Keyes v. School District No. 1 Denver, CO. Appendix Vol. 4

    APPENDIX
Volum e 4— Pages 1515a to  1988a

Supreme Court of the United States
OCTOBER TERM, 1971

No. 71-507

WILFRED KEYES, ET AL., 
PETITIONERS,

-v.—

SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, 
DENVER, COLORADO, ET AL.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES 
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

CERTIORARI GRANTED JANUARY 17, 1972 

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FILED OCTORER 8, 1971



INDEX TO APPENDIX

Volume 1
P A G E

Docket Entries .....- .................... -.......- ..................— la

Complaint for Permanent Injunction and Declara­
tory Judgment ...... -....................... .......................... 2a
Exhibits annexed to Complaint:

Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 3—Resolution 1520 .............. 42a
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 4—Resolution 1524 .... _........ 49a
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 5—Resolution 1531 .............  60a

Motion for Preliminary Injunction ......................... . 71a

Answer of Defendants Amesse, Noel and Voorhees,
J r .................. — ............................................ -........  73a

Hearing on Preliminary Injunction July 16-22, 1969 85a

T estim o n y

(M in u t e s  of H earing  on P r e l im in a r y  I n ju n c t io n  
J u l y  16-22, 1969)

Plaintiffs’ Witnesses:
Rachel B. Noel—

Direct —........................................................  85a
Redirect .........................  104a

A. Edgar Benton—
Direct ............................-.............................  108a
Cross —.......................................................... 121a
Redirect ..............     123a



11

Paul 0. Klite—
Direct .......... ............ -
Voir Dire .... .............
Cross .........................
Redirect ....................

James D. Voorhees, Jr.-— 
Direct ........................

George E. Bardwell—
Direct ........................
Voir Dire ............... .
Cross .........................

Robert D. Gilberts—
Direct .......................
Cross .........................
Redirect ............ .......

Defendants’ Witnesses:
Gilbert Cruter—

Direct ..... ................
Voir Dire ................. .
Cross ........................

Howard L. Johnson—
Direct ...... ................
Cross ___ _________
Recross .............. ......

Robert Gilberts—
Direct .......................
Cross ........................
Redirect ...................
Recross ...... ..............

PAGE

126a,133a
...... 132a
.....  139a
...... 142a

143a

151a,191a
...... 185a
..... 193a

...... 227a

...... 252a

....... 255a

208a,214a
...... 213a
...... 216a

256a
302a
369a

376a
393a
408a
414a



Richard Koeppe—
Direct _____ ____ _________ ________ 419a, 437a
Voir Dire .................. ......—................ ........ 436a
Cross ............................... ......... .................. 438a

Preliminary Injunction ...................... ...................... . 452a

Memorandum Opinion and Order of District Court 454a

Opinion of Court of Appeals dated August 5, 1969 .... 455a

Supplemental Findings, Conclusions and Temporary 
Injunction by District Court ................................. 458a

Opinion of Court of Appeals dated August 27, 1969 459a

Order ................. ..................... ...............-— ............... 463a

Opinion by Brennan, J. on Application for Vacating 
of Stay ............................. ......................................  464a

Opinion of Court of Appeals dated September 15,
1969 .......... .......... ............................ ............. .........  467a

Answer ....................... ...............................................  470a

Memorandum Opinion and Order........................ ..... 475a

I l l

PAGE



Volume 2

(Minutes oe Trial on Merits,
F ebruary 2-20, 1970)

PAGE

Minutes of Trial on Merits, February 2-20, 1970 .... 481a

Plaintiffs’ Witnesses:
Paul Klite—

Direct .....................................481a, 493a, 502a, 523a,
530a, 533a, 537a

Voir Dire ........................................ 491a, 502a, 522a,
528a, 532a, 536a

Cross ..................................................................  564a
Redirect ............................................................  621a

Lorenzo Traylor—
Direct ................................................................  579a
Cross ..................................................................  607a
Redirect ............................................................  621a

Gerald P. Cavanaugh.—
Direct ..........    626a
Cross ..................................................................  646a
Redirect ...................................................   652a
Recross ..............................................................  655a

Mary M o rto n -
Direct ................................................................  656a
Cross ..................................................................  660a

Marlene Chambers—
Direct .......................................................... 665a, 671a
Voir Dire ..........................................................  670a
Cross ..................................................................  676a
Redirect ............................................................  681a
Recross ..............................................................  682a



V

PAGE

Palicia Lewis—
Direct ...................................... -..................- 684a
Cross - ............-..................... -.......................  693a
Redirect .......................................................  696a
Recross .................................... -..... -..............  696a

Mildred Biddick—
Direct ............................................................  697a

George E. Bardwell-
Direct ..............-........... 700a, 703a, 707a, 716a, 727a,

757a, 769a, 790a, 798a
Voir Dire ....................-.......702a, 707a, 715a, 726a,

755a, 767a, 786a, 791a
Cross ............... ........................................ ....  800a
Redirect .......... .................... -.......................  818a

George L. Brown, Jr.- 
Direct ................ 857a

Dr. Dan Dodson—
Direct ...........
Cross .............

1469a
1493a

Defendants’ Witnesses:
Robert L. Hedley—

Direct ..................
Voir Dire .........—

Lois Heath Johnson—
Direct .................
Cross ........ -..........
Redirect ..............
Recross ...............

820a, 834a 
.....  833a

.....  893a

.....  922a

.....  955a

......  956a



VI

Palmer L. Burch—
Direct ........................................................... 963a
Cross ............................................................. 978a
Redirect .............................................. 1023a, 1030a
Recross ...........................  1025a

PAGE

Volum e 3

William Berge—
Direct ........         1033a
Cross .....    1051a

James C. Perrill—
Direct .......   1076a
Cross ....................................     1083a
Bedirect ... .......    1100a
Recross ...........    1101a

John E. Temple—
Direct .......................................1101a, 1115a, 1129a
Voir Dire .......... ........... ...................... 1112a, 1128a
Cross .................................................     1131a

Jean McLaughlin—
Direct ..........     1131a
Cross ...........    1146a
Bedirect ..................    1150a

Dr. Harold A. Stetzler—
Direct ........................................................  1150a
Cross ......................     1189a
Redirect ..........    1210a

Lidell M. Thomas—
Direct ..........................................................   1214a
Cross ............................................     1239a
Bedirect .......................................................  1252a
Recross ......................................................... 1253a



Charles Armstrong—
Direct ........................................................... 1254a
Cross ............................................................. 1289a

Kenneth Oberholtzer—
Direct ........................................................... 1299a
Cross ................................    1393a
Redirect .......................................................  1463a

Memorandum Opinion and Order of District Court .. 1514a

V l l

PAGE

Volume 4
(M in u t e s  oe H earing  on  R e l ie f , M ay 11-14, 1970)

Hearing* on Relief, May 11-19, 1970 ........................  1515a

Plaintiffs’ Witnesses:
James Coleman—

Direct .................................................1516a, 1526a
Yoir Dire ...............................-........... -......... 1520a
Cross ................... ..................... -..................  1552a
Redirect ..........    1561a

Neal Sullivan—
Direct ........................................................... 1562a
Cross ...........- ...............................................  1588a
Redirect ............    1598a

George Bardwell—
Direct .............    1602a
Cross .........................................................—- 1664a
Redirect ....................   1683a

William Smith—
Direct ...............    1688a
Cross ............................................................  1698a



V l l l

Robert O’Reilly—
Direct ..................................................1910a, 1925a
Voir Dire ...............................................    1920a
Cross ............................................ ................  1942a
Redirect .......................................................  1968a

Defendants’ Witnesses:
Robert D. Gilberts—

Direct .......   1706a
Cross ............................................................. 1763a
Redirect ........................      1834a
Recross .......     1842a

James D. Ward—
Direct ..........        1844a
Cross ....    1868a

George Morrison, J r . -
Direct .......     1874a
Cross ........         1892a
Redirect .......................................................  1896a

Albert C. Ream er-
Direct ........................................................... 1897a
Cross .............................................................  1905a

Decision Re Plan or Remedy by District Court.........  1969a

Final Decree and Judgment...... ....................    1970a

Defendants’ Notice of Appeal ......................   1978a

Plaintiffs’ Notice of Appeal................     1979a

Decision by Court of Appeals on Motion for Stay, 
etc................................................................. ........... „ 1981a

PAGE



IX

Decision by U. S. Supreme Court on Stay, etc..........  1984a

Opinion of Court of Appeals dated June 11, 1971 ..... 1985a

Judgment of Court of Appeals dated June 11, 1971 - 1985a

Decision by Court of Appeals for “Clarification of 
Opinion” —...............................—........ ..............— 1986a

Order Granting Certiorari......................................— 1988a

I ndex  to E x h ib it s  A ppea rs  in  E x h ib it  V o lu m e

PAGE



1515a

Hearing on Relief, May 11-14, 1970

The Court: Now, you undertake to represent the 
Hispano community too?

Mr. Greiner: That’s correct, Your Honor.
The Court: And are you certain that they wish to 

be bused, integrated ? Every word I get, every piece 
of evidence I get is that there is a difference of view­
point here, a very major difference. That they would 
resist any effort to integrate.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, the only answer that 
I can give the Court based on the record in this case 
is that we had no intervention in this case after 
notice of publication and quite a bit of publicity. We 
had no intervention from—in behalf of the Hispano 
community that would indicate that divergent view. 
I think one of the questions—

The Court: Well, I think we ought to keep this 
in mind in presenting the evidence, this inquiry in 
mind, and consider whether it’s proper for a Court 
and counsel to determine what’s good for them and 
order them to do it whether it is of their consent or 
not, you know. I don’t see that that is saving their 
constitutional rights, if this be true.

Mr. Greiner: Well, I think, Your Honor, it’s going 
[91 to be what it—what it boils down to is a question 
of, is there another reasonable, realistic alternative ? 
That’s what this hearing is all about. And the ques­
tion of the consent of the people who are to be 
affected by the plan of relief is really a secondary 
question. The question is, how do you remedy the 
inequality? A lot of children in the school district 
wouldn’t go to school at all—



1516a

The Court: I’m not talking about the children. 
I’m talking about the people, you know. No, I ’m 
merely saying that our basic legal problem is rem­
edying the invasion of the constitutional rights. And, 
if it’s true that there is a segment that says their 
rights are not violated, why, I don’t see that it is 
any of our business to say, “Well, they are. And 
you’re going to get them remedied whether you like 
it or not.” I just don’t—Not a single Spanish-origin 
person has appeared here demanding relief or even 
suggesting that any should be granted to them.

Mr. Greiner: Well, I think the only basis upon 
which we can proceed, Your Honor, is the status of 
the record and the record—in the record there is no 
dissenting Hispano intervenors.

The Court: Okay.
#  *  #  *  *

[13] * * *
J ames Coleman, a witness called by and on behalf of 

plaintiffs, having first been duly sworn, was examined and 
testified as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Greiner:

The Court: Give us your name and address and 
profession.

The Witness: James Coleman, Baltimore, Mary­
land. I’m a sociologist at Johns Hopkins University.

By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Dr. Coleman, you’re currently in the Department of 
Social Relations at Johns Hopkins, is that correct? A. 
That’s right.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1517a

Q. How long have yon held that position! [14] A. 
Since 1959.

Q. What are your duties and responsibilities in the De­
partment of Social Relations? A. I’m Professor of Social 
Relations at Johns Hopkins.

Q. Have you prepared a resume of your experience and 
qualifications? A. Yes, I have.

Q. Handing you what’s been marked as Plaintiffs’ Ex­
hibit 512, and I would ask you to identify that, please. A. 
Yes, that is my resume.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, we would submit Dr. 
Coleman’s resume. It is part of our memorandum 
which has previously been supplied to counsel.

Mr. Ris: No objection.
The Court: It will be received.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 512 was re­
ceived in evidence.)

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Coleman, I wonder if you could relate for us just 

briefly some of the experience which you have had in the 
field of the analysis of the factors which led to inequality 
of educational opportunity in schools which are racially 
isolated? A. My initial and major experience in this direc­
tion came with the analysis of the survey of equality of 
educational opportunity which was requested of the Com­
missioner of [15] Education in the Civil Rights Act of 
1964. That was published in July of 1966. Subsequent to 
that time I have carried out some further examination of 
the same data and more recently some examination of data 
from a number of specific cities which have carried out 
some studies of their own.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1518a

Q. Can you identify some of the cities for us? A. Yes. 
New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Los Angeles. 
These were not detailed examinations but simply looking 
at some of the work which—reviewing some of the work 
which those cities have done themselves.

Q. You mentioned this 1966 publication. I’m handing you 
what’s been marked for identification as Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 
500 and entitled Equality of Educational Opportunity and 
ask you if that is the document to which you have reference? 
A. Yes, it is.

Q. Can you tell the Court, please, Dr. Coleman, what 
your duties and responsibilities were in connection with 
that study? A. In connection with the survey which led to 
this and the publication of the report, I was director of the 
staff which produced the report.

Q. What was the purpose of the study? A. The pur­
pose of the study was to fulfill Section 402 of the Civil 
Rights Act which requested the Commissioner of [16] Edu­
cation to carry out a survey of the lack of equality of edu­
cational opportunity in the United States, as a consequence 
of several factors, the principal of which was racial char­
acteristics of the students.

Q. Now, would you describe briefly how the study was 
conducted? For example, how many students were the sub­
ject of the study? A. The study was conducted by carry­
ing out—by selecting a sample of schools, first selecting a 
sample of high schools throughout the United States and 
then selecting a sample of feeder junior high and elemen­
tary schools which served those high schools and then ex­
amining the characteristics of the schools, some of the 
characteristics of the teachers, and some of the character­
istics of the students in Grades 1 through 6, 9 and 12.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1519a

Q. What characteristics were considered? A. Well, 
there were a number of characteristics of the schools and 
of the school districts which were considered which in­
cluded the major characteristic that educators have charac­
teristically examined in terms of school quality. Most of 
the kinds of things which school financial resources go into 
purchasing and then a number of characteristics of teachers, 
ranging from things of having to do with their attitude 
to things, having to do with their experience, to a test of 
verbal skills which was given to the teachers.

[173 Q. What method was used to survey the teachers? 
A. The teachers were surveyed by essentially a relatively 
short questionnaire which they completed. This was in 
similar form of that which was completed by students, but 
shorter, and the test involved—associated with the ques­
tionnaire—was also short.

Q. Do you recall approximately how many students re­
sponded to this questionnaire? A. Yes, there were some­
thing over 600,000 students in the five grade levels that I 
mentioned throughout the United States, around 4,000 
schools being involved.

Q. And approximately how many teachers ? A. If I re­
call correctly, something around 60,000 teachers.

Q. What were the geographic characteristics of this sur­
vey? A. Well, the geographic characteristics of the sur­
vey were 50 states of the United States and the District 
of Columbia, without carrying out a representative sample 
of each state; nevertheless, carrying out a representative 
sample of regions in the country. So that properties of the 
survey and the sample were to have a representative ex­
amination of schools serving children in different regions 
and particularly children of different races in those regions, 
different races or social origins.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1520a

£183 Q. Did you also study children in urban and rural 
settings? A. Yes, within each region there was a separa­
tion between students who attended schools in metropoli­
tan areas and those who were outside metropolitan areas.

Q. Was Denver one of the areas which was the subject 
of this study? A. With regard to that, I have to indicate 
I am not at liberty to say for the following reason: that in 
carrying out the survey an explicit promise was made to 
the superintendents of schools in all of the districts which 
were surveyed that none of the districts would be identi­
fied in publication or otherwise, so that there has been— 
this has been adhered to in the past, and unless I am 
formally directed to do so, I would prefer not to.

Q. For what period of time was the study conducted? 
A. The study was conducted in the fall of 1965—-beginning 
in September—and extending through to October, covering 
a very short period of time, and the analyses of the data 
were then carried out in the winter and spring of—the 
winter of 1965 and the spring of 1966.

Q. And then what has been marked for identification as 
Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 500 was published at what time? A. 
In July of 1966.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, at this time we would 
[191 offer Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 500.

Mr. Bis: May I voir dire the witness?
The Court: Yes.

Voir Dire Examination by Mr. Ris:
Q. Dr. Coleman, you are the director of this survey as 

you have indicated. You had substantially—a substantial 
number of people who were actually doing the detail work 
on it? A. Yes.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Voir Dire



1521a

Q. Who drafted the questionnaires? A. The question­
naires were drafted principally within the Office of Edu­
cation by a group of staff members there.

Q. There have been substantial criticisms since the re­
port was published and before the survey was completed as 
to whether some of the questions were not quite fair, isn’t 
that correct? A. Well, no.

Q. You’re not aware of any such criticism at all? A. 
I ’m not aware of the criticism about the fairness of the 
questions. I think there was a good deal of concern in 
various localities of the country about some of the ques­
tions which were asked, but I  don’t think having to do with 
fairness.

Q. What were the nature of the objections to which you 
[203 refer? A. I think objections had to do with the 
question—the objections were of several sorts; that is, a 
short time prior to that in some states there had been 
either—in some local boards there had been resolutions that 
there would be no racial identification of children. Now, 
in Grade 1, where the teacher completed the questionnaire, 
the teacher was required to fill in the questionnaire which 
required filling in the race of the child. And that was seen 
in some localities as being in violation of the resolutions 
which had recently been passed by these localities. So I 
think that was probably the major—that, and the very fact 
that having children identify themselves with regard to 
race or with regard to ethnic origin, because there was also 
a question having to do with whether a person came from 
Mexican-American or Puerto Rican background, and those 
questions, I think, were the ones which excited the most 
concern. Simply because there had been, as I indicated, a 
number of district resolutions passed against any kind of 
racial identification.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Voir Dire



1522a

Q. Were you aware that Colorado had a constitutional 
provision pertaining to classification of students by race? 
A. I don’t think that that constitutional provision was—I 
don’t know the details of that constitutional provision, but 
it was not in the judgment of the attorneys at the U.S. 
Office of Education—it was not violated by [21] this.

Q. The question was, were you aware of such a provision? 
A. I was aware in a number of states that there were pro­
visions of this sort.

Q. Is that the type of objectionable situation it was; as 
to race and—and then the geographic areas? A. Yes.

Q. Now, you say you’re under some orders not to dis­
close the cities that did not—the cities that did participate. 
Can you tell us then that Denver is not one of the par­
ticipants in this area ? A. I cannot say anything in regard 
to systems which did not participate.

Q. And under whose direction is this order? A. Alex 
Andermood was Assistant Commissioner of Education at 
this time and he is the one who made that—

Q. But you will answer it if ordered by the Court? A. 
I certainly will answer it if ordered by the Court. I would 
like at the same time to communicate with the Office of 
Education before doing so.

Mr. Bis: If the Court please, may I ask the Court 
to order him to answer whether Denver is repre­
sented in the study?

The Court: Well, this is voir dire. For w'hat pur­
pose? What are you seeking to do?

[22] Mr. Bis: It’s one element—
The Court: This is premature.
Mr. Bis: The Court may be right. Maybe it’s a 

little premature and he has to communicate with

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Voir Dire



1523a

Washington. Later in cross-examination—but it 
might save some time if we could resolve it now.

The Court: You’re going to object to this coming 
in?

Mr. Eis: Yes, sir.
The Court: Doesn’t it teach us anything?

Wouldn’t it be of any value at all?
Mr. E is: I  think it may be of some value.
The Court: Do you think it’s prejudicial to the 

defendants ?
Mr. E is: I don’t think it’s competent. As I am 

going to continue my voir dire, there is a great deal 
of raw data that the Department is not permitting 
access to anybody on it and the Hopkins case refused 
admissibility on that basis, and this is the next step 
I’m going to take. But I was trying to get this one 
point at the moment which I think would be rele­
vant later on.

The Court: Well, I  suppose we could assume that 
Denver was included. Do you have reason to believe 
that Denver was not studied?

Mr. E is: I ’m informed that Denver was not and I 
[233 just want it as a matter of record. I’m in­
formed by the superintendent of schools.

The Court: For purposes of your objection, I ex­
pect we could assume they were not.

Mr. Eis: All right.
Do you stipulate then there is not—
Mr. Greiner: I don’t know that to be the fact.
The Court: Okay. I expect then you can tell us, 

Doctor, whether Denver was not.
The Witness: As I say, if possible, I would like 

to communicate with the Office of Education because

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Voir Dire



1524a

there were two categories of school systems which 
did not participate; those which were not originally 
sampled and those which were sampled but refused 
to participate.

The Court: Do you know the answer to the ques­
tion?

The Witness: No, I’m not clear which of these 
categories Denver was—-

The Court: Well, he’s not in a position to answer 
it right now, anyway.

Mr. Ris: All right.

By Mr. R is :

Q. Then, at a recess, can you verify this? A. Yes.
Q. Is it true, Doctor, that there were eleven major school 

systems which, for either one of the reasons you just [243 
stated, are not included in the study? A. Yes, there were 
a lot of—a large number of systems were not included 
for one of these two reasons.

Q. I’m speaking of major—say, over 500,000 population. 
A. Yes. I don’t have the specific numbers but I  would 
certainly think that would be approximately right.

Q. Now, Dr. Coleman, is it true that all these question­
naires came in and were reviewed and you—I presume 
were computerized and so forth? Is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. And the raw data itself is locked up in the archives 
of H.E.W.? A. The data available is on tape to any re­
searcher who wants to carry out further examination of 
the data, and a number have done so.

Q. Are they available for court purposes? A. Yes.
Q. Would they—were they available in the Hopkins 

case? A. They were available in the Hopkins case.
Q. Isn’t it true that H.E.W. declined to produce them?

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Voir Dire



1525a

A. H.E.W. declined to permit identification of the par­
ticular systems involved; that is, H.E.W. declined to have 
a specific analysis of the District of Columbia schools 
[25] carried out, pursuant to the agreement that had been 
made with the school superintendents when the survey was 
carried out.

Q. So Judge Wright declined the admission of the re­
port, is that correct? A. I don’t think so.

Q. Do you know? A. I testified in that case.
Q. I  understand.
The report was not admitted into evidence, was it, Doc­

tor? A. Well, I ’m surprised that—I testified at great 
length in that and I had thought that the report was cer­
tainly discussed in the case.

Q. But it was not admitted into evidence? A. Well—
Q. Do you know? A. No, I’m sorry. I  am—my impres­

sion is that it was admitted into evidence. Now, if you 
know to the contrary, then—

Q. I have been so informed and I am surprised that you 
thought it was. A. Well, I think it was, yes.

Q. Who actually did the correlating of the answers to 
the questionnaires? The staff people? [26] A. Yes.

Q. In the Deparement of Education? A. In the IT.S. 
Office of Education.

Q. So the report itself, Exhibit 500 in this case, con­
tains the ultimate conclusions rather than any of the basic 
raw data from which conclusions were drawn? Correct? 
A. That’s right, yes.

Mr. B is: If the Court please, we would object 
to the admission of this—any more than any text­
book or other document to buttress the testimony of 
the witness—

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs— Voir Dire



1526a

The Court: Do you wish to have it introduced 
simply for reference purposes?

Mr. Greiner: That’s correct, Your Honor.
The Court: Or cross-examination ?
Mr. Greiner: I am going to ask the witness to 

relate—-to advise the Court as to what the major 
findings of the study were; what the conclusions 
were that were reached and most of these causative 
factors.

The Court: Well, can he refer to it? We will 
withhold a ruling on that until a little later on. But 
he can refer to it all he wishes and it can be used 
to cross-examine him.

Direct Examination by Mr. Greiner (Cont’d ) :
Q. I believe you said there were some 600,000 students 

[271 surveyed.

The Court: Were you offering it testimonially as 
well? For the purpose of utilizing its content as if 
it were evidence in the case, testimony in the case?

Mr. Greiner: I  believe, Your Honor, what I ’m 
about to do is demonstrate through the witness that 
the survey was broad enough in its scope, it cov­
ered districts like Denver even if it may not have 
covered Denver, so the question as to its relevancy 
or its pertinency, vis-a-vis Denver, which—we think 
it is pertinent and relevant because it was the broad­
est survey ever conducted and it is very thorough. 
So I think, to answer Your Honor’s question—

The Court: Well, really, I think that the facts 
and figures in it might be of some value to us. I 
suppose—if he’s going to give conclusions that are

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1527a

contained in it, I suppose he can be cross-examined 
by those.

Mr. Greiner: That’s correct, Your Honor.
The Court: Very well. Go ahead.

Q. Now, Doctor, you said that there were some 600,000 
students surveyed. A. That’s right.

Q. And some 4,000 different schools? A. Yes.
Q. And can you tell us whether or not urban school sys­

tems such as Denver were in fact included in this survey? 
£283 A. There were a very large number of urban school 
systems which were included in the survey. The original 
sample was carried out in such a way as to be representa­
tive of regions of the United States as well as represen­
tative of the United States as a whole, and one classifica­
tion within regions was urban areas. Now, no school dis­
trict is exactly like any other and that is why we have a 
representative sample; so we can get a broad conclusion 
as to which are representative of the country as a whole, 
and of regions. Something like between 60 and 70 percent 
of the schools selected in the sample or in the school sys­
tems selected in the sample participated in the survey and 
others declined to do so.

Q. Are you familiar with the existence of any other 
study of equality of educational opportunity which was 
as comprehensive as that you directed? A. There has not 
been, to my knowledge, any similar survey. There have 
been plans which have been discussed in the U.8. Office of 
Education for the carrying out of further national sur­
veys. There is also a national assessment of education 
which is currently being carried out, but there are no such 
surveys covering elementary and secondary education 
which are as broad as this one.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1528a

Q. Have lawyers’ studies been used as a basis of other 
studies of equality of educational opportunities? [29] A. 
Yes, it served as a basis of a number of local studies which 
have been carried out in local school systems and they 
have carried out changes in their systems through school 
integration or some other activities. They have used that 
as a source. There has also been a number of things in 
various places which have stemmed from this in one way 
or another, the organization for economic cooperation and 
development in Europe has established equality of edu­
cational opportunity which follows very much the pattern 
which was initiated by that survey.

Q. Can you summarize or capsulize for us Exhibit 500, 
several hundred pages in length, on what were the major 
conclusions reached by the study? A. Well, first of all, 
let me say that there were a number of sections to the sur­
vey or a number of things which were reported in that 
volume, and the only ones which I will make any statement 
on here are those which have to do with elementary and 
secondary education, for which this major survey that we 
described was carried out. There were also other surveys 
for secondary education and some other examinations which 
are in the report which I think are not relevant to the 
present case and so I will report only on those that I  see 
as possibly relevant.

The survey attempted to examine the question of equal­
ity of educational opportunity in what might be seen as 
[303 three different ways. One is through looking at the 
input resources into schools and how those varied accord­
ing to particular classifications of students that were 
surveyed. I  should remark at the outset that the survey 
examined the equality of educational opportunity with 
regard to the following racial and ethnic groups: Negro,

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1529a

Mexican-American, Puerto Rican, Oriental, American In­
dian, and whites other than those who were included in the 
previous classification.

So, with regard to these six groups and with regard to 
Negroes and whites in particular regions of the country, 
there was an examination of, first of all, as I indicated, the 
input resources into schools.

Q. Can you give use some example of those resources? 
A. Well, there were a large number of items having to 
do with schools which were examined—which examined 
such things as the number of books in the school library, 
the age of the textbooks, the age of the school buildings, 
the size of the site on which the school building existed, 
the kinds and number of curricula that existed in the 
school, the existence of audiovisual equipment, the exist­
ence and character of science laboratories; whether they 
were free public kindergartens or not, and a whole variety. 
The classroom size, per pupil expenditure of instruction; 
the number of items on this—of this general character.

Q. And what was the second? [313 A. The second was 
the degree of racial segregation in schools, that is, as with 
the first, not taking as a given or as answered the question 
of whether this in itself constitutes inequality of educa­
tional opportunity, but rather recognizing that our task 
was to examine inequality of educational opportunity as it 
may be defined by a number of people in the population 
and in the Congress and in the Executive of the federal 
government. Our task was to examine the different pos­
sible definitions of inequality of educational opportunity 
and one of these is clearly the degree of racial segregation 
in the schools. So that this was the second major area that 
we examined, that is, the racial composition of the schools.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1530a

The third major area that we examined was to look not 
at the input resources into the schools but at the output 
resources of the schools, and in that we took a fairly nar­
row definition of output. We didn’t look at the kinds of 
social attitudes or anything of that sort that might be seen 
as a legitimate output of education, but took a narrow 
definition, really, examining principally verbal skills and 
mathematic skills of children of these six different groups 
and, as I said, of Negroes and whites in different regions 
of the country.

Q. This then was the achievement data? A. That’s right. 
This was the achievement data and [32] again, not view­
ing this per se as a measure of the equality or inequality 
of educational opportunity, but viewing this as an ele­
ment which is relevant to the question of equality or 
inequality of educational opportunity because the further 
examination of that data was to see how this achievement 
varied as a consequence of different resource input into the 
school and then to see how those resource inputs were 
related to the race of the child. So that, essentially, this 
third area was to examine what might be described as those 
resource inputs of the school that were relevant to the 
outputs of the school; that is, those which exhibited some 
degree of impact or effect upon the achievements of stu­
dents in the school.

Q. Can you tell us what the major factors were in the 
school which contributed to the presence or absence of 
unequal educational opportunity? A. Well, if I  could go 
back to the prior question, I  think it didn’t—I didn’t com­
pletely answer that. I should say that, in examining those 
three kinds or three definitions of what might constitute 
inequality of educational opportunity, we found a smaller 
degree of difference with regard to input resources at the

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1531a

—of the sort I described before, a smaller degree of dif­
ference between schools attended by persons in these dif­
ferent racial and ethnic groups than had been previously 
anticipated or that had been previously felt to be [33] 
the case. So that, with regard to that measure of inequality 
of educational opportunity, we found smaller differences 
than anticipated.

