 15.9
Gatewood 27 25.7
Columbus 27 15.2
Wheeler 27 8.1
Oakridge 26 42.3
Fillmore 25 6.4
Stonegate 24 33.1
Sequoyah 24 19.5
Britton 24 37.9
Bodine 23 34.2
Western Village 23 65.6
Southern Hills 22 7.0
Lafayette 22 2.7
Van Buren 22 7.7
Willard 21 9.1
Parmelee 21 11.8
Wilson 21 26.4
Arcadia 20 28.5
Stand Watie 19 25.9
Lee 18 6.6
Hillcrest 18 11.6
Coolidge 18 5.1



551

School

Faculty 
1986-87 
% Black

Enrl. 
1986-87 
% Black

West Nichols Hills 17 20.0
Eugene Field 17 31.8
Prairie Queen 17 6.2
Madison 17 15.0
Davis 17 9.9
Johnson 15 27.4
Arthur 15 7.3
Adams 14 6.1
Buchanan 10 8.8
Pierce 10 16.3
Linwood 10 13.6
Rancho Village 0 10.6

Ŝource: PX 25 (Exhibit 1(b) to Defendants' Answers to Plain­
tiffs' First Interrogatories on Remand), PX 29 (Exhibit 2(a) to 
Defendants' Answers to Plaintiffs' First Interrogatories on 
Remand)



552

PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 56
Minutes, December 10, 1984, 

School Board Meeting

The Board of Education of Independent School District 
Number 89 of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, met in a 
special, meeting in the Board Room, Administration 
Building, 900 North Klein, Monday, December 10, 1984 at 
6:30 P.M.

Present: Susan Homes President
LaRue Donworth Vice President
Jean Brody Member
Paul Heath Member
Betty Hill Member
Hugh Long Member
Clyde Muse Member

*  *  *

SPECIAL BUSINESS

The purpose of the special meeting was for public hear­
ings on the 1985-86 Student Assignment Plan. Mrs. 
Homes announced the method for conducting the hear­
ings and called on the speakers.

Seventy-five persons were heard, and their remarks are 
summarized as follows:

1. Chuck Keeler, Teacher, Classen High School, spoke 
in favor of the HALO (A.F.T. proposed) Plan.

2. Bob Stalnaker, Teacher, Eisenhower Middle School, 
felt Eisenhower would be underutilized as a fifth 
year center as proposed in the plan. He also asked 
about the Board's intentions for the Arcadia area.

3. Diane Harvey-Oden, Monroe School Patron, sug­
gested that integration should begin before fifth



553

grade; felt if the plan was implemented, desegrega­
tion would not be as good as it is now.

4. Wayne Dempsey, Patron, expressed concern with the 
plan, specifically to the elementary school issue. 
Closing Classen High School was also discussed. Mr. 
Dempsey disapproved the previous allowance of 
transfers, and felt Classen should be left open.

5. Joyce Henderson, Principal of Classen High School, 
asked that Classen be continued, but as a special 
(magnet) high school.

6. Alfred N. Blakeley, Patron, commended the Board 
for taking a stand spoke against the concept of 'sepa­
rate but equal'; proposed the Board consider this a 
preliminary plan and not take action at this time.

7. Carolyn Wallace, Northwest Classen Patron, com­
mended the board on the plan; felt those responsible 
for the plan would be alert to any inequities and the 
measures to correct them should they occur.

8. Charles Moore, Patron, Classen area, suggested the 
Board was moving much too fast and needed to 
study the plan further.

9. Julie Perkins, Student, Capitol Hill Middle School, 
asked that the students not be asked to move; that 
the school not be changed to a fifth year center.

10. Sheldon Dadson, student, Capitol Hill Middle 
School, spoke on retaining the school as a middle 
school and told of the special programs there.

11. Effie Grimes, Patron, Northeast area, spoke against 
the plan; felt the current assignments were working; 
felt the proposed plan would create segregation 
again.

12. Joyce Collins, Patron, Capitol Hill Middle School, 
asked that the school be left a middle school.

13. Ed Kirkpatrick, Classen High School parent stated 
that philosophically he had a problem with the plan 
because of the possible re-segregation.



554

14. Katrina Adams, Student, Capitol Hill Middle School, 
stated majority of students did not want the school 
changed to a fifth year center. She presented the 
Board with a petition signed by the students.

15. Michael Stephenson, Student, Capitol Hill Middle 
School, spoke against making the school a fifth year 
center.

16. Mike Wetmore, Student, Classen High School, asked 
about transportation for the students if they were 
transferred to Northwest; felt the Board had not 
given the HALO Plan serious consideration; and felt 
Classen should not be overlooked because they did 
not "make waves".

17. Kay Floyd, Eisenhower Middle School Patron, stated 
a concern that if the plan was approved, Hoover 
would need portables, have large classes, and 
require teachers to travel from room to room. 
Requested opening Nichols Hills as a fifth year cen­
ter and leaving Eisenhower and Hoover as middle 
schools.

18. Chester Boevers, Patron, support the proposed plan; 
like the neighborhood school concept.

19. Charlene H. Moore, Student, Classen High School, 
suggested the Board consider moving the Cleveland 
students to Classen, using Classen as a magnet, or 
changing the boundaries. If Classen is to be closed, 
asked that the students and teachers be moved to 
N.W. Classen with allowance for special transfer to 
Douglas or N.E. on request.

20. Dianne Kruegar, Patron, Arcadia, felt the fifth grade 
was too late for integration; asked if the fifth grade 
could be left at the Arcadia Elementary School.

21. Charles Alexander, Teacher, Capitol Hill Middle 
School, spoke against the plan. He felt the plan was 
a step backward, caused unnecessary movement of



555

staff, loss of pay for some, and retained the "unnec­
essary" fifth year centers. He proposed the HALO 
Plan.

22. Kylle Kerstan, Teacher, Rogers Middle School, con­
tinued to explain the A.F.T.'s plan. She felt the Union 
and community input should have been sought -  
suggested a modification of the Board Committee's 
plan.

23. Ann Turner, Teacher, Grant High School, continued 
discusion [sic] of the HALO Plan, which was devel­
oped after input from teachers and patrons was 
sought.

24. Ruth Nichols, Teacher, also outlined a part of the 
HALO Plan.

25. Tony DeGlusti, AFT Staff, continued the presenta­
tion about the AFT proposed HALO plan; stated 
affirmative action was a "given" in the plan; stated 
the plan offered was not perfect, but is an alterna­
tive.

26. Georgia Iannello, President, A.F.T., asked that the 
Board take a serious look at the plan, look at the 
cost. She said the teachers were concerned about 
resegregation, and asked the Board to take some 
more time.

27. Mary Hamilton, Lafayette Kindergarten Teacher, 
said that Lafayette should be the starting point as a 
neighborhood school.

28. Cherie Scott, Bodine Patron, asked that the fifth 
grade be left at Bodine; wanted justification for the 
fifth graders to be moved.

29. Sam Barnett, Capitol Hill Middle School Parent, sup­
ported leaving CHMS a middle school; asked that 
the Board reconsider making the school a fifth year 
center.

30. Leslie Brown, Acting President, Oklahoma City 
Branch of NAACP, stated that his organization



556

opposed the plan as presented; that the district 
should not return to a segregated society, and felt 
the plan did this.

31. Pamela Woody, Oakridge Patron, asked for consider­
ation of Oakridge as a K-5 school.

At 8:00 p.m. President Hermes declared a recess. The
Board reconvened at 8:14 p.m. Mr. Long left the meeting
during the recess.

32. Barbara Erickson, Teacher, Classen High School, 
stated she believed in the integrated school system; 
could not support resegregation; felt Classen was a 
fine school.

33. Jan Collins, Patron, supported the revised student 
assignment plan as a step forward to neighborhood 
schools. She asked that the board consider eliminat­
ing fifth year centers; and asked that K-5 schools be 
instituted. Ms. Collins presented a petition suppor­
ting those views to the Board.

34. Rita Chappie Clytus, Patron, spoke against cross­
town busing for purposes of desegregation; sup­
ported the plan; asked for racial integration using 
field trips, etc., rather than busing.

35. Freddie Williams, Patron, commended the Board for 
their actions; supported the plans; opposed busing; 
asked the Board to fortify the plan with equity, care, 
and concern.

36. Mildred E. Rayner, Patron, Teacher, expressed con­
cern for the students and staff of CHMS as well as 
the fifth grade students to be assigned there under 
the new plan because of the size of the playground, 
facilities, location, number of restrooms, etc.; asked 
about the cost of adapting the school for fifth year 
use; asked the CHMS be left as is.

37. Linda Sellers, Patron, CHMS Teacher, stated CHMS 
has a good program, and is self-supporting as far as



557

special activities are concerned; gave examples of 
their efforts. She supported leaving the school a 
middle school.

38. Brenda Fink, Patron, supported the new proposed 
plan over the Finger Plan.

39. Heather Howerton, Student CHMS, wished to "save 
the school".

40. Eunice O. Farbes, Teacher, Classen High School, 
stated that students of all races need to go to school 
together as little children if integration is to be suc­
cessful. Asked that the Board find a way to keep 
Classen open as a kind of school that would "pull 
in" students.

41. Mrs. Andrew J. Brooks, Teacher, Classen High 
School, spoke against the plan; felt it was a step 
backward and would not support integration.

42. Mary Edwards, Patron, spoke for the proposed plan.

43. Jamie Atherton, Patron, supported the proposal; 
supported the concept of neighborhood schools.

44. Sheila Thornton, Patron, supported the plan.

45. Jay Mercer, Patron, supported the plan, either K-4 or 
K-5; felt that main concern should be safety of the 
kids.

46. Leora Cole, Patron, was against the busing of chil­
dren, kindergarten through fourth grade; stated that 
busing prevented participation by students in extra 
curricular activities; supported the plan.

47. Ann Wilson Witte, Teacher, President of OEA, OKC, 
expressed concern about transfer of teachers; asked 
the teachers be treated fairly and with dignity.