Q. You’re talking about the physical resources? The 
hardware of education? A. That’s right. Now, with re­
gard to the third conception of equality of educational 
opportunity that I just described, the question came, what 
were the sources in the school or what were the character­
istics of the school that were most highly related to the 
achievement of students or the output of the school. And 
we grouped those characteristics of the school into three 
broad categories; those which were characteristics of the 
school of the sort I  described before with the physical input 
into the school, including things about the curriculum but 
not including characteristics of the teachers. The second 
broad set of characteristics was those having to do with 
characteristics of teachers and the third one was one which 
was introduced only in a later stage of the analysis and 
what might be described as educational resources brought 
by other children to the school. What was done was to 
measure the characteristics of the home environment of 
the children who were in the school and then to examine 
how a child in that school—how a child’s performance was 
the function of family background of the other children 
in the school. That was the third general set of resources 
[34] in the school that we examined.

First, as I said, was more merely the physical and cur­
ricular aspects of the schools and the second was charac­

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1532a

teristics of the teacher and third was the characteristics 
of the students in the school.

Now, we found, first of all, that schools differed. Schools 
attended by these different racial and ethnic groups dif­
fered least with regard to these first two categories and 
most with regard to the third category. That is, they dif­
fered least with regard to physical input of the schools 
and next with regard to the characteristics of the teachers 
in the school and the most with regard to the characteris­
tics of other students in the school. Secondly, when we re­
lated the output of the school to—the performance of 
students to the other three characteristics; that is, when 
relating performance of students in the school to these 
three clusters of characteristics, we found that the one 
which was least related to performance was the physical 
and curricular aspects of the school. What was the next 
most related to performance was the characteristics of the 
teacher, and what was the most related to the performance 
were the characteristics of other students. So that there 
was roughly an inverse order between those characteris­
tics which were effective in producing educational output 
and those which were similar for the schools attended by 
children of different racial and ethnic [35] groups; that 
is, those characteristics in which the schools attended— 
for example, were attended by Negroes and whites—dif­
fered most with characteristics of the other students in 
their schools, and with the ones which were shown to be 
most effective in the analysis.

Q. Now, with regard to this third factor, student en­
vironment or the environment created by the student group, 
did you also have occasion to study the peer group en­
vironment created? I know you have studied the black

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1533a

school children and the environment created by those chil­
dren, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. Now, did yon also consider Mexican-American or His- 
pano children separately! A. Yes.

Q. What did you find was the relationship, if any, be­
tween the types of school environment created by those 
two groups? A. Well, first of all, I think it can be fairly 
stated that of the six racial and ethnic groups that were 
described there were four which had roughly similar levels 
of performance and roughly similar levels of family back­
ground when one looks at the kinds of resources that ex­
isted in the family. Those were Puerto Bican, Mexican- 
American, American Indian and Negro, and two which had 
both higher levels of performance [36] and higher socio­
economic characteristics of background, those of whites 
which I mentioned before and Oriental Americans. In terms 
of kinds of impact that a child from one of these first four 
groups—the kind of impact that the average family back­
ground of children in these four groups and that is not of 
any particular child, but I’m talking about average family 
background in terms of its socioeconomic resources, those 
were roughly similar across these four groups.

Obviously, of course, there are major differences be­
tween, for example, American Indians and the other three 
groups, but at least among the other three groups, espe­
cially when urban-rural differences are controlled, with 
socioeconomic backgrounds which are not extremely dif­
ferent, then what was found, and it was found in the study, 
was the—what was found was the socioeconomic back­
grounds or the educational resources in the home rather 
than specific racial characteristics of the student which re­
lated—which was the environmental resource that I  de­
scribed earlier.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1534a

Q. Now, Doctor, on the basis of that factor, the simi­
larity of the types of background, for example, and the 
Hispano—and that Hispano and Negro children bring to 
school with them, did you or can you reach any conclu­
sions as to the effects of the peer group, the student peer 
group in schools which are predominantly minority in 
their character, such as, for example, 40-percent Hispano 
and 40-percent black, and [37] contrast it with schools 
which are predominantly composed of one minority group. 
Is there a difference? A. In terms of our examination, 
there would be no reason to see any difference at all. As 
I say, in elaboration of that, the important set of vari­
ances or the set of variables which were found to be 
important were that educational resources brought by the 
child into the school from his home and which then had an 
impact upon other children in the school, and these were 
related to the racial characteristics of the children, but it 
was not the racial characteristic or the ethnic characteris­
tic per se, but these educational characteristics as it af­
fected other students.

Q. And there is a correlation, is there not, between the 
socioeconomic factors and the race? A. Yes.

Q. Now, did you also have occasion to study the dif­
ferent mixes of the ethnic groups and racial groups in 
these schools? A. There has been a good deal of exami­
nation of that. That was examined only in fairly small— 
a fairly small report that we are discussing, but it’s been 
examined with regard to these same data in subsequent 
analyses. And first of all, I should say it’s difficult to make 
strong inferences in this area. Essentially, if I understand 
your question correctly, you’re asking what is the effective
[38] student body of different socioeconomic positions,

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1535a

for example ranging from, say, zero to a hundred percent 
middle class. Is that your—

Q. That’s right. A. First of all, I  should say that the 
inferences cannot be absolutely conclusive in this regard, 
but there seems to be a kind of majority effect, that is, 
that if the school is predominantly middle class, then there 
are beneficial effects on those students who are not middle 
class in the school or who come from, family backgrounds 
which have poor educational resources in them; without 
being deleterious, effects the quality upon the other chil­
dren.

If the majority is in the reverse direction, there seems 
again to be this kind of majority or climate effect of the 
school which leads to the—which does away with those 
benefits. As I say, the inferences in this area cannot be 
entirely conclusive, but that is both on the basis of these 
data, principally to further analyses which have been car­
ried out, and on the basis of some other research which 
has been—

The Court: Well, then, the culturally-deprived 
whites would be exactly in the same position in your 
mind!

The Witness: Tes, sir.
The Court: As the Negroes or Hispanos or Ori­

entals, is that right!
[39] The Witness: Yes, sir.
The Court: And with similar deprived—
The Witness: Yes, sir.
The Court: Well, they say it’s the middle class— 

upper middle class influence that produces most sig­
nificantly; whether the students are Negro or what­
ever they are.

Jam.es Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1536a

The Witness: Yes, sir. That’s certainly the evi­
dence of onr survey. Now, there has been some 
other examination which is not entirely consistent 
with that bnt I think all of the examination of this 
question shows that the major influence is that of 
the educational resources in the child’s home, which 
are principally derivative from the socioeconomic 
background of the child.

The Court: That’s what the defendants here said 
at the trial. They said that the whole problem was 
that of the culturally—cultural deprivation, eco­
nomic deprivation, and not the schools themselves. 
This was the education that was being offered; that 
they were just dealing with a group of students 
whose level of basic knowledge was low. And so on.

The Witness: I’m not talking now about the in­
fluence of the child’s background upon his perfor­
mance. I ’m talking about the influence of the back­
ground of other children in the school upon his 
performance and, if I understand what you just 
said—

[40] The Court: Well, you said that was what 
determined the inferiority of the schools, that is, 
whether or not they had a large number of white 
middle-class students.

The Witness: Yes, sir.
The Court: Isn’t that what you said?
The Witness: Yes, sir.
The Court: So it follows that, if our culturally 

and economically deprived are in the minority, why, 
then the school itself is going to be an inferior one.

The Witness: Yes, sir. That would certainly be 
the conclusion.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1537a

The Court: And I take it that you’re saying that 
the quality of the educational effort is not going to 
make very much difference.

The Witness: What I ’m saying is that inferiority 
of that school is for, let’s say, for example, for a 
hypothetical child whose school is a predominantly 
lower-class black school, for example, or predom­
inantly middle-class school, that his educational ex­
perience will be very much a function of that social 
composition of the school more than of the explicit 
resources which the school has put into the system. 
In other words, I think that’s what you just indicated.

The Court: So you’re spinning your wheels try­
ing to improve these schools and thus improve the 
educational [413 experience of the child in them by 
programs of this kind?

The Witness: Yes, sir. I think that would be the 
principal inference one would draw from the re­
sults of most of these programs as well. That is, 
our survey didn’t examine explicitly programs—that 
is, special programs that had been introduced be­
cause in many respects many of these programs be­
gan only after our survey was carried out. Many 
of them have been done, for example, in response to 
Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act which came out about—only subsequent to that, 
but the results of these further—of studies of these 
special programs have not been very encouraging 
with regard to their effects.

Mr. Greiner: We’re about to get to that, Your 
Honor,

The Court: I figured you were. I will let you 
develop it.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1538a

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct 

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Coleman, yon have mentioned studies that were 

conducted subsequent to that which you directed. Are you 
familiar with the report of the United States Civil Eights 
Commission which was based in part upon the data gathered 
in the Coleman report? A. Yes.

Q. What was the nature of the study conducted for the 
Civil Rights Commission? A. Well, the Civil Rights Com­
mission report directed [42] itself much more specifically 
to questions of school integration in comparison to com­
pensatory programs than the survey that we carried out 
did. Ours was directed toward broader questions and so 
that there was analysis—there was both further analysis 
of the data which had been gathered under our survey. 
Analysis of some special data in particular localities. One 
examination very—one very intensive examination of the 
effects of socioeconomic and racial integration in Rich­
mond, California, for example, that is reported in the ap­
pendix to that survey, and then there was an examination 
of compensatory education programs which existed at that 
time.

Q. Now, was this study then put out in published form? 
A. Yes, it was.

Q. I ’m handing you what’s been marked for identifica­
tion as Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 27 and 27-A, being the appendix 
to Exhibit 27, and ask you if you can identify those for 
us? A. Yes, these are the reports to which have been— 
to which you have been referring.

Q. Now, what role did you play, Dr. Coleman, in the 
creation of the study now represented by Plaintiffs’ Ex­
hibits 27 and 27-A? A. I played no role whatsoever other 
than as a consultant to the study and was not very deeply 
involved.



1539a

Q. As a consultant, what did you do? A. I  simply dis­
cussed at a meeting of consultants of [431 that study the 
general directions that the survey might take and what 
kinds of data it might use. One of the persons who worked 
intensively with me on the equality of educational op­
portunity was a major staff member in this report. He 
carried out the analysis of—a further analysis of these 
data.

Q. Now, Exhibit 27 was published when, Doctor? A. I 
believe it was 1967.

Q. And how much time subsequent to the publication of 
the Coleman report was this? A. I think it was less than 
a year.

Q. Now, does Exhibit 27 then attempt a further eval­
uation of, for example, the then compensatory education 
programs? A. Yes. It carries out a further examination 
—or a more explicit examination of the compensatory 
programs and certainly our survey didn’t carry out such 
an examination at all. I  should say, however, that partly 
because of the fact that many of those programs have 
been subsequent to the publication of this, there has been 
much more recently, by the New York State Department 
of Education, a very comprehensive survey carried out 
of both compensatory programs and school integration 
activities at local levels which has a title similar to this. 
I ’ve forgotten exactly the title.

Q. I think we just happen to have that with us, [443 
Doctor. I t’s been marked for identification as Exhibit 508. 
That’s Dr. O’Reilly’s study. A. That is the Report on 
Racial and Social Class Isolation in the Schools. That’s 
the most recent and comprehensive survey which has been 
done up to this point. I think, in contrast to nearly every­
thing that’s been done before Avhich was quite partial and

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1540a

quite—well, either partial or a little early with regard to 
the evaluation of compensatory programs, and I think 
this is really kind of a benchmark for evaluation of these 
programs at this point.

Q, Now, turning your attention back to Exhibit 27 and 
27-A—do you recall what conclusions were reached in 
those studies regarding the efficacy of compensatory ed­
ucation programs in these isolated schools! A. Yes, the 
conclusions that were reached were essentially conclusions 
—the conclusion that compensatory education programs 
had not shown any generally effective methods for in­
creasing achievement of children from disadvantaged back­
grounds. That is, it was a fairly discouraging conclusion 
with regard to those compensatory programs. And those 
fairly discouraging conclusions, I think, have been really 
characteristic of most of the examinations of compensatory 
programs which have been carried out.

Q. Now, when we talk about compensatory education, 
Dr. Coleman, what kinds of programs are we talking about? 
What [45] are some of the objectives of these compensa­
tory programs? For example, does it include remedial 
instruction? A. Well, the objectives of the programs, the 
objectives of the—of many of the programs are very di­
rectly to increase achievement in cognitive skills which 
are viewed as the principal resonsibility of elementary 
education. That is, verbal skills and mathematical skills. 
So that the goals have not completely focused upon that 
but very largely focused upon these two things, verbal 
and mathematical skills.

Q. What about factors such as—I believe it’s called cul­
tural encouragement or broadening the horizons of the 
child? A. Well, there has been some of these, as well. 
However, from the point of view of the kind of evaluation

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1541a

which has been used both in the report under question, 
racial isolation in the public schools and other evaluations, 
most of those valuations have to do with these specific 
cognitive skills, that is, the question of whether a given 
compensatory program increases such cognitive skills more 
than would be expected by the regular program that the 
child would attend through that period of time.

Q. Well, factors such as building self-esteem, for exam­
ple, and overcoming a negative attitude in the child, or 
getting additional parental involvement with the education 
of the child? Aren’t those factors which would also lead 
to [46] improvement in these cognitive skills? A. Yes, 
these certainly might well do so, and it’s just that the final 
criterion which has been used principally for evaluating 
these surveys is whether in fact cognitive skills are in­
creased. Now, many of the things of the sort you described 
have some value in their own right and also may be factors 
which, if improved or if effected, then, in turn affect cog­
nitive skills which are the principal criteria that have 
been used in evaluating the cognitive skills.

Q. Dr. Coleman, I ’d like to turn your attention to the 
question of integration. What is the nature of your study 
on the question about the causal relationship, if any, be­
tween integration of the minority child and, by that, I 
mean placing them in a—let’s say a majority Anglo school? 
What is the relationship between that process and the 
improvement of the minority child’s achievement? A. I’m 
not sure I understand the question. Well, could you state 
it in other words ?

Q. Well, can you tell us if there is any beneficial effect 
upon the minority child? A. If there is any beneficial 
effect upon the minority child? Can you continue the 
question?

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1542a

Q. By integrating the child. A. Well, I’m sorry. Let’s 
say that the survey that [47] we carried out was a survey 
which examined only children in those schools in which 
they were found and so wdiat we had to do was to examine 
children who were in integrated schools and had—and had 
this similar background but in integrated—segregated 
schools. The only was I can answer your question is to 
say that, in terms of the analysis that we carried out, 
the analysis was limited not to moving children from one 
school to another and see what the consequences were, 
but limited to examining children in the schools in which 
they were found, controlling insofar as possible on the 
backgrounds of these children, and then looking at their 
performance in the schools that they were with. And, as 
I indicated, the performance was more strongly related 
to the educational background of the other students and 
by that factor, the racial composition of the school they 
were in, than to any other single characteristic of the 
school—-

Q. What was the relationship? A. That the higher the 
educational resources of the other children in the school 
they brought with them from their homes, the greater the 
achievement of any particular child in that school, control­
ling on his own family background. So that it was a posi­
tive effect of the educational resources in the homes of 
the other children who were in the school.

Q. Then what in your mind is the primary factor that 
is present in the integrated school, the predominantly 
Anglo [48] schools, that led to their improvement and 
achievement of the minority child? A. Well, I  must make 
inferences because of the fact that one has simply the 
statistical education and then the question is, what are

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1543a

the mechanisms involved, and if I understand your ques­
tion, you’re asking what are the mechanisms?

I am tempted to express—and a number of people have 
at some length—the inference that I would draw from 
various evidence that I have had—I have seen is that it 
has to do with the linguistic and conceptual challenge 
that environment brings to a child. Well, that environ­
ment brings for a child—that linguistic and conceptual 
challenge is the thing which is provided for—created by 
the environment of the other children in the school. What 
that means in effect is that, if the inference is correct, 
is that a child from a linguistically-impoverished back­
ground will be most affected by a school situation which 
has a—which is more linguistic, particularly the rich or 
different educated environment.

Q. Are you familiar, Doctor, with any programs of com­
pensatory education which supply this factor that you have 
just described? A. Well, I think that, if a program of 
compensatory education were to be effective, it would prob­
ably have to be through that kind of mechanism. I think 
that the major [493 problem with compensatory programs 
is that it’s much more difficult and, if possible, much more 
expensive to introduce such environmental changes in the 
child’s environment, not only within the classroom but 
outside the classroom when the actual social environment 
that he experiences in the sense of other children he talks 
to remains homogeneous with his past.

Q. Now, did Exhibit 27 also consider these same factors? 
A. Yes. Again, it’s difficult to isolate these factors per se 
and as a consequence I think one must depend upon in­
ferences with regard to this.

Q. But with—were the conclusions which you have just 
described also reached by the Civil Bights Commission

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1544a

study? A. The conclusions that I have described were 
certainly compatible with the conclusions that they reached.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, at this time we would 
offer Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 27 and 27-A.

Mr. Bis: We would object on the grounds of in­
sufficient foundation.

The Court: Are you offering the content of both 
of these as testimony?

Mr. Greiner: Well, I think really the function of 
these is simply to inform the Court of the state of 
the art, so to speak, insofar as the analyses which 
have been conducted [50] concerning really the 
primary issue we have before us and namely what 
works and what doesn’t work.

The Court: What part are you going to rely on? 
The whole thing?

Mr. Greiner: There is a particular section there, 
Your Honor, toward the back which contains the 
analysis of compensatory programs as well as an 
analysis of the then integration programs which 
were in existence at the time that report was pub­
lished. The appendices, which is 27-A, is simply 
data used by the study in reaching its conclusions.

The Court: Are you familiar with this material?
The Witness: Yes, I  am.
The Court: Have you read it?
The Witness: Yes.
The Court: No, I mean Mr. Bis.
Mr. Bis: I have read so much that I—
Mr. Greiner: We listed that as an exhibit on 

about June 16th last year.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1545a

Mr. E is: I’m familiar with the volume and I have 
a copy, yes, Tour Honor, insofar as the particular 
part counsel is referring to.

The Court: Well, he’s got a paper clip there.
Mr. E is: Mine didn’t have a paper clip.
Mr. Greiner: I ’m not sure that paper clip is in 

the right place, Your Honor.
E513 The Court: Well, we will receive it for 

whatever value it may have, bearing in mind that 
it is hearsay, of course. This is somewhat an un­
usual type case, but if there are parts of it that 
you feel are particularly incompetent, why, you 
can call my attention to those.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibits 27 and 27-A 
were received in evidence.)

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Coleman, calling your attention then to the 

breadth of these surveys represented by Exhibit 500, Ex­
hibits 27 and 27-A, in your opinion are the results of that 
survey sufficiently founded in the data—is the data com­
prehensive enough that you would consider it to be reliable 
in applying it to a school district such as Denver’s?

Mr. E is: I’ll object to that because the witness 
stated he had very little to do with 27 and 27-A ex­
cept on a consulting basis, and so, by his own ad­
mission, he has not examined the data and cannot 
draw such a conclusion.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, I believe the witness 
has stated that most of the data upon which 27-A is 
based is data that was developed in the course of 
preparing Exhibit 500.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1546a

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct 

Q. Is that correct? A. That’s correct.

The Court: Are you familiar with the Denver 
condition?

[52] The Witness: I am familiar with some con­
siderable part of the Denver situation now. I  have 
read a number of documents relating to this case, 
yes.

The Court: Well, do you feel you can answer this 
last question, as to whether this 27 is germane to 
the problem here?

The Witness: Yes, I would certainly think it is 
germane, that is, surveys which are carried out on 
a school system other than a particular school 
system under consideration have, I  think, charac­
teristically been used as a basis for policy in par­
ticular school systems.

The Court: The thing that worries me about all 
this is that what you say is that the schools are 
not inferior as counsel proved at the trial, but that 
the students are inferior. They proved it over­
whelmingly that the schools were inferior; their 
offerings were inferior. Now, in coming up with 
a new tack—it’s not the schools at all, it’s the stu­
dents and their economic and cultural deprivation 
that makes the educational experience one that is 
noncompetitive. It’s dull; not exciting. I mean, I 
get that from what you’re saying. Sort of a self- 
defeating proposition. They proved the constitution 
was violated and now they are unproving it.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, what vre’re trying to 
avoid is a duplication of the testimony that the 
Court has already received. We could go into 
teacher attitudes, teacher [53] experience.



1547a

The Court: Well, he says it is of no consequence.
The Witness: I ’m sorry. I didn’t mean to say—
The Court: You said these programs were worth­

less. I ’m exaggerating a little bit to make my point. 
Isn’t that what you’re saying?

The Witness: No, what I am saying—
The Court: Virtually worthless?
The Witness: I’m really trying to say the follow­

ing that is, that first of all that, of the school re­
sources which are provided by the school system, 
those which show most relation to a child’s achieve­
ment are the characteristics of the teachers, in par­
ticular the verbal skills of the teachers. But that 
these are not as important for the achievement of 
the particular student in terms of our analysis as 
the social composition of the rest of the student 
body. Secondly, that with regard to compensatory 
programs, if one evaluates these programs simply 
in terms of the increase in performance that occurs 
as a consequence of them or that occurs for children 
who have participated in them, there is very little 
cause for optimism with regard to the overall effec­
tiveness of these programs. But, of the things which 
the school board provides, the characteristics of 
teachers and in particular the verbal skills of teach­
ers seem to be the most important characteristics.

The Court: We will take a short recess.
£54] (Whereupon, the trial recessed at 11:06 a.m. 

and resumed at 11:23 a.m.)
Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, Dr. Coleman isn’t back 

yet.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1548a

Your Honor, we are just about finished with Hr. 
Coleman. I  don’t believe the Court has ruled on 
500, and we would offer that at this time. Per­
haps we could dispose of that while we’re waiting.

The Court: 'Well, he’s going to give us some in­
formation on it, isn’t he, as to whether Denver was 
considered?

Mr. Greiner: We can certainly check on that.
The Court: I mean, before we ruled on it? I 

mean, we were withholding a ruling. He didn’t know 
the answer.

Mr. Greiner: I’m sorry, Your Honor. We can’t 
seem to find Dr. Coleman. He may be calling Wash­
ington, but I haven’t been able to find him.

The Court: Do you have any other witnesses you 
wish to call?

(Colloquy not transcribed herein.)
The Court: Well, if you wish to take a recess 

while you find him, I ’ll be glad to do that. Would 
you prefer this?

Mr. Greiner: I would prefer it, Your Honor. I 
think things would follow a lot more logically.

The Court: Are you going to ask him how many 
white middle-class or black middle-class people he 
needs in order [553 to achieve the objectives? What 
percentage he needs?

Mr. Greiner: I believe he said the majority, Your 
Honor.

The Court: A simply majority?
Mr. Greiner: Yes.
The Court: In order to make any impact?

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1549a

Mr. Greiner: You need a majority to create this 
environment that is necessary.

The Court: Okay. Well, let us know when you’re 
ready.

(Whereupon, the trial recessed at 11:29 a.m. and 
resumed at 11:35 a.m.)

Mr. Greiner: We apologize. The witness thought 
we were in recess until 12:30 and therefore went 
ahead and tried to place this call to Washington.

The Court: That’s all right. The reporter is hav­
ing trouble getting his testimony. I  don’t know how 
we can remedy it but I’m afraid you’re going to have 
to keep your voice up full.

The Witness: Fine.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Coleman, just prior to the recess, we were dis­

cussing the educational resources which the schools allo­
cate to particular schools, which the system allocates. Now, 
is there a condition that you’re aware of of these homo­
geneous residential areas which do exist and how [56] 
do these neighborhood residential patterns relate to the 
kinds of students that you find in the schools? A. Well, 
the answer to that depends very much upon the way in 
which the school system organizes its schools in relation 
to residents. That is, most school systems organize their 
schools in relation to the residents by having fixed school 
districts and some of these are very ethnically homoge­
neous. And a few school systems don’t operate in that 
fashion. But the impact of the educational resources that 
I described before that are brought with other children to 
the school from their home really is the function very much

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1550a

then of the social composition of the schools which are 
organized in most districts in the United States, are in 
turn the function of the socioeconomic and ethnic compo­
sition of the neighborhood.

Q. So then it’s a matter of student assignment policy! 
A. That’s right.

Q. Now, could you report to the Court on your tele­
phone call and what the status was! A. The telephone 
call at this point is inconclusive. I indicated to the people 
of the Office of Education to give me an answer with re­
gard to two questions, that is, the status of Denver with 
regard to which of these two categories it was in, and 
secondly, the question from their counsel as to what their 
position is with regard to the nature of this [57] informa­
tion. So they are searching—they’re doing that now.

The Court: Finally, Dr. Coleman, you mentioned 
that you were on this Cabinet committee. Can you 
give us the nature of—•

A. Well, I ’m not on the Cabinet committee because only 
Cabinet committee members are on the Cabinet committee. 
I ’m a consultant to the Cabinet committee on school de­
segregation which is attempting to first develop legisla­
tion for $500 million worth for this year and a billion 
dollars for next year for implementing school desegrega­
tion, both in the South and North. And for then laying 
out guidelines for the conditions under which such money 
can be used by schools—by local school systems so that I 
am principally advising the committee with regard to the 
guidelines which school systems would—the guidelines for 
school systems with regard to the use of the moneys for 
school desegregation.

Q. In that context, does school desegregation include 
transportation? A. Yes, in the conception of the Cabinet

James Coleman~for Plaintiffs—Direct



1551a

committee as it currently—I think I ’m probably not really 
—the Cabinet committee is still determining the character 
of these things and so I ’m not really specifically knowl­
edgeable about what will be the outcome of the Cabinet 
committee’s deliberations.

£58] Q. What is the time table for making this $500 mil­
lion available? A. There will be some funds-—it is ex­
pected that there will be some funds available by the end 
of June.

Q. Then, directing your attention back to the relation­
ship between the neighborhood school policy and the 
homogeneous character of schools that are created by 
that policy, is there any way that you can see, Doctor, that 
we’re going to adhere to the neighborhood school policy of 
attaining the racial and ethnic heterogeneity which you 
believe to be necessary for equality of educational oppor­
tunity? A. It seems to me there is a very—a specific in­
compatibility between neighborhood school policies and 
equality of educational opportunity as it derives from the 
social composition of the school itself. I think this was 
not necessarily the case in the past but there has been a 
general shift over a period of time toward increasing 
homogeneity, not solely with regard to race but increasing 
the homogeneity of neighborhoods, and this homogeneity 
of neighborhoods has, in terms of the evidence that I have 
seen with regard to school performance, has reduced the 
equality of educational opportunity as a consequence of the 
—of increasing the homogeneity of neighborhoods. I think, 
as a consequence, it’s probably necessary in order for equal­
ity of educational opportunity to exist to have affirmative 
action [59] of sort that is not necessary when neighbor­
hoods were less homogeneous than at present.

Mr. Greiner: We have no further questions, Your 
Honor.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1552a

Cross-Examination by Mr. Ris:
Q. Dr. Coleman, the budgetary amount that you are 

working on as a consultant to the Cabinet committee—is 
that to provide funds to the states for compensatory edu­
cation programs basically? A. No, this is not, basically 
what this is designed for.

Q. What are the funds designed for? A. The funds are 
basically designed to aid school districts in implementing 
desegregation.

Q. And certainly it’s for providing additional educa­
tional curriculum, increasing teacher input and so forth, 
is it not? A. Yes.

Q. And to provide situations where the need appears 
that there can be smaller teacher-pupil ratio? A. Well, 
insofar as that is carried out in desegregated settings, in­
sofar as the orientation of that program exists.

Q. But it is to provide that as one of the things—that’s 
one of the things it’s to provide, is it not? [603 A. I t’s to 
provide—yes, certainly.

Q. To provide more facilities, physical facilities, more 
teacher availability to the students to attempt to increase 
their educational achievement? A. Well, let me say two 
things. First of all, neither the legislation nor the specific 
guidelines for the utilization of these funds is completed. 
When legislation is completed then it may be changed in 
Congress. So that it’s not possible for me to say anything 
specifically about what that legislation or—about the spe­
cific details of how those funds will be used. But, I  can say 
that the major orientation of the persons who are respon­
sible for administering those funds is for their use in aid­
ing school desegregation.

Q. Well, the funds are not going to be limited to trans­
portation of pupils from one school to another? A. No.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1553a

Q. Obviously not. A. No.
Q. So there are many other programs that are being 

considered for the use of these funds'! A. Yes.
Q. To increase the educational opportunity of the chil­

dren I A. Exactly.
Q. Has your entire career been engaged in sociology, 

[613 Dr. Coleman? A. Since I have completed my edu­
cation, it has. Before that, I worked as a chemist for two 
years.

Q. And you have never taught in public school systems? 
A. No, I have never taught in the public schools.

Q. Never been involved in planning or administration of 
a public school system? A. No, I never have.

Q. Have you ever visited the Denver schools, in any of 
the individual schools? A. No, I have not.

Q. Have you ever visited with the superintendent or the 
members of the staff pertaining to vote conditions? A. No, 
no vote factors.

Q. Are you acquainted with the programs that are pres­
ently in existence or contemplated in the Denver schools, 
particularly Manual High School and Cole Junior High? 
A. Yes, I’m acquainted with some of their programs. I ’m 
not acquainted with them in precise detail, but I have read 
about particular programs at Manual, and also programs 
at Cole and some of the elementary schools.

Q. And what has been the source of your information? 
A. Some of the material which I think was submitted by 
the defendants in this case.

Q. That came in during the previous trial? [62] A. 
Yes.

Q. Have you read some of the transcript? A. Yes.
Q. Is that the extent of your information? A. I also 

read some of the material which was presented by the 
Superintendent of Schools, both in 1968 and more recently.

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1554a

I  just scanned the material which was dated, I think, May 
5th, 1970.

Q. You’re not holding out yourself as an expert to the 
Denver situation! A. No, certainly not.

Q. Have you had some change of opinion yourself or 
some change in the inferences you have drawn from your 
study since the original publication of Exhibit 500? A. 
No, I  think not. At that point or within a month after that 
was published I wrote a statement which was a review in 
an attempt to summarize some of the conclusions of that 
which was published, and that statement I think was sub­
stantially the same as what I have been indicating.

Q. Dr. Coleman, insofar as a child coming from a home 
and neighborhood environment where he has been cultur­
ally deprived in his beginnings, his awareness, preschool, 
and then attends say a middle-class school, was it your 
original thought as a result of your study that this child 
would absorb facts and learning processes from middle- 
class students [63] —students in the middle-class homes 
who came with the more advanced learning process and 
knowledge? A. That was not my belief prior to carrying 
out the study. Prior to carrying out the study I assumed, 
as I  think most of us assumed, that there was far more 
impact of the usual school resources that we conceive of 
as school resources relative to the impact of these less 
tangible things that you were just describing. In carrying 
out that analysis and as a result of that analysis I  was 
forced to come to that conclusion.

Q. Well, you have more of a feeling now, as I  gather 
from your testimony previously, then, it’s more of a mat­
ter of a motivation now rather than actually learning from 
the peer group? That is, he is more highly motivated 
rather than the learning process itself? A. No, I think

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1555a

it’s simply a matter of having to cope with a more chal­
lenging environment which is less like that that he has 
come in. contact with in the past, and to myself, I  have 
often used the analogy of an English-speaking child at­
tending a school in which all the children spoke French. 
That is, this is the way in which yon would—he would very 
quickly come to learn French; not through anything other 
than the fact of being confronted every minute of the day 
with the necessity for communicating with those students.

Q. Doctor, wouldn’t you recognize that some children 
£64] when they go into a school, that basically they are 
frustrated and give up? A. Well, my assumption before 
carrying out the survey was that particularly—well, espe­
cially class—lower-class students, that is, students from 
especially deprived backgrounds—if someone separated, for 
example, Negro students in integrated schools between 
those who were white disadvantaged and those who were 
not white disadvantaged, that there would be a negative 
effect for those who were white disadvantaged. And I ’m 
not surprised in both our analogy and in other analogies 
to find that was the case.

Q. You didn’t find that to be the fact, though? A. No.
Q. You have never been informed of that occurring in 

individual cases in any of the schools systems? A. In fact, 
it’s kind of a general conception that one gets from an 
anecdote case that would lead to having the prior expecta- 
tation or certainly led me to have that prior expectation.

Q. Actually, your study didn’t study individual students, 
did it? A. Well—

Q. I mean, you were studying the large mass of students? 
A. Yes, but we did that essentially by studying the indi­
vidual students. That is, we just didn’t look at the [65] 
average performance in the classroom. But we looked as

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1556a

to how a particular child in that classroom—how his per­
formance was affected by other children in that class, 
whether it was related to the performance of others in the 
class.

Q. What do you mean by a stable racial integration pat­
tern, Dr. Coleman? A. Well, when I use that term I mean 
one in which the—essentially in which the population is 
stable; one in which the racial composition of the school 
doesn’t change sharply over a period of time.

Q. And there are some schools that are not stable, al­
though racially integrated, is that correct? A. That’s 
right.

Q. There are problems if the school is not stable? A. 
I ’m not sure I understand the import of your question.

Q. Well, is there any difference between a stable racially 
integrated school and a nonstable racially integrated school 
in its operation and achievement? A. I think there are 
both internal and external sources of instability. That is, 
some of the sources of instability have to do with simply 
population movements quite independent of the school. 
But some of them have to do with the problems that arise 
within the school; problems [663 that are not treated when 
they arise by the particular school principal.

Q. In your study with respect to teachers, you mentioned 
that verbal skills, you found, made a substantial difference. 
Did I understand you correctly? A. Yes.

Q. Was that the principal difference you found in teacher 
characteristics? A. Well, no. We examined a number of 
teacher characteristics but this was the one which was most 
highly related to the achievement of students in the schools 
of these teachers.

Q. You mean basically in minority schools? A. Well, 
yes, for minority students. Whether they were in predomi­

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1557a

nantly white schools or predominantly black schools or 
predominantly schools of another ethnicity. That is, inde­
pendent of that, the finding1 was that the student’s per­
formance was related to verbal skills of the teacher.

Q. This was regardless of the experience that the teacher 
had in teaching? A. Yes, the experience that the teacher 
had did not appear to be as important a factor in and of 
itself as those verbal skills.

Q. Was this also true and important regardless of the 
advanced degree the teacher might have? £67] A. Yes, 
although these other factors, in particular the education 
of the teacher, were not unrelated to the child’s achieve­
ment ; just that they were not as highly related as the verbal 
skills.

Q. Did you find, also, that this verbal skill was the over- 
lying or important—

The Court: Beg your pardon? Keep your voice 
up, too.

Mr. Ris : All right.

Q. —that the verbal skill was the most important, again, 
regardless of the race of the teacher or the ethnic origin 
of the teacher? A. Yes.

Q. So that the race or ethnic origin did not make the 
difference that the verbal skill did? Correct? A. That’s 
right.

Q. Now, in your study and your conclusions, Dr. Cole­
man, have you differentiated the predominantly white 
schools by socioeconomic class of the students attending 
those schools? A. We haven’t classified the schools simul­
taneously by—well, if possible, let me start over again.

Q. Go ahead. A. Could I ask you repeat the question 
because I think—

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1558a

The Court: Have you isolated schools in your 
study [68] upon the basis of racial or of cultural 
and economic deprivation?

The Witness: Yes. We certainly have.
The Court: You have made studies that were 

based upon this? This matter, regardless of race?
The Witness: Yes.
The Court: I think that’s what he’s leading to.

Q. That’s exactly what I’m leading to. And, regardless 
of the race, if it’s a low socioeconomic homogeneous neigh­
borhood, you find low achievement? A. Yes.

Q. And that is true regardless of the racial composition 
of the school, if it’s a low socioeconomic area? A. Yes.

The Court: Well, that’s a problem for the legis­
lators or the school board; not for the Court. In 
other words, there is no—according to you, there is 
no discrimination based upon race or color or na­
tional origin. The discrimination, if any, is based 
upon poverty. And that may not be anything a 
court can do. I mean, there is no constitutional 
deprivation.

The Witness: Two things have to be distinguished. 
One is the deprivation which arises to a child from 
his own background and the other is the deprivation 
which may accrue to him as a consequence of the 
backgrounds of the other £683 students in the same 
school that he is attending, and the research that I 
was reporting found both of those factors to be 
important in a child’s achievement; the first being 
more important, but the second not being negligible.

The Court: Well, if you have a school that is 100- 
percent white but is economically and culturally de~

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1559a

prived, why, its level would be just as low as one 
that is 100-percent black.

The Witness: The results of the research would 
say that a child in that school would be suffering 
lack of equality of educational opportunity as a 
consequence of the other students in the school, in­
dependent of the fact that it was white rather than 
black.

The Court: I thought that’s what you said.

By Mr. Ris:
Q. Now, in addition to the family background of the child 

—the neighborhood background of that student is also of 
powerful impact! A. The survey that we carried out did 
not distinguish between the composition of the neighbor­
hood and its effect and the composition of the school and 
its effect. The major reason it did not was because most 
schools—the composition of many schools, most schools, is 
similar to the composition of the neighborhood itself.

Q. Well, then, Dr. Coleman, we end up with the general 
conclusion that there are many factors, social and economic 
[70] factors that determine a child’s environment and it 
has just a tremendous effect on how he is going to achieve 
in school, is that correct? A. Yes, I think that would be 
a—

Q. And I would gather then that we conclude that the 
schools have to take that child as he is and that we have 
very little impact on him? A. Well, I wouldn’t conclude 
that because I would conclude that the schools, insofar as— 
well, the schools which themselves have a certain social 
composition and thus constitutes a certain environment, do 
either reinforce his family background environment or act 
apart from it. Insofar as they do reinforce it and insofar

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1560a

as lie does come from a disadvantaged background, then I 
think the schools do exercise a kind of—in a sense a de­
pressive effect in that regard.

Q. Then the search at the moment—the search of the 
sociologists and educators and all is how to find a program 
within the school that is at least in part going to offset this 
socioeconomic background to this child—that the child is 
subject to up to this point? A. Well, that would be the 
strategy, to carry out such a search. At the same time, the 
social composition of the schools has been shown to be 
important and this social composition of the school is in 
itself a factor which then [71] either releases the child 
from this background environment or fails to do so.

Q. What happens when the child gets out of school and 
goes back home to his home in the neighborhood environ­
ment? Does he have some regression? A. Well, I think 
two kinds of questions can be asked. One is, what happens 
to the child? Well, I ’m sorry. I thought you mean after 
the end of school. I think I misunderstood the question. 
I mean, when he leaves the school during the—

Q. Right. And in the summer vacation. A. There is 
some evidence now, particularly during summer vacations, 
that there is a strongly depressive effect upon, for exam­
ple, Negro children, whether it’s neighborhood or home or 
whatever, but during the summer period.

Q. Dr. Coleman, you were quoted in a recent Senate 
hearing as expressing an opinion that children should have 
some experience in a psychological minority environment 
and some experience in a psychological majority environ­
ment. What do you mean? Did you make such a compari­
son? A. Yes, I  did. If I were designing an educational 
experience for a child, I would certainly include both these

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1561a

kinds of experiences; the experience of being in a psycho­
logical majority and the experience of being in a psycho­
logical minority. I think both of these are quite important. 
Now, [721 these are independent of the question of what 
is the kind of environment that is most conducive to learn­
ing cognitive skills. These have to do with the types of 
environment that affects a child’s social attitude and his 
sense of self-esteem and things like that, and so I was 
referring to those when I raised the question of being in 
a psychological minority and in a psychological majority.

Q. Would such a plan be consistent with a child spend­
ing part of this time in his homogeneous neighborhood 
school and part of the time in an educational center where 
he could be a minority there as compared to a majority 
elsewhere? A. Yes, I think that would certainly be con­
sistent. Now, the impact upon his cognitive skills would 
depend really upon the proportion of time in those two 
environments.

Q. Did you express in your opinion that an ideal or an 
optimum would be about -50 percent each way! A. I  am 
not sure what I  said in that.

Mr. Ris: That’s all we have at this time.
*  #  #  *  #

[go] * * *

Redirect Examination by Mr. Greiner (Cont’d ) :
Q. Doctor, would you report to us, please, on what you 

learned from your conversation with the Washington office? 
A. Yes. I’m sorry if my fears were unfounded and—well, 
I’m happy that my fears were unfounded and the Office of 
Education—it was indicated that the proscription was 
against releasing any data on particular schools or school 
districts which had participated, and not against indicating

James Coleman—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



1562a

[81] which had not. The Denver school system was not 
drawn in the initial sample of the schools which were 
sampled or school systems which were sampled for the 
survey. It had a probability of being drawn but it was 
not drawn. So it was not part of the survey.

Mr. Greiner: That’s all we had from Dr. Cole­
man, Your Honor, unless you have further ques­
tions.

The Court: No.
(Witness excused.)
Mr. Greiner: Our next witness is Dr. Neal Sulli­

van.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Neal Sullivan, a witness called by and on behalf of 
plaintiffs, having first been duly sworn, was examined and 
testified as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Greiner:

The Court: Give us your name, address and pro­
fession.

The Witness: Neal Sullivan, 287 Harvard Street, 
Cambridge, Massachusetts.

By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Dr. Sullivan, have you compiled a resume of your 
experience and so forth? A. Yes, I have.

Q. Handing you what’s been marked for identification 
as Plaintiff’s Exhibit 513, I ask you if that is your resume? 
A. Yes, it is.



1563a

£82] Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, we would intro­
duce it at this time.

Mr. Bis: No objection.
The Court: It will be received.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 513 was re­
ceived in evidence.)

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Sullivan, by whom are you currently employed! 

A. The Massachusetts State Board of Education.
Q. What position do you hold with the State Board of 

Education! A. I’m the Board’s secretary.
Q. And how long have you held that position? A. For 

sixteen months.
Q. Now, what are your duties and responsibilities for 

the State of Massachusetts? A. To carry out the policies 
adopted by the State Board and by the general court and 
to oversee the operation of the public schools, housing, and 
1,250,000 students.

Q. Now, does Massachusetts have a statute requiring 
the elimination of racial imbalance? A. Yes, they do.

Q. Do you, in the course of your duties, administer that 
statute? A. Yes, I do.

£83] Q. Can you give the Court some indication of what 
is involved in the administration of that statute? A. That 
was a mandate of the general court indicating that when 
a school—when a single school -would have more than 50 
percent black students that the local school committee 
would have to take action to reduce that and keep it below 
50 percent.

Q. Now, what kinds of action have been taken by these 
local school districts? A. Redistricting, reorganization,

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1564a

pairing of schools, busing students, to the development 
of educational parks.

Q. Can you give us some idea of the types of programs 
that are now under way in the public schools of Massachu­
setts that are directed towards either desegregation or in­
tegration of student bodies? A. I think the one that would 
be the most significant to this Court would be the City 
of Boston, with approximately the same student popula­
tion. A large city, but with a similar public school popula­
tion. The reason for the size of the school population being 
about the same is that Boston has an extremely large paro­
chial school population, so that I think it’s significant that 
when I am in Denver I talk about what’s going on in 
Boston— Boston is busing students. Boston is discontinu­
ing neighborhood schools. Boston is developing an intri­
cate program with 28 affluent white suburbs. Boston is 
doing everything that is necessary under the law to de­
segregate and then integrate its schools. And at the same 
time the State Department of Education is running an 
experimental school in the heart of the black section of 
the City of Boston that is a suburban school, bringing 
together black and white children.

Q. Now, these integration programs, many of them, I 
take it, are brought about by the mandate of this state 
legislation, is that correct? A. Boston was, or the school 
committee of Boston gained national notoriety for feet- 
dragging, procrastination, and doing all those thing that 
many school committees dor A lot of talk and no action. 
The law certainly stimulated them. I think I stimulated 
them a little bit, too.

Q. Now, with regard to the transportation of students in 
Boston, for example, can you tell us what is involved 
there? How many students are being transported? A.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1565a

Boston is now transporting children on an inner city basis 
to the suburbs to—to 28 suburbs. I would estimate approx­
imately 2,000 students are being moved out of the city 
every day in what is known as the MED CO program and 
a bridge program. That is, blacks going out.

Q. That’s one-way busing, is that correct! A. That’s 
one-way busing; out of the city to the suburbs. There is 
another program in which .Boston cooperates [85] with 
the state when we bus white youngsters into the city now 
with state money. The state legislature this year has pro­
vided funds for that program. In addition, in the City of 
Boston, using state money, there are black and white 
children, many thousands of them, elementary, junior high 
and high school students, being bused to accomplish in­
tegration.

Q. Now, is this busing essentially voluntary, Doctor? 
A. Yes, it is at the present time.

Q. Now, has that voluntary program in Boston suc­
ceeded in turning any formerly all-black schools into pre­
dominantly Anglo schools? A. No. As a matter of fact, 
I  am critical of the voluntary nature of the program. It 
still is a program that wouldn’t solve the problems of the 
City of Boston. The thing that is going to solve Boston’s 
intricate racial problems, school problems, is the assistance 
given Boston in school buildings. Now, there—they are 
now planning $200 million worth of new schools and this 
is the thing that is going to make the difference in Boston. 
I would predict that there would probably be fewer stu­
dents riding ultimately in the Boston plan. They are build­
ing these large educational park-like schools on the periph­
ery of the ghetto, and with Boston’s transportation system, 
the public transportation system, there is a strong possi­
bility that the busing aspects of this will not be of major

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct

concern



1566a

[86] Q. Now, how long has the MEDCO program been 
in existence! A. I think approximately four years.

Q. Has there been any attempt to evaluate the effects 
of that program on the achievement of minority children 
being bused into the Anglo schools? A. Yes, indeed, and 
also achievement of the Caucasian children in the lily- 
white suburbs. And that research indicated that the black 
child’s achievement improved and that the Caucasian child 
just went along on a very steady pattern that he has been 
achieving on for all these years.

Q. What kinds of racial compositions are being achieved 
in these formerly Anglo schools? A. Well, it’s not the 
significant type we’re talking about because we move 2,000 
black children out to 28 communities. What happens here 
is that there is an attitudinal ehange on the part of white 
parents. It was not easy. There was trouble in the 28 
communities. There was resistance on the part of the 
white suburbs, but not resistance enough that practical 
educators didn’t go ahead with the program. It was a 
good program educationally, sociologically and psycholog­
ically, so you do what is right and you convince the school 
committees. You don’t have to convince every person in 
the suburb. If we waited for that we would never have 
any integration.

Q. Now, the plaintiffs in this case, Doctor, in £873 de­
signing their plan for relief, have really split it into three 
parts, the first being desegregation and the second being 
integration. In other words, programs directed for smooth­
ing this transition when you first have the desegregation.

What types of programs have you—have been used in 
the Massachusetts programs to achieve that transition? 
A. Well, the Massachusetts, I think, was similar to most 
states and educational systems. Initially it was a moving

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1567a

body type of concept and program, assuming that every­
thing would fall into place, And large amounts of money. 
It was not budgeted by school committees nor the state 
in order to prepare children, nor to prepare faculty in 
order to prepare the ancillary services that relate to the 
child once he is moved. At the present time we’re doing 
better in Massachusetts. We’re far from a position that 
would be worthy of imitation. We have a long way to go. 
I think desegregation is moving faster than integration and 
it is certainly the latter goal that we are working toward. 
Desegregation is just now getting started. Integration is 
to achieve something that is worthwhile.

Q. Now, you mentioned programs directed toward, first 
of all, preparing the faculty of the staff. What kind of 
programs do you have in mind? A. Well, I would have 
to cite the efforts made in Berkeley where we have a staff of 
a thousand teachers where we [88] gave that our prime 
consideration, our prime budgetary effort, which was made 
in the area of faculty. There would be no sense in inte­
grating children or trying to desegregate if the faculty 
wasn’t ready to accept the child and to accept the philos­
ophy of the program. So, for a period of two years, we 
put hundreds of thousands of dollars into the Berkeley 
program and I think overall it might have—well, during 
the period I was there, it would have exceeded well over 
a million dollars. It meant a complete retraining of those 
teachers who were going to be affected, particularly in 
the elementary schools. It meant taking them out of their 
lily-white schools and their ghetto schools—taking them 
away from there. It meant giving them courses in human 
relations. It meant taking the children, mixed groups with 
the teachers, to science camps outside of 'the city where 
they lived together. We did everything that a good school

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1568a

system does in order to prepare those teachers who were 
going to supervise it and carry it out to prepare them for 
the day of integration.

Q. Now, you have mentioned Berkeley, Doctor. You were, 
for some period of time, the Superintendent of Schools for 
the Berkeley School District, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. Is that the position you held before your current 
position? [89] A. Yes.

Q. What was the period of your tenure in Berkeley? 
A. Four and one-half years.

Q. During what years are we talking about? A, 1964 
through—to February, 1969.

Q. Now, during that period while you were there—while 
your were Superintendent of Schools in Berkeley, was 
Berkeley undergoing the implementation of a plan of in­
tegration? A. Berkeley started its integration certainly 
after I  arrived.

Q. Was one of your duties as the superintendent the 
administration of a program for integration? A. Yes, 
indeed.

Q. Now, as I understand it, the program in Berkeley was 
done in stages, is that correct? A. That is correct.

Q. What was the first stage of the program? A. To 
integrate the junior high schools. There are three large 
junior high schools, one black, one white and one in be­
tween. And the first assignment was—and these were 
Grades 7, 8 and 9. The first assignment was to break 
away from the old 7th, 8th, 9th-grade organization and 
reorganizing them, completely desegregated, on a 7th and 
8th-grade basis. And the 9th-grade children in the city, on 
a single campus, and that completely desegregated the 
[903 junior high schools with that one act.

Q. Then when did the segregation of the elementary

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1569a

schools at Berkeley commence! A. Well, actually it went 
on in pieces during the period of 1964 through 1968. For 
example, we bused hundreds of black children into the 
prestigeous lily-white schools in the hills; those nice neigh­
borhood schools, and we conducted that program and care­
fully evaluated it for a period of three years. It went so 
well that the lily-white schools and the parents in those 
schools were prepared to accept completey desegregation 
of the Berkeley elementary and primary schools and early- 
childhood schools that was effected in September of 1968.

The Court: What is a lily-white school!
The Witness: All white, Your Honor.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. So I take it integration of the elementary schools was 

first undertaken on a pilot basis, is that right! A. Indeed 
it was.

Q. How many schools were affected ? A. All the schools, 
some black children, and incidentally a cross-section of 
black children, some slow, medium, some fast; different age 
groups. The different sections. Some in trouble, some not 
in trouble. All bused to every single school throughout the 
Berkeley area. They had—they all had some—

Q. Were any Anglo children bused into the black schools! 
[91] A. None.

Q. Did those schools then remain predominantly black! 
A. They did.

Q. What is the racial and ethnic breakdown of the Berke­
ley school population! A. Forty-three percent black, five 
percent Chicano and fifty-two percent white,

Q. There is some Oriental there, is there! A. Yes, and 
as a matter of fact, I guess I  gave too many of the Chicanos

Neal Sullivan■—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1570a

in there because we would have to add Orientals in that 
group.

Q. Now, as I understand it, the chronology of the inte­
gration program was to start at the junior high school 
level first. Was that your own choice? A. No, it was not. 
If I had complete freedom to integrate a school system and 
I, as superintendent of schools, couldn’t expect that—but, 
If I  had, I  would integrate the early childhood and kinder­
garten and the first grade first. And not junior high 
schools.

Q. What’s the reason for that? A. The great payoff is 
the earlier you do it the richer the reward. Very difficult to 
integrate thirteen, fourteen, and fifteen-year-old students. 
They have their minds set. They have attitudes that have 
been reinforced by living in isolation for thirteen years, 
and it’s tough. [921 As a matter of fact, around the 
country the integration of our high schools has not worked 
for that very reason. So the great payoff comes at early 
childhood education, but it’s been rarely tried.

Q. Now, you mentioned that the pilot elementary inte­
gration program was studied, I take it, for its results, is 
that correct? A. That’s correct.

Q. Can you describe for us what aspects of the program 
were subject to the study? A. Everything. It was carried 
on by Professor Johnson from San Francisco Tlniversity— 
San Francisco State. It was Dr. S. I. ITayakawa’s school, 
not San Francisco University. I want to make that distinc­
tion. This was the very distinguished professor who headed 
the program up and he conducted it over a period of three 
years.

Q. Now, for example, was the effect of the integration 
upon the minority child’s achievement evaluated ? A. Yes, 
it was.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—-Direct



1571a

Q. What kind of findings resulted from that evaluation? 
A. That was the most interesting, I  thought, part of the 
research, other than the attitudinal results and the research 
on the black youngsters transported into the white schools 
clearly indicated improvement; improvement in achieve­
ment. He reacted to the composition. Many of these 
[93] youngsters had been straight-A students in the black 
schools. When they got up into the white school they were 
straight-C and B students by comparison. And they were 
receiving- poorer marks. Their parents went to the white 
schools and visited there. We saw to that. It was only 
fair. They saw the great differences in the two buildings; 
libraries, rugs, properly-lighted schools, lunchrooms that 
were adequately staffed as against the large blackboard- 
jungle-like school that we had along the waterfront. Now, 
the black youngster went into this school during the day­
time and returned to his own home at night and he had— 
it had a great effect on the siblings in his own home. He 
had homework to do. He had homework in his other school, 
too, but he didn’t do it for one reason or another, and I 
think I can advance reasons why he didn’t. But when he 
came home from the white school and when he was going 
hack the next day to compete with whitey he started to do 
his homework and the results were most satisfying to the 
parents who suddenly insisted that they wanted the same 
good things for the siblings in the family and all of the 
neighborhoods also.

So the results were clearly indicated; changed achieve­
ment rates on the part of the black students.

Q. Now, when the elementary school integration pro­
gram was fully implemented in Berkely, can you tell us—• 
tell the Court, please, just what was involved in that 
program? E943 A. Well, that was a complete desegrega­

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1572a

tion program and a great deal of planning went into that. 
I probably spent, and my staff, most of onr time during a 
two-year period to make sure that it would go well. The 
first year we spent working with the community orienting 
and educating them as to the why of integration. And that 
is a major job. We did the same amount of work with 
the staff and the same amount of work with the students. 
This was an around-the-clock preparation. We were, at 
the same time, analyzing the budget and extrapolating the 
costs to see what it’s really going to cost to integrate a 
school system; to really figure out honestly what it costs 
to bus half the students in the city. All those intricate 
details were worked out. Every answer was given. Meet­
ings were held; radio, television. We printed our own 
newspaper with our stories.

Everybody was given a chance to come up with a plan. 
We asked the community this one question: Is integra­
tion in America and Berkeley a worthwhile goal? And that 
was the question. The answer was a resounding yes, and 
then we asked the community if the answer is yes, would 
you help us find ways of carrying it out. We had hundreds 
of plans submitted and finally ended up with two and it 
narrowed down to one which turned out to be the Berkeley 
Plan. And that was the one that was implemented.

Q. Now, in describing the Berkeley Plan, what sort of 
[95] other studies did you have available to you to give 
you guidance? A. Very little.

Q. When was this plan taking place? What time period 
are we talking about? A. The period 1966-1967, 1967-1968. 
Those two years where we made the all-out efforts for total 
integration of the primary elementary schools.

Q. Were there any other integration programs then in 
existence which you could use as models for your own pro­

Neal Sullivan-—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1573a

gram? A. No. Riverside had made a good move—River­
side, California, and Camden, New Jersey; Evanston, Illi­
nois; and there were others. We felt that there was one 
missing dimension that—to the few that made an effort, 
and that missing dimension was this: they didn’t seem fair 
to all concerned; fair to the whites. They didn’t seem to ns 
to be fair to the blacks.

Q. Why not? A. The black child was the only one tak­
ing the bus ride.

Q. Now, we were inquiring, Doctor, about the compo­
nents of the integration program in the elementary schools. 
What was done? For example, did you simply close the 
formerly all-black schools? A. No, we didn’t. Every 
school—and there are old [96] schools in Berkeley—they 
have the same problem that a city has like Boston. Berke­
ley could spend a hundred million dollars on its schools 
right now because many of them should be torn down. The 
interesting thing was that the schools that were in shambles 
were the black schools. These at one time were white 
schools prior to Woi'ld War II. When they were finally 
taken over completely by the blacks, no changes were 
made. The library, cafeteria, fluorescent lights, the rugs 
went into the white schools. Also, the teachers who were 
more experienced seemed to follow the white students and 
not the black child, and instead of having trees and grass, 
we had asphalt jungles on the playgrounds. It was similar 
to those stories that we can read about in the inner city 
school. Berkeley was no exception. The blacks took over 
old schools and they became more old and tired. Very 
interesting. Once those schools were integrated, the first 
thing that the school committee had to do was put in a 
sprinkler system in them. Also, the town took out the 
incandescent lights and put in fluorescent lights. They did

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1574a

all these things that should have been done many years 
before just for humane reasons. And it wasn’t until the 
white child was to enter those schools did the community 
really make the decision to put the money into them to 
correct them.

Q. Now, how were these formerly all-black schools util­
ized? What did you do with the grade level difficulty in 
[97] the elementary schools? A. We’re now talking about 
the Berkeley Plan and the high schools. They were very 
small. Some of them were as small as eight groups; cozy 
neighborhood groups, I like to call them. Some were 
slightly larger than cozy, but really not big. They were 
delightful schools for the upper middle class and middle- 
class people. Those schools had limited playground space 
and for that reason they became the K-3 schools. All of 
the white children in those schools, all the fourth-graders, 
all the fifth-graders and all of the sixth-graders were given 
bus rides into the black section of Berkeley where those 
schools were made into middle-class schools, Grade 4, 5, 
and Grade 6. That basically was the plan.

Q. Now, was that reassignment mandatory? A. Abso­
lutely.

Q. Was that bus ride mandatory? A. Absolutely, until 
someone wanted to have his mother drive him or get on a 
bike. He had to go to school.

Q. Now, prior to the implementation of the Berkeley pro­
gram, hew many predominantly white schools were there in 
Berkeley? A. Well, let’s look instead at the predomi­
nantly black ones. I would say six predominantly black and 
fourteen or fifteen predominantly white in that area.

[983 Q. What was the total student population? A. 
Sixteen thousand.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1575a

Q. Now, once you mentioned programs directed toward 
faculty and staff. What was it that you found that it was 
necessary for the faculty and staff to learn in connection 
with this integration program? A. Well, we learned a 
great deal. We learned, for one thing, that the universi­
ties and colleges in preparing teachers for this wonderful 
profession of mine completely ignored the entire factor of 
human relations.

Q. What do you mean by human relations? A. You have 
to live with one another; the social ethics of getting along 
together, the climate of the community, the respect for 
the other people; understanding a little bit, at least, about 
the history; what was true about the black man, really; 
what happened to him in America; the history of the 
things; the history of the Oriental; the history of the 
Mexican; the history of the white man in America.

Q. These were programs of minority history that were 
taught to the teachers? A. Oh, yes. We had to start 
over, teachers and students.

Q. Now, were there also minority history programs that 
were implemented for students themselves? A. Abso­
lutely. We introduced a kindergarten through the twelfth 
grade, a social science curriculum that included [993 the 
history and the culture—the cultural achievement, the 
giants in our history who were black in the world and the 
—and who had been somehow or other left off the history 
pages. This was put in the program, yes.

Q. Were you also breaking new ground, Doctor, in the 
development of those curricula? A. Well, not really. I 
think most school systems in the country are sensitive to 
this problem and I am very proud of what’s been done 
from Maine to California in this area. I think educators 
have been quite responsive.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1576a

Q. Now,—so the Berkeley Plan then was a plan prem­
ised on integration? A. Absolutely.

Q. Now, prior to the implementation of the Berkeley 
Plan, what, if anything’, in the Berkeley school system was 
done or attempted to be done to improve minority achieve­
ment through compensatory programs? A. Well, the first 
thing they did—they just about doubled their tax rate in 
order to have many, many millions of dollars to pour into 
these black schools.