48. Beth Antonelli, Patron, wanted equal opportunity in 
education, regardless of where the students attended 
school; supported the proposed plan.



558

49. Mary Ann Gates, patron, supported the proposal.
50. Billie Oldham, Patron, was for the plan.
51. Kathy Shinn, Patron, supported the plan.

52. Clara Luper, Patron, Teacher, John Marshall High 
School, spoke against the plan, and said litigation 
would follow if the plan was adopted.

53. Gwen Sneed spoke against the plan; asked the Board 
to review the proposal and come up with something 
different.

54. Debbie Robinson supported the proposal so that her 
children would not be bused across town.

55. Cecil Williams spoke to the issue, opposing the plan.
56. Chelle Luper, Student, NAACP Youth Council, was 

against the plan.

57. Charles Wilson spoke against the plan; liked things 
the way they are now.

58. Sheronda Mitchell, NAACP Youth Council, spoke for 
integrated schools and against the plan.

59. Darlene Smith, Dewey Fifth Year Center Patron, 
spoke in support of the plan.

60. Clyde Madden, Patron, spoke in opposition to the 
plan; asked the Board to vote the plan down.

61. Wayne Vincent, Patron, Classen High School, said he 
was concerned that the discussion seemed to be that 
of a black/white issue. He proposed that the plan for 
Classen be termed "reorganization"; that Northwest 
Classen should be renamed Classen.

62. Ira Hall, Patron, said whatever plan was decided on, 
we should all work for the welfare of the children.

63. Phoebe Revelle, Teacher, Northeast High School, 
voiced her pride in the OKC Public Schools; spoke 
against the plan, stating that it offered a return to 
segregation.



559

64. James O. Morrissey supported the plan; thanked the 
Board for "taking up the torch" for the students.

65. Marilyn A. Hildreth, Patron, West Nichols Hills, 
spoke against the plan; said that she would rather 
have her child ride a bus than go to segregated 
schools.

66. Earnestine M. Bell spoke against the plan.

67. Zack Phillips, Patron, spoke against the plan; said 
the plan would not work. He asked that the Board 
come out with a "decent" plan for all students.

68. Lael Erickson, Patron, spoke against the plan; stated 
that it [is] regressive rather than progressive.

69. Barbara True supported the plan. She said it was not 
going backward; rather, it will give the children in 
grades K-4 a feeling of security being nearer to 
home.

70. Kay Ahaus, Patron, asked the Board to reconsider 
the plan, to not act in haste. Regarding Hoover and 
Eisenhower, she felt they would be overcrowded 
under the proposed plan.

71. Robert Schumacher, Student, Southeast High School, 
thanked the Board for listening.

72. Leonard Senton, President, OKC Urban League, said 
that when the original plan was developed it was 
unfair in the black children had to be bused grades 
1-4 and white did not. He said if we are not going to 
have two-way busing, then students should be 
allowed to stay in their own neighborhoods.

73. Joanel Provo, Teacher, CHMS, spoke against the 
plan.

74. Wallace Johnson supported delaying any action until 
further study takes place.



75. Blanton Bennett opposed the plans; asked for a post­
ponement until a plan beneficial to all concerned 
could be developed.

*  *  *

560



RECORD, SUPPLEMENTAL VOLUME II



561

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 5D
Oklahoma City Population Change in 

East Inner-City Tracts, 1950-1980

BLACK POPULATION
TRACT NO.* 1950 1960 1970** 1980**

13 660 4818 5463 4198
27 686 2696 1691 22
28 2233 6784 4554 3504
29 5244 3684 1183 447
30 3976 5066 2746 853
38 4828 3324 1625 912
79 not 2905 2747 2623

tracted

TOTAL POPULATION
TRACT NO.* 1950 1960 1970** 1980**

13 4618 5531 5655 4278
27 3496 3684 1821 45
28 6699 7097 4631 3617
29 5368 3747 1190 456
30 7673 6488 3026 1082
38 6446 4115 1768 1064
79 not 3030 2791 2663

tracted

^Proportion of total Oklahoma City black population living in 
these tracts: 1950, 82%; 1960, 84%; 1980, 16.8%.
**The tract numbers for 1970 and 1980 had the number 10 
preceding each original tract number, i.e., tract 13 became tract 
1013.

Source: U.S. Census



562

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 5E
Oklahoma City Black Population Turnover* 

in East Inner-City Tracts

TRACT NO.**
1965-70

(percent)
1975-80

(percent)

13 40.5 23.8
27 49.9 no data
28 31.0 35.5
29 38.9 39.5
30 60.7 49.4
38 59.4 48.5
79 31.2 no data

Average % 
Turnover 42.0 33.2

^Percent who did not live in the same house 5 years previously.
**The tract numbers for 1975-80 had the number 10 preceding 
each original tract number, i.e., tract 13 became tract 1013.

Source: U.S. Census



POPULATION GROWTH/CHANGE IN THE OKLAHOMA CITY
METROPOLITAN AREA

% Growth Absolute 
1960-1970 White Change

Absolute 
Black Change

£3OTS£
£ ST«—t-
O o' £  £

Oklahoma School District (1) 1.6% -6784 8126
g* o
o 3
3 1» 3-tj*(2) 25.7% 1986 1247

(3) -8.8% -64 -85 o
Eastern Oklahoma County 38.3% 20571 3666
Northern Oklahoma County 77.2% 7763 65 3OQ
Western Oklahoma County 
Part of Canadian County

112.9% 
* **

54352
***

75 
* **

D
EFEN

D
A

N
T'S EX

H
IBIT 6



% Growth 
1970-1980

Oklahoma School District (1) -7.8%
(2) 10.5%
(3) 40.3%

Eastern Oklahoma County 28.2%
Northern Oklahoma County 94.4%
Western Oklahoma County 17.0%
Part of Canadian County 165.8%

Absolute Absolute
White Change Black Change

-36185 5093
-1254 2650

535 -55
17633 8854
15423 781
11257 2907
23692 118

564



% Growth Absolute Absolute
1960-1980 White Change Black Change

Oklahoma School District (1) -6.3% -42969 13219
(2) 38.7% 732 3897
(3) 28.0% 471 -140

Eastern Oklahoma County 77.4% 38204 12550
Northern Oklahoma County 244.5% 23186 846
Western Oklahoma County 149.2% 65609 2982
Part of Canadian County *** *** ***

*** Canadian County was untracted in 1960 
See Map for Geographic Units

Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1960, 1970, and 1980.

565



566

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 10 
Abstract, Clark, Residential Segregation 

in American Cities

Population Research and Policy Review 5: 95-127 (1986) 
© Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht - Printed in the 
Netherlands

Residential segregation in American cities: a review and 
interpretation

W.A.V. CLARK
Department of Geography, University of California Los 
Angeles, CA 90024, USA

Abstract. Significant levels of separation between blacks 
and whites still exist in large American cities, and debate 
about the causes of that residential separation has been 
considerable. A balanced analysis of the factors that 
might explain residential segregation -  economic status 
(affordability), social preferences, urban structure, and 
discrimination -  suggests that no one factor can account 
for the patterns that have arisen in U.S. metropolitan 
areas. Empirical estimation of the impact of economic 
status suggests that 30-70 percent of racial separation is 
attributable to economic factors. However, economic fac­
tors do not act alone, but in association with preferences. 
Together with elements of the urban structure, these fac­
tors bear much of the explanatory weight for present 
residential patterns. Survey evidence from both national 
and local studies shows that black households prefer 
neighborhoods that are half black and half white, while 
whites prefer neighborhoods ranging from 0 to 30 percent 
black.



567

The debate about causes seems most polarized over 
the role of discrimination. Although comments in the 
literature often focus on the past use of racially restrictive 
covenants by state-regulated agencies and discriminatory 
acts by realtors and financial institutions, the docu­
mented individual cases of discrimination do not appear 
to be part of a massive collusion to deny housing oppor­
tunities to minorities. A review of the evidence from 
social science investigations demonstrates that there are 
multiple causes of racial residential separation in U.S. 
metropolitan areas.

*  *  *

An earlier version of this paper was presented to the U.S. 
Commission on Civil Rights, Washington, D.C., Novem­
ber 12, 1985.

* *  Hr



568

Oklahoma City Public Schools 
Percent Black in Residential Zones

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 11

Residential
Zone

(School Name)

Percent
Black
1972

Percent
Black
1986

Projected
Percent
Black
1995

Eugene Field 0.6 31.9 39.5
Sequoyah 0.0 26.2 34.9
Britton 0.4 25.9 37.0
Stonegate 0.5 21.9 32.5
Ridgeview 0.1 17.5 29.8
Hawthorne 0.9 17.3 28.1
Johnson 0.0 13.9 26.7
Davis 0.3 13.8 25.1
Kaiser 0.0 13.2 24.5
Parmelee 0.0 12.2 23.3
Linwood 0.4 11.6 23.6
W. Nichols Hills 0.3 10.4 23.2
Madison 0.3 10.0 22.5
Hillcrest 0.3 9.8 21.5
Cleveland 0.5 8.8 22.1
Mayfair 0.2 8.4 21.0
Hayes 0.7 7.9 20.3
Arthur 0.2 7.9 20.6
Burbank 0.0 7.5 20.8
Adams 0.0 7.4 20.4
Monroe 0.2 7.0 20.6
Quail Creek 0.0 6.3 19.5
Lee 0.2 6.1 19.3
Heronville 0.7 6.1 18.8
Fillmore 0.5 5.4 18.3
Southern Hills 0.1 5.1 18.1
Mckinley 0.0 5.1 18.1
Pierce 0.2 5.0 18.9
Buchanan 0.3 4.8 18.4
Coolidge 0.0 4.3 17.5



569

Residential
Zone

(School Name)

Shields Heights 
Henry
Prairie Queen
Rancho
Sunset
Stand Watie
Garfield
Lafayette
Valley Brook
Telstar
Western Village
Harrison
Star
Bodine
Oakridge
Wilson
Lone Star
Gatewood
Putnam Heights
Wheeler
Columbus
Van Buren
Belle Isle
Ross
Westwood
Willow Brook
Willard
Tyler
Edgemere
Emerson
Mark Twain
Spencer
Riverside

Percent Percent 
Black Black
1972 1986

0.0 3.9
0.8 3.6
0.1 3.1
0.0 3.1
0.5 2.8
0.2 2.5
0.0 2.4
0.0 2.4
0.9 2.1
4.8 64.9
2.2 64.8
2.5 56.3
4.2 46.8
3.2 40.7
1.9 39.3
2.5 33.7
3.0 31.7
5.0 28.4
3.1 26.4
1.3 15.9
2.1 7.4
1.3 7.3
1.6 7.3
1.2 3.0
1.8 2.0
5.1 61.9
5.3 9.3
5.5 29.6
8.9 48.9

10.2 37.9
12.3 16.5
17.9 71.5
20.2 14.6

Projected
Percent
Black
1995

17.6
17.0
16.7 
16.6
17.3 
16.6 
16.6 
16.2
16.8
66.0
64.0 
60.2
53.5
46.3
45.8
42.7
39.7
37.3
35.9
26.7
20.4
20.1
20.4
17.3
17.1
63.9
22.6
36.8
54.1
44.5
27.4
71.2 
26.1



570

Residential
Zone

(School Name)

Projected
Percent Percent Percent 
Black Black Black
1972 1986 1995

Nichols Hills 23.5 51.2 54.5
Horace Mann 25.6 42.0 48.8
Rockwood 36.9 48.9 50.5
Shidler 53.1 43.1 47.9
North Highland 55.0 95.0 87.5
Arcadia 62.7 35.1 42.5
Near Spencer (2) 84.8 100.0 94.8
Near Spencer (1) 86.4 92.3 89.6
Green Pastures 95.4 95.2 91.6
Dewey 95.6 96.8 91.0
Polk 96.5 95.4 91.0
Lincoln 96.7 90.9 87.1
Dunbar 97.3 100.0 94.6
Edison 97.7 98.2 93.8
Edwards 97.8 99.4 94.8
Longfellow 97.8 97.5 92.9
Page 98.0 100.0 93.2
Near Parker 98.4 96.9 92.8
Parker 98.5 97.1 93.0
Harmony 98.6 98.9 93.5
Truman 98.9 99.3 94.4
Woodson 98.9 96.2 91.8
Garden Oaks 99.1 98.2 94.0
Creston Hills 99.3 98.8 94.3
Culbertson 99.3 98.1 93.5



571

White Population in Oklahoma City SMSA 
1970-1980

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 21

Percent
1970 1980 Change

All Ages: 
SMSA 571,229 644,868 12.89
Inside District Boundary 
Outside District

254,758 217,989 -14.43

Boundary 316,470 426,878 34.89
Ages 6-9:
" SMSA 44,076 37,759 -14.33

Inside District Boundary 
Outside District

17,558 10,383 -40.86

Boundary 26,517 27,375 3.24
Age 10: 
"SM SA 11,578 9,913 -14.38

Inside District Boundary 
Outside District

4,637 2,451 -47.14

Boundary 6,940 7,461 7.51
Ages 11-13:

SMSA 33,279 26,487 -20.41
Inside District Boundary 
Outside District

13,222 6,614 -49.98

Boundary 20,056 19,872 -0.91
Ages 14-17:
“ SMSA----- 42,678 40,175 -5.86

Inside District Boundary 
Outside District

17,863 10,427 -41.63

Boundary 24,814 29,747 19.88

Source: 1970 and 1980 U.S. Census.



572

Black Population in Oklahoma City SMSA 
1970-1980

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 24

Percent
1970 1980 Change

All Ages: 
Sm sa 54,267 73,374 35.21
Inside District Boundary 
Outside District

46,010 53,637 16.58

Boundary 8,256 19,736 139.03
Ages 6-9:

SMSA 5,908 6,036 2.17
Inside District Boundary 
Outside District

5,034 4,450 -11.61

Boundary 873 1,585 81.54
Age 10:
' S MS A 1,600 1,501 -6.19

Inside District Boundary 
Outside District

1,353 1,133 -16.26

Boundary 246 367 49.06
Ages 11-13:

SMSA 4,254 4,089 -3.88
Inside District Boundary 
Outside District

3,601 3,078 -14.53

Boundary 652 1,010 54.92
Ages 14-17:

SMSA 4,829 6,270 29.84
Inside District Boundary 
Outside District

4,086 4,811 17.74

Boundary 742 1,458 96.47

Source: 1970 and 1980 U.S. Census.



School Districts in Comparably Sized SMSAs 
Black versus Non-Black

District Location

Number
of

Schools

Total
Number of 

Students
Percent
Black

Dissimilarity
Index Year

Columbus, OH 126 67,202 • 44.0 0.136 1984
Providence, RI 29 18,280 26.0 0.185 1984
Louisville, KY1 144 91,912 30.0 0.193 1984
Dayton, OH 43 29,649 60.0 0.194 1984
Indianapolis, IN 86 53,087 46.0 0.194 1984
Syracuse, NY 34 20,720 33.0 0.196 1982
Buffalo, NY 75 46,818 47.0 0.224 1982
Greensboro, NC 37 21,908 49.0 0.245 1984
Worcester, MA 48 19,805 6.0 0.263 1984
Gastonia, NC2 55 31,843 17.0 0.284 1984
Norfolk, VA3 50 35,694 58.2 0.288 1986
Milwaukee, WI 137 87,308 51.0 0.303 1984
Nashville, TN4 119 63,030 36.0 0.308 1984
Rochester, NY 49 32,100 52.0 0.314 1984
Sacramento, CA 71 42,284 23.0 0.319 1984
Albany, NY 17 8,050 43.0 0.332 1984
Salt Lake City, UT 53 24,454 2.0 0.344 1984

D
EFEN

D
A

N
T'S EX

H
IBIT 38 

School D
istricts in C

om
parably Sized SM

SA
's



District Location

Number
of

Schools

Total
Number of 

Students
Percent
Black

Dissimilarity
Index Year

Oklahoma City, OK 86 39,837 39.3 0.389 1986
Richmond, VA 55 29,626 86.0 0.406 1984
Jacksonville, FL5 144 99,582 36.0 0.422 1984
Orlando, FL6 97 80,044 24.0 0.423 1984
New Haven, CT 39 17,071 60.0 0.440 1984
Scranton, PA 25 11,976 2.0 0.471 1978
Palm Beach, FL7 95 76,185 28.0 0.519 1984
Portland, OR 111 50,628 15.0 0.533 1984
Kansas City, MO 73 36,228 68.0 0.540 1984
Tulsa, OK 91 44,833 26.0 0.557 1984
Hartford, CT 39 23,581 45.0 0.589 1984
San Antonio, TX 94 59,106 13.0 0.676 1984
Memphis, TN 105 73,291 78.0 0.677 1984
New Orleans, LA8 128 82,968 86.0 0.705 1984
Birmingham, AL 95 44,207 81.0 0.743 1984

* Based on 1984 SMSA populations reported in 1986  S ta te  an d  M etro p o lita n  D ata  B ook . Includes 24th 
through 55th largest SMSAs (excluding Honolulu); Oklahoma City is ranked 39th.

574



N o te : The dissimilarity index equals the number of students who must be reassigned to achieve 
racial balance relative to the number who would be reassigned if the district were completely 
segregated. An index of 1.0 corresponds to complete segregation. An index of 0.0 means every 
school has the districtwide proportion of blacks.

S ou rce: Office of Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education; Norfolk Public School District 
membership records; Oklahoma City Public Schools membership records.

1 Jefferson County.
2 Gaston County.
3 Norfolk County.
4 Davidson County.
5 Duval County.
6 Orange County.
7 West Palm Beach County.
8 New Orleans Parish.

575



576

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 40
Indices for Residential Zones

Segregation Indices for Residential Zones 
Actual Values: 1972-1986 

Forecasts: 1987-1995 
Oklahoma City Public Schools 

Black versus Non-Black

Year Enrollment
Percent
Black

Dis­
similarity

Index
Exposure

Index

1972 53,486 25.1 0.869 0.149
1973 48,874 27.5 0.856 0.160
1974 43,843 28.3 0.839 0.172
1975 45,324 30.0 0.809 0.188
1976 41,725 30.9 0.785 0.201
1977 41,428 32.3 0.763 0.212
1978 38,958 34.1 0.739 0.222
1979 38,420 35.1 0.727 0.229
1980 37,882 34.3 0.709 0.250
1981 36,386 36.1 0.709 0.248
1982 36,470 36.4 0.693 0.257
1983 35,994 37.4 0.672 0.266
1984 35,481 38.8 0.661 0.274
1985 35,514 39.1 0.651 0.283
1986 35,466 40.0 0.640 0.290

1987 35,189 40.6 0.619 0.304
1988 34,936 41.3 0.599 0.316
1989 34,708 41.9 0.580 0.328
1990 34,508 42.6 0.562 0.338
1991 34,315 43.1 0.544 0.348
1992 34,135 43.7 0.527 0.357
1993 33,974 44.2 0.510 0.365
1994 33,813 44.7 0.494 0.373
1995 33,667 45.2 0.478 0.381



577

*  *  *

Notes: The dissimilarity index for residential zones
equals the number of students who would 
have to move to achieve racial balance relative 
to the number who would have to move if 
residential zones were completely segregated. 
An index of 1.0 corresponds to complete resi­
dential segregation. An index of 0.0 means 
every residential zone has the districtwide pro­
portion of blacks.

The exposure index equals the average fraction 
of non-black students in black students' resi­
dential zones. An index of 0.0 corresponds to 
complete residential segregation.

Residential zones are defined by the 1972 
Desegregation Plan.