Q. How long did the compensatory effort last? A. Pour 
years, and. it continued. When integration was effected, 
compensatory education didn’t stop. You see, I believe 
that’s the best compensatory education; integration. So all 
this was a compilation of those things that we learned. 
[100] For example, the thrust in our curriculum was that 
everyone is going to learn to read. And we first had to 
convince teachers that everyone had the ability to read. 
That was one of those reasons for the in-service program 
because a lot of teachers look at someone and say he is 
black and he can’t learn, and if you’re white you can read. 
So they work with you. They don’t work with the people 
over here. So we had to do a great deal of work with read­
ing and we all became reading teachers and we mandated 
reading courses and proper methods courses for our entire 
staff, and I mean the entire staff, all the way through high 
schools. Those teachers who were teaching English and 
social science were expected to become versed in the pro­
gram.

Q. That was part of the integration program? A. Ab­
solutely. They certainly wouldn’t have moved into a de­
segregation and an integration program without preparing 
the students for this, and one of the ways to prepare them 
is to better educate them. Now, the results of our efforts

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—-Direct



1577a

clearly indicated that we were not going to do it in isola­
tion. It was a missing component, and we found this 
missing component when we bused black children into the 
white schools. Different things happened.

Q. Now, before you had the integration program at 
Berkeley, can you describe for us the types of compensa­
tory programs which were attempted? [101] A. I think 
Berkeley, like every other community that has a heart, 
tried everything that had been called to our attention. The 
major thrust was obviously where the money is, and that 
is what the teachers insisted upon, is to lower classes— 
lower class size. That costs money. That costs consider­
able money. Class size then was given the first considera­
tion. The second was materials and equipment. Hundreds 
of thousands of dollars for the electronic equipment that 
most schools have now. Those new' books that try to in­
corporate the black man in our history. The addition of 
paraprofessionals. In other words, children that the young­
sters could identify with. Lots and lots of black adminis­
trators at high levels. That’s very important. Berkeley 
gave that top priority. Black principals in white schools. 
We felt that was only fair. White principals in black 
schools. We felt that was good. You name it and we 
tried it.

Q. Did you have cultural enrichment programs, for 
example? A. Yes, we did. We boug’ht all the records 
and all those humanity series and Encyclopedia Britannica 
and others that do just an excellent job. We gave them 
the ride to the school, and a ride to the park. The ride to 
the super market, the camp, and a ride to the police sta­
tion. We wanted them to have—to meet everything.

Q. Did you have programs that were designed to build 
[102] the minority child’s self-esteem? A. We tried.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1578a

Q. Well, so you had four years of primary emphasis on 
compensatory education. What was the impact of com­
pensatory—the compensatory program on the minorities’ 
achievement? A. It had no effect.

Q. What, in fact, did happen? A. We integrated the 
schools. What happened was overall there was retrogres­
sion in all the black schools in achievement.

Q. Now, since the full implementation of the integration 
program at Berkeley, have there been continuing studies 
of its impact on minority achievements ? A. Massive stud­
ies; overstudies. I ’m not there any longer, but there they 
are under the microscope, yes.

Q. What are the results of these studies? A. Of course, 
they have only been in there sixteen months, actually, of 
school following the complete integration of the schools. 
I talked to the superintendent of schools there. I haven’t 
personally seen the evidence. He tells me that—

Mr. Ris: Just a moment. We will object to this. 
If there is some evidence of this, we would like 
to see it.

The Court: Sustained:

By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Well, what was it then that led the C103] Berkeley 
community to decide to change its student assignment 
policy? A. It was based on—obviously the school com­
mittee had an effect on the community. A school committee 
that was committed to doing what was right for the 
children and a superintendent who believes in quality inte­
grated education, a staff that cared, and a selling job to 
that community, and then not waiting for the consensus 
on the part of a hundred and twenty-five to a hundred and

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1579a

fifty thousand students. But the school committee voting 
to do what was right and they did.

Q. Now did you, as the superintendent at Berkeley, feel 
that there was an educational premise to the integration 
program? A. If I hadn’t, I wouldn’t have recommended 
it.

Q. What other bases were there for the decision to inte­
grate? A. Psychological and sociological and legal and 
moral.

Q. What about the psychological basis? A. Well, my 
experience with black children—and I have taught in black 
schools in the South and when I served there as a super­
intendent of schools in Berkeley I am a teacher. In meet­
ing these children, it was very clear to me that in their 
isolation they were completely rejected and psychologically 
this came through. Inferiority complexes; a [104] feeling 
that they couldn’t accomplish anything. So, psychologi­
cally, the experience was devastating and has been for 200 
years. Sociologically, we are stereotyping black people. 
We don’t have fair housing in states where I have worked. 
So they live in ghettos. And that tells the community 
something. Morally, I think as an educator I should do 
what I consider is right. And legally I would leave the 
courts to decide that. I  followed what I thought was meant 
by the Sixteenth Amendment and the Civil Bights Act 
of 1964.

Q. Now, when Berkeley was considering all these plans 
before the ultimate plans were actually decided upon, was 
the alternative of simply increasing the compensatory 
education and leaving the schools segregated? Was that 
an alternative? A. Yes, absolutely. And a segment of 
the community pushed real hard saying that the money 
that we were going to spend for busing, if it could be put

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1580a

into programs in the ghetto schools, everything would 
come out okay. Now, that’s the oldest promise of them all, 
and it was rejected.

Q. During this period of emphasis on compensatory 
education, what were the costs of that compensatory pro­
gram? A. Well, the tax rate was $3.25 when I went to 
Berkeley. In order to do all these things that I talked 
about doing, the lowering of the pupil-teacher ratio, in­
creasing teacher salaries, improving facilities, using 
money for transportation, the tax rate went on a vote of 
the people from [105] $3.25 to 4.75. That happened two 
years after I arrived in Berkeley.

Q. Well, approximately how many million dollars were 
spent for compensatory education before the integration 
program was implemented? A. I would hesitate to give 
you a figure here today.

Q. But that money was not effective in raising the 
minority achievements? A. No, it was not.

Q. Now, did you have any experience with regard to 
using larger class sizes in the integrated school than had 
been possible in the segregated school? A. Well, we moved 
during those years into differentiated staffing, into large 
groups, small group organizations. But we did not, when 
we went into integrated classes, indicate to people it would 
save money. As a matter of fact, we retained those pupil- 
teacher ratios we had introduced into the all-black schools 
when we totally integrated the system. We continued to 
have a lot of pupil-teacher ratio in the integrated schools.

Q. Now, what in Berkeley—did you have complete com­
munity acceptance for this integration program? A. No, 
certainly not. There was a recall election during the early 
years of my administration.

Q. They didn’t like what you were doing? [106] A. A

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs■—Direct



1581a

good many people didn’t like what I was doing, that’s 
right.

Q. Now, what was done to marshal community accept­
ance of the integration plan? A. I mentioned earlier that 
we used the media completely. I had my own radio pro­
grams. I had my own column in the local newspapers. We 
found this effective. But I think probably our most effec­
tive communication vehicle was the openness of the school 
committee meetings, the willingness of the school commit­
tee to everything; where to move around the community 
to hold its meetings in black schools and in Oriental areas 
and in the hills. It was an all-out effort by not five peo­
ple nor one person, but an entire staff. The staff, for 
example, the union, clearly indicated in its negotiations 
with the school committee that they wanted integrated 
schools. The students themselves spoke out on the sub­
ject. We spent a great deal of time with the clergy; the 
clergy took a position on the subject. Spent a great deal 
of time with the Chamber of Commerce that was reluc­
tantly opposed to—initially opposed to school integration; 
came around in favor of it. The town businessmen. The 
university staff. We worked with all of them and asked 
for their support and in the end got it from most of them.

Q. Now then—

The Court: Well, you have had that kind of [1073 
acceptance of your ideas and your program in Mas­
sachusetts, apparently.

The Witness: Your Honor, I think that integra­
tion is widely accepted across Massachusetts today. 
We have pockets of resistance, particularly in Bos­
ton and Springfield.

Neal Sullivan-—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1582a

The Court: But you’re doing it quite differently 
in Massachusetts. You’re following different pat­
terns.

The "Witness: Yes, in a way. As Commissioner of 
Education, I  have several hundred committees for 
which I am responsible. But I ’m continuing to use 
the media. I’m continuing to ask every school com­
mittee to do those things that I did in Berkeley. 
I have my own study advisory council, my teacher 
advisory council on a state basis, so I ’m doing the 
same things I  did in Berkeley but now on a state 
basis.

The Court: Well, is this a statewide system?
The Witness: No, it is not, Your Honor.
The Court: How come you can exchange students 

inside—or to the suburbs?
The Witness: That has to be by vote, Your Hon­

or, with the school committee in the respective sub­
urban community. It has to be by cooperation. And 
not by edict of the state. I only have persuasive 
power in this area.

The Court: And so these suburban schools agreed 
to receive the students?

[108] The Witness: (Nods affirmatively.)
The Court: Is this an exchange program?
The Witness: No, it was a direct movement of 

blacks into the white schools. There was no ex­
change. Now there is a movement back in the sub­
urbs into the city, but that’s a separate program. 
The two are not related.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1583a

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct 

By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Doctor, when you got the minority child into the 
desegregated school, what did you find with regard to 
that child’s level of achievement? A. It was many years 
below the level of the white child. We didn’t discover that 
when he got there. We knew it before he went.

Q. Now, what did you do to help the minority child 
catch up? A. I think the greatest thing we did was to 
integrate every classroom in the same manner we inte­
grated the city. Every classroom in every building also 
had to be integrated and in this same degree. They were 
heterogeneous classes. Berkeley had been a district track­
ing school system. And it continues to have some of the 
tracking aspect at the secondary level, although they are 
quickly eliminating it. But at the elementary level we went 
from homogeneous groupings to completely heterogeneous 
arrangements. And in my opinion it had the greatest ef­
fect on the black child.

The Court: Well, to what extent? What do you 
£1093 regard as heterogeneous composition?

The Witness: This would be, Your Honor,—
The Court: What do you mean by your telling us 

that?
The Witness: Children of different intellectual 

capacities, ranging from the area of the low 90s, 
the high 80s in the Intelligence Quotients to the 150s 
and 160s. The wide range. We would not put the 
low students together. We would not put the fast 
students together.

The Court: What about racial composition?
The Witness: The same way, Your Honor. In 

each classroom we used computers to do this. There



1584a

would never be in a classroom—and again I indi­
cated at the secondary level there is still a trace of 
the tracking system that goes on. But at the ele­
mentary level the classroom would have somewhere 
between 30 and 45 percent black children and the 
other composition, the 55 to 65 percent would be 
either a combination of blacks and Orientals and 
Ohicanos or all blacks in some cases. But each class­
room would have the same racial composition as 
the school and as the community.

By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Now, prior to the implementation of the integration 
program, I believe you mentioned that the minority schools 
in Berkeley continued to have less experienced teachers, 
is that correct? A. No question about it, that’s right.

Q. What about the rate of teacher turnover at those 
[1103 minority schools? A. Three to four times as high 
as it would be in the white schools.

Q. Now, what had been done prior to integration to 
try to hold the experienced teachers in those ghetto schools? 
A. No particular bonus, but instead an effort to provide 
all teachers with top salaries. That was the thrust at 
Berkeley. I’m not about to say that teaching in an all- 
white school is a picnic, but teaching in a black school is 
just an impossible situation. Both the all-white school and 
the black school can indeed be challenging, and should be 
rewarding. So the Berkeley Plan was to upgrade the sal­
aries of all teachers; not some teachers.

Q. Now, did you consider the alternative of additional 
compensations as an inducement to get these good teachers 
into the black schools? A. It was considered and rejected.

Q. Why did you reject it? A. I t was not fair. It wouldn’t

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1585a

get the job done. Providing additional money in commu­
nities that Pm familiar with where there have been insen­
sitive programs, providing transportation in and provid­
ing some extra money—it hasn’t brought out better teach­
ers. Instead, when Berkeley completely integrated its 
schools, the greatest reward for the recruiter was that we 
had 300 applicants for many of our [111] jobs. Teachers 
like to teach in an integrated setting if salaries are com­
mensurate with the challenge.

The Court: You mean they prefer integrated 
schools over the segregated schools?

The Witness: No, I didn’t mean to say that, Your 
Honor.

The Court: I’m curious.
The Witness: No. I think teachers—the teachers 

that I  have been employing now for these good 
many years since moving with the Kennedy admin­
istration into the South and recruiting blacks and 
■whites, teachers by and large would prefer teaching 
in an integrated setting.

The Court: And this is a—there is a tendency 
for them not to like to teach in a segregated school?

The Witness: Particularly segregated black
schools, Your Honor.

The Court: I suppose, like anybody else, they 
don’t like to travel long distances.

The Witness: Your Honor is right. That’s one 
of the reasons.

The Court: They probably prefer to live in more 
pleasant areas.

The Witness: That’s one of the reasons.
The Court: Go ahead.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1586a

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—-Direct 

By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Prior to the implementation of [112] the integration 
program, can yon describe for us the types of classroom 
discipline problems, keeping the child’s attention, and so 
on, which took place in the minority schools? A. It was 
similar to those minority schools that I visited and that 
I have operated all over the country. It just happens that 
when you put black children together in isolation you 
bring out the very worst of them, and I think that is true 
with any minority group. It certainly was true in the Irish 
ghetto school I  attended outside of Boston when I was a 
kid.

I don’t think you bring out the best in people when you 
isolate them and when you add to their frustrations of 
their being rejected, and it makes it doubly difficult and 
so discipline has been hard and it was hard in the Berkeley 
schools in the all-black schools.

Q. Does this take teacher time away from teaching? A. 
It makes it almost impossible at times.

Q. Now, what was the experience on classroom, disci­
pline problems in the integrated environment? A. Well, 
this probably was the most satisfying part of the integra­
tion program, particularly for the teachers who were com­
ing from the all-black schools. Now, we found for the first 
time perfect control, perfect relationship; group self-dis­
cipline. And there indeed was a controlling and a leveling 
factor brought into the school, brought into the [113] 
classroom by the white child. There was no question about 
that. It became an easier situation in order to conduct an 
educational program.

Q. Now, approximately how many children are now be­
ing transported under the Berkeley program? A. Four 
thousand.



1587a

Q. And in considering this transportation—let’s see. 
That’s about 20 percent of Berkeley’s school children? A. 
Yes, and we’re talking about the elementary school and 
that’s about half of them. There is no transportation pro­
vided for the junior high school youngster. They get there 
on their own.

Q. I see. So, half of Berkeley’s elementary school popu­
lation is transported? A. Approximately.

Q. Now, when you were considering transportation as an 
alternative, was this opposition on the school based on 
safety reasons? A. Absolutely.

Q. What did you find? Did you study the safety factors 
and the—in the school transportation system? A. An ex­
haustive study was made.

Q. What was it that you found? A. It -was the safest 
way to get to school.

Q. Was there a—was this a local study or did you go 
[114] to national sources? A. We started in the State 
of California and that particular system—vre had the com­
plete cooperation of the California State Patrol and we 
used their research. The year that we studied it they didn’t 
have a single death in the transportation of hundreds of 
thousands of students under extremely difficult conditions. 
Miles and miles. The same general observation was made 
with the national study through the National Education 
Association. The most dangerous way to get to school was 
to walk, and the most dangerous place to walk is in your 
own neighborhood, and the next most dangerous way to 
go to school was to ride with your mother or father in that 
second car.

Q. Now, have you also had an opportunity in the Berk­
eley program to study the impact of integration upon the 
Anglo child’s achievement? A. Yes, indeed.

Neal Sullivan■—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1588a

Q. Were there adverse implications? A. No.
Q. What happened to the achievement levels of the Anglo 

child? A. Continued on its very steady pattern. No 
change.

Q. What kinds of racial composition are we talking about 
in the integrated schools? A. Thirty-five to 45 percent 
black in every classroom.

£1153 Q. Now, from your experience as a school super­
intendent and in your position with the Department of 
Education with the State of Massachusetts, you have had 
some experience in both compensatory programs and in 
integration programs. A. That is correct.

Q. Do you have an opinion, Doctor, as to which is the 
most effective way to go about this? A. Yes, I do.

Q. What is that opinion? A. That is the best compensa­
tory educational program that I know of is integration.

Mr. Greiner: No further questions.

Cross-Examination by Mr. B is:

Q. Are conditions in Boston comparable to those in Berk­
eley from the school standpoint? A. Public schools, I 
would say no.

Q. What’s the school population in Berkeley? A. As I 
indicated in the testimony, 16,000.

Q. What is it in Boston? A. Approximately 100,000 of 
public school students.

Q. What is the parochial school population? A. Close 
to 50,000.

Q. In Berkeley what is the geographical area of the 
school system? [1163 A. I would estimate in the area of 
25 to 30 square miles.

Q. Do you know what the average busing distance is for

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1589a

a child under the present plan! A. I would estimate 
around three or four miles.

Q. And what’s the general nature of the population in 
Berkeley? A. Are you speaking now of school popula­
tion?

Q. No, I’m thinking of professionals and the occupation 
of parents. A. I would say it’s a cross-section of Amer­
ica; lots of poor people and quite a few rich.

Q. Would you say that the average intelligence of a 
native of Berkeley is higher than that of the average per­
son in the State of California generally? A. No, I wouldn’t 
say that.

Q. You wouldn’t say that? A. No.
Q. Do you say that the problems of any school district 

are the same as the problems of any other school district? 
A. If they have similar racial compositions, yes, and socio­
economic conditions, I think they’re very similar.

Q. Can you take one plan for one system and apply it 
to another ? A. No, I  clearly indicated that I thought each 
city [1173 should develop its own plan of integration.

Q. Each city has to be handled—has to handle their 
problems on a case-to-case basis? A. Yes, I think that 
you involve all the people to come up with the Denver plan.

Q. Now, your first plan in Berkeley, you indicated was 
a partial plan. How many children were involved in that 
before you went into your September, 1968, all-city plan? 
A. Are you talking about the busing of the primary young­
sters to the hill schools?

Q. Yes, sir. A. Three or four hundred.
Q. Was it more than 250? A. I  would estimate from 

three to four hundred here today in this courtroom.
Q. Well, you wrote an article in the Harvard Educa­

tional Review, didn’t you, concerning the Berkeley Plan,

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1590a

the Berkeley Unified School District! A. I recall writing 
for the Harvard Review, yes.

Q. Do you remember stating that approximately 250 Ne­
gro elementary school children were being transported 
from overcrowded areas! A. Would you repeat that ques­
tion, please?

Q. Approximately 250 Negro children have been trans­
ported from the overcrowded poverty areas of—

[118] The Court: The question is, did you write 
that?

Q. Did you write that, sir? A. If it’s in the Harvard 
Review—What’s the date of that?

Q. Well, I  don’t find the date on it. I ’m sorry. A. Be­
cause 250 might be the right—

Q. Well, did that expand? A. Yes, it did increase as it 
went along; not to any great degree. I indicated three or 
four hundred would be tops.

Q. Now, this was your first plan, was it? A. At the 
primary level?

Q. Yes, sir. A. Yes.
Q. And were these children selected to do this or did 

the parents volunteer? A. The parents had to be in­
volved.

Q. And they had to volunteer their children to do it? 
A. That’s right.

Q. Do you know whether this was—whether there was 
any correlation at all to the socioeconomic area of the 
people who were interested enough to volunteer their chil­
dren as to the balance? A. Well, we had sufficient volun­
teers so that we could—

Q. Well, not everyone that volunteered was taken? Did 
[1193 you make any study to determine the family back­

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1591a

ground of the children who were volunteered? The par­
ents of those who volunteered as compared with those who 
had not volunteered? A. No, because we felt it was a 
cross-section of the school but never attempted to find 
out—

Q. What that—what exactly that correlation might be? 
A. Yes.

Q. What did you do? A. What did we do about what?
Q. Attempting to determine this socioeconomic back­

ground of the family from which each of these children 
volunteered? A. We determined the socioeconomic back­
ground of all children in Berkeley.

Q. I’m asking you, did you do it on an individual basis ? 
A. Yes.

Q. How~ did you do that? A. By questionnaires to the 
parents.

Q. And you did that on these 250 children? A. Did it 
on all the students.

Q. What did you find out? A. A real wide range of 
socioeconomic conditions in the community.

Q. And then what did you do with that information? A. 
In selecting the students to become involved in the inte­
gration plan, we took a cross-section of them.

E120] Q. And in each instance you actually went back 
into the child’s background and determined what that back­
ground was? A. We tried.

Q. What type of questions did you ask? A. I don’t 
remember specifically because I didn’t work on the ques­
tionnaires.

Q. Did you see the questionnaires? A. I recall seeing 
them.

Q. Do you recall what the questions were that were 
included in that questionnaire? A. No, I don’t.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1592a

Q. But you did not select anyone who had not volun­
teered through their parents? A. That’s right.

The Court: Well, in this busing program—that’s 
a voluntary program?

The Witness: Yes, it is, Your Honor.
The Court: Well, did you design that?
The Witness: No, that was designed by the school 

committee of the City of Boston.
The Court: In other words, this doesn’t represent 

any change of viewpoint that you had from Berkeley 
to Boston?

The Witness: No. Again, my powers are persua­
sive, Your Honor, and this was a voluntary system 
and in an interim [1213 period prior to the erection 
of these many new school buildings.

The Court: In other words, you still hold the 
views that you had when you were in Berkeley?

The Witness: Yes, I do, Your Honor.
The Court: But you’re not able to put them all 

into effect in Boston?
The Witness: That’s right, Your Honor.

By Mr. B is:

Q. With respect to the achievements of the pupils in 
Berkeley, was the district norm higher than the national 
or state norm before your integration went into effect? A. 
I think so, definitely.

Q. And so you started out on a higher basis to begin 
with at all levels? A. Not at all levels, no.

Q. The average? A. It would be higher.
Q. Now, with reference to your—one of your writings 

—it’s impossible to separate the effects of integration and

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1593a

the effect of the students’ social class. How do you ana­
lyze the effects of integration? A. In terms of the class 
a child is coming from. If you would read a little more 
there—

Q. In the comparison of predominantly Negro schools 
£122] with the hill school levels, are the foothill schools 
the ones that already were partially integrated? A. That 
would be correct.

Q. And in your article you’re talking about three 
schools, the three levels: one, the hill schools which would 
be under, it says here—

The Court: Then the foothill schools were what?
You haven’t mentioned those before.

The Witness: This would be partially integrated.

Q. Now, how many were there of the so-called hill 
schools? A. Well, I would say eight.

Q. How many foothill schools? A. Four.
Q. And the Negro schools? A. Four.
Q. Now, in comparison—and I will go back in the quotes 

here—in comparison with the predominantly Negro schools 
with the foothill schools, it is impossible to separate the 
effects of integration . . .

Now, if you can’t make a distinction to the effects of 
integration and the effects of the students’ own social class, 
as stated in this article, then how do you determine the 
effects of integration you previously testified to? A. 
Through the experience that we had by moving the [123] 
black youngster from the very low socioeconomic areas 
of the city into the higher socioeconomic areas.

Q. You can’t determine the effects of integration after 
you move, can you? A. That’s right.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs■—Cross



1594a

Q. As you say here, that you cannot separate the ef­
fects of integration from the effects of the students’ own 
social class? A. Well, we’re talking there about the foot­
hill schools and just as in most communities, thank God 
there are some black people who make it despite the sys­
tem.

Q. Lots of people, white people, make it despite the 
system? A. Indeed. We have a different type of circum­
stance with black—with the black child responding alto­
gether differently to the environment than the youngster 
whose family didn’t make it and hasn’t made it and is in 
great trouble.

Q. Now, even after these youngsters from the Negro 
schools moved to the hill schools, was the achieving gap 
closed between the children that were moved up in the hills 
and the children who were originally on the hill? A. I  
indicated that there was progress made; slow progress 
initially on the part of the black youngsters moving up 
with no slowing down on the part of the white child.

Q. But you stated in the article nevertheless it £124] 
remains a considerable achieving gap between the Negro 
and other students even at the hill schools? A. Indeed, 
and that’s correct. And that’s why we can’t delay with 
integration.

Q. Then integration per se is not the only answer, is it? 
A. I think it’s the only answer in America. If we’re going 
to have—

Q. All you do is integrate, and that solves everything? 
You don’t mean that, do you, sir? A. It might not solve 
everything but, if we have to make some choices here as 
to what we’re going to do in our society, I suggest to you 
that the top priority I  would give would be to give inte­

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1595a

gration a chance. We haven’t given it a chance. That’s all 
I ’m saying.

Q. Well, that, in and of itself is not sufficient, though, 
even under your theory, is it? A. Under the Berkeley 
Plan, I felt that there were so many indicators in Berk­
eley after the complete integration that it became a more 
mature community where people were living together in 
harmony so that I  was convinced that, with that experience 
and the experience that I had in the South, that indeed it 
was the answer today. Economy is needed. Everyone has 
to make a living. We have to have health services. We 
have to live in decent surroundings. I’m not saying a 
[125] school is going to correct all these things. It’s going 
to help, though.

Q. That’s what I ’m trying to get at—that mere integra­
tion isn’t the beginning and the end. You don’t deny that? 
A. It’s going to go a long way, but there have to be other 
factors involved in America.

Q. Now, also, even under your own theory that integra­
tion in the schools has to be—as you say in the article, 
a massive educational revolution? Bight? A. I like that 
expression.

Q. Well, that’s yours, isn’t it? A. You bet. I like that 
language.

Q. You need something more than integration? A. 
You bet. Massive reform.

Q. Massive education revolution for which community—- 
A. Would you read that?

Q. Certainly there can be no educational—equal educa­
tional opportunity in Berkeley or any other place without 
racial integration of the schools, and this is italicized—- 
massive educational revolution for which community edu­
cational centers offer the most promise. A. I ’m talking

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1596a

here about a part of the Volume II: Racial Isolation. That 
was given to you this morning as an exhibit, in which I 
wrote one of those articles—one of [126] the suggestions, 
and it was the—on the educational part. What I ’m talking 
about here is a much larger community center for a single 
campus where we would bring together larger numbers of 
children where we would have the libraries, the cafeterias, 
the gymnasium facilities, the classrooms, the speech teach­
ers, special facilities, the nurses and so forth that you can’t 
have in a small neighborhood school. That’s what I’m re­
ferring to here.

Q. And this is why you get into that particular type 
of center, a differentiated staffing as you mentioned? A. 
Exactly.

Q. So one without the other is still ineffective, is that 
right? You have to have a continuing thing? A. Well, one 
without the other is what Berkeley has now because Berk­
eley doesn’t have the other that I’m talking about. They’re 
spending a great deal of extra money educating children 
in an integrated setting in small schools. Small schools 
are expensive to operate. And the final Berkeley Plan on 
my leaving there was a recommendation for a series of 
educational parks to replace the neighborhood schools for 
reasons of economy and services.

Q. And that has not been accomplished even at Berkeley, 
then? A. Not yet.

Q. Now, even beyond that, that is not going to solve 
[127] all the problems of the disadvantaged youngster, 
is that correct? A. That is correct.

Q. Still a lot of things that the school district can’t do 
anything about? A. (No answer.)

Q. That has to be done by—it’s got to be done by other 
governmental agencies? A. Let’s assume all school sys-

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1597a

terns will make the massive and the humane effort that 
Berkeley made and then there would be fewer of these 
things left out.

Q. Well, you have your own theory in this article. You 
said that education and reform itself is not sufficient. So 
I think it has to go beyond the school district for all these 
problems before all these problems are solved. Isn’t that 
true? A. Indeed it does. Reform has to be a cross-sec­
tional thing in our society.

Q. Now, you talked about Berkeley, that the entire sys­
tem became engulfed in a reading program; all the teach­
ers at all levels. A. I  indicated that, at the secondary 
level, those teachers, English and social sciences—

Q. Now, this great effort that was done went beyond 
the normal curriculum, did it not? [1283 A. Yes, it did.

Q. And it involved additional programming? A. Yes.
Q. Additional teachers? A. Yes, indeed. Machines, 

everything.
Q. And how do you distinguish between those inputs 

from compensatory education? A. They are part of com­
pensatory education.

Q. Oh, they are? A. Yes.
Q. So they’re still needed, are they? A. Indeed.
Q. Even under your theory? A. Yes.
Q. To what extent did you have student mobility, par­

ticularly in the core area schools in Berkely? Was it 
a major factor? A. Which school?

Q. In the core area. A. Extremely high mobility.
Q. Did you find a decrease in mobility after the integra­

tion? A. We found that to be true but we also found 
another phenomena that is understandable. We found the 
heavily-populated blacks in Oakland and Richmond segre­
gated schools [129] falsifying records and doing all sorts

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1598a

of things in order to get into the Berkeley schools. I 
couldn’t blame them. I didn’t like at all the falsifying of 
records but I could understand what they wanted.

Q. You got an influx then? A. Yes, we did.
Q. Now, you talked about an increase in the tax rate. 

Much of that went for things that were other than strictly 
compensatory education, did it not? A. I would say yes.

Q. Capital improvements, increased teacher salaries, in­
creased costs of doing business, so to speak? A. Indeed.

Mr. Ilis : That’s all.

Redirect Examination by Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Sullivan, it’s a fact, is it not, when Berkeley was 

considering its integration program, that there were great 
fears expressed that integration would lead to white flight? 
A. Yes, indeed.

Q. Now, you mentioned there was an influx of blacks into 
Berkeley. Was that also—was there also an influx of 
Anglos? A. That probably was the most satisfying of all 
the [130] phenomena that occurred around the Berkeley 
Plan. You see, Berkeley, since 1948, had started to lose its 
white population. The mayor of the city was concerned 
concerned. It was not until Berkeley took the first initial 
steps to desegregate its schools did the white migration stop 
and turn around, and during my years in Berkeley there 
was an increase in the white population. I’d like to make it 
very clear in answering the question from the defense 
about the increase in the black population—we had to be 
extremely rigid and find those black children who were il­
legally entering the school system and asked them to leave. 
But there was a stop in the white movement out and there 
was a slight increase in movement in.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



1599a

Mr. Greiner: No further questions.
Mr. Eis: Nothing further.
The Court: I gather from what you have said, 

Doctor, that you believe that the isolation of the black 
students is one major problem in the inferior educa­
tion?