Sources: Oklahoma City Public Schools assignment 
records. Enrollment totals exclude kinder­
garten, special education students and trans­
fers into the district.



578

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 45 
Indices for All Schools

Segregation Indices for Oklahoma City Public Schools 
Black versus Non-Black 

All Schools

Year Enrollment
Percent
Black

Dis­
similarity

Index
Exposure

Index

1970 71,089 22.9 0.817 0.182
1971 68,840 23.4 0.780 0.222
1972 60,674 26.4 0.277 0.669
1973 54,196 26.7 0.255 0.677
1974 52,143 28.3 0.236 0.670
1975 50,162 29.7 0.246 0.651
1976 47,941 31.1 0.254 0.636
1977 46,274 32.3 0.270 0.619
1978 42,933 33.1 0.245 0.619
1979 42,471 34.8 0.267 0.594
1980 40,961 35.3 0.230 0.603
1981 40,777 35.5 0.233 0.596
1982 41,427 35.5 0.244 0.592
1983 40,513 36.7 0.234 0.584
1984 40,373 38.3 0.244 0.563
1985 40,174 38.6 0.377 0.464
1986 39,837 39.3 0.389 0.453

* *

Notes: The dissimilarity index equals the number of
students who must be reassigned to achieve 
racial balance relative to the number who would 
be reassigned if the district were completely 
segregated. An index of 1.0 corresponds to com­
plete segregation. An index of 0.0 means every 
school has the district wide proportion of 
blacks.



579

The exposure index equals the average fraction 
of non-black students in schools attended by 
blacks. An index of 0.0 corresponds to complete 
segregation.

Source: Oklahoma City Public Schools membership 
records.



Elementary Schools by Race 
(Ranked by Percent of Black Students), 
Oklahoma City Public Schools, 1985-86

Rank School % Black % Oriental % Indian % Spanish % White
% Non- 
White

1 Lafayette 2.0 1.0 5.4 5.4 86.2 13.8
2 Shields Heights 4.0 0.3 7.4 21.4 66.9 33.1
3 Hillcrest 5.1 0.8 5.6 4.0 84.5 15.5
4 Arthur 5.7 1.8 8.6 4.1 79.8 20.2
5 Rancho Village 5.8 1.2 4.0 5.2 83.8 16.2
6 Prairie Queen 6.2 2.2 4.3 2.6 84.7 15.3
7 Parmelee 6.3 1.8 8.3 4.6 79.0 21.0
8.5 Davis 6.6 6.0 6.6 15.7 65.1 34.9
8.5 Willard 6.6 3.9 19.7 28.3 41.5 58.5

10 Coolidge 7.3 3.6 5.7 2.3 81.1 18.9
11 Buchanan 7.5 3.7 3.0 5.8 80.0 20.0
12 Lee 7.7 1.3 11.0 24.5 55.5 44.5
13 Southern Hills 8.0 5.1 1.1 6.8 79.0 21.0
14 Van Buren 8.4 0.9 11.9 3.1 75.7 24.3

D
EFEN

D
A

N
T'S EX

H
IBIT 63

R
acial C

om
position of Elem

entary 
Schools (K

-4), 1985-86



Rank School % Black % Oriental % Indian % Spanish % White
% Non- 
White

15 Adams 8.5 0.0 4.5 7.0 80.0 20.0
16 Fillmore 8.7 1.5 3.3 5.7 80.8 19.2
17 Linwood 9.2 1.4 3.3 1.0 85.1 14.9
18 Wheeler 10.0 1.1 8.3 18.9 61.7 38.3
19 Madison 10.5 3.3 2.9 5.3 78.0 22.0
20.5 Hayes 10.7 0.0 4.9 3.4 81.0 19.0
20.5 Mark Twain 10.7 0.0 10.7 10.7 67.9 32.1
22 Heronville 11.0 0.7 8.2 15.4 64.7 35.3
23 Kaiser 11.9 2.3 0.5 4.0 81.3 18.7
24 Quail Creek 13.2 0.5 0.5 0.5 85.3 14.7
25 Columbus 14.9 1.3 9.5 23.5 50.8 49.2
26.4 Pierce 16.7 0.0 5.0 10.4 67.9 32.1
26.5 Sequoyah 16.7 1.2 4.4 4.4 73.3 26.7
28 Ridgeview 16.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 81.0 19.0
29 Hawthorne 17.2 8.1 9.7 12.9 52.1 47.9
30 Monroe 19.1 3.2 1.2 3.2 73.3 26.7
31 West Nichols 

Hills 21.7 1,5 2.2 1.1 73.5 26.5



Rank School % Black % Oriental %

32 Westwood 22.3 0.5
33 Stand Watie 24.8 1.8
34 Johnson 27.0 0.7
35.5 Gatewood 30.7 12.1
35.5 Horace Mann 30.7 4.3
37 Stonegate 31.0 2.3
38 Putnam Heights 31.1 9.8
39.5 Eugene Field 31.3 4.7
39.5 Wilson 31.3 11.2
41 Bodine 32.7 1.9
42 Arcadia 35.6 0.0
43 Shidler 35.9 0.0
44 Britton 36.5 1.7
45 Rockwood 39.0 0.7
46 Harrison 41.6 0.7
47 Oakridge 43.5 1.5
48 Willow Brook 46.3 1.2
49 Star 54.5 0.0

Indian % Spanish % White
% Non- 
White

6.8 20.9 49.5 50.5
7.7 15.0 50.7 49.3
1.3 6.5 64.5 35.5
3.7 10.5 43.0 57.0
2.7 3.2 59.1 40.9
0.6 1.6 64.5 35.5
4.0 5.1 50.0 50.0
9.8 26.5 27.7 72.3
4.6 6.6 46.3 53.7
3.2 1.4 60.8 39.2
6.9 2.8 54.7 45.3
5.9 28.9 29.3 70.7
1.7 1.7 58.4 41.6
6.6 11.1 42.6 57.4
1.3 3.9 52.5 47.5
3.0 1.5 50.5 49.5
1.2 2.7 48.6 51.4
1.2 0.3 44.0 56.0

582



Rank School % Black % Oriental %

50 Telstar 55.8 1.7
51 Edgemere 56.3 19.3
52 Western Village 60.0 3.8
53 Spencer 71.6 0.6
54 North Highland 96.3 0.9
55 Dewey 96.6 0.4
56 Lincoln 97.2 1.0
57 Parker 97.3 0.0
58 Polk 98.4 0.4
59 Truman 98.7 0.0
60.5 Creston Hills 99.0 0.0
60.5 Garden Oaks 99.0 0.5
62 Edwards 99.5 0.0
63 Longfellow 99.6 0.0
64 King 99.7 0.0
District Elementary
Students 36.0 2.3

Indian % Spanish % White
% Non- 
White

3.3 2.1 37.1 62.9
2.7 6.0 15.7 84.3
0.6 0.9 34.7 65.3
1.4 0.6 25.8 74.2
0.0 0.0 2.8 97.2
0.0 0.0 3.0 97.0
0.6 0.0 1.2 98.8
0.9 0.5 1.3 98.7
0.0 0.0 1.2 98.8
0.0 0.0 1.3 98.7
0.0 0.0 1.0 99.0
0.0 0.0 0.5 99.5
0.0 0.0 0.5 99.5
0.4 0.0 0.0 100.0
0.3 0.0 0.0 100.0

4.2 6.8 50.7 49.3

583



Total Enrollment for Oklahoma City 
Public Schools All Schools

Percent

Year
Black

Students
Non-Black
Students

Total
Students

Percent
Black

Change in 
Non-Blacks

1970 16,256 54,833 71,089 22.9
1971 16,122 52,718 68,840 23.4 -3.9
1972 16,028 44,646 60,674 26.4 -15.3
1973 14,490 39,706 54,196 26.7 -11.1
1974 14,740 37,403 52,143 28.3 -5.8
1975 14,879 35,283 50,162 29.7 -5.7
1976 14,888 33,053 47,941 31.1 -6.3
1977 14,959 31,315 46,274 32.3 -5.3
1978 14,971 29,291 44,262 33.8 -6.5
1979 14,779 27,692 42,471 34.8 -3.6
1980 14,456 26,505 40,961 35.3 -4.3
1981 14,473 26,304 40,777 35.5 -0.8

D
EFEN

D
A

N
T'S EX

H
IBIT 67 

Student Population by R
ace, 1970-1986



Year
Black

Students
Non-Black
Students

Total
Students

Percent
Black

Percent 
Change in 
Non-Blacks

1982 14,710 26,717 41,427 35.5 1.6
1983 14,858 25,655 40,513 36.7 -4.0
1984 15,466 24,907 40,373 38.3 -2.9
1985 15,504 24,670 40,174 38.6 - 1.0
1986 15,648 24,189 39,837 39.3 -1.9

Source: Oklahoma City Public Schools membership records.



586

Minutes, July 2, 1984 School Board Meeting

THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF INDEPENDENT 
SCHOOL DISTRICT NUMBER 89 OF OKLAHOMA 
COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, MET IN A REGULAR MEET­
ING IN THE BOARD ROOM, ADMINISTRATION 
BUILDING, 900 NORTH KLEIN, MONDAY, JULY 2, 1984

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 76

AT 7:00 P.M.

Present: Susan Hermes President

LaRue Donwerth Vice President

Jean Brody Member

Paul Heath Member

Betty Hill Member

Hugh Long Member

Clyde Muse Member

Others present: Don Wright, Superintendent; 
Darrel Shepard, Clerk; Ronald Day, Attorney; 
Don Ladd, Treasurer; Central Office staff mem­
bers, representatives from professional groups, 
the news media and other interested persons.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

1. The first item of Unfinished Business was consider­
ation to designate Bodine Elementary School as a 
"stand-alone school", to include grades K, 1, 2, 3, 4, 
and 5, beginning with the 1984-85 school year.

Pat Watson, Director of Planning, Research and Eval­
uation, gave a brief synopsis of the written report as



587

presented to the Board, dated June 26, 1984. She 
stated the report dealt with K-4 stand alone and K-5 
stand alone schools. There are currently three K-4 
stand alone schools in the District, Harrison, Edge- 
mere, and Western Village. By board action this fiscal 
year, Rockwood will also become a K-4 because the 
only feeder zone was moved to another school due to 
low bus ridership. The report also dealt with the 
proposed 1984-85 Bodine K-4 as one option.

The second part of the report addressed K-5 stand 
alone schools, which do not send students to fifth 
year centers, but where students remain in their 
neighborhoods. Currently, Arcadia and Horace Mann 
are K-5 stand alone, and Rockwood and Bodine K-5 
stand alones are options for 1984-85.

Mrs. Hill asked if and when staff would be recom­
mending Rockwood as a stand alone. Dr. Wright 
responded that at this point in time staff hasn't fully 
considered it; but the information on Rockwood is 
contained in the report.

Dr. Muse asked if Horace Mann and Arcadia were 
considered stand alone based on the same criteria. 
Mrs. Watson said Arcadia's stand alone status was 
based on different criteria because of its isolated loca­
tion; however, the racial balance was in compliance. 
Horace Mann has been a stand alone K-5 since the 
inception of the Finger Plan.

Continuing with the report, John Fink, Research 
Associate, discussed the K-4 portion of the report as 
follows:
"For Bodine to become a K-4 stand alone would 
involve reassigning the feeder students from the 
Creston Hills area currently attending Bodine to 
Hayes. Approximately 11 students would have 
to be reassigned, all of whom are black. The 
reassignment of these 11 students would really 
have no impact on the capacity at either Bodine 
or Hayes. The Creston Hills students would



588

travel an additional two miles, but it would be 
shorter time for them because of access to the 
freeway. Recall that the Creston Hills students 
are currently assigned to three elementary 
schools. The assignment would be to Hayes and 
Oakridge. No elementary and fifth year clusters 
would be broken with this plan. All schools 
would remain in compliance with the policy on 
racial balance. There would be no transportation 
savings for the district with this plan.

"Let us now consider a K-4 stand alone at Rock- 
wood. Currently, fifth grade students who res­
ide in the Rockwood neighborhood are assigned 
to Longfellow or Page Woodson. If Rockwood 
were to be made a K-5 stand alone school, 
approximately 81 students would have to be 
reassigned; 23 black students, 58 non-black stu­
dents. There, is adequate capacity at Rockwood 
to allow for these additional 80 or so students.
Two portables would be freed up at Longfellow 
from this reassignment that could be used else­
where. Again with this reassignment, all schools 
would remain in compliance with Policy JC 
regarding racial balance; i.e., no need to adjust 
Longfellow or Page Woodson. Both schools 
would remain in compliance, even though the 
fifth grade students from the Mark Twain neigh­
borhood were brought back to their stand alone 
area. Approximate annual savings in transporta­
tion costs to the District, $18,000.

Belinda Biscoe, Research Associate, reported on the 
K-5 options:

"This will be a summary of what we talked 
about at the last Board Meeting, which was the 
feasibility of making Bodine a K-5 stand alone 
for the next school year. The number of reas­
signments would total 146 students; 49 black 
students, and 97 non-black students. In terms of 
capacity, Bodine would need an additional four



589

portables. The students who are currently 
assigned to Bodine from the Creston Hills 
neighborhood were recommended to be reas­
signed to Hayes. Hayes does have adequate 
capacity to accommodate those students. The 
travel distance would be two miles further for 
the Creston Hills students, but there is less 
travel time because there is access to the free­
way. Once the Bodine students are taken from 
Creston Hills, Creston Hills would then be out 
of compliance in terms of Policies JC and FL on 
racial balance and school closing criteria. In 
order to balance Creston Hills, the recommenda­
tion was made to take the fifth year students in 
the Mark Twain neighborhood and reassign 
those students to Creston Hills. If those students 
were reassigned to Creston Hills, they would be 
one mile closer to their homes compared to their 
current reassignment of Longfellow. Once all 
these reassignments are made, all of the schools 
would then be in compliance with the policy on 
racial balance. In terms of savings for transpor­
tation, the District would save approximately 
$18,000 a year, which is the equivalent of one 
bus."

There was discussion of the cost of moving portables 
and demountables versus the savings in transporta­
tion. Dr. Muse stated spending $20,000 to move four 
portables did not represent an $18,000 savings to him. 
Mrs. Watson replied the transportation savings would 
be annual as opposed to a one-time expense for mov­
ing the portables.

Ms. Brody asked for clarification on the number of 
portables needed at Bodine before and after the new 
classroom addition. After the addition is completed, 
nine portables will be needed. Before the addition, if 
Bodine becomes a K-5 stand alone, four classrooms 
would be needed in addition to the 14 portables 
already there. Dr. Wright said the plan was to use one



590

demountable, which is the equivalent of three class­
rooms, and one portable. Dr. Biscoe said once the 
addition is completed, nine portables would be 
moved out. Dr. Wright mentioned that whether Bod- 
ine is left as it is or made a K-4 or K-5, the demount­
able would be needed there for the future because of 
the growing population of that area.

Mrs. Watson concluded the Research Department's 
report. She spoke concerning why two schools, Bod- 
ine and Rockwood, were being considered for K-4 or 
K-5 stand alone status as follows:
"Our charge was to look at the entire district for 
schools that could qualify as stand alone K-4 or 
K-5. As we looked at all the schools in the 
District, these two popped out for these reasons:
Low ridership in the Rockwood area was a rea­
son for establishing a K-4. The Board took that 
action, so we have eliminated having just a few 
students on a bus being the only feeder zone 
into Rockwood. At Bodine, the overcrowding 
has been an issue and it is currently racially 
balanced. Eleven students are not going to make 
a large difference, but it would somewhat 
relieve the overcrowding.

"As we look at K-5 schools, these two schools 
also pop out again because they are in inte­
grated neighborhoods and they are farther from 
fifth year centers than other schools that we 
looked at. The transportation, because of their 
distance, is an issue of students' time on the bus 
as well as cost. The reassignment of fifth graders 
would not seriously impact the fifth year centers 
that these students are assigned to."

Jesse Lindley, Assistant Superintendent for Educa­
tional Services, then presented a report on compari­
son of the instructional programs at Horace Mann 
(stand alone K-5) and Polk Fifth Year Center as fol­
lows:



591

"Basically, there are differences between the two 
programs in that you have more students in a 
grade at Polk than you do at Horace Mann. 
There are some things you can do when you 
have more students in a grade than you can 
when you have just one class. We have one and 
a fraction classes of fifth grades at Horace 
Mann.

"In summarizing the differences, we do have a 
Chapter I Lab at Polk, which we don't have at 
Horace Mann, but that's because Horace Mann 
doesn't qualify for Chapter I services. We do 
have a visual arts program in all the fifth year 
centers. We have not been providing that at the 
stand alone school. This year, it was provided 
because there was some free time available on 
the schedule of the artist-in-residence. Both 
schools have the vocal music programs. Polk has 
a string program, which Horace Mann does not. 
(The string program) is the special feature of the 
5th year centers.

"Another feature of the fifth year centers pro­
gram which is available at Polk and which is not 
available at Horace Mann, is the special interest 
sessions. In the special interest sessions, stu­
dents are spread out over a number of interests 
that they may have; typing, creative writing, 
newspaper -  whatever the students are inter­
ested in. They spend approximately 50 minutes 
per week pursuing that special interest."

"Both Horace Mann students and Polk students 
have the career awareness program. Both have 
Opening Doors programs. Both have the physi­
cal education program. With regard to an intra­
mural program, Polk does have an intramural 
program that Horace Mann does not, and that's 
primarily a function of the number of students 
available, which makes it possible to have an 
intramural program at Polk. There are such few



592

students at Horace Mann in the fifth grade that 
you can't very well have an intramural pro­
gram."

In response to questions from Dr. Heath and Mrs. 
Donwerth, Mrs. Watson stated there were 55 fifth 
year students at Horace Mann, 293 at Polk, nine at 
Arcadia; and that there has been no study done com­
paring the test scores of the Polk and Horace Mann 
fifth graders.
Mrs. Hermes asked what, if any, of the fifth year 
programs would be at Bodine if it became a K-5 stand 
alone. Dr. Lindley said staff would not recommend 
that the visual arts program or the strings program be 
instituted at Bodine. He said having an intramural 
program would depend on whether there were 
enough students in the fifth grade and whether the 
principal and staff there wanted to sponsor it. He said 
the special interest sessions would be somewhat 
dependent upon the school staff and whether they 
were willing to assume the responsibility for it.
Mrs. Donwerth asked what the rationale was for not 
including the visual arts or strings programs at Bod­
ine. Dr. Lindley stated that when the fifth year centers 
were established, they were made unique in order to 
provide something that was not available in other 
schools. He said over the years there has been a push 
to provide some of those things at the other schools, 
for example, physical education and vocal music. He 
said it was the Board's prerogative to change that 
direction if they saw fit.

Mrs. Donwerth said she had a problem with punish­
ing a group of students because they are in a natu­
rally integrated neighborhood by not providing some 
of the programs contained in the fifth year centers; 
however she did think some type of uniqueness 
should be maintained in the fifth year centers.
Mr. Long made a statement concerning the special 
fifth year centers programs. He felt all fifth grade



593

students should receive the services that those in fifth 
year centers do, and that it was unfair to the students 
at Horace Mann right now that they do not.
Ms. Brody asked what the original rational was for 
keeping Horace Mann a K-5 school in the original 
court order. Mrs. Watson responded with a brief his­
tory as follows: "In 1972 there were 11 schools that 
were allowed by the court to remain K-5 neighbor­
hood schools based on the spring projections. How­
ever, three of those, including Arcadia, started the 
school year exceeding the black/other ratio that was 
anticipated. In 1974, Nichols Hills was made a K-4; it 
was an original K-5. North Highlands was changed 
from a K-5 to a fifth year center. Overcrowding at 
Edgemere caused it to drop off the list, becoming a 
K-4 in 78-79. In 1980-81, looking at the racial balance 
in all the schools, all the schools dropped off except 
Arcadia by reason of location, and Horace Mann by 
reason of natural integration. Horace Mann was one 
neighborhood that was naturally integrated, and it 
was a board member's recommendation to keep it as 
a K-5. At that time, the long range planning commit­
tee had spoken to discontinuing K-5's, but that was 
not a unanimous decision, and the Board decided to 
leave Horace Mann as a K-5."