The Witness: I  definitely do, Your Honor.
The Court: And then you do not agree with Dr. 

Coleman’s thesis that the big problem is economic 
and cultural deprivation and that the solution is to 
integrate the deprived with the culturally-adequate 
group ?

The Witness: Judge, as you report what Dr. Cole­
man said, I  will accept it. I  was in the courtroom 
earlier this [1311 morning and I must say I couldn’t 
hear Mr. Coleman. I’m sorry.

The Court: I  may be oversimplifying what he said.
The Witness: If that’s what he said, then I would 

enter a demurrer. I  think the big problem in educa­
tion is the isolation of black people.

The Court: I  believe he said that, if you had a 
school populated by blacks, if 50 percent of them 
were from homes that were economically and cul­
turally secure, that the result would be just as good 
as if you had 50 percent of students from white 
homes that were middle-class homes.

The Witness: Your Honor, I have read that and I 
suggest to the Court today that what we should start 
to do is become equally interested in at least what 
happens to the attitude of these people. Let’s assume 
that making—I am concerned about their hardened 
attitude about their brother whites and yellows and 
browns. I have supervised black schools and I can

Neal Sullivan—-for Plaintiffs—Redirect



1600a

report to you that we had some singular success in 
achievement, hut I can report to you that the atti­
tudes didn’t improve. Instead they worsened, and 
that concerns me even more than achievements.

The Court: I  can understand that. What do you 
think you do to accomplish this improved atmo­
sphere'? Do you stimulate the student to do more 
work? You say there is an attitudinal change.

£132] The Witness: Absolutely, and you put your 
finger on it, Your Honor. The word is stimulation. 
Indeed. And it is stimulated and I think I heard you 
say this morning that the black man is competitive 
when he is given that opportunity.

The Court: I don’t think there is any question 
about that.

The Witness: I thought I heard you say that. And 
I agree with you. And I suggest that, if we provided 
him with those opportunities to compete against 
the white student, that the—that his own level of 
achievement would richly reflect the competition. The 
achievements would change. We know this to be 
true, if they were given that opportunity.

The Court: Well, am I to understand that you 
took a couple of years to get this program really 
set up and off the ground at Berkeley?

The Witness: Yes, Your Honor. It took two 
years in order for me to guarantee to the parents 
that there would be something good at the end of 
the bus line and that I could guarantee that for 
them. It took two years for us to do it, to complete 
everything.

The Court: And in Boston, when you get these 
new facilities completed, do you expect to carry out

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



1601a

the same kind of a program yon have had in Berke­
ley?

The Witness: Yes. We’re moving toward that 
direction in Boston now, retraining of staff, and 
there is [133] real receptivity in the city and in the 
staff in preparation of programs.

The Court: But your view is that there should 
be a combination, apparently, is that correct!

The Witness: Absolutely.
The Court: That people now say there ought to— 

they ought to have a home school and a campus 
school as well?

The Witness: No, I ’m not saying that. My ex­
perience here indicates that that is doubly expensive 
and I oppose that type of arrangement.

The Court: How would you work it out, then, 
for them to have the exposure?

The Witness: I think the way that I worked it 
out in Berkely and that it is being worked out now 
in Boston and in innumerable other communities 
throughout the United States, where a child is given 
a single campus and on that campus—it’s large 
enough to have a multiracial setting with different 
types of facilities that that student and his fellow 
students need, and I think the best arrangement is 
to do that—the best way to do that is by keeping 
them on a single campus, on a permanent basis. 
That doesn’t say you don’t give them the rich re­
warding field trips and exposures. You do that, 
Your Honor.

The Court: But this is a long-term program, this 
campus idea, isn’t it? You can’t use the same fa­
cilities that [134] you have at present.

Neal Sullivan—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



1602a

The Witness: You can use some of the same fa­
cilities, Your Honor, but again you’re being very 
perceptive and I have strongly recommended that 
the state and federal government provide our cities 
with dollars so that school administrators can built 
these facilities without pushing harder on local 
bond issues and overburdening local property tax­
payers on the tax basis. I think we need state and 
federal help for these buildings and I think we’re 
going to get it. We have it in Massachusetts now.

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct

George Bardwell, a witness called by and on behalf of 
plaintiffs, having first been duly sworn, was examined and 
testified as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Greiner:
[135] The Court: Please state your name and 

address.
The Witness: George Bardwell, 22801 South Har­

rison, Denver, Colorado.
The Court: You’re the same George Bardwell 

who has testified before and has been qualified, is 
that right?

The Witness: I have.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Bardwell, in front of you on the witness stand 

you will find a stack of exhibits, the first of which has been 
marked for identification as Exhibit 509. Would you 
please describe Exhibit 509 to the Court! A. Yes, Ex­
hibit 509 is a table showing the twelve of what are desig­
nated elementary schools showing the enrollment data by



1603a

the Anglo percentage, Negro percentage and Hispano per­
centage ; teacher experience data for 1968 for new teachers, 
probationary teachers and median experience; and per­
centile median achievement for 1968, Grade 5.

Q. Now, with regard to the percentile achievement of 
the schools which to date the Court has designated, how 
many such schools are there, first of all? A. Excuse me?

Q. How many Court-designated elementary schools are 
there on that chart? A. There are twelve.

Q. And what is the source of the data on Exhibit 509? 
A. The source of the data, the Defendants’ Exhibit F-l, 
[1361 Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 246, 247 and 377.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, we would offer 509 at 
this time.

Mr. Ris : No objection.
The Court: It will be received.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 509 was received 
in evidence.)

Q. Dr. Bardwell, referring to Exhibit 509, how many of 
the Court-designated schools are achieving- at below the 
25th percentile? A. Eight.

Q. Now, next in front of you is what has been marked 
for identification as Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 510. Would you 
please describe that to the Court? A. Yes. Exhibit 510 
shows ten target schools which we have classified as Plain­
tiffs’ target schools, showing the ethnic enrollment, teacher 
experience data, and the median achievement.

Q. And the source of the data on 510 is the same as the 
source of the data on 509? A. Yes.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, we would offer Exhibit 
510 at this time.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1604a

Mr. Bis: No objection.
The Court: It, will be received.

[1373 (Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 510 was 
received in evidence.)

Q. Now, first of all, Exhibit 510 shows certain of the 
achievement data for these target schools, is that correct? 
A. Yes, it does.

Q. How many of these target schools are performing 
below the 25th percentile? A. Every single one of them.

Q. And Exhibit 510 also makes comparison, does it not, 
between the schools which have been designated by the 
Court and these target schools? A. Yes, it does.

Q. Now, what is the comparison with regard to the teacher 
experience information? A. In the case of the Court 
schools, the percentage of new teachers for the twelve 
Court schools is 23 percent. In the case of the ten target 
schools the percentage is 20.

Q. What is it for probationary teachers? A. For pro­
bationary teachers for the Court schools, 48 percent, and 
for the target schools, 42 percent.

Q. And is the city average also given? A. I t is.
Q. What is the city average of the probationary teachers? 

A. Thirty-seven percent.
[1383 Q. What about the median years’ experience? A. 

In the case of Court schools, 3.5 years. In the case of the 
target schools, 3.7 years, and in the case of all schools in the 
city, all elementary schools, 5.6.

Q. What is the comparison between the achievement 
levels of the target schools and the Court schools? A. For 
the twelve Court schools, 21 percent percentile at Grade 5 
and for the ten target schools, 20 percentile.

Q. And again, achievement at the 20th percentile means

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1605a

what? A. It means that throughout the United States 80 
percent of the children at the Grade 5 on this test are per­
forming above that particular level.

Mr. Ris: If the Court please. Excuse me. When 
I said no objection to this, I have no question as to 
its authenticity or correctness of the figures. I do 
object to what’s being done with it now and with the 
questions now being asked Mr. Bardwell to inject 
these other target schools into this particular hear­
ing and, as I  said, as I  said in my opening statement, 
it was our position this was going only to the Court- 
designated schools. I just want to make my record 
on that, please.

The Court: You’re not asking’ me to retry the 
issues that have already been tried?

Mr. Greiner: No, Your Honor. The Court has 
made [139] a distinction which the Court in its 
opinion designated as being tentative in nature. 
We’re taking the Court at its word and we are in­
troducing evidence to show that there really is no 
logical basis for distinguishing between the schools 
which you have already selected and these remaining 
target schools. That’s certainly the purpose of this 
proof.

The Court: Well, we will permit you to make your 
record, anyway.

Q. First of all, Dr. Bardwell, you will recall that in the 
opinion of March 21, the Court used a rule of thumb of 
between 70' to 75 percent composition of one minority group. 
Do you recall that? A. I  do.

Q. Now, referring to Exhibit 510, are there any schools

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1606a

among plaintiffs’ target schools that meets that criteria! 
A. Yes, there are.

Q. What is the racial composition of Smedley Elementary 
School? A. Seventy-seven percent Hispano.

Q. And what is the racial composition of Elyria Ele­
mentary School? A. Seventy-three percent Hispano.

Q. Are these both low-achieving schools, also? A. They 
are.

Q. And what is the achievement level at Smedley? [140] 
A. Nineteen percent.

Q. And what is it at Elyria? A. Twenty-three percent. 
Q. And what is the Anglo population as shown by Exhibit 

510 of Gilpin School? A. Gilpin, seven percent.
Q. Gilpin? A. Excuse me. Three percent.
Q. Crofton? A. Seven percent.
Q. Ebert? A. Eleven percent.
Q. Wyatt? A. Two percent.
Q. Boulevard? A. Thirty percent.
Q. Garden Place? A. Seventeen percent.
Q. AVyman? A. Twenty-eight percent.
Q. Have you given it for Smedley and Elyria? A. 

A. Twenty percent for Smedley and twenty-seven percent 
for Elyria.

The Court: What are you reading from?
Mr. Greiner: Exhibit 510, Your Honor.

[141] Q. So all of these target schools—have you com­
bined the Negro and Hispano enrollments? What is the 
percentage composition of the combined enrollment? A. 
All of these would have 70 percent or the greater minority 
enrollment.

Q. Now, you have what’s already in evidence as Exhibit

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1607a

883 in front of you. Now, I’d like to direct your attention, 
Dr. Bardwell, to the tables in back of Exhibit 883 that 
contain socioeconomic data.

The Court: 'What exhibit is this now?
Mr. Greiner: 883, Your Honor.

Q. Now, the tables in Exhibit 883—do they give socio­
economic data by school? A. They give mean family in­
come from the 1960 census.

Q. And that is by school? A. It is by school.
Q. Can you find the data there for Gilpin School? A. 

Yes.
Q .What is the mean family income of Gilpin? A. 

$3,680.
Mr. Ris: If the Court please, this is all ten years 

ago, the 1960 census. We don’t think that’s relevant 
with the changes that have happened since then.

The Court: It has very little probative value.
Mr. Greiner: Well, Your Honor, it gives us a 

starting [142] point and then we’re going to try to 
update it to the best of our ability based on other 
data.

The Court: Are you going to go through all these 
schools with this?

Mr. Greiner: Just ten of them. It won’t take long

Q. What is the city median family income? Do you have 
that, Dr. Bardwell? At that time? A. $6,400.

Q. And what was the family income at Crofton? A. 
$3,630.

Q. At Ebert? A. $3,608.
Q. Wyatt? A. $4,050.

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1608a

Q. Boulevard? A. $5,355.
Q. Garden Place? A. $4,830.
Q. Wyman? A. $4,606.
Q. Smedley? A. $5,008.
Q. Elyria? A. $4,500.
Q. And Swansea? [143] A. $5,590.
Q. Were any of these schools of this socioeconomic of 

family income—were any of these schools up to the city­
wide average? A. No, they were not.

Q. Now, I wonder if you could step to the board here 
and direct your attention to the map that’s been placed 
there.

Mr. Greiner: This would be Exhibit 514.

Q. What is Exhibit 514? A. It’s a map of the junior 
high school boundaries in September of 1967, as shown by 
this map by the blue dots—these are the Court-designated 
schools.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct

The Court: Who prepared this plan that you are 
offering? Or are you just trying to refute what 
was in my opinion? Of offer some rebuttal or some­
thing of that sort?

You make an offer of proof. I mean, just for the 
record.

Mr. Greiner: I ’ll be happy to, Your Honor.
The Court: We will not have any of this. There’s 

no point in retrying the case. I’m not going to do it. 
We spent all those weeks, you know, trying the law­
suit. And you had full opportunity and, too, I don’t 
want any more testimony based upon the testimony 
received this morning, you know, that would supple­
ment the main case. You follow me, don’t you?



1609a

I mean, that would support the position taken by 
Dr. Coleman [1443 or by Dr. Sullivan. Because, 
really, it goes to the basic issues that we tried, this 
material.

Mr. Greiner: Well, perhaps I misread Your 
Honor’s opinion of March.

The Court: I didn’t think we were going to go 
over all that material again, you know. We developed 
a tremendous record of factual material that 
you can refer to if you like. But I didn’t—the pur­
pose of the hearing now is for the most part to 
receive any suggested remedies that you wish to 
offer, you know, so that we can enter a final judg­
ment in this case. It won’t be too final, I don’t think. 
I think it’s going to be temporary final. But, I 
mean, it doesn’t look to me like we’re going to wrap 
up this in one fell swoop. We do the best we can.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, the major thrust of
the plaintiffs’ evidence at this hearing is going to 
be directed toward remedies. But, as we said on 
April 16th in our first preliminary memorandum, we 
did feel that in the Court’s opinion of March 21 that 
the Court had indicated that it had tentatively se­
lected a criteria of racial composition and the Court 
at least in my mind indicated that it had not closed 
its mind to this question.

The Court: Well, I just don’t feel that we should 
reopen the whole case. Do you follow me? Do you 
know what I’m talking about?

[1451 Mr. Greiner: We are not reopening the 
whole case. We’re only talking about these ten ad­
ditional schools, Your Honor.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1610a

The Court: Well, I say to you that—you make 
your offer of proof and maybe we can get some 
enlightenment from that as to what you have in 
mind.

Mr. Greiner: What we have in mind is, Your 
Honor,—in our offer, is as follows: that the evi­
dence which is already in the record in this case 
regarding the achievement in these target schools, 
regarding the racial composition of these target 
schools, regarding the teacher experience of these 
target schools, all shows that the educational situa­
tion in these ten additional target schools is exactly 
as bad as—

The Court: Oh, I  agree with that, but the record 
shows that. If you will remember in my finding I 
said that we were limited under the pleadings and 
the issues developed to attack racial segregation. 
Isn’t that right?

Mr. Greiner: That’s right.
The Court: In other words, what Dr. Coleman 

said today, namely, that desegregation of poor 
people and deprived people creates this problem. 
Well, this is a problem that I cannot deal with. 
I t’s not a Fourteenth Amendment problem, you 
know. I don’t think I can. If it doesn’t deal with 
discrimination based upon race or national origin 
or creed. But, if it is discrimination based upon 
poverty, this is not [146] open to me. I mean, in 
and of itself. That’s what Coleman said.

Mr. Greiner: I  believe what Dr. Coleman said, 
Your Honor, is that—

The Court: Am I wrong about that?
Mr. B is: No. Counsel, in his proposed—

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1611a

Mr. Greiner: Pd like to be able to finish my offer 
of proof.

The Court: That’s what I thought he said.
Mr. B is: That’s what he said. He is merely ar­

guing now; not even suggesting additional proof. 
I t’s not even an offer of proof.

The Court: "Well, we will see what he’s got.
Mr. Greiner: What Coleman said this morning, 

Your Honor, was that the factor in school which 
contributed most to the inequality of educational 
opportunity was the homogeneous peer group. We 
asked Hr. Coleman if there is any difference in the 
kind of peer group environment created by Negroes 
as compared with Hispanos. He said no. If there 
is a racial basis for saying that a school that is 
75 percent of one ethnic minority is a segregated 
school, that same basis obtains if it’s 35 percent of 
one minority group and 40 of another. We can see 
very clearly that the effects are exactly the same. 
Those children got in those schools—

The Court: All right. That is all argument based 
[147] upon the evidence that is in the record now, 
I suppose. I  mean, you introduced evidence at 
length and in depth concerning the conditions in 
these schools, all of them.

Mr. Greiner: That’s correct. We haven’t cor­
related the socioeconomic data which is already in 
the record and that was the purport of my last 
question to Hr. Bardwell. In words, there is a very 
strong correlation in this city between socioeconomic 
status and race and ethnicity. You can talk about 
the upper-middle-class black school but when we look 
at the schools that are the subject of this presenta­
tion, there are no such schools. They don’t exist.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1612 a

The Court: Well, I suppose that you might clas­
sify the Northeast Denver schools along this line, 
some of them.

Mr. Greiner: Well, but we look at the achievement 
level of those schools—we see then that there is no 
good achievement in those schools.

The Court: Well, then, Dr. Coleman’s testimony 
doesn’t come out. That’s the only thing I can say.

Mr. Greiner: Perhaps it doesn’t on that one point.
The Court: What do you propose to have Dr. 

Bardwell testify to?
Mr. Greiner : Well, we will get to the 1960' census 

data in the record. Dr. Bardwell has also conducted 
a study, I believe in 1967, dealing with the socio- 
economic conditions of this north central portion of 
the school district and in [1483 this portion many 
of these target schools to which we’re having refer­
ence. We do have some updated socioeconomic data. 
That was all I was seeking to put through this—

The Court: Do you have an exhibit on that that 
he has prepared?

Mr. Greiner: We’re going to make one, Tour 
Honor, right here by just labeling the schools for 
which we have this additional data.

The Court: What is the story? What’s he going 
to say?

Mr. Greiner: That the socioeconomic status of 
this neighborhood is still very, very low in terms 
of the rest of Denver. These are still low socio­
economic schools, just as they were in 1960.

The Court: That the condition is the same as that 
which he has read from Exhibit 883?

Mr. Greiner: That’s correct.
The Court: Substantially?

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1613a

Mr. Greiner: Relatively, yes.
The Court: It hasn’t changed on any of these 

schools that you have just mentioned?
The Witness: Schools we’re talking about here 

and the area that comprises a good portion of the 
target schools that we have in mind, that this is in 
the area that is precisely in the middle of the so- 
called census poverty area [149] of the city in 
which I was consultant to the mayor’s office on the 
survey of that particular area to determine certain 
socioeconomic characteristics, educational character­
istics of these residences. This is the so-called 
poverty area of the city. And it is in that area-— 
The results of the study are published on poverty 
and jobs in Denver through the mayor’s office and 
I just simply wanted to point to the fact that half 
of the target schools that we’re talking about here 
are located precisely in the middle of this poverty 
area.

The Court: Okay.
Mr. Greiner: May we proceed with that, Your 

Honor?
The Court: Well, doesn’t that pretty well wrap 

it up? What you’re saying is that there is no sub­
stantial change relatively.

The Witness: What I ’m saying, Your Honor, is 
that it is peculiar in a way that, if one were to look 
•—if one were to lay the red dots on the northern 
area of the city here, which is called the poverty 
pocket of the city, that one would find five of the 
target schools in that area and that the schools 
that we have designated here as Court schools, 
while lying also in that poverty area, that these 
lie in the middle of the worst of it.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1614a

The Court: What do you want him to do? Mark 
up the map now?

Mr. Greiner: Yes, just to indicate these other 
[1503 target schools and their locations.

The Court: All right. One more map isn’t going 
to kill us.

Mr. Ris: I ’m not sure, Your Honor.

By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Would you identify, please, the schools that you are 
marking? A. This is Garden Place and—

The Court: I’ll take judicial notice of the fact 
that it is the poverty area.

A. This is Boulevard, and this is Crofton. This is Gilpin 
and this one is Wyatt. This one is Swansea. This one is 
Elyria. This one is Wyman and this one is Ebert.

Q. Thank you, Doctor.
Dr. Bardwell, did you participate in the drawing of the 

plans of the plaintiffs relating to the desegregation of the 
Court-designated elementary schools? A. I  did.

Q. Turning you attention next to Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 501, 
which is before you, would you describe for us what Ex­
hibit 501 pertains to? A. Yes. It is a proposed plan 
which we have designated Plan 1 for desegregating the 
Court’s elementary schools.

Q. Would you advise us, please, of the general concept 
of Plan 1? What is the basic premise? A. This plan is 
based—

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct

[151] Mr. Greiner: The corrections were in the 
defendants’ plan, Your Honor.

This begins at Page 12 of our memorandum.



1615a

Q. Do you have the question in mind, Doctor? A. Yes, I 
do. This plan desegregates the twelve designated Court 
schools by use of exchange transportation with seventeen 
other elementary predominantly Anglo schools. By retain­
ing each of the Court schools as well as the seventeen Anglo 
schools as Grades K through 6— The way in which this 
plan was constructed is roughly as follows: Anglo schools 
were selected which had approximately 85 percent Anglo 
enrollment and over in 1969, and a second criteria, those 
schools whose capacity could accommodate the exchange 
transportation with the Court-designated schools, and, 
three, the Anglo schools were selected such that the racial 
composition of the schools, once the exchange transporta­
tion was finished, would not depart by more than one stan­
dard deviation from the city average. In addition to that, 
the plan incorporates the feature that, after the exchange 
transportation is completed, that the capacity of the 29 
schools that are involved would not depart by more than 
ten percent of full utilization of the plan. The next step 
was to compute mileages from each of these schools to 
every other school and construct tables that were useful 
then for the computer. This information was transferred 
to punched cards and a rather complex computer [152] 
program was written and developed for the solution of what 
is called a linear program transportation solution for these 
29 schools. The solution is given in Exhibit 501-C.

Q. Now, the results of this linear program and the trans­
portation plan—how does this plan affect the distance 
traveled by children under the transportation plan? A. No 
other conceivable plan of transportation would have less 
transportation than what this plan has. It minimizes the 
total amount of transportation and hence inconveniences 
of all students.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1616a

Q. What about the effect of the cost of transportation? 
A. It minimizes the total cost.

Q. What criteria was used in terms of the composition 
of the school population resulting from the cross trans­
portation? A. The criterion was adopted that no school 
after the proposed plan had been effected would depart 
from this city average by more than one standard deviation.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, at this time we’d like 
to offer Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 501, which is really just 
a narrative description of this first alternate plan.

The Court: Very well. Do you have any objection?
Mr. Ris: No, sir.
The Court: It will be received.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 501 was re­
ceived in evidence.)

[1531 Q. Now, again, with respect to this first plan, 
Exhibit 501, looking at Exhibit 501, what is the range of 
Anglo composition which will result from the implementa­
tion of this plan at the affected schools? A. This shows 
that the minimum percent Anglo composition at any one 
of the affected schools is 54 percent.

Q. What is the maximum Anglo composition? A. Sixty 
percent.

Q. Now, how many schools are going to be affected 
should Plan 1 be adopted? A. Twenty-nine.

Q. And of those 29, there are 17 Anglo schools ? A. That’s 
right.

Q. And the 12 Court-designated schools ? A. That’s right.
Q. How many students will have to be transported under 

Plan 1 ? A. 8,380 students.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1617a

Q. And do you know how many of those will be Anglo? 
A. Yes, 4,284.

Q. Do you also have a breakdown of Negro and Hispano? 
A. Not separately, but as combined, 4,900.

Q. So roughly the same number of minority students 
and Anglo students? A. That’s right.

[154] Q. Now, what effect would the implementation of 
this plan have upon the twelve mobile units now located at 
Smith Elementary School? A. The plan contemplates that 
the capacity utilization of Smith Elementary School would 
be 106 percent, and of the permanent facilities, and the 
mobile units would be withdrawn.

Q. There were mobile units at others of these minority 
schools affected by this plan—does the plan contemplate 
their removal, also? A. They would be removed as well

Q. Now, does the plan address itself to overcrowding 
which exists in some of these schools? A. It does.

Q. And would you describe that, please? A. Yes. Of 
the Court’s elementary schools which were overcapacity in 
1969, Bryant, Webster, at 112 percent; Fairmount, 131 
percent; and Greenlee at 116 percent, all utilized to within 
ten percent of the rated capacity. In fact, in those schools 
it would be less than that: 105 percent and 106 percent 
and 105 percent respectively.

Q. Now, those percentages which you have just given are 
shown on Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 501-A, are they not? A. They 
are.

Q. And how is Exhibit 501-A—how was it developed? 
A. This is one of the solutions of the linear program [155] 
and just merely a summary of the characteristics of the 
schools after Plan 1 had been implemented.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, we offer 501-A at this 
time.

George Bar dwell-—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1618a,

Mr. Els: We have no objection.
The Court: It will be received.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 501-A was re­
ceived in evidence.)

Q. Now, we have talked about the remedying of over­
crowded schools. What, if anything, did the plan consider 
with respect to the underutilization of certain of the 
schools? A. Of the twelve elementary schools which were 
designated by the Court, in 1969 Columbine was 80 percent. 
Elmwood realized its capacity at 87 percent. In each of 
these cases implementation of this plan in these schools 
would be utilized to the extent of 94 percent in each case. 
Now, these other schools—

Q. Now, next calling your attention to 501-C, would you 
describe for us what 501-C is? A. 501-C is a detailed trans­
portation schedule for the sending and receiving Anglo 
students and the sending and receiving of minority stu­
dents. It depicts the number of students to be transported 
from each of the schools, each of the Anglo schools, and 
indicates how many of those students are to be received at 
each of the minority schools.

[156] Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, we offer 501-C.
Mr. Ris: No objection.
The Court: It will be received.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 501-C was re­
ceived in evidence.)

Q. Now, have you also prepared an estimate on the opera­
tional costs? A. I have.

Q. And this is the transportation program? A. Yes.
Q. Is that shown on what has been designated Exhibit 

511? A. Yes.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1619 a

Q. Would you tell us, please, what the source of the data 
in 511 is? A. For proposed Plan 1, the estimated maxi­
mum cost—

Q. Pardon me. What is the source of the data? A. Ex­
cuse me. The source of the data is based upon a memo­
randum dated April 10, 1968, to the Superintendent, Dr. 
Gilberts, from Howard L. Johnson entitled Daily Average 
Number of Pupils to be Transported . . .  in the 1968-69 
school year. The second source is the volume, Transporta­
tion in Denver Public Schools, dated April 1968, in particu­
lar Pages 2 through 6.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, we offer Exhibit 511 at 
E1573 this point.

Mr. Kis: We don’t challenge the source. We don’t 
challenge the arithmetic as made, but we do challenge 
the ultimate figures. We will have some evidence—

The Court: Very well. It will be received subject, 
of course, to the right to refute it.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 511 was re­
ceived in evidence.)

Q. Referring you then to Exhibit 511, Doctor, have you 
made an estimate of the operational costs—or the maximum 
operational costs of Plan 1? A. Yes.

Q. What is that cost? A. $623,600.
Q. Now, can you explain to us how you developed this 

cost per student/mile figure of 3.23 cents per student/mile? 
That’s reflected on Exhibit 511. A. Yes, from the memo­
randum that was just cited as one of the sources of this 
exhibit, the total number of route miles per day were de­
veloped from the figures supplied by Mr. Johnson to Super­
intendent Gilberts. These figures show that for the ele­

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1620a

mentary schools 18,928 miles, and for the junior high 
schools, 13,972, making a total of 32,900 miles per day one 
way. Now, by dividing that by the number of students that 
were involved in this figure, 8,744, which was [158] the 
number of students being transported at that time, we 
come up with an average number of miles per student of 
3.8 miles now being transported, using, of course, 1968 in­
formation. By examining the transportation in the Denver 
Public Schools report, the administrative services, the 
budgeted 1968 transportation cost for regular transporta­
tion for junior high school students and elementary school 
students was $382,740. By dividing that dollar figure by 
the total number of miles just calculated by 181, which is 
the number of school days in the year, by two, for one way, 
gave us cost per mile of 3.23 cents per student/mile per 
day one way.

Q. Now, 511 also' contains a resume does it not, of the 
average miles which a student would be transported one 
way under this Plan 1? A. I t does.

Q. What is that distance? A. For the Anglo students 
the average student/mile would be six and one-half miles. 
For the minority student the average student/mile would 
be 6.3.

Q. And the overall average? A. Overall, 6.4.
Q. And what costs are included, Dr. Bardwell, in the costs 

per student/mile figure shown on Exhibit 511? A. These 
include the salaries of supervisors, bus drivers, bus me­
chanics, equipment repair, contracted services, [159] re­
placement of buses, pupil transportation insurance, gaso­
line, lubricants, tires, tools, repair parts, supplies and 
other expenses; garage repairs and maintenance by private 
garages.

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1621a

Q. Now, do these costs include the capital cost of acquir­
ing additional school buses? A. They do not,

Q. Why not? A. In order to do that, it would require a 
detailed examination of the bus routes to be taken, the num­
ber of students that would be picked up at each school in 
each bus, and it is very difficult to determine this figure 
because at the present time the school district utilizes its 
buses to the extent of about 70 percent of their rated 
capacity and this means that, if more students were to be 
transported, it is likely that the percent utilization of the 
capacity of the buses would be increased and so therefore 
that is an unknown factor. In addition to that, there is 
likely to be some rerouting of students that, are now on 
buses. This contributes to uncertainty. And in addition to 
that, one would just simply have to get a detailed schedule 
of the buses before one would be able to—

The Court: What exhibit are you reading from? 
What exhibit do you have in front of you right now?

The Witness: I don’t have any now, sir.
The Court: Well, I  thought he had.
[1603 Mr. Ris: 511 he has been referring to.
The Court: Tes. That’s right. That has not been 

received yet, has it, Mr. Greiner?
Mr. Greiner: I believe it has, Your Honor.
The Clerk: Yes, Your Honor.
The Court: All right.

Q. Now, are there other alternatives in devising the 
actual transportation schedule or transportation of these 
students? Are there other thing that can be done to in­
crease the utilization of both existing equipment and new 
equipment? A. Yes. I mentioned that, to take advantage 
of some of the students that are not now being transported

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1622a

among the various schools, some utilization of facilities 
might he had by rerouting* some of these students, making 
that ride a bit shorter. In addition to that, it would be 
worthwhile to institute linear programming in the use of 
transportation schedules in the district, and this would 
then minimize the total amount of transportation for the 
district.

Q. What about the time of day at which different schools 
are open? A. I t’s possible, as is being done now, to 
stagger the starting time of schools so that one bus could 
serve for two.

Q. Now, what impact, if any, Dr. Bardwell, does Plan 1 
have automatically upon teacher assignments in these 
Court-designated schools? [1613 A. Well, automatically 
it doesn’t have any effect on teacher assignments simply 
because each of these schools will be designated K through 
6 schools and therefore some conceivable arrangement in 
order to equalize the teacher talents would be necessary 
if such a plan were to be implemented.

Q. Now, Doctor, I’d like to call your attention to what’s 
been marked for identification Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 502, which 
purports to describe the second alternative plan for de­
segregating the Court-designated schools. Would you 
please compare or contrast Plan 2 with Plan 1? A. Plan 
2 again directs itself to the twelve Court schools. This 
plan envisages that a Court, school would be only a 4 
through 6 school. And that, paired with each one of these 
Court schools, or perhaps more than one, would be a group 
of predominantly Anglo schools which would enroll only 
Grades K through 3, and thus the Court schools would 
exchange K through 3 students with 4 through 6 pupils 
from the Anglo schools.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1623a

Q. Now, in terms of the number of students to be trans­
ported under the second alternative plan, Doctor, how does 
the transportation requirements compare? A. In the case 
of Plan 2, it would require the transportation of approxi­
mately 11,109 students.

Q. So that’s approximately 3,000 additional students? A. 
Yes.

£1623 Q. And increased transportation requirements in 
a pairing concept? A. Because, under Plan 2, it would 
mean that roughly half of the students—not quite that 
many, but let’s say roughly half of the students would 
be transported because those students that are now going 
to a school and, let’s say kindergarten through 3, would 
have to be transported to a school that would be desig­
nated kindergarten through 3 if their school was not.

Q. Do you have more children being transported because 
—There are whole classes of children being transported, 
is that correct? A. That’s correct.

Q. Now, what impact does the second alternate plan have 
upon the overall underutilization of the schools that you 
mentioned? A. In the case of Smith Elementary School, 
for example, the mobile units that would be involved at 
that school would be removed and the utilization of that 
capacity would be at 114 percent. Other mobile units 
throughout the district that would be involved in this plan 
would also be eliminated.

Q. How does this plan affect the overcrowding that now 
exists at Montbello Elementary School? A. Well, it is pro­
posed under this plan that Montbello, being a severely 
overcrowded school at this time—

[163] Q. What is the current capacity utilization? A.
173 percent.

Q. What grade levels does it encompass? A. K 
through 6.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1624a

Q. What will this plan do for Montbello? A. It is pro­
posed that Grades 4 through 6 at Montbello at the current 
time will be transported to Columbine, which is a 4 through 
6 school. That would result in a capacity utilization at 
Montbello from 173 percent to 118 percent and would con­
vert the Montbello into a K through. 3 school only.

Q. Now, will any minority students be bused into Mont­
bello under this proposal? A. No.

Q. And what would be the racial composition of Colum­
bine, the receiving school of these Montbello children? A. 
The racial composition at Columbine after the transporta­
tion would be—

The Court: Before you leave that, you would be 
using Montbello then, just its school population to 
integrate Columbine? And Montbello would remain 
a white school? Do I understand you correctly?

The Witness: Columbine would be paired with 
Bradley, Ellsworth and Montbello; all three schools. 
Columbine has a good deal of unused capacity at 
this particular time, and at the same time Montbello 
is overcapacity. In order to [1641 utilize that, it is 
proposed here that this particular arrangement with 
Montbello students would be effected.

The Court: You wouldn’t have any Negro stu­
dents into Montbello?

The Witness: No.
The Court: Are there any there now?
The Witness: Yes, the racial composition is about 

85 percent Anglo.
The Court: And it would remain about that per­

centage ?
The Witness: After the plan is implemented, the

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1625a

racial composition at Columbine would be 59 per­
cent Anglo,

The Court: I mean Montbello.
The Witness: Montbello would be—and I am as­

suming here that the same portion exists for the K 
through 3; that it would be around 85 percent.

By Mr. Greiner:

Q. How would the second plan affect the capacity utili­
zation of Bryant-Webster, Fairmount and Greenlee? A. 
In the case of Bryant-Webster, we remind ourselves again 
that there is 112 percent capacity. Fairmount is at 131 
percent and Greenlee is at 116 percent, and these are util­
ized as capacity utilizations below these particular schools.

Q. Then what about the capacity utilization of such [165] 
schools at Coulmbine, Elmwood, Fairview, Mitchell and 
Whittier? A. All of these schools are underutilized by as 
much as 20 percent and under the proposed plan these 
schools would be utilized more heavily than they are now. 
For example, in the case of Columbine the percent capacity 
would be 101 percent.

Q. Now, directing your attention to what’s been marked 
as Exhibit 502-A, Doctor, would you please just briefly 
describe for us the data reflected on that exhibit? A. Yes, 
this table shows the effect of the pairing plan proposed 
here and shows the Court schools and those schools that 
are suggested as pairing schools for each of the Court 
schools. The enrollment in 1969 for kindergarten through 
Grade 3 and for Grades 4 through 6 are shown on that table 
and also the percent capacity after the implementation of 
the plan, the resulting percentage Anglo at each of those 
schools, and the number of students transported for kinder­
garten through Grade 3 and Grades 4 through 6, the total

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1626a

number of students that are transported one way each and 
every day and the average miles of students one way.

Q. Now, can you summarize for us the source of the 
data shown on Exhibit 502-A? A. Yes. In the case of the 
enrollments for kindergarten through Grade 6, this is the 
September 26, 1969, report of [166] the pupil membership 
by the office of planning, research and budgeting in the 
Denver Public Schools. In the case of mileage calculations, 
these were taken from the data indicated in Plan 1.

Q. These are the distances involved? A. These are the 
distances between the various schools.

Q. And that is also the source of the average miles per 
student one way? A. A calculation resulting from that.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, we would offer 502-A 
at this time.

Mr. Bis: No objection.
The Court: It will be received.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 502-A was re­
ceived in evidence.)

Q. Then calling your attention to 502-B, what is that 
exhibit, Doctor? A. This is a table capsulizing the char­
acteristics of the Court schools, their racial and ethnic 
compositions, and the enrollments in Grade K through 3 
and Grades 4 through 6; the number in special education; 
and their capacity.

Q. Is this then just a summary of data that are in evi­
dence from other sources in this case? A. Yes, it’s for the 
Court’s convenience.

Mr. Greiner: We offer 502-B, Your Honor.
[167] Mr. Bis: No objection.

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1627a

The Court: I t will be received.
(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 502-B was re­

ceived in evidence.)

Q. Then, with regard to Plan 1-—I think I forgot to offer 
501-B, which is also—is it not a resume of the statistical 
data on the schools to be affected by Plan 1? A. That’s 
correct.

Q. Prior to implementation of the plan? A. That’s cor­
rect.

Mr. Greiner: We would offer 501-B.
Mr. Pis: No objection.
The Court: It will be received.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 501-B was re­
ceived in evidence.)

Q. Now, under the pairing plan in the second alternative, 
what will the range of racial compositions at the affected 
schools be in terms of Anglo composition, Doctor? A. In 
every case the schools will have 51 percent Anglo enroll­
ment or better. These remain at a low range of from—a 
low of 54.1 percent to a high of 67.5 percent and, in con­
trast, for example, Columbine having six-tenths of one 
percent of Anglo students to 97 at—97 Anglo at Bradley.

Q. Now, how are students to be selected for participa­
tion in this plan at the selected schools? [1681 A. There 
would be no problem of choice here simply because those 
kindergarten through Grade 3 pupils, for example, the one 
—at one of the Court-designated schools, would be auto­
matically selected for transportation to one of the pairing 
schools. Similarly, those students in Grade 4 through 6 at 
one of the predominantly Anglo schools would be auto­

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1628a

matically transported to one of the receiving Court schools. 
So there would be no problem of selection of students.

Q. Eventually all students at the selected schools would 
participate in this plan? A. That’s correct, if they re­
mained in that school.

Q. Now, what does the second plan do with respect to 
the assignment of teachers? A. Here again, it would sug­
gest that the assignment of teachers would be automatic 
as well, because those teachers that specialized in Grades K 
through 3 obviously couldn’t very well stay at a school 
in which only Grades 4 through 6 were held, and therefore 
the assignment of teachers to a kindergarten through Grade 
3 would be automatic as well as the students.

Q. In other words, the teachers would follow the stu­
dents? A. That’s correct.

Q. Now, referring back to Exhibit 511, the cost [169] 
estimate under Plan 2, how many students would be trans­
ported at the elementary level? A. 11,109.

Q. And what would be the average miles trip per student 
one way? A. 6.3 miles.

Q. And you have used the same cost per student/mile? 
A. I  have.

Q. And then what would be the total maximum operating 
cost of Plan 2? A. It is estimated to be 813,800.

Q. Next I’d like to call your attention, Doctor, to Ex­
hibit 503. Would you please identify for us Exhibit 503.

Mr. Bis: If the Court please, we’re now getting 
into Part 3 or proposed Plan 3 and, we assume, 
proposed Plan 4, which gets into the target elemen­
tary schools, the plaintiffs-designated schools rather 
than the Court-designated schools, so I would object 
to any testimony as to Plan 3 or Plan 4 as being 
beyond the scope of this hearing.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1629a

The Court: Well, before we reach that point, have 
you prepared a narrative summary of Plan 2?

The Witness: Yes, sir.
The Court: Has that been received?
Mr. Greiner: That’s Exhibit 502, Your Honor. I 

don’t know if we have offered that. I thought we had.
[170] The Court: I  don’t recall either. I don’t 

have any record of it.
Mr. Greiner: Here it is, Your Honor. We offer 502.
Mr. Ris: No objection.
The Court: It will be received.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 502 was re­
ceived in evidence.)

The Court: Well, it’s at least within the area of 
the plans and he is going to argue that there is no 
rational basis for omitting at least some of these 
schools, so I suspect that this is sufficiently relevant 
to receive it.

We are now embarking on Plan 3?
Mr. Greiner: Yes, Your Honor, Exhibit 503.

By Mr. Greiner-.
Q. Would you describe for the Court, Dr. Bardwell, the 

relationship between Plan 3, the narrative statement for 
which is Exhibit 503, and Plan 1? What is the relationship 
between the concepts involved? A. The concepts here are 
identical. That is, Plan 3 is identical to Plan 1 except that 
it incorporates the additional ten target schools and addi­
tional number of predominantly Anglo schools, making a 
total of 50 schools altogether.

Q. So, whereas Plan 1 affected some 29 schools, as I  re­
call it, Plan 3 would affect 50 elementary schools? A. That’s 
right.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1630a

[1713 Q. And how many of those would have been pre­
viously predominantly minority schools! A. You mean of 
the 50!

Q. Yes. A. Excuse me. Twenty-two.
Q. How many of them would have been previously pre­

dominantly Anglo schools? A. Twenty-eight.
Q. Now, what was the bases used for selection of the 

Anglo schools with which we preface Plan 3? A. The cri­
teria for selection of Anglo schools in this plan was iden­
tical to that used in Plan 1 except that the racial composi­
tion of the particular school, in order to be included, was 
80 percent or more.

Q. Eighty percent Anglo or more? A. That’s right.
Q. How many students would have to be transported if 

Plan 3 were to be implemented? A. 11, 471.
Q. Now, how does that compare with, for example, the 

amount of students—the number of students that would be 
transported under the pairing plan, the second plan? A. 
It would be only 362 students more under Plan 3.

Q. Now, what about the average miles traveled per stu­
dent one way under Plan 3 ? [172] A. In Plan 3, six and a 
half miles. Plan 2, 6.3.

Q. And Plan 1 was 6.4? A. Plan 1, 6.4.
Q. What is the average range of Anglo enrollment which 

would be achieved under Plan 3 if it were implemented? 
A. In Plan 3 the average enrollment in any school would 
be 51 percent.

Q. And the maximum? A. The maximum would be 61 
percent.

Q. Then have you also prepared an estimate reflected on 
Exhibit 511 of the total cost of the transportation under 
the third plan? A. Yes, $867,000.

George Bar dwell-—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1631a

Q. So that’s about 50,000 more than the pairing which 
the Court just designates? A. That’s correct.

Q. Now, calling your attention to Exhibit 503-A, 503-A 
simply shows the results of implementation of Plan 3, is 
that correct? A. That’s correct.

Q. And 503-B is a compilation of what, Doctor? A. 
503-B is merely a capsule summary of the racial and ethnic 
distribution of students for the schools, both the Anglo 
schools and the Court and target schools that are involved 
in this plan, together with a summary of the numbers [173] 
of students to be sent and received under this Plan—under 
this transportation plan at each one of these schools.

Q. And then 503-C depicts what? A. This is a detailed 
transportation schedule for each one of the 50 schools 
involved, which shows the number of students to be trans­
ported from each school to every one of the other schools 
in. order to achieve the objectives of that plan.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, we offer 503-A, -B and 
-C at this time.

Mr. B is: Objection on the grounds it’s beyond the 
scope of this hearing.

The Court: Overruled. It wall be received.
(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibits 503-A, 503-B 

and 503-C were received in evidence.)
Mr. Greiner: We are also offering 503, Your Hon­

or, which is a narrative description of the plan.
The Court: Very well.
Mr. Bis: Same objection.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 503 was re­
ceived in evidence.)

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1632a

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct 

By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Now, Doctor, finally, with regard to a plan for the 
desegregation of both the target schools and the Court 
schools, I call your attention now to Exhibit 504. Would 
you explain to the Court the relationship between the 
[174] fourth plan and Plan 2! Both plans still utilize a 
pairing concept, do they not? A. They do. Plan 4 is iden­
tical in its conceptualization to Plan 2.

Q. Except there are more minority schools selected? A. 
In this case there are, of course, the twelve Court schools 
as well as the ten target schools. Together then this would 
be 22 minority schools which would be involved in the pair­
ing plan.

The Court: Identical with Plan which now?
The Witness: Identical to Plan 2 in concept. 

That’s the pairing plan. Except here we are in­
volved with ten target schools in addition to the 
twelve Court schools.

Q. So that each of the current minority schools would 
become Grades 4 through 6, is that correct? A. That’s 
correct.

Q. And each of the affected Anglo schools would be K 
through 3, is that right? A. That’s correct.

Q. Now, have you prepared an exhibit—and I will now 
refer you to Exhibit 504-A—showing the, proposed pair­
ings of the target schools? A. That’s correct.

Q. And then the pairings of the Court-designated 
schools would remain the same as under Plan 2, is that 
correct? [1751 A. That’s correct.

Q. And then 504-B depicts what? A. Merely a summary 
table showing the characteristics of these target schools



1633a

with regard to the enrollments and the membership com­
position so far as grade level is concerned in 1969.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, at this time we would 
offer Exhibit 504, 504-A and 504-B.

Mr. Ris: Same objection as to the 503 series.
The Court: Overruled.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibits 504, 504-A. and 
504-B were received in evidence.)

Q. Now, Doctor, with regard to this fourth alternative 
plan for desegregating both the target schools and the 
Court-designated elementary schools, how many schools will 
be affected in this plan? A. In this plan there would be 
53 schools.

Q. And what would be the total number of students that 
would have to be transported under this plan! A. 16,845.

Q. And what about the average length of the bus ride? 
A. 6.6.

Q. And what would be the maximum annual operating 
cost of such a program as you estimate it? A. In this 
case we have estimated $1,292,800.

[176] Q. Now, would this plan also have the same effect 
upon the—for example, the location or the elimination of 
mobile units at Smith and so on? A. It would.

Q. And the overcrowding at Montbello, the same con­
cept is included? A. (Nods affirmatively.)

Q. Now, what about elementary schools which are over­
capacity? Would their—would this utilization be reduced 
there? A. The utilization would be reduced.

Q. What about the range of Anglo composition at the 
paired schools if this plan were implemented? A. The

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1634a

range of Anglo compositions would be from 50.3 percent 
Anglo to a higb of 63.8.

Q. How are students selected for transportation in this 
plan? Is it just the same as Plan 2? A. Here again, the 
selection would be automatic.

Q. Would it have any effect on teacher assignment? A. 
In the same way as Plan 2.

Q. Now, that Plan 4 would cost an estimated $1,292,000? 
A. That’s right.

Q. But you also prepared an estimate of what it would 
take to desegregate all of the elementary schools in the 
district? [177] A. I have.

Q. And is that estimate reflected on Exhibit 511? A. 
It is.

Q. And how many students would be required for trans­
porting under the citywide plan? A. In this case, for the 
entire 91 schools, 14,364 students.

Q. What would be the total cost of that plan? A. The 
maximum cost of $904,000.

Q. The average miles of students one way is almost a 
mile less than any of the other plans. What’s the reason 
for that? A. Well, when you give yourself the flexibility 
of desegregating all the schools in the city, you can do that 
much more efficiently than by picking out certain schools, 
because your transportation routes become much more 
efficient.

Q. Now, have you also prepared a proposed plan with 
respect to the junior high schools? A. We have.

Q. Now, one of the junior high schools that was desig­
nated by the Court for relief was Cole Junior High School. 
Before we get to the details of this plan I wonder if you 
could describe for us the general condition in terms of

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1635a

capacity utilization that we now find in the junior high
[178] schools in the district? A. Yes, we have a situation 
here in the case of the 18 junior high schools—In 1969 the 
enrollment was around 23,440 students. Excuse me. The 
capacity, 23,440. And yet, the enrollment was 22,419, which 
means that the junior high schools as a total are under­
utilized to the extent of about 1,021, and this means that 
the building of Place School, due to open in 1971, and 
assuming it will have a capacity of 1,200, this means we 
will have an unused junior high school capacity in 1971 
of approximately 2,200 students. But, in addition to that, 
there are certain schools within the district in which Jef­
ferson is one and John F. Kennedy is another in which 
the capacity utilization of these schools is more than 100 
percent, and yet a very large part of their enrollment was 
bused in in 1968.

Q. How many students were bused into Thomas Jeffer­
son? A. The best figure that I have here is for 1968 and 
at that time 1,284 students were bused in.

Q. What was the other school? A. Excuse me?
Q. What was the other school? A. John F. Kennedy.
Q. And how many students were being bused into Ken­

nedy? A. 533.
Q. Now, these are students—Anglo students who are

[179] already on buses, is that correct? A. That’s correct.
Q. Now, is there a relationship, Doctor, between the over­

crowded junior high schools today and the racial composi­
tion? A. Well, generally, one finds that except for the 
two schools that were affected by the Court’s order, Hill 
and Smiley, that the more heavily utilized the school is, 
then the higher its racial composition in terms of Anglo 
percent.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1636a

Q. The minority high schools are less utilized? A. Than 
when it happened to be underutilized school.

Q. Would you explain for us, Doctor, the first alternative 
being proposed by the plaintiffs as it affects Cole Junior 
High School? A. In order to desegregate and improve the 
conditions that we have referred to earlier with regard 
to Cole, it is proposed that we can increase the Anglo 
percentage of students at Cole from 1.4 percent, the per­
centage in 1969, to 66 percent by implementing this par­
ticular plan, while at the same time relieving the over­
crowding at Thomas Jefferson and John F. Kennedy with­
out requiring any new transportation of students in the 
district. This could be accomplished by simply transporting 
those students, 1,038 of them that are now on a bus going 
to Thomas Jefferson or John F. Kennedy, and simply have 
their designations to be Cole Junior High School [1803 
instead of Thomas Jefferson or Kennedy.

Q. Now, do spaces have to be created for those Anglo 
students if they are to be received at a school? A. No.

Q. Wliy not? A. Because Cole at the present time has 
989 students, but the capacity for 1,725. In other words, 
the percent capacity in 1969 was 58 percent.

Q. So then the first alternative simply contemplates a 
diversion of Anglos already being bused? A. I might add 
—excuse me—that there is the additional proviso here that 
the few students, about a hundred, a hundred and twenty, 
would be transferred from Cole to either one of the two 
schools—they happen to be bused into Cole at the present 
time—just north of Vasquez Boulevard, which is over the 
two-mile limit under the transportation arrangement with 
the school district. It’s across a heavily-traveled highway 
and so they are transporting to Cole now.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1637a

Q. So these students would not be bused into Cole any 
longer but could be sent to either John F. Kennedy or T.J., 
is that right? A. Or one of the other schools that happens 
to have available space.

Q. Now, have you also prepared a second alternative 
[1813 plan dealing with junior high schools ?

The Court: Are these special education groups 
that are now being bused at schools?

The Witness: Excuse me ?
The Court: Are there special education groups 

that are now being bused to this school, to Cole?
The Witness: No.
The Court: I had thought that there was some 

evidence on that at the trial. These are regular 
students ?

The Witness: These are regular students and it is 
my understanding that these students are now two 
miles away from Cole and they happen to be in an 
area just north of Vasquez Boulevard.

The Court: You mean out toward Commerce City, 
that area?

The Witness: That’s right, that being beyond the 
two-mile limit. Then they are entitled to transporta­
tion.

The Court: How many of them are there?
The Witness: About 124.
The Court: And you propose to send them where?
The Witness: It wouldn’t make too much differ­

ence, I suppose, given the shortest bus ride, prob­
ably to Thomas Jefferson—this would take advantage 
of the use of Valley Highway, which would be very 
quick transportation.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1638a

The Court: I t’s a pretty long ride, though, isn’t 
£1823 it, the north end of town to the south end?

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Now, have you also developed a plan, Doctor, that 

would be broader in scope than just Cole Junior High 
School? A. Yes, the second alternative for the junior high 
schools would be to correct the segregated status of Horace 
Mann, Lake Morey and Baker, in addition to the secon­
dary status of Cole.

Q. Baker is also a Court-designated school, is it not? 
A. That’s correct.

Q. What is the racial composition of minorities at Morey? 
A. 26.8 percent Anglo.

Q. How would this second alternative plan with regard 
to the junior high schools—

The Witness: It is proposed here that—
The Court: Have you completed Cole?
Mr. Greiner: Yes, the first alternative as to Cole, 

Your Honor.
The Court: Have you got a narrative on that one ? 
Mr. Greiner: Yes, we do. It has been marked for 

identification as Exhibit 505 and we offer it at this 
time.

The Court: I t will be received.
(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 505 was re­

ceived in evidence.)
[183] The Court: Do you have an alternative 

plan on Cole?
Mr. Greiner: Yes, they are both contained in Ex­

hibit 505, Your Honor.

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs-—Direct



1639a

Q. Would you describe then this second alternative? A. 
It is proposed under this alternative that again the trans­
portation that is now being undertaken in the district with 
regard to certain schools, particularly Anglo transporta­
tion, that this transportation be rerouted to Cole, Horace 
Mann, Lake, Morey and Baker, and this would mean re­
routing of approximately 2,278 Anglo students that are 
now on a bus, but it would in addition require that 1,900 
approximately minority students from these five junior high 
schools be transported out of these schools in order to 
have an effective racial composition after the implementa­
tion of the plan of approximately 70 percent Anglo.

Q. So that the new transportation required would be 
1,900 minority students? A. That’s correct.

Q. And the other transportation would be that of—which 
really already exists except the designation would be 
changed? A. That’s exactly right.

Q. What would be the racial composition resulting at 
these five schools? A. It would be approximately 70 per­
cent Anglo in each [1843 case.

Q. Now, how would this plan affect the overcrowding at 
certain of these junior high schools? A. The transporta­
tion could be arranged in such a manner that John F. Ken­
nedy, Thomas Jefferson, whose capacities are now utilized 
fairly heavily, would be relieved by the transfer or rerout­
ing of students that are now being transported into those 
two schools. Additional relief might be given to some of 
those schools also whose capacity is somewhat overutilized 
if we consider that overutilized is above, let’s say, 100 per­
cent.

Q. Are any of these schools on double sessions? Or do 
you know? A. It is my understanding that one of them 
is but I’m not certain of that.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1640a

Q. Now, how would this proposed second alternative re­
late to the superintendent’s general proposal of a model 
school complex? A. It would seem to us that, if these 
five schools were desegregated according to this alternative, 
then the racial composition of the entire junior high school 
picture for the city would look very good and then the 
superintendent’s model school complex could be given a 
great deal more flexibility because each one of these junior 
high schools then would be approximately equal in racial 
composition. And so [185] the problem of what might be 
called exchanges for this—for integration purposes wouldn’t 
have to be undertaken.

Q. Now, how do these plans relate to the relief which 
has been granted by the Court under Part 1 of the reinstate­
ment of the resolutions? Doesn’t the injunction—won’t it 
call for certain transportation for students out of Cole, for 
example? A. Oh, yes, yes. That’s incorporated under both 
of these alternatives. That is, the number of students that 
were assigned out of Cole under the resolutions will be 
carried through, and that was implicit when these plans 
were drawn up.

Q. So that, as I recall, some 200 would be transported 
out of Cole under Part 1 of the Court’s decision? A. That’s 
correct.

Q. And you are proposing that some 1,900 additional be 
transported out of both Cole and other minority schools? 
A. That’s right.

Q. Now, have the plaintiffs also prepared a plan as to 
the only senior high school in the district which has been 
designated by the Court for relief? A. Yes, we have.

Q. And that is the plan for Manual High School? A. 
That’s correct.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1641a

Q. And this plan is reflected in Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 506? 
[186] A. It is.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, we offer 506 at this 
time.

The Court: Yery well.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 506 was re­
ceived in evidence.)

*  *  #  *  *

[193] * * *
By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Dr. Bardwell, calling your attention to where we were 
at the close of court yesterday, you recall that we were 
discussing the Manual plan which is contained in a nar­
rative statement which has been marked for identification 
as Exhibit 506, and there are two alternatives in the courses 
of action proposed in Exhibit 506. A. Yes, there are.

Q. Now, what is the first alternative course of action 
with respect to Manual High School? A. Well, as the Court 
will recall, in Resolution 1520 and 1524 there were certain 
boundary changes for George Washington and East and 
South, and consistent with the philosophy that is expressed 
in those two resolutions, the plaintiffs have suggested that 
the high school boundaries of the city be redesigned con­
sistent with the redistricting that [194] was effected by 
Resolution 1520 and 1524. Thus, for example, under those 
resolutions the students in certain Park Hill areas were 
assigned to George Washington and under our plan of re­
districting these students would continue to go to East as 
they were reassigned under those resolutions. Students 
assigned to East from George Washington around the Ells­
worth Elementary area-—these would continue to go to

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1642a

East. Students assigned now to South from south of Cherry 
Creek area would instead go to East—that would go to 
East, would now be assigned to Manual. Students now as­
signed to East under the resolution around the Harrington 
area would remain at East. In addition to that, Montbello 
area would be assigned to George "Washington rather than 
East.

Q. Have you prepared a map which reflects these sug­
gestions, Doctor? A. We have.

Q. And that’s Exhibit 507? A. It is.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, we introduce 507.
The Court: Now, this is all geared to next fall? 
The Witness: Yes, sir.
The Court: This would take effect regardless of 

the year the student was in high school?
The Witness: I  suppose it would be conceivable, 

for example, to continue those students now attend­
ing those high [195] schools—to allow the effect of 
the plan to take place. It would be an optional 
feature to it.

By Mr. Greiner-.
Q. In other words, it would be done in stages? A. Yes. 
Q. Has the introduction of the effectiveness of boundary 

changes in stages by the child entering a certain grade level 
•—has that been a device employed by the school district in 
the past? A. It has in the past.

Q. And Exhibit 507, which has just been introduced— 
that purports to depict at least our rough suggestions as to 
how those boundaries could be redrawn, is that correct? 
A. Yes, and the net effect of this would show that consis­
tent with the philosophy of those two resolutions that the

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1643a

boundary lines for George Washington High School have 
effectively been moved north; that the boundaries for East 
High School have been moved south; and Manual High 
School have been moved south, and in order to accommo­
date those changes then certain other adjustments in the 
boundary lines for other high schools in the city had to be 
made as well.

Q. And those are shown on this exhibit. Now, if you were 
to ignore for the time being the feeder relationship into 
these senior high schools from the junior high schools and 
simply send students out on the basis of geography as 
£196] depicted in Exhibit 507, do we have sufficient data 
at this point to know what the-—what exactly—where ex­
actly these boundaries would have to be drawn? A. No.

Q. What would be necessary before we could predict 
where the boundaries would have to be drawn in order to 
achieve, say, a racial balance at Manual? A. Additional 
information in the form of what kind of desegregation plan 
would be adopted so that one would know the racial compo­
sition of the various elementary schools.

Q. Well, let’s leave that aside. Let’s say just on the 
basis of geography and feeder relationship. A. We would 
not.

Q. Would you have to have a block count then? A. You 
would have to know block statistics with regard to number 
of students in these areas. Certain projections of school 
population over a period of time in order to find out whether 
or not these boundary lines are practical or realistic.

Q. Now, this is the same kind of information that was 
necessitated in the formulation of Resolutions 1520 and 
1524, for example, when the boundary lines were redrawn? 
A. That’s correct, the sort of information that was gathered 
on behalf of Barrett in order to find out—excuse me—

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1644a

under the resolution in order to find out what children— 
£197] how many children were in various blocks of the 
areas that were actually involved in those resolutions.

Q. So this again is a procedure which has been formally 
employed by the District ? A. It is.

Q. Now, what about—

The Court: Before you get to that, could you tell 
me—just describe generally where the new bounda­
ries of Manual would be I

The Witness: There’s been no attempt, Tour Hon­
or, to draw those boundaries along certain street 
paths but rather to indicate as best we could—the 
best we know at this point an approximation of what 
elementary schools would be included within that 
particular high school district. And the attempt 
has been made here to try to keep the number of 
students about the same in order to utilize effec­
tively the capacity of the high school as we have 
now; thus, for example, when a particular area has 
been assigned to Manual, let’s say from the now 
South High School area, certain additional areas 
would have to be assigned to South in order to 
effectively utilize the capacity of South.