Hearings
The following persons addressed the Board concern­
ing the recommendation to designate Bodine Elemen­
tary School a K-5 stand alone for 1984-85:
1. Jerry Ellington, representing neighborhood watch 

association and surrounding Bodine neighbor­
hood

2. Don Johnson, Patron
3. Leonard Benton, Urban League of Greater Okla­

homa City
4. Pat Musgrave, Patron



594

Mr. Ellington spoke in opposition to busing and in 
support of the recommendation to designate Bodine a 
stand alone K-5. He presented the Board with a peti­
tion signed by approximately 337 patrons who sup­
ported the recommendation.

Mr. Johnson stated he believed the Finger Plan was 
working; and felt a comprehensive study should be 
conducted and a plan developed to effect a smooth 
transition before Bodine is to become a stand alone 
school.
Mr. Benton expressed concern that if a trend toward 
K-5 stand alone schools continued, the northeast 
quadrant would see more and more fifth year centers 
close. Fie said alternatives should be explored, 
including re-establishment of elementary schools in 
the northeast quadrant that would have the chance to 
become stand alone.

Ms. Musgrave said she though it was time the District 
started looking at solutions to Bodine's problems.
Mrs. Donwerth made the motion, seconded by Mr. 
Long, to designate Bodine Elementary School as a 
stand alone K-5 school beginning with the 1984-85 
school year.

Dr. Heath then moved that the motion be amended to 
reflect that Bodine Elementary School be designated a 
stand alone K-4 school beginning the 1984-85 school 
year. The motion was seconded by Dr. Muse.
Prior to voting on the amended motion, Board mem­
bers made the following (edited) statements:

(Dr. Muse) "There are at least four things that I think 
ought to be considered as we think about moving to 
the posture of stand alone schools in our community. 
As it relates to the Bodine situation, I would suggest 
to you that the proposal as it presently stands is 
educationally unsound. Don Johnson spoke to one of 
the primary deficiencies in the program in that you're 
moving from a 558 member student body to a 784



595

member student body. What Don Johnson did not 
suggest or add is that this transition is taking place 
while you are at the same time installing a new prin­
cipal. We're moving from 14 portables to 18, and 
when the new $1 million addition is completed, we 
will still need 9 portables.

"While we are talking about only 11 students, these 
11 students are human beings. They have formed 
acquaintances and alliances at their present educa­
tional site. Can we move them just as we would 
pawns, chips, inanimate objections? Is it just a matter 
of two and a half miles further, or does it involve the 
warm blooded innocent black children who are 
manipulated needlessly? As we think about the one- 
room school as we talk about portables, we need to 
keep in mind that there is a lot of folklore about the 
one-room school; but it did not include the demount­
able or the portable. When we lauded the one-room 
school, we were talking about something that was in 
the infancy of our nation.

"Fiscally, I think the recommendation is irresponsible. 
We're talking about $18,000, which is not, in fact, 
$18,000. Though day you may eliminate one bus, 
you're going to have to extend the use of another bus, 
and thoses buses don't run on air. You need to actu­
ally evaluate the actual amount of fuel and all that's 
involved before you can assess what the actual sav­
ings would be, even though you take one bus off. But 
then when you take into account that you must put in 
one demountable at $25,000 or four portables at 
$5,000 each, that, to me, does not sound like good 
fiscal management.

(Dr. Muse, cont'd) "Another problem with this whole 
proposal is it reeks with injustice. There is no equity 
in treatment as far as the students themselves are 
concerned. Mr. Benton has already spoken to the fact 
that the Finger Plan in its inception required all black 
kids, grades one through four, to be bused into the 
majority community. That fact alone stifles the



596

growth of the Northeast Quadrant. What parent with 
a pre-school child, who is aware that his child is 
going to have to be bused, would buy a home in that 
location?
"As you think about the overall program, it seems 
like it was a deliberate, concerted effort to deal injus­
tice upon our community -  and that's not enough, it 
seems. At every opportunity that comes along, one 
more stroke to further impoverish the Northeast 
Quadrant is taken, and I refer as a case in point to the 
recent decision to move the Cowboy Hall of Fame. So 
there seems to be a deliberate, concerted effort to see 
to it that not only will the black community or the 
Northeast Quadrant not integrate, there also seems to 
be a concerted effort on somebody's part to see that it 
always remains impoverished. Grade five kids were 
to be bused into the Northeast Quadrant, and then 
after that, into the middle schools and high schools 
which are scattered throughout the district. If we take 
out the 104 students out that are currently going to 
Creston Hills, that brings that school, with the 55 or 
whatever the number is that's going to be bused in, 
down to 188 fifth grade students. If the kindergarten 
program fluctuates or falters, Creston Hills gets on 
the closing list. And what's true of Creston Hills is 
true of Dewey, it's true of Garden Oaks, it's true of 
about 6 of the 13 fifth year centers that exist right 
now in the Northeast Quadrant. I suggest to you that 
that is simply not justice.
"The final thing that I think we need to consider 
relates to No. 7 of our Board Goals. We said that we 
want to be careful to institute programs that have 
human relations and public relations value. If by 
"human" we mean all humans, and if by "public" we 
mean all of the public, then we need to recognize that 
this recommendation is a human relations and public 
relations disaster because it does not promote good 
feelings for the school district in the black commu­
nity. I think that what we really ought to do is have a 
study that tells us how far we've come. It ought to



597

take into account demographic information, all of the 
kinds of projections that we are so capable of gather­
ing; a concerted, planned, strategy-developed, step- 
by-step (plan), followed to enhance educational offer­
ings for all of the students in all of this district; I do 
not believe that we ought to piecemeal it and place 
this district in the posture of having to react rather 
than act, and that's exactly what we're doing if we 
pass this recommendation because it is just a matter 
of time before the pressure begins to mount and you 
will have to move some more schools into the stand 
alone posture."
(Mrs. Donwerth) "I understand where Dr. Muse is 
coming from; my concern is we hear a lot about the 
black community and what their thoughts are on this. 
I'm curious to know if that is a geographical area 
when we refer to the black community or if are we 
referring to the black population. I really feel like 
we're talking about moving only 11 students versus 
104 students including many black students. I think 
the $18,000 is the yearly cost savings (of bus transpor­
tation). I don't think these parents and these students 
should be punished because of the overcrowding at 
Bodine. They had nothing to do with the fact that we 
don't have the money to build them a gigantic school 
to house their children in -  I'm sure they'd love that. I 
was thrilled that we were able to get through a mil­
lion dollar addition (at Bodine).
"I've been in the school system for several years. To 
me, the court order was designated because there 
were inadequacies and inequities in education 
throughout Oklahoma City. Our children have had to 
pay the price for that -  for what the adults did. Our 
kids have had to suffer the ills of society. I would 
suggest that we can no longer be considered about 
geographical areas; we have to be concerned about 
kids in this district, and what is best for (all of the) 
kids. I feel like that's what the court order (Mrs. 
Donwerth, cont'd) was all about. I think we should 
celebrate the fact that this community has integrated



598

naturally. I feel like its a slap in the face to those of us 
who have stayed with the District and not moved out 
to other areas and have tried to raise our kids in 
Oklahoma City schools, and there are many of us that 
have done that and worked to help build the school 
system because we believed right was right and 
wrong was wrong. I don't think two wrongs make a 
right, and that is why I am excited about the Bodine 
School.

"Dr. Muse alluded to Creston Hills and placing them 
on the closing criteria. With the plan the staff has 
provided for us, this would not come about. They 
would receive students from another area that would 
keep them above the closing criteria. That is why I am 
encouraging the Board Members to support this 
move."

(Dr. Heath) "I would like to discourage the passing of 
the original motion for educational reasons. To me, 
after looking at the criteria and the information that 
the staff has prepared, I, frankly, have changed my 
mind in terms of what is educationally best for the 
district as a whole. I can't support the motion for K-5; 
obviously, I can support the concept K-4 because it is, 
I think , in the long run meeting the Board's goals and 
educational needs of the community. I think it will 
cost considerably more to go to K-5. I think it will 
impact the total district in a way that the District is 
not ready to address. I don't feel staff is really ready 
to address it, and I don't think this Board is really 
ready to address the ultimate impact of starting down 
a road when we really don't know where the road 
leads. I want to encourage those of you who don't 
have your mind made up to consider my amended 
motion K-4 instead of K-5 for educational reasons."

(Ms. Brody) "I've been in this school system 18 years, 
and this is the first time I've sat in this auditorium, 
either as a Board member or a patron, when we 
discussed changing of transportation plans and 
school assignments, and I would like to compliment



599

the people in the auditorium on their effect. I think 
it's a sign of growth of this system. I'm kind of proud 
of all of you. It's (like) we've grown up together.

"I'm at a real dilemma. Dr. Ellington talked about the 
fifth year center and the lack of continuity. 1 rarely 
will bring up experiences, but my children all went to 
the fifth year centers and I think they are extraordi­
narily fine. They went the first year, the third year, 
and the sixth year of the Finger Plan, and we all 
learned together. But I also represent a district that 
has stand alone schools. I have Arcadia, which is 
unique, and I have two elementary schools, K-4, that 
are stand alone. Mr. Long and I both have students at 
John Marshall, which is a stand alone high school. 
Frankly, we are very proud of that and the neighbor­
hoods and what that has represented and the growth 
in the Northeast Quadrant.