And a similar philosophy has been used in the re­
design and construction of the other high school 
areas as well. Notice that the net addition and the 
net subtraction from each of those areas is about 
the same after the [1983 redistricting has been 
done.

The Court: What I think you’re doing is main­
taining the east and west boundaries and greatly 
extending the north-south boundaries and—at East

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1645a

and Manual, is that correct? Generally, is that what 
your scheme is?

The Witness: Excuse me, Your Honor?
The Court: Greatly extending the north-south

boundaries ?
The Witness: That’s right.
The Court: In other words, in effect to narrow 

the corridors?
The Witness: In effect, they become strips, think­

ing in terms of providing access for the predomi­
nantly Anglo population in the south and southeast, 
to be incorporated with Manual, East and George 
Washington.

The Court: Thus, you take Manual’s—you take 
Manual’s south boundary all the way to Washington 
Park?

The Witness: It’s conceivable. That’s right.
The Court: And redistrict it on the east to York 

Street or something of that sort?
The Witness: You will recall, Your Honor, that 

Manual is a smaller school than some of the other 
schools in the area so that its attendance areas can 
be somewhat smaller than some of the other high 
schools.

The Court: You’d do about the same thing to 
East?

[1993 The Witness: That’s correct, but it is some­
what larger.

The Court: From York to beyond Colorado Boule­
vard?

The Witness: Well, excuse me. On the east, the 
boundaries are considerably east of Colorado Boule­
vard.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1646a

The Court: Yes, I said beyond Colorado Boule­
vard.

The Witness: Yes.
The Court: From York Street eastward beyond 

Colorado Boulevard, and then it wouldn’t go all the 
way to the city limits, I take it!

The Witness: That’s right.
The Court: And East High and Washington -would 

take up where Manual leaves off, is that correct!
The Witness: That’s correct.
The Court: When you say you would send Mont- 

bello on to—•
The Witness: Yes, that would include Montbello, 

At the present time Montbello has been assigned to 
East and even in terms of distance there isn’t too 
much choice between East and Washington.

The Court: And Washington’s south—its south 
boundary would be right near Washington!

The Witness: That’s correct.
The Court: And would project north?
The Witness: (Nods affirmatively.)
£200] The Court: Okay. Go ahead.

By Mr. Greiner-.
Q. Turning your attention next then, Doctor, to the sec­

ond alternative for Manual, would you describe, please, for 
the Court, what the concept is of the second alternative, 
the first concept being the integration matter. A. We have 
been impressed with the possibility of using Manual as 
an open school and effecting some of the innovative pro­
grams at Manual.

The Court: Well, you say “we.” Whom do you 
mean?

George Bardivell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1647a

The Witness: The plaintiffs.
The Conrt: Your whole staff?
The Witness: That’s right.
The Court: You can only speak for yourself here.
Mr. Bis: I object to any testimony from this wit­

ness—by his own testimony, his previous qualifica­
tions as a mathematician and statistician—Now, when 
he gets into other fields and we would object to any 
testimony at all from him expressing opinions on—

The Court: Well, I agree that his last statement 
—that “We have been impressed with the idea that 
Manual become a special school” is perhaps not 
within the field of his expertise.

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, I think this becomes 
apparent from the questions and responses in this 
area'—[201] Dr. Bardwell is really talking about 
what the Board itself has proposed.

Mr. Bis: Well, I  will object to that. It’s not within 
his specialty.

The Court: Quite true. I’m grateful, of course, 
for any help I can get from anybody, you know. I 
need it badly. At the same time, I ’m not going to 
be greatly impressed with—I mean, I just feel that 
the last statement ought to be stricken.

Let’s start all over again. I mean, undoubtedly 
he has been impressed. And also, he can’t testify 
for any group, I  don’t believe. I’m sure you’ve got 
a staff of people working but I  don’t think it’s per­
missible for him to express the summary of the think­
ing of the group. I ’m sure you see what I mean.

Mr. Greiner: I think we can overcome this, Your 
Honor.

The Court: Very well.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1648a

George Bar dwell-—for Plaintiffs—Direct 

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Bardwell, with respect to the second alternative 

for Manual, what is the philosophy depicted by this alter­
native? What are we going to do with Manual? A. The 
intent here is to consider Manual an open school.

Q. Now, what does that man? A. It effectively means 
opening Manual to attendance by any high school student 
in the city to participate in some of the special programs 
that would be available at Manual.

[202] Q. Now, where does the idea of these special pro­
grams come from? What is the source of them? A. It 
comes from the School Board’s response contained in the 
Board Resolution 1562.

Q. Can you specifically identify the reference that you 
have? A. Yes, this is a report to the Board of Education, 
a plan developed in accordance with Resolution 1562 sup­
plied by Superintendent Gilberts in May, 1970, and I have 
reference in this regard to Manual as an open school, Pages 
125 to 135, approximately.

Q. This is part of the defendants’ plan, is that correct? 
A. It is.

Q. So, essentially, what the plaintiffs are suggesting here 
—suggesting that the defendants’ plan be adopted and 
applied to Manual? A. As one alternative.

Q. Now, under this alternative, what children would be 
able to attend Manual? A. Any high school student in the 
District.

Q. Now, under the Board’s proposal, what types of pro­
grams would be foreseen at that open school? A. There 
are a number of programs that have been detailed in the 
response to the Board Resolution 1562, which [203] is the 
Board’s plan, and I might indicate as an illustration on



1649a

Page 127 some of the program activities that the Board 
has in mind. For example, building trades; cosmetology; 
power and transportation; metals and metal fabrication; 
machine metals; home economics related occupantions. In 
addition to that, certain professional programs: those that 
would be in premedicine, prelaw, preeducation; the area of 
data processing; communications; preengineering.

Q. Now, as I understand what the Board has described 
on those pages, Doctor—these are programs which are al­
ready in existence at Manual, is that correct? A. That’s 
correct, or intended.

Q. Or in the planning stages? A. Or in the planning 
stages.

Q. Now, where would the formal students who are now 
attending Manual—what alternative would they be given? 
A. It is our proposal that those students be given the 
option of continuing at Manual or attending any other high 
school in the area—in the District.

Q. Now, do you have any kind of an estimate of—-

The Court: That’s what the School Board recom­
mended, too?

The Witness: No, I don’t think that aspect of the 
optional attendance of Manual students is a part of 
the Board’s plan.

[204] Mr. Greiner: I think this is one question, 
Your Honor, as to whether the Board’s proposal— 
new proposal for voluntary enrollment would be ap­
plicable to Manual students. I believe that it would 
be. That’s my initial understanding.

The Court: So then it would be just exactly what 
you’re proposing here? Bight?

Mr. Greiner: Yes, in essence, that’s right,

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1650a

Q. Now, do you have any estimate as to what the maxi­
mum amount of additional transportation might be that 
would be required to effectuate an open school at Manual! 
For example, what if everybody at Manual open to trans­
fer—how many students would we be talking about? A. 
The present time, if we considered all the Manual students, 
transporting them out, this would mean about 990 students. 
Let’s say, to utilize the capacity of Manual which would be 
about 1,500 students, that we’re talking about a maximum 
of about 2,500 that would require transportation.

Q. So that is outside transportation? A. Yes.

The Court: How many is that?
The Witness : Twenty-five hundred.
The Court: Would be transferred?
The Witness: Altogether.
The Court: What’s the total enrollment at Manual 

[205] now?
The Witness: Nine hundred ninety, sir.
The Court: What’s the capacity?
The Witness: About fifteen hundred.
The Court: But this plan, I  supose, would use the 

facilities to a greater extent?
The Witness: That’s true.
The Court: Night classes and other things.
The Witness: Bight. So there—this would mean, 

of course—the Manual capacity would be 1,600 stu­
dents transferred in at the high school and all the 
other students being transported out.

The Court: Twenty-five hundred?
The Witness: Yes.
The Court: But it is unlikely that nine hundred 

would be transferred on an open enrollment basis. 
Very remote, I  suppose.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1651a

The Witness: That’s right.
The Court: If half of them applied it would be 

pretty—a pretty high number, I suppose; at first, at 
least. Maybe later when they got accustomed to the 
program—

The Witness: Quite conceivable.

By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Doctor, I have had a chance to consult with one of the 
staff and I believe the number of students at Manual is 
1,500, not 900. £206] A. You’re correct. Yes.

Q. Is that right? A. Yes.
Q. And the capacity is 1,800? A. That’s right.
Q. So then the maximum amount of transportation, 

rather than being 2,500, would be about 3,300, if you had an 
absolute turnover? A. That’s about right; about 3,100.

Q. Eighteen and fifteen?

Mr. E is: He doesn’t have his computer.

A. I  messed up on that.
Q. That’s New Math.
Now, I would next like to call your attention, Doctor, 

to the area of the second major component of the plaintiffs’ 
proposed plan, namely, the integration component, and 
would you first of all describe what the common premise 
of this integration component is?

Mr. Ris: If the Coxirt please, again I think this 
is beyond the scope of this man’s expertise, and we 
object to it.

The Court: Well, he is just describing it now, I 
take it.

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1652a

Mr. Greiner: That’s correct.
The Court: Proceed. Overruled.
£2073 I don’t know what it is either, but we will 

find out, I expect here. What is the component?
Mr. Greiner: The integration component, Your 

Honor. You recall, Your Honor, that we’ve got de­
segregation, integration and compensation as ele­
ments of our overall plan. Now we’re talking about 
integration.

The Court: You mean the Manual program alone?
Mr. Greiner: No, all of the programs at each level.

A. The proviso is that one of the desegregation plans have 
been accepted by this Court—it is proposed that certain 
plans be implemented to ease the transportation from a 
desegregated status to a—an integrated status for the plans 
that are being proposed here in which certain components 
of integration regarding students parents, faculty and staff 
are being proposed.

Q. Now, has the Board in its proposal—

The Court: What page are you on now?
Mr. Greiner: Pm in the memorandum, Your Honor.
The Witness: 49.
The Court: Okay. That would be of some help to 

me to understand what he is—•

Q. Now, Dr. Bardwell, I believe the first component of 
the integration aspect is that the plaintiffs are suggesting 
in-service training programs for faculty and staff. Is the 
concept of in-service training programs also reflected in the 
[208] Board’s proposal? A. Yes, sir, it is.

Q. And does the Board indicate what the function is of 
their in-service training program? A. (Nods affirmatively.)

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1653a

Q. Now, would you describe those for us? A. Yes, they 
are essentially to instruct the faculty and staff in various 
teaching techniques for dealing with the disadvantaged and 
minority students; the cultural understanding and to im­
prove attitudes and expectancies of teachers with regard 
to minority children and perhaps, most important of all 
are certain programs to help us recognize our own biases; 
our own prejudices. So these would be the purposes of the 
program of the faculty and staff in-service training.

Q. Now, has the Board also proposed the next compo­
nent—their faculty and staff orientation program? A. They 
have.

Q. And what is involved there? A. These are orienta­
tion programs, faculty and staff orientation programs, are 
designed to familiarize the faculty with the buildings and 
facilities of the schools to which they would be assigned, 
certain special programs that are available at those schools, 
the materials, the resources, other facets of the building 
facilities and the programs at those schools. And, in addi­
tion, to familiarize the [2093 faculty and staff with certain 
components of the community which that school would 
serve.

Q. Doctor, if I can return your attention to the in-service 
training program that you first described—in the past has 
the School District employed such in-service training? A. 
It’s my understanding they have.

Mr. Ris: Just a moment. This is getting way be­
yond this man’s competency in describing what the 
Board’s plan is. And it’s wholly improper—a wholly 
improper approach, and I object to it.

The Court: Well, he’s not describing the Board’s 
plan now, is he ?

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1654a

Mr. Bis: Well, I think that’s the only justification. 
That’s the tenor of his testimony; that he was famil­
iar with the Board’s plan as contained in the exhibit, 
which has been offered, and this is all that he has 
been asked. Now he has been asked to go beyond 
that.

The Court: Now he is describing the detail of the 
plaintiffs’ integration plan.

Mr. Bis: Well, he was just now asked, what have 
they been doing in the past.

The Court: Well, he wants to know if they—if the 
Board has any experience in this.

Mr. Greiner: I can make the question more—
[2103 The Court: I mean, in this kind of in- 

service training.
Mr. Bis: This man doesn’t know. He hasn’t been 

in—
The Court: Well, he can say he doesn’t know.
Mr. Bis: But he’s testifying from hearsay, is 

what he’s doing.
The Court: Well, don’t you think they have any 

experience along this line?
Mr. Bis: Well, I think any member of the public 

knows generally about it but I object to this man. 
I t’s beyond the question; beyond his knowledge; 
he’s now just sounding out on various things that 
have been told to him or that he thinks he knows.

Mr. Greiner: I can withdraw the question and 
frame one that won’t trouble him so much.

The Court: Well, it’s not really a question of 
troubling counsel, although of course I  think we 
ought to avoid anything that is going to raise the 
boiling point of anybody here too much.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1655a

Mr. Ris: Well, if lie approves of certain portions 
of the Board’s plan, although he has—all he has to 
do is say so. But now he’s going into describing the 
next step here of how it compares with the past and 
so forth. And this was not a part of the plaintiffs’ 
case. If they want to [211] propose any plan, why, 
all they have to do is-—

The Court: That is an integral part of their plan, 
isn’t it, this training program?

Mr. R is: It may very well be for a proper per­
son, but this man is not that expert.

Mr. Greiner: I ’m sorry. Has the Court ruled 
on the objection? I ’m willing to withdraw the ques­
tion.

The Court: I think he can go ahead and describe 
what the plan is, at least. We’re entitled to know 
that. I could read it, I suppose. But it might be of 
some help to have him outline it now and I don’t 
see where that is any great amount of prejudice. 
Surely there would have to be a lot of preparation 
in anything as momentous as this in terms of train­
ing and personnel involved and preparation of the 
parents and the students as well. I mean, what you 
propose is a momentous program. So I think—I 
expect it would be proper to hear what’s involved. 
That’s all I ’m doing.

Q. Doctor, do you have the question in mind?

The Court: What knowledge do you have as to 
what the Board has done on previous occasions in 
regard to training the personnel involved or the 
community ?

George Bardwell—-for Plaintiffs—Direct



1656a

The Witness: I’m aware from certain publica­
tions that they—the School Board has presented to 
the public and to ourselves certain in-service pro­
grams that have been instituted in the past. Our 
program here is merely what you [2123 have before 
you-—merely a conceptualization of—

The Court: What you’re saying then is that the 
school administration is certainly competent to de­
vise the details of a program of this kind to carry 
it out, is that right?

The Witness: I ’m withholding judgment on that, 
sir. What I ’m saying is that these are some of the 
ingredients we feel are necessary if the plan of in­
tegration is to be installed. And we have merely 
outlined this on Page 49.

The Court: Well, then, the objection was to what 
extent has the school administration done this in 
the past. Isn’t that right?

Mr. Greiner: That’s correct.
The Court: What’s the object of it? Trying to 

show they will do it in the future if they did it in 
the past?

Mr. Greiner: Yes, and that—
The Court: And he says he is withholding judg­

ment on that. So I guess we’ll have to take him at 
his word. That kind of ends that question—that line 
of questioning. He still is doubtful.

Q. Dr. Bardwell, in connection with the Board’s pro­
posal for its implementation of Resolution 1520, 1524 and 
1531, did those proposals contain a facet of faculty and 
staff in-service training and preparation? A. They did.

[213] Q. What work—were workshops held last sum­
mer for that purpose? A. They were.

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1657a

Q. Now, do you know whether or not in the past, for 
example, in connection with the implementation of the 
resolutions, the attendance at those in-service programs 
was mandatory or voluntary? A. My understanding is 
that they were voluntary.

Mr. Ris: If the Court please, I move that be 
stricken.

The Court: Granted.
Mr. Ris: He obviously doesn’t know.

Q. Do the plaintiffs proposals propose that these pro­
grams be voluntary or mandatory? A. Mandatory.

Q. Now, we’ve already covered the faculty and staff 
orientation program and—is that also a part of the Board’s 
proposal directed to the Court? A. It is.

Q. Now, the next major facet regarding community in­
volvement—again, what is the basic premise with respect 
to community involvement? A. The basic premise is that, 
in order to have an effective plan of desegregation, integra­
tion, that community involvement is an ingredient for the 
three-part phase of [2143 this integration of the School 
District.

Q. Now, what types of programs do we propose to 
achieve in this community involvement? A. We are pro­
posing that school and staff assignments be made quickly.

Mr. Ris: If the Court please, I’m going to again 
object to this. Because he is now going into plan­
ning, the administrative level of which he is not 
competent to do.

The Court: I wasn’t paying any attention. I was 
reading the next section. But, proceed.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1658a

Mr. Greiner: Well, I can restate the question.
The Court: I can’t rule on it if I don’t know what 

it is. But I suppose it’s of the same nature as the 
rest of them.

Mr. Bis: Well, he was now going into what the 
administration should do in the very near future 
and so forth. He’s now asking about—going into 
detailed planning, you see, on community involve­
ment.

The Court: Well, I don’t suppose it will hurt us 
to hear what he has to say.

Q. What’s one of the facets, Dr. Bardwell, which we 
propose for this community involvement? A. One of them 
is that the staff assignments, faculty assignments, be 
made quickly so that the persons involved will be in a 
position to know what those assignments are and—[215] 
at an early time so that planning can appropriately take 
place.

Q. So that teachers are—will knowT what schools they’re 
going to be teaching? A. That’s correct.

Q. Do teachers have some responsibility in the develop­
ment of programs at the schools, curricula and so forth? 
A. It certainly should.

Q. So that this gives the most possible time for plan­
ning? A. It does.

Q. And what other types of community involvement 
programs are part of the plaintiffs’ proposal? What about 
communications to the students and parents? A. I t’s im­
portant that parents and students be advised quickly and 
as early as possible what their assignments will be so the 
programs might be set up to acquaint the students, as well 
as the parents, as well as the various programs that are

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1659a

going to be instituted in that school. To get familiar with 
certain of the resources at the school facilities. In other 
words, to make this transition as comfortable and as pleas­
ant as possible.

The Court: Is it your assumption that there 
would be a final judgment here!

The Witness: Would be a what?
[216] The Court: A final judgment that every­

body abide by and they could start their program— 
instruction and planning at once so as to be ready 
by September?

The Witness: That would be great, sir.
The Court: Well, that’s a dream.
The Witness: It may be.
The Court: Because I anticipate that one or both 

litigants here will appeal this to the Supreme Court. 
If they get any kind of a ruling by September 1st, 
why, it would be pretty miraculous, I would think; a 
final ruling. But, anyway, the essence and thrust 
of what you’re suggesting is the program, perhaps, 
and not the timetable, is that correct?

Mr. Greiner: That’s correct, Your Honor. That is 
a problem we have faced ever since we instituted 
this action.

Q. Now, what about the use of volunteer or parent aides 
with respect to the integration program ? A. We are pro­
posing that paraprofessionals be used extensively and 
teacher aides and business aides and other ways in which 
professional people whose energies and talents can be 
taken advantage of by the School District itself. We are 
proposing that recruitment of people themselves be under­

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1660a

taken and recognition given to some of the services that 
they can perform.

Q. Now, what about programs directed toward easing 
the tensions, the rumors that go around when you have 
this first [217] mixing of children in these schools? How 
do we propose that that be handled? A. We are suggest­
ing that programs be sponsored to inform parents of the 
necessity for integrated education, to increase the under­
standing between parents who might have some misgivings 
about a program of integrated education. The same thing 
would apply to students, as well. We are suggesting also 
that a kind of ombudsman relationship be set up by the 
School District to receive complaints, a clearinghouse for 
problems that might arise in the process of such plans for 
it.

Q. Are we proposing that the currently existing school 
community relations office handle that job? A. Well, some­
thing that functions.

Q. Now, Doctor, I’d like to next call your attention to 
the general area of compensatory education programs. 
What, again, is the major premise of such compensatory 
education programs as proposed by the plaintiffs? A. 
Again, we feel that an important ingredient of desegre­
gating the schools, and then integrating will require a sub­
stantial input of compensatory education as a package for 
successfully integrating the schools that are involved in 
this suit.

Q. Now, does that contemplate compensatory education 
in an integrated setting? [218] A. Yes, it does.

Q. Now, would these compensatory programs apply in 
general regardless of the plan of desegregation which 
might be adopted by the Court? In other words, is there

George Bardivell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1661a

a general component? A. Yes, they would apply in gen­
eral to all the plans.

Q. Now, what is the basis for these suggestions which 
we are putting forth with regard to these compensatory 
programs? Where do they come from? A. Most of these 
came from the School Board’s suggestions in Plan—and 
in response to the Board Resolution 1562.

Q. Whereas, the Board’s suggestions are not premised 
on first segregating, ours are, is that correct? A. That’s 
correct.

Q. Now, what considerations have been given to avail­
ability of funds for the types of programs which the plain­
tiffs are contemplating proposing? A. The Board’s plan 
—their plans have been analyzed with regard to the ex­
penditure and—or allocation of various funds or various 
programs that have been proposed and we have taken 
those funds and have indicated and have concluded that 
the funds that the Board is willing to spend upon com­
pensatory education alone would be quite sufficient for the 
plans that are proposed here.

Q. What are some of the items? What is the source of 
[2192 these dollar amounts? A. These dollar amounts are 
taken directly from the plan developed in accordance with 
Resolution 1562 submitted by Superintendent Gilberts in 
his report to the Board of Education.

Q. So we are reallocating these amounts which the de­
fendants have identified, is that correct? A. We are.

Q. Now, would you please identify for us some of these 
specific amounts? A. Yes, there are funds that have been 
allocated by the Board to the outdoor education in the 
amount of about $247,000. Cultural arts, $165,000, to illus­
trate. In addition to that, we find that certain moneys that 
are earmarked in the 1970 school year would be available

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1662a

for implementing our program. For example, $160,000 for 
Complex 1. And $167,000 for Complex 2. And in-service 
training would be $201,000. These moneys would be avail­
able for our program. And, in fact, some of the special 
programs that have been proposed by the Board, moneys 
that have been allocated for that, would be available for 
our plan simply because the necessity for implementing 
some of these programs would no longer be required.

Q. Why not! A. Because we would be desegregating 
the schools.

£2203 Q. In other words, some of these plans proposed 
by the defendants are for giving some sort of integrating 
experience to children, is that correct? A. I suppose you 
could say that.

Q. For example, that’s one of the things that is talked 
about in the Ballerette program, is it not? A. That’s 
right,

Q. And if the plaintiffs’ plans are adopted, Dr. Bardwell, 
where will the child get his integrating experience? A. 
He would have to have it on a day-to-day basis, so this 
would be—there would be no way of him getting away 
from this whole business here of a paternalistic kind of 
desegregation which really doesn’t exist under these plans.

Q. Now, then, Dr. Bardwell, what procedures have been 
suggested by the plaintiffs for measuring the efficacy of 
whatever plan is adopted by the Court?

The Court: What is paternalistic kind of deseg­
regation ?

The Witness: Oh, I suppose it’s a nice word for 
simply saying tokenism.

The Court: Where does the paternalistic come in?

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1663a

The Witness: Well, paternalistic in the sense of a 
generic term for simply saying one is skirting the 
issue.

The Court: I don’t see that at all. I  suppose there 
is a certain amount of paternalism in all of these 
[221] efforts in the sense that the family turns over 
the children to the school administration for the day. 
Isn’t that right?

The Witness: You mean under our plan?
The Court: Under any plan. I  mean, they relin­

quish a certain control when the child leaves the 
neighborhood, I suppose. Isn’t that right?

The Witness: Eight.
The Court: And there is a substitution, I expect, 

of official paternalism in any of these plans, isn’t 
there ?

The Witness: Well, I use this in the sense—
The Court: I think you used it in the sense that—■ 

in a critical sense.
The Witness: Yes, I did.
The Court: This is the type of word that defines 

something you don’t like, I ’m sure.
The Witness: Yes. I ’m simply saying that the 

plans that we are proposing here face up to the 
problem of desegregated education.

The Court: Thus, this is not paternalism.
The Witness: Eight.
The Court: Gro ahead.

Q. Calling your attention, Doctor, then to the procedures 
which we are recommending for analysis of the efficacy of 
these programs, would you please just briefly describe the 
types of procedures and the reasons for them? [2223 A. 
Yes. In order to make sure that the plaintiffs’ desegrega­

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1664a

tion programs are being effective and to provide for modi­
fication of these programs, a series of procedures are being 
suggested for evaluating that effectiveness. One of these 
being that the racial and ethnic composition of any school 
affected by the Court’s order should not be allowed to de­
part from the city average by more than one standard devi­
ation. There are other suggestions here for measuring the 
performance of students on standardized tests, and we are 
suggesting certain quality control programs and certain 
statistical programs to measure the effectiveness of the 
desegregation plans that are being proposed. We are also 
suggesting that the transportation patterns that are being 
effected under these plans be efficient and effective by sug­
gesting the use of linear programming and other—certain 
other—a certain system analysis technique. We are sug­
gesting, also, the use of costing principles and modern 
accounting be used to measure the effectiveness and to pro­
vide for modification of the compensatory programs that 
would be put in operation. These are detailed on 57 and 58.

Mr. Greiner: We have no further questions of Dr.
Bardwell.

Cross-Examination by Mr. Ris:
Q. Dr. Bardwell, you have been referring to the [2231 

plaintiffs’ memorandum for hearing on relief, at least para­
phrasing certain portions of it, particularly to the latter 
part of your testimony. You actually prepared this memo­
randum, did you? A. Excuse me, sir?

Q. Did you prepare this memorandum? A. You mean 
this memorandum?

Q. Plaintiffs’ memorandum for the hearing on relief to 
which you have been referring throughout your testimony. 
A. No, I prepared a substantial part of it.

George Bardivell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1665a

Q. Who else prepared it? A. Dr. Klite.
Q. Who prepared the portion on community involvement, 

for example? A. I think it was Dr. Klite that prepared 
part of it and I prepared part of it.

Q. Who prepared the part on plaintiffs’ plans for equal­
izing' educational opportunity at Manual? A. What are 
you referring to? What page?

Q. Page 46, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 506. A. Oh, Manual High 
School?

Q. Yes, sir. A. Dr. Klite prepared that.
Q. Who prepared the other part? A. I did.
[224] Q. And then all of these plans are basically the 

product of you and Dr. Klite? A. Correct.
Q. And that is true for the entire memorandum filed with 

the Court; plaintiffs’ memorandum, for hearing on relief? 
A. Yes. That’s not entirely true because—

Q. Well, you tell me wdiat’s true. That’s why I’m asking. 
A. Well, it’s a joint effort by us and if there—there might 
have been a first drafting or something and we would 
bounce certain ideas off the other members and—

Q. Other members of what? A. Other members.
Q. Of what? A. Mr. Barnes, Mr. Greiner, Dr. Klite 

and myself.
Q. The four of you then prepared this plan? A. That’s 

correct.
Q. And so the four of you are the authors of this plan 

in this case? A. That’s correct.
Q. Throughout your figures you have been referring to 

school capacity, and those—the rated capacity on the basis 
that we discussed rated capacity at the February hearing; 
generally 30 people per room? A. That’s correct. And 
these capacities were figured [225] under the same capaci­
ties that were used in the report of pupil membership of

George Bardwell-—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1666a

September, 1969, less the possible units or the temporary 
structures at those particular schools.

Q. And the figures did not take into consideration—the 
computer programming did not include any input with 
respect to actually the rated capacity along the lines Dr. 
Oberholtzer testified concerning? A. The standard that 
was used was that, if the capacity that is stated by the 
School Board published by the School Board of a certain 
amount, then that capacity in the linear program wTas 
within ten percent of that capacity.

Q. But you were present wrhen Dr. Oberholtzer testified, 
were you not? A. I was.

Q. And you recall that there was testimony with respect 
to certain schools wherein they had a lower pupil-teacher 
ratio so that there was a lower number of students per 
room for specific education rooms, that in certain instances 
a school is fully utilized so far as the base is concerned but 
with a number substantially less than its rated capacity ? 
Do you recall that testimony? A. Yes, but you’re for­
getting—

Q. You recall that testimony? A. I do.
Q. Now, did you, in your input computer programming 

[226] consider any such deviations in the actual use as 
compared to rated use? A. Yes, we did.

Q. What schools did you do that on? A. The rules that 
we used—because these schools would be desegregated— 
there would be no reason to consider one seat in a school 
any different than any other seat simply because the utili­
zation capacity under the segregation of that would equate 
one—

Q. Dr. Bardwell, you have evaded my question. My 
question is, did you in the input consider any actual utili­

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1667a

zation less than the rated capacity as presently exists? 
A. It was not necessary to do so.

Q. Yon didn’t do it? A. Absolutely not,
Q. Now, if yon would just listen to the question. Just 

don’t argue with me and you can bring all your own 
theories forward. All I’m trying to get are facts as to 
what you did. Now, in connection with your transportation 
and the distances involved, did you consider the distances 
between one school, say the sending school, and the distance 
to the receiving school? A. That’s correct.

Q. And if a child in the sending school was already liv­
ing some miles further away from the sending school and 
in [2273 a direction opposite that of the receiving school— 
that was not put in your input at all? A. No, it was not 
necessary to do that because the transportation plans that 
are now within the District in which I have indicated the 
average distance that the students that are now being 
transported to get to school itself—we have not put into 
the computer program the requirement or transportation 
schedules necessary to bring those students from outlying 
areas into these schools. This would be in addition to the 
mileages and costs of the existing* program. But I might 
add—and I think it’s worthwhile to add here that the sched­
ule of transportation taking account of those students that 
are not now being transferred in, could be utilized more 
effectively, and the distances themselves would be some­
what shorter than simply adding the average number of 
miles under our plan, plus the average number of miles 
under the existing plan.