"I have a problem with the diminution of the fifth 
year centers because I am -  a strong advocate of 
them. I would not ever again want to sit here and 
decide to create another fifth year center until we 
have done a long, comprehensive plan. I would like 
to see if it's possible to put a K-5 school in the 
Northeast Quadrant. We've never really looked at 
that very hard, but I think that certainly we should 
look at that. I especially think a comprehensive look 
needs to be taken at where we are as far as demo­
graphics and things like that. I don't think we should 
ever again create a K-5 stand alone school until we've 
done that.

"I'm concerned that during the Rockwood discussion 
I kept hearing about Mark Twain students. 'Stand 
alone' is 'stand alone'. I have come a long way in the 
consideration of Bodine Elementary, and it has not 
been easy. I think that's why I appreciate (the parents) 
affect up here today, and I will support the K through 
5 concept at Bodine, but it's the last time until we go a 
comprehensive study. I do want a comprehensive 
study looking at the Northeast Quadrant."



600

(Mrs. Hill) "I find myself in a big dilemma, having 
been on the Board as long as I have. I have probably 
spent more hours than most Board members, espe­
cially with Clyde and LaRue, as we've debated this 
back and forth. I'll probably go back to my original 
concept. If you'll all remember, the original purpose 
of the Finger Plan called for the integration of neigh­
borhoods and allowed for additional stand alone 
schools. I've lost some in my area, and as we've 
talked about Rockwood tonight, which is in my area, 
I'm really disturbed to think that staff and the Super­
intendent would recommend Bodine and not both 
Bodine and Rockwell. I see this as a very peicemeal 
[sic] way of doing things, and I don't think this board 
does things in a piecemeal fashion.

"I then have to look at the other side of the coin and 
ask if I should penalize the parents from Bodine 
because they have reached the status of a K-5 inte­
grated neighborhood. I do believe that if we are going 
to have K-5 schools they must be for everyone -  we 
cannot just pick and choose. This, of course, would 
give us basically two K-5 schools. I think I'm hearing 
the Board say Rockwood is not gong to make it, and 
this is sad. I guess I've always believed in stand alone 
schools, so that's probably where I'm coming from, 
but I really am disappointed that we're going to have 
to piecemeal it. I, too, think this board needs to do a 
study so that we can look at some other alternatives 
to see what will best benefit the kids in Oklahoma 
City. I'm hoping that maybe that is where we will end 
up."

Voting on the amended motion, on roll call the votes 
were as follows: Ms. Brody, no; Mr. Long, no; Mrs. 
Hill, no; Mrs. Donwerth, no; Dr. Muse, aye; Dr. 
Heath, aye; Mrs. Hermes, aye. Three aye, four no. 
Mrs. Hermes declared the motion failed.

On roll call for the original motion, the votes were as 
follows: Ms. Brody, aye; Mr. Long, aye; Mrs. Hill, aye; 
Mrs. Donwerth, aye; Dr. Muse, no; Dr. Heath, no;



601

Mrs. Hermes, no. Four aye, three no. Mrs. Hermes 
declared the motion carried.

Mrs. Hermes passed the gavel to Mrs. Donwerth, Vice 
President, and made the following motion:

"I move that we begin a study right now on the 
racial progress in the 1-89 school district, and 
ask the committee to bring back to the Board its 
recommendations next year. I think that this 
Board needs to look at that at the same time we 
look at potential school closings."

The motion was seconded by Ms. Brody, and is for 
action at the next regular Board Meeting, July 16, 
1984.

Dr. Muse made the following motion, for action July 
16, 1984:

"I move that we also make Lincoln a stand alone 
K-5 school."

The motion was seconded by Ms. Brody.

Mrs. Hill then made the following motion, for action 
July 16, 1984:

"I move that we consider Rockwood as a stand 
alone K-5 because it does not involve moving 
any students."

The motion was seconded by Mrs. Donwerth.



602

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 79

Minutes, November 19, 1984 School Board Meeting

THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF INDEPENDENT 
SCHOOL DISTRICT NUMBER 89 OF OKLAHOMA 
COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, MET IN A REGULAR MEET­
ING IN THE BOARD ROOM, ADMINISTRATION 
BUILDING, 900 NORTH KLEIN, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 
19, 1984 AT 7:00 P.M.

PRESENT: Susan Hermes President
LaRue Donwerth 
Jean Brody 
Paul Heath 
Betty Hill 
Hugh Long 

Clyde Muse

Vice President
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member

Others present: Don Wright, Superintendent; Darrel 
Shepard, Clerk; Ron Day, Attorney, Central Office staff 
members, representative from professional groups, the 
news media and other interested persons.

*  * *

Special Report -  Board Committee Report on Student 
Assignment

With Mrs. Donwerth presiding, Dr. Muse, Mrs. Hermes, 
and Mrs. Hill presented their report as follows:

(Dr. Muse) "In July of 1984, we as members of 
the Oklahoma City School Board charged our­
selves with the responsibility of studying the 
1-89 elementary K-5 grade schools. We investi­
gated elementary grade schools with regard to



603

neighborhood racial makeup, potential busing 
reduction, possible boundary changes, and pos­
sible grade realignments. Although many 
options were explored, we will first present the 
one that was most feasible. Other options will 
be discussed briefly at the end of our report.

"Our purpose in undertaking this study was 
multi-faceted. First, we wanted to know if we 
could maintain a unitary school system. Second, 
we wanted to establish K-4 schools in the north­
east section of the district where there are none 
currently. Third, we wanted to look at the effects 
of creating more K-5 stand-alone schools. 
Fourth, we wanted to maintain K-4 neighbor­
hood schools with stability. Fifth, we wanted to 
increase pride and parental involvement in all 
out schools. And last, but of utmost importance 
to our board, we wanted to continue to be an 
integrated school district in an urban setting.

(Mrs. Hermes) "Now let's look at the specifics of 
this plan. At the elementary level, the plan calls 
for K-4 neighborhood schools throughout the 
district. Please note pages 5 and 6 of your book­
lets, titled Proposed Student Assignment Plan. 
On the overhead, all the schools shown would 
become neighborhood K-4 schools. Please note 
that under this plan, all of the fifth year centers, 
which are in the Northeast Quadrant, would 
become K-4 neighborhood schools. In addition, 
all of the current K-5 schools, Arcadia, Bodine, 
and Horace Mann, would become K-4 neighbor­
hood schools.

"In arriving at a plan for fifth year centers, we 
divided the district into four sections. We will 
be referring to these sections as number 1, 2, 3, 
and 4. Note that Arcadia is in section 2. Our 
plan calls for one fifth year center in sections 1, 
2, and 3, with two fifth year centers in section 4 
where there are many more students.



604

"In section 1, Green Pastures is recommended as 
the fifth year center for the Star Spencer area. 
All the students currently at Parker would be 
reassigned to Green Pastures, as Parker would 
become a K-4 neighborhood school under this 
plan. K-4 students in the Green Pastures atten­
dance area would all be reassigned to Spencer 
Elementary. Green Pastures was selected pri­
marily for reasons of centrality.
"Eisenhower is the recommended fifth year cen­
ter for section 2. Eisenhower was chosen in pref­
erence to Hoover because we felt it would be 
better to transport the majority of students at 
the fifth year level for one year as opposed to 
three years of busing for middle school.
"Classen is the recommended fifth year center 
in section 3. The Classen High School age popu­
lation is not currently nor in the future pre­
dicted to be large enough to support as 
comprehensive a program as can be offered to a 
larger student body. Therefore, we felt that the 
facility could better be utilized as a fifth year 
center. In addition, the Classen building is desir­
able as a fifth year center location with reduced 
transportation and more space.
"Two fifth year centers are recommended in sec­
tion 4 since there are many more fifth year stu­
dents in this area. We propose converting both 
Capital Hill Middle and Webster Middle into 
fifth year centers. Capital Hill Middle is pro­
posed because it has the space, a swimming 
pool, large auditorium, and a location that can 
allow us to reduce transportation for more stu­
dents.
"Webster is proposed as the second fifth year 
center site since its location is also excellent for 
reducing travel and housing the types of pro­
grams needed for fifth graders. There is also 
space at this site to build a pool."



605

(Mrs. Hill) "Since this proposed plan relocates 
students at a few middle schools and high 
schools, the next part of our report addresses 
the impact of these proposed recommendations 
at the middle school and high school levels. 
Let's first attend to the impact of the proposed 
plan at the middle school level.

"If both Webster and Capital Hill Middle 
become fifth year centers, students from these 
schools would have to be reassigned among the 
current middle schools in the southern part of 
the district, Jackson, Jefferson, and Roosevelt. 
Since the remaining middle schools could not 
totally absorb all the students from Capitol Hill 
Middle School and Webster, a new middle 
school would have to be created, Southeast High 
School was the logical choice since it was origi­
nally designed to be a junior high school, but 
has housed high school students. It is large 
enough to accommodate a large number of mid­
dle school students and is in a strategic location 
to reduce transportation. As a result of not 
wanting to adversely impact any one middle 
school's enrollment or black/other ratio, dis­
placed students from Capital Hill Middle School 
and Webster Middle School would be reassigned 
among all middle schools in the south. All mid­
dle schools would remain racially balanced 
under this plan.

"Now let's focus on the high school assign­
ments. Under the proposed plan, Classen High 
School would be converted into a fifth year cen­
ter, and Southeast High School would be con­
verted into a middle school. The attendance 
areas and zones assigned to Classen and South­
east High School can be absorbed at Grant, Cap­
itol Hill High, Douglass, Northeast, and 
Northwest Classen. All of the high schools 
would continue to be racially balanced.



606

"We feel that there are many benefits to this 
proposed plan, not only for our students and 
parents, but also for the community at large. 
The implementation of this plan will provide 
neighborhood schools, K-4, establish fifth year 
centers in all areas, reduce busing, improve pro­
grams, increase parents' participation, and 
increase community involvement and support.

"There were other options explored that seemed 
less desirable. We will briefly discuss these. One 
alternative would establish K-5 or K-6 neighbor­
hood schools. One major drawback to either 
plan is building capacity. More programs are 
being offered to meet the special needs of stu­
dents than in past years. We do not have the 
facilities to house K-5 or K-6 at many of our 
elementary schools, much less allow for any 
growth in the student population, and many 
would have to close due to low enrollment. 
Further the Board feels that the fifth grade is the 
latest point in a student's education where inte­
gration needs to occur for us to have a positive 
inter-racial climate in a unified, desegregated 
district. The Board is also committed to the fifth 
year concept where we could offer a unique and 
comprehensive educational program for stu­
dents.

"Another option would be for us to continue 
with our present policy and as neighborhoods 
become more integrated, convert K-4 schools to 
K-5 neighborhood schools. This option would 
continue to call for students at K-4 schools to 
attend fifth year centers in the Northeast Quad­
rant of the district and would not allow for 
residents in the Northeast Quadrant to have 
neighborhood schools."

(Dr. Muse) "In closing our report, let me reite­
rate that the Board's plan for elementary stu­
dents establishes K-4 neighborhood schools in



607

all areas of the district with five fifth year cen­
ters also located in all sections of the district. We 
feel that this plan maintains a unified and 
desegregated schools district, yet allows for 
reduced busing, improved educational pro­
grams, increased opportunity for parental 
involvement, and increased community involve­
ment and support."

Dr. Muse then made a motion that the Board of Education 
vote on the three options presented by the Board Com­
mittee on December 17, 1984. In the meantime, meetings 
would be held across the district to inform the public. 
The motion was seconded by Dr. Heath. On roll call the 
votes were as follows: Ms. Brody, aye; Mr. Long, aye; Mrs. 
Hill, aye; Mrs. Donwerth, aye; Dr. Muse, aye; Dr. Heath, 
aye; Mrs. Hermes, aye. All aye.

Mrs. Donwerth stated the plan was the committee's pro­
posal, not necessarily that of the full board.

Ms. Brody commented that the Board and Administration 
would have to be very sensitive to the feelings of stu­
dents and patrons as they met with the community to 
discuss the plan. She also said when the agreement (with 
the teachers) was negotiated it was done so without the 
knowledge that schools might be changed around. She 
wanted to know how the contract would affect transfers 
of teachers as well as classified personnel should the plan 
be implemented. Ms. Brody addressed the group from 
Southeast High School and stated she knew it had been 
traumatic for them as they learned of the proposed plan.

Dr. Heath suggested one way of disseminating accurate 
information to the community about the plan would be to 
have a "phone bank" set up and staffed by qualified



608

persons. Mrs. Hermes responded that it was already 
being arranged.

Mrs. Hermes remarked that the Board Committee had 
spent many hours since the committee was formed in July 
working with the Research Department, looking at all the 
options. She said she knew change was painful; that this 
was the best plan the committee could come up with that 
would continue an integrated system while allowing 
more neighborhood schools and reduced busing. She 
encouraged the patrons and students to attend the "town 
meetings" scheduled for November 26 and 27, 1984. She 
announced that a Special Meeting was scheduled for 
December 10, 1984 for public hearings prior to the 
Board's voting on the three options on December 17, 
1984.

Mrs. Donwerth said she believed the concept of the plan 
was good; however, she was concerned about the stu­
dents, patrons and teachers of Southeast High School. She 
thought there were a lot of questions that had not been 
answered yet, but that the Board was trying to look at the 
overall good of the district. She said board members 
would work with the community and spend as much 
time with them as possible.

Dr. Heath also pointed out that the committee had stud­
ied the plans very carefully, but invited anyone with an 
alternate plan to present it to the Board.

*  *  *



DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 108 
Majority-To-Minority Transfers

May 6, 1987
OKLAHOMA CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

TRANSFER DATA

Table 1
One-year Kindergarten Option 

(Computer code "M01")

609

Year Grade # Black # Other Total

1984-85 K 38 60 98
1986-87 K 36 40 76

TOTALS 74 100 174

Table 2
Majority to Minority Transfer Option, 1985-86 
(Computer Codes "NOl," "N 02," and "N 03")

Year Grade # Black # Other Total
1985-86 K 14 4 18

1 54 4 58
2 96 2 98
3 73 5 78
4 76 4 80

TOTALS 313 19 332



610

Table 3
Majority to Minority Transfer Option, 1986-87 
(Computer Codes "NOl," "N 02," and "N 03")

Year Grade # Black # Other Total
1986-87 K 4 2 6

1 17 2 19
2 38 3 41
3 61 4 65
4 46 4 50

TOTALS 166 15 181
Source: Oklahoma City Public Schools computer files,

1984-85, 1985-86, 1986-87



611
i

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 119 
Extracurricular Activities Report -  High Schools

OKLAHOMA CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
HIGH SCHOOLS

EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES REPORT

Non-Black
1976-77
Black % Black Non-Black

1986-87
Black & Black

1 . Cheerleaders 50 27 35.1 62 44 41.5
2. Student Council Members 285 146 33.9 143 123 46.2
3, Student Council Officers 36 19 34.5 33 28 45.9
4. Band Members 463 269 36.7 213 267 55.6
5. Pep Club 1010 221 17.9 58 58 50.0
6. Pep Club Officers 76 12 13.6 7 13 65.0
7. Freshman Class Officers 18 13 41.9 26 19 42.2
8. Sophomore Class Officers 22 12 35.3 25 9 26.5
9. Junior Class Officers 28 19 40.4 15 21 58.3

10, Senior Class Officers 
Athletics

26 20 43.5 22 32 59.3

11. Football 510 336 39.7 110 191 63.5
12. Football 9th — — - - - -
13. Boys Basketball 96 258 72.9 26 233 89.9
14. Girls Basketball 98 105 51.7 22 175 88.8
15. Wrestling 158 36 18.6 90 105 53.9
16. Cross Country 88 25 22.1 70 64 47.8
17. Boys Track 75 100 57.1 21 112 84.2
18. Girls Track 47 96 67.1 26 135 83.9
19. Boys Tennis 152 10 6.2 73 9 10.9
20. Girls Tennis 109 13 10.7 109 4 3.5
21. Swimming 151 17 10.1 130 5 3.7
22. Golf 96 5 4.9 86 8 8.5
23. Gymnastics 170 331 66.1 - - -
24. Baseball 147 61 29.3 162 62 27.7
25. Softball 130 62 32.3 75 109 38.4

TOTAL DISTRICT 4041 2213 35.4 1604 1826 53.2
ENROLLMENT
IRS
5/4/87

9897 4880 33.0 5773 4501 43.8



612

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 120 
Extracurricular Activities Report -  Middle Schools

OKLAHOMA CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
MIDDLE SCHOOLS

EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES REPORT
1976-77 1986-87

Non-Black Black % Black Non-Black Black & Black
1 . Cheerleaders 42 8 16.0 77 24 23.8
2. Student Council Members 157 103 39.6 150 116 43.6
3. Student Council Officers 2 2 50.0 16 22 57.9
4. Band Members 879 295 25.1 370 234 38.7
5. Pep Club 0 0 — 114 84 42.4
6. Pep Club Officers 0 0 - 7 1 12.5

Other Activities
7. Volley Ball 45 60 57.1 63 89 58.6
8. Wrestling 115 61 34.7 110 76 40.9
9. Advanced Orchestra 18 5 21.7 114 36 24.0

10. Intermediate Orchestra 21 12 36.4 104 22 17.5
11. Advanced Band 48 38 44.2 280 197 41.3
12. Beginning Band 442 36 46.2 239 162 40.4
13. Boys Basketball 6 24 80.0 39 121 75.6
14. Girls Basketball 23 29 55.8 38 102 72.9
TOTAL DISTRICT 1398 673 33.4 1721 1286 42.8
ENROLLMENT 7252 3586 33.1 4914 3299 40.2
IRS
5/4/87



613

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 140
Parental Organization Statistics

PARENTAL ORGANIZATIONS AND ACTIVITIES* ** 
OKLAHOMA CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

1984-85 1985-86 1986-87
Numbers of 
Schools with 
Parent-Teacher 
Associations 15 28 42:
PTA Membership 1,377 2,476 3,358
Open House 
Attendance at
Elementary
Schools 11,478 15,231 16,645
Parent/Teacher 
Conference Day 
Attendance 11,250 14,025 14,995

*Source: State PTA Membership Records (attached); School 
District Records.
**After state PTA membership data was submitted, PTA units 
formed at 5 more schools bringing the total number of PTA 
units to 47 as of May 5, 1987. The membership in these 5 PTA 
units is 132. In addition to the 47 PTA units, 21 other schools in 
1986-87 have Parent-Teacher Organizations (PTO's) with a 
membership of 1,571.



614

DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 142
Adopt-A-School Statistics 
Adopt-A-School Program*

Oklahoma City 

1984-85
Numbers of 

System-Wide 
Adopting

Public Schools 

1985-86 1986-87

Organizations
Number of 

Adopting

1 16 21

Organizations 
(Number of

53 369 349**

Adoptions) (111) (378) (522)
Elementary 
Fifth Grade

16 137 239

Centers 4 26 17
Middle Schools 4 140 48
High Schools 26 33 27
Special Centers 3 33 18



615

Value of Donated Services and Materials

Adopt-A-School Data Not 
as shown on Main- 
p. 19, tained
Statistical 
Profile
American 
Institute 
of Architects 
reported this 
amount after 
publication of 
Statistical Profile 
Total

Current
Estimate

$1,213,064 $1,000,000* ** ***

467,916
$1,681,000

*Source: 1985-86 Statistical Profile; Current School District 
Records
**American Institute of Architects (AIA) decreased actual 
number of architects involved in Adopt-A-School from 1985-86 
to 1986-87 but increased number of projects from 1 to 5
***Final figures for the 1986-87 school year are yet to be com­
piled.



%

t

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.


Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Return to top