Q. In other words, you are saying there could be some 
judgments made? A. There certainly could.

Q. But your exhibits do not make those adjustments? 
A. They do not.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1668a

Q. That’s all I trying to get at, Doctor. Also, in your 
pairing plan, you are considering that there are substan­
tially the same number of students in [228] K-3 as in 4 
through 6, is that correct? Do you have a breakdown on 
that? A. We did. We used your report of pupil member­
ship giving- the breakdown of the number of students in 
kindergarten through Grade 3 and 4 through 6, and very 
carefully calculated the necessary capacities to accommo­
date K through 3 and 4 through 6.

Q. I don’t know whether that was in or not. Now, the 
exhibits pertaining to the actual transportation—how many 
would go from each school and so forth—are all those 
numbers of students practical in your opinion, Doctor, to 
send those as shown on the print-outs? A. Can you repeat 
your question?

Q. Is it practical to send the children in each and every 
instance as shown on your print-outs from one school to 
another? I ’m not speaking theoretically. I ’m talking about 
practically. Or, do you know? A. May I ask you to clar­
ify what you mean by practical?

Q. For example, the program on Exhibit 501-C, trans­
portation schedule for receiving Anglo students, you would 
send from Bradley, for example, 373 students. Now, you 
would only send one student to Mitchell. Is that practical? 
A. I  see what you mean. Yes.

Q. So would you transport just one student from Brad­
ley to Mitchell? [229] A. No.

Q. Isn’t that what this says? A. Yes. The program 
itself and the transportation schedule comes out with raw 
information and then this is then—If one wanted to be 
exact, the transportation schedule that is involved, ob­
viously certain adjustments which are practical ought to

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1669a

be made in the plan of this sort so that if one, two, three 
and perhaps five students are to be sent from one school to 
another, it wouldn’t make much sense to the expense of—

Q. That was the gist of my question. Now, also further 
look at Exhibit 501-C, which is the transportation schedule 
for sending and receiving minority students. Now', the 
very first item there—.Bryant—it will send 262 students 
to the following—and there are two schools, is that correct!

The Court: What page are you on now ?
Mr. Ris: This is Exhibit 501-C, Page 18.

Q. Do you have that, Doctor? A. I do.
Q. So you would transport out from Bryant these stu­

dents? A. I think the same suggestion that was made 
before with regard to numbers, that there would have to 
be, I  think, an adjustment here as to a minimum number 
to be transported [230] from any school. And actually, 
according to your Exhibit 501-B, on Page 15, there are 
only four Negroes in Bryant School at all, isn’t that cor­
rect? A. 501-D?

Q. 501-B, as in baker. Page 15. A. Pm sorry.

The Court: Well, it only shows four Negroes, is 
that right?

Q. Is there any purpose—segregation purpose in send­
ing Negroes from Bryant-Webster ? A. No.

Q. Now, Fairmount, Exhibit 501-C, showrs you -would 
send out two. A. Right.

Q. And there are no Negroes in Fairmount according 
to 501-B. How does that happen? A. Well, in putting in 
the—putting this in the computer, there are certain round

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1670a

values for the percentages and a tenth of a percent or 
something of that sort that you would put into the com­
puter, certain kinds of—what might be called spurious, 
very small values, which you might attribute to School 1, 
while a white person or two white people, where those 
white children might not be there in the first place.

Q. And this is inherent in the computer programming? 
[231] A. No, it’s not inherent in computer programming. 
If you say there are a hundred students at a school and 
you have 70.4 percent or 120 students in a school and you 
have 70.4 percent of one racial group, if you calculate those 
out you oftentimes get 32 and a half students. Well, there 
are no such things. They have to be rounded to the near­
est number. Well, when certain figures like that are put 
into a computer, on a percentage basis, then the rounding 
out will oftentimes attribute to a school one person here, 
one person there, or it may be that the figure for the total 
number of Negro students at a school might be one, two, 
or three, and conceivably four students less than the en­
rollment at that school. This is part and parcel of the—

Q. Here at Fairmount there are no Negroes, though, 
according to your white chart, is that right? A. That’s 
right. So, in other words, for example at Fairmount when 
the figures were put in the computer it actually rounds the 
figures off so the rounding percentage may come up to 
99-percent Hispano or Anglo and the remaining number 
would be Negro. This is by subtraction.

Q. Are you suggesting that there are some Negro stu­
dents at Fairmount that are not shown on 501-B? A. No. 
These print-outs—they reflect the—mainly the—

Q. The geographic proximity, is that right? [232] A. 
well, sir, these I  think at best are approximations.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1671a

The Court: He means, what goes into the deci­
sion?

A. I  think that would go into the decision, if this plan were 
adopted for example, would be a transportation schedule 
much like you have right before you, with practical adjust­
ments to that plan for, let’s say, sending only students 
whose total number exceeded five of a particular kind. So 
that, if transportation schedules called for, for example, 
receiving at Mitchell one student from Bradley, it wouldn’t 
make much sense to stop a bus for one student to be 
dropped off at Mitchell.

The Court: Well, what are the ingredients of the 
computer decision? That’s what I ’m trying to get 
at. Do you understand this?

Mr. Bis: From a negative standpoint, I was try­
ing to find out what it wasn’t doing or what it  was 
doing incorrectly since there are some figures here 
that are obviously ridiculous. You can’t transport 
two Negro students out of Fairmount when there 
aren’t any there.

The Court: Well, that’s fairly obvious.
I would like to cut a little deeper here and find 

out what the computer is thinking about. That’s all; 
I mean, when it yields these results.

The Witness: Information that was put in, Your 
Honor, indicated—

[2333 The Court: Does it ever give a capricious 
or malicious decision?

The Witness: Sometimes it does. That’s right. 
Hopefully we can control that.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs-—Cross



1672a

The Court: Okay. What are the elements that it 
is seeking? Its first mission, of course, is, I take 
it, desegregation of a school.

The Witness: That’s correct.
The Court: And then, secondly, integration.
The Witness: That’s right.
The Court: Does it accomplish this task upon 

the basis of geographic—a basis of geographic prox­
imity or expediency?

The Witness: It does.
The Court: Primarily?
The Witness: No, there are a number of in­

gredients here which I think are important.
The Court: That’s what I want.
The Witness: And one is that into this program 

one of the inputs is that no school that would be 
involved in the program itself would have an Anglo 
composition that would depart from the city average 
by more than one standard deviation. That means 
that the lowest Anglo proportion in any one of the 
schools affected in this plan would be no less than 
54 percent. The highest being 60 percent. In addi­
tion to that, [234] the capacity of each one of the 
schools that is involved in the plan would be utilized 
to within ten percent of its rated capacity. This 
means that no school would be utilized to less than 
94 percent capacity and none of them would be 
utilized to more than 106 percent capacity.

The Court: Well, tell me this. Are you seeking 
in your desegregation effort and integration effort 
to get the middle-class students into these inferior 
schools?

George Bardivell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1673a

The Witness: I’m glad you raised that question, 
sir.

The Court: In other words, I see that you are 
sending Traylor students to Elmwood, which is the 
worst building in the city, and to Fairview. I mean, 
is Traylor—Traylor, as I understand it, is probably 
the best facility in the whole city. What is the com­
puter doing there?

The Witness: I wonder then if you would take a 
look at Exhibit 501-A. That gives us an idea of what 
would happen to the average achievement at each 
one of these schools if the transportation schedule 
that we have just indicated were put into effect.

And what it does here—the program did not take 
into account some of the aspects of increasing in 
achievement coming about simply from desegrega­
tion, but simply was a linear combination of the 
achievement scores of the students that would be 
transported, for example, when the various—[2353 
from the various schools into the various receiving 
schools for those students, and I think what is re­
markable about this is that average achievement is 
rather uniform for all of the schools that would be 
involved in this plan which suggests that not only 
desegregation takes place on a racial basis, but de­
segregation also takes place on an equivalent basis, 
and the relationship between those factors is very 
highly correlated with the socioeconomic class. 
Thus, for example, in this particular exhibit we 
find that no school would have an average achieve­
ment even at its worst of less than 31 percent and 
this is in considerable contrast to what we now have 
of achievement scores varying all the way from 15

George Bardivell—for Plaintiffs—-Cross



1674a

percent in the school program to some of the schools 
involved all the way to 73 percent, 75 percent, 80 
percent.

Q. Dr. Bardwell, on this point, all you’re doing is taking 
some low achievers from one school and putting them into 
these high-achiever schools and vice versa, right? A. Ef­
fectively, yes.

Q. And so that when you say you’re making these schools 
more equal in achievement, percentages, average—which­
ever those may be—and the chart does not know what 
you’re doing—is just moving people around so that the 
averages in each school is different not because of anybody 
having increased this achievement, but merely by getting 
new averages with pupils there, isn’t that right? [236] 
A. By no means.

Q. Then what is this last column in 501? A. It essen­
tially is what exists now without taking account of the 
increase in achievement coming* about by desegregating 
the students into the schools that are indicated on this 
exhibit.

Q. That is your hypothesis as a result of this; that there 
is going to be an increase in all these schools ? A. I think 
it is supported throughout the country.

The Court: But as of now*, the average is just a 
result of mixing the low achievers with the high 
achievers ?

The Witness: That’s right.

By Mr. Bis:

Q. And that’s all you show in any of your charts? A. 
We’re preparing our case in the worst light.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1675a

Q. So you do not have any figures here to show what 
these achievers will be in, in say three years, five years ox- 
ten years? A. No.

Q. In fact, you don’t have any figures—Your computer 
print-outs—do you have print-outs that would show that? 
A. Eight.

Q. Now, I would refer you, please, Dr. Bardwell, ex­
pressly to the Manual plan, Exhibit 506. As I gather from 
[237] your testimony, your first alternative—what you’re 
really seeking and asking the Court to do is to modify 
what the Court has already indicated is going to be a part 
of the permanent injunction? Correct? A. This would be 
one modification.

Q. Under Resolution 1520 and 1524? So you say the 
Court should not only reinstate as the Court has stated 
the permanent injunction on Part 1, but go beyond that? 
That, in essence, is your plan, is that correct? A. It would 
be.

Q. Now, have you considered the transportation prob­
lems for students at the high school level under your first 
alternative for Manual? A. No, we have not calculated 
any precise transportation schedules or any transportation 
distances that would be involved.

Q. Would your plans contemplate transporting senior 
high school students say from Fairmont Subdistrict to 
South High? A. We have no plans for transporting high 
school students.

Q. Now, as I  look at your Exhibit 507, the map, is it 
correct that Washington High would have the one feeder 
junior high? And that would be Smiley? A. There would 
be one feeder junior high in that [2381 particular high 
school district.

Q. And for Kennedy there would be none? A. Well,

George Bardtvell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1676a

that doesn’t necessarily mean that there are the junior high 
school districts.

Q. This is under your plan, is what I’m asking-? A. Tes.
Q. A junior high district—these are presently set out? 

A. That is right.
Q. At least no junior high located in the Kennedy area? 

A. That’s right.
Q. And you would have three junior highs located in 

the Manual area; Cole, Morey and Byers, is that correct? 
A. Yes.

Q. And three junior highs in the North High area? A. 
Right.

Q. So either North or West—they would have one—One 
would have three junior highs and the other would have 
two junior highs, is that correct? A. Included in the geo­
graphical area, that’s rig-ht.

Q. Again, may I go back just to the elementary school 
busing once more and our computer figures—is it possible 
from an economical and practical standpoint to set that up 
on the basis of bus capacity so that you wouldn’t have 
maybe [239] eight kinds in one bus time and time again 
and— A. This information would have to be put into the 
computer and it would be so extensive so as to make it not 
practical to do so, and I think any kind of transportation 
plan we’d devise, based upon the outline we have prepared 
here, it would be a detailed analysis indicating whether or 
not—indicating an efficient way to do this would be to pick 
up, let’s say a certain number of students at this school 
and at the same time going by another school in order to 
make effective use of a bus in order to get those students 
at the receiving school.

Q. Now, may I ask you this—

George Bardwcll—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1677a

The Court: Are you talking about high schools 
now?

The Witness: No.

Q. So at the present time it would not be practical to 
computerize it on a busload basis, is that correct? A. 
Well, it’s not practical for us. We don’t have the man­
power.

Q. But you understand what I ’m asking? With the 
school reserves available to you? A. It is quite easy to 
do this.

Q. Could this also take into consideration tinder your 
theory, Dr. Bardwell, that the children who are beyond 
the walking distance to an elementary school and who are 
now bused because of that distance? [2403 A. By all 
means.

Q. And they would be bused to that elementary school 
and another bus picks them up there? A. By no means. 
For example, some of the students that are bused into the 
outlying areas—we indicate a student is to be transferred 
from University to Park Hill—I don’t know whether they 
are—but the transportation schedule would call for him 
to be put into the program when it’s finalized that the 
students are bused into the University Park, they would 
then be put on the bus going to Park Hill.

Q. So from Southeast Denver it would take normally 
26 minutes to get to University Park and you would just 
bus them further north for the additional time and dis­
tances involved? A. That’s correct, and the total mileages 
involved would be considerably less than certain mileages 
now, yes. Some of them would be less.

Q. Would you give us an illustration? A. Yes. There 
are some students that are actually transferred from Sted-

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1678a

man and Smith in which the transportation route is almost 
12.4 miles.

Q. How would that lessen? A. Well, I illustrated— 
Q. Wouldn’t this still be in existence? A, Not neces­

sarily, no.
[24] Q. You don’t know that it wouldn’t be in existence? 

It’s a possibility under this arranging that some of it might 
be adjusted out? A. That’s correct.

Q. Now, with respect to your boundary changes at the 
high school level—you said a block count would be required?

The Court: I think we’ll take a recess now.
(Whereupon, the trial recessed at 11:00 a.m. and 

resumed at 11:15 a.m.)

By Mr. R is:
Q. Hr. Bardwell, you referred to the necessity for block 

counts on redistricting the senior high schools. If you were 
going to do that that would require a block count through­
out the city? A. Yes, that’s right.

Q. Now, with regard to the—

The Court: You are now talking about Plan 1 of 
the senior high school redistricting ?

Mr. Eis: Under Alternate 1 of the high school 
plan, yes, sir.

Q. And then after those block counts you would also have 
to make projections as to what movement there might be— 
there would be in the pupil population that—■ A. Yes, but 
I  would suspect that one would not have to be that precise 
about the block counts to get an approximation [2421 of

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1679a

what the utilization of the capacity of each of these high 
schools would be. But, to be entirely precise about it, one 
would have to do that.

Q. Are there any other ways of doing it? A. Oh, yes. 
I think that there are attendance records, let’s say, at the 
school that could be used and at the same time the 1960 
census information which would give a rough indication 
of what kinds of population densities you would have in 
various parts of the city. But this would be at best a rough 
approximation.

Q. Now, with regard to the budgetary matters, you did 
not attempt to go back and go over the entire school bud­
geting to see what your proposed changes, what effect it 
would have, did you? You didn’t go back to the proposed 
budget for 1970, or ’71, for example, or the existing budget 
for 1969 and 1967 and go through it to determine what 
changes would be required in the budgets to effectuate your 
programs? A. We did not.

Q. So that the availablity or priority of funds shown 
on Pages 55 and 56 of the plan, the plaintiffs’ plan, entitled 
Part 7, availability and priority of funds—that is just some 
rough figures you put together? A. They are merely a 
reflection of what you people had considered or the School 
Board had considered was to be feasible to allocate there.

124:33 Q. You didn’t go back and figure out what the full 
budgetary effect wmuld be? A. We did not.

Q. Now, the outdoor education item, you show on Page 
55 under this part of your plan you would just do away 
with that? A. Well, we feel that that has a lower priority 
than some of the other items within the budget for deseg­
regating the schools and integrating them and we felt that 
that amount of money would be available for planning the 
more important purpose.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1680a

Q. But in 19701—the 1970 budget—there is $247,000 allo­
cated for that and that would just—you would just with­
draw that complete allocation?

The Court: Some of these are earmarked federal 
grants, aren’t they? That couldn’t be used for any­
thing else.

The Witness: That may be true. Which of those 
funds are earmarked, I do not know.

The Court: Well, I  don’t know either, but I know 
at Manual and Cole they have special programs, so 
I have been told, and the sources of these funds are 
federal funds, as I understand it. Of course, these 
funds wouldn’t be available for other uses, I assume. 
They wouldn’t go back into the general fund.

The Witness: No, but there is the question of 
[244] whether or not, under a desegregation plan, 
whether or not the reason for the use of the funds 
under that kind of a plan makes just as much sense, 
let’s say, within a desegregated setting than in the 
given setting where it is segregated. Whether or not 
the funds would still be applicable in that case per­
haps is a question, but, it seems reasonable to sus­
pect that those funds would be available under those 
circumstances as well.

The Court: Well, I  don’t think reason has any­
thing to do with it. When you’re dealing with the 
Health, Education and Welfare Department, I think 
they work in categories, probably. I mean, I  have 
been given to understand that.

The Witness: Something that would have to be 
investigated, yes.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1681a

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross 

By Mr. B is:
Q. Also, did you take into consideration to what extent 

this $217,000 budget for Ballerette in the outdoor educa­
tion has already been committed? A. We have not.

Q. You did determine the cost for busing under your 
Exhibit 511, is that right? A. That’s correct.

Q. Have you determined the cost for the in-service train­
ing that you recommended? A. No, we have not.

Q. Did you determine the cost for the staff and [245] 
faculty orientation you recommended? A. No, we have not.

Q. Do your figures consider the cost for compensatory 
education, as you recommended in the integrated setting? 
A. No, we have not.

Q. Did it consider the cost for the special programs at 
Manual and Cole? Or, would you just do away with all 
these special programs? A. We have not considered those 
costs there.

Q. Did you consider the cost of testing all pupils three 
times a year as you recommended in one portion of your 
plan? A. We have not.

Q. Did you consider the cost of a block count for redis­
tricting the high schools? A. We have not.

Q. Did you consider the cost for the public relations for 
community acceptance? A. We have not.

Q. Did you consider the cost for capital expenditures 
for buses or for changes made in the—changes made neces­
sary in the high school, particularly under your Plans 2 
and 4? A. We have not.

Q. Did you consider whether the changes in the physical 
schools would be necessary; the size of the desks and seating 
[246] and the heights of the blackboards and so forth 
under Plan 2 and Plan 4? A. Would there be a change?



1682a

Q. You don’t know that there would be a change! A. 
As far as we’re concerned, we feel there would be no 
change.

Q. You think that the desks and seats for a first-grader 
are the same as those for a fourth-grader? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And for a sixth-grader? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And the height of the blackboard—they are all the 

same whether they are first-graders or sixth-graders ? A. 
Yes. In fact, many of those rooms are already—are kinder­
garten through Grade 3.

Q. You don’t know what changes would be necessary? A. 
No.

Q. You don’t know that any such changes would be nec­
essary? A. No.

Q. Well, then, your conclusion that you stated before 
that- sufficient funds are available within the current bud­
get to implement the plaintiffs’ plans— that’s not a correct 
statement? A. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that be­
cause—

£247] Q. You told us about all these costs that you 
haven’t even considered. How can you make that state­
ment, Dr. Bardwell? A. That’s correct, we have not con­
sidered the costs in detail, but we have nevertheless modeled 
those programs very much after the plan that has been 
presented by the School Board and we are merely con­
tending that the funds that are made available under the 
proposed plans to implement Resolution 1562 would be 
also available for the plan that is being proposed here.

Q. But, nevertheless, despite the fact that you have not 
considered all of these, you will stand on your statement 
that all this could be done within the current budgetary 
items? A. That’s correct.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1683a

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Redirect 

Mr. Eis: That’s all,

Redirect Examination by Mr. Greiner:
Q. Or. Bardwell, you were asked a question about the 

source of some of the components of the plan and you 
identified for us the authors of the plan. But the sources 
were not limited to the authors. For example, one of the 
sources is the Board’s own plan, is it not! A. By all 
means.

Q. Now, do you know whether or not under the Board’s 
[248] current proposal as implemented for voluntary open 
enrollment, that some of the transportation under voluntary 
open enrollment requires less than, let’s say, the best utili­
zation in terms of the numbers of students being picked up 
and deposited at various schools? A. Well, any plan that 
is developed on an essentially haphazard or nonrandom 
basis—or a random basis like voluntary open enrollment, 
the chances are almost certain that it is not an optimum 
kind of transportation plan.

Q. Now, you mentioned that we didn’t have the manpower 
to develop the detailed transportation schedule that would 
be involved. Does the School District have the transporta­
tion department? A. It does.

Q. And it is Dr. Qlander’s department, is that right? 
A. Yes.

Q. And do you have any idea of how long it would take 
his department to prepare the detailed plan of transporta­
tion, the actual bus schedules, if he worked hard? A. I 
don’t know how long it would require.

Q. Are we talking about a couple of years? A. Well, 
I  know that, for example, to develop the kinds of linear 
programming that was developed for our plans here, it is 
essentially my own work and the work of some students



1684a

that helped me write some of the programs, and this [249] 
effectively saved about three or four men working a couple 
of years by the use of the computer. Well the same kind 
of efficient use of manpower can be used by the School Dis­
trict itself and with appropriate input of information like 
that, allow the computer to take advantage of efficient use 
of manpower, and I suspect it might take—it’s purely a 
guess on my part—a couple of men, oh, three or four men, 
four or five weeks.

Q. I suppose we can ask Mr. Olander about that. Now, 
Exhibit 507, which shows the general geographic outlines 
of the proposed redistricting of the senior high school 
areas, does Exhibit 507 purport to show anything about 
junior high school feeder relationships into those senior 
high schools? A. It does not.

Q. Now, Doctor, in the District today are there some 
junior high schools which in fact feed more than one senior 
high school? A. Yes, sir.

Q. So that is not a different concept? A. No problem, at 
all.

Mr. Greiner: No further questions.
Mr. E is: That’s all.
The Court: I assume—I gather from what you 

said that on the elementary-high school program that 
you have advanced that you think that the Plan 2 is 
much preferable to [250] Plan 1, is that correct?

The Witness: Well, Your Honor, it depends upon 
one’s point of view. In Plan 1, for example, and I 
think this is in response to an earlier question you 
made of me, that that plan minimizes the total 
amount of transportation for all students that would 
be involved.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



1685a

'The Court: This is the one in which yon trans­
ported classes, complete classes and changed the 
character of the schools?

The Witness: That’s right. Now, it minimizes the 
total transportation. And you see that there are 
about 8,000 students that are to be transported under 
that arrangement. In Plan 2 it increases the trans­
portation that is involved and hence the cost, but 
it has some other advantages, Plan 2, because the 
assignment of students is automatic. The assign­
ment of teachers would be automatic. And one would 
avoid the agonizing problem that would be pre­
sented in Plan 1 by what students are to be involved 
in the program. So, there are advantages.

The Court: Well, the plan wouldn’t give you com­
plete integration, anyway, would it?

The Witness: It would certainly give you com­
plete integration for the 29 schools that are involved, 
yes, sir. And, in fact, the most efficient way that it 
could be done.

The Court: Let me see if I understand it, Doesn’t 
[2513 this contemplate moving, say kindergarten 
through the third grade to an Anglo school and vice 
versa? Or, moving the fourth, fifth and sixth grades 
of the receiving school to the sending school?

The Witness: That would be Plan 2. And that 
would of course, involve more students.

The Court: Then once they arrive where they 
would be, why, this would complete integration with­
in each classroom, is that correct?

The Witness: That’s right.
The Court: I  mean, that’s what you have contem­

plated?

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



1686a

The Witness: That’s correct.
The Court: Turning to the high school proposition 

that you have submitted, I assume that from what 
you say that your alternative plan for making Man­
ual a specialized school is not one you think is as 
good as the desegregation plan?

The Witness: No, it would not.
The Court: Well, of course, it would achieve inte­

gration, wouldn’t it?
The Witness: The concept there would he to 

change the community image of Manual itself by 
turning it into a specialized school with attributes 
that would provide that school with a symbol of 
excellence, of the kind of education that all students 
would look to that school for the various kinds of 
programs.

[252] The Court: But you would still retain its 
general program as well?

The Witness: No, I would not.
The Court: Well, then, it would have to achieve 

integration then because those who wish to take a 
general high school course would have to go to 
another school—

The Witness: To the extent that that would take 
place, it’s true. And to the extent that the students 
at Manual chose other schools for their high school 
education, to that extent the integration would be 
achieved.

The Court: Well, if they stayed at Manual they 
would have to take a particular course that would 
be offered there?

The Witness: That’s right.

George Bardwell—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



1687a

The Court: To be sure, they could take pre-pro­
fessional courses, but the great emphasis would be 
on practical trades, wouldn’t it!

The "Witness: No, there would be some emphasis 
upon that, of course, but we would conceive that to 
change the image of Manual would be to implement 
certain programs that would be visionary. Would 
be innovative. And advanced training in engineering.

The Court: Well, what—in what respects does 
your program differ from that of the School Board?

The Witness: None at all, sir, except to provide 
[253] the option for those students that are at 
Manual to stay at Manual or to transfer to any other 
high school in the city.

The Court: Well, doesn’t the School Board pro­
gram contemplate that?

The Witness: I ’m not certain that it does. I  don’t 
know.

The Court: But yours would be an absolute right 
to transfer?

The Witness: That’s right. We want to guarantee 
that right.

The Court: Well, I suppose there are variations 
of that concept that could be applied here. I  sup­
pose that Cole could be utilized for example as a 
specialty school as well, couldn’t it?

The Witness: It could.
The Court: A specialized school for the whole 

city?
The Witness: It could.
The Court: Those two schools are sort of sym­

bols, it seems to me, of segregation. I mean, they 
seem to, for some reason to—to have that character.

George Bar dwell—for Plaintiffs—Redirect



1688a

The Witness: That’s true.

*  #  *  *  *

[2543 * * *

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Direct

William Smith, a witness called by and on behalf of 
plaintiffs, having first been duly sworn, was examined and 
testfied as follows:

The Court: Please give us your name and address 
and occupation.

The Witness: William Smith, 3401 East 26th Ave­
nue, Principal, Barrett Elementary School.

Direct Examination by Mr. Barnes:
Q. Mr. Smith, how long have you held this position? A. 

About eight and a half months.
Q. How long have you been employed by the Denver 

Public Schools? A. Fourteen years.
Q. What was your position immediately previous to your 

present position? A. I  was the Assistant Principal at Gil­
pin School.

Q. What was the racial composition approximately of 
that school? A. Approximately 54 percent Hispano, 50— 
well, let’s say 50/50 black and Hispano at Gilpin.

Q. In what other schools have you held positions in the 
Denver Public School system? [2553 A. Well, I  worked 
prior to going to Gilpin—I worked at Hallett two years; 
Barrett five years; Fairview three years.

Q. When were you notified that you would become prin­
cipal of Barrett School? A. June of 1969.



1689a

Q. Did you know what the racial composition of the 
school was at that time? A. Yes, I  did.

Q. What was it? A. Approximately 95 percent black.
Q. What steps did you take during the summer of 1969 

to prepare new programs for Barrett School to begin in 
September? A. I went on vaction first of all and then I 
came back in July and I did talk to Dr. Gilberts about the 
second week of July and asked him if I might take over 
the building before the principals normally take the build­
ing, and he said yes, so I did officially take possession of 
the building and I did go into the building and start look­
ing at records, pupil records and so forth.

Q. Did you design some new programs to be implemented 
in the fall? A. Yes, I did.

Q. Were these programs designed for an integrated 
[256] school? A. No, they were not.

Q. Did you request any additional funds for these pro­
grams? A. Other than just one set of books—I did ask 
for a set of books into new words, and that was granted.

Q. Before discussing the details of these programs with 
you, Mr. Smith, would you tell us how many children are 
being bused into Barrett this year as the result of this 
Court order? A. Approximately 300 youngsters, Anglo 
and black.

Q. Three hundred—315? Somewhere in that area? A. 
In that neighborhood, yes.

Q. How many children are within walking distance of 
Barrett this year? A. Approximately 98.

Q. What race are they? A. Predominantly black, His- 
pano, and that’s about it. Black and Hispano.

Q. And the total number then is about 415? A. Pour 
hundred fifteen, right.

Q. Do you know what the pupil population of Barrett

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1690a

was the preceding year, 1968-69? A. Yes, from the semi­
annual report, the pupil population, this was June of 1969, 
was 383 pupils at Barrett.

[257] Q. You have increased in size this year? A. That’s 
right.

Q. How many teachers do you have at Barrett this year? 
A. Sixteen and a half.

Q. How does that compare with the previous year? A. 
We had nineteen.

Q. So you have more pupils and fewer teachers? A. 
That’s right.

Q. The racial composition of Barrett this year under this 
Court order is what? A. Seventy-fivg percent Anglo, twen­
ty percent black, five percent Hispano and Oriental.

Q. Is the racial composition, Anglo and non-Anglo, gen­
erally reflected in all of the classes of Barrett this year? 
A. Yes.

Q. When a new child comes to Barrett during the middle 
of the year or has come to Barrett this year, on what basis 
has that child been assigned? A. Well, in the office I have 
—let’s call it a book, a register for each youngster of each 
classroom racially balanced. So that, if I receive an Anglo 
youngster, a boy, in the fourth grade, I know exactly what 
room he goes in. And that way you don’t have a segregated 
classroom within an integrated school.

[2583 Q. Does this result in the exact same pupil/teacher 
ratio in each class? A. You mean class size?

Q. Yes. A. The same class size. In our classes—-the class 
sizes are different. One fourth-grade class may have 34, 
the other may have 28. The important thing is to have 
racially-balanced classrooms.

Q. Have you received complaints from teachers concern­
ing the disproportionate size which you maintain in order 
to have racial balance ? A. No.

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1691a

Q. How many of yonr present teachers have requested 
transfer for next year? A. One, so far.

Q. What was the basis of that request! A. Well, the 
teacher was assigned as a music teacher and she knew very 
little about music so I made the transfer within the build­
ing and took a second-grade teacher and she agreed to 
teach the music and the new teacher taught second grade. 
And we made the transfer within the building.

Q. Is one teacher leaving' the building, however? A. That 
would be the teacher that is leaving, yes, because the teacher 
that has the—that agreed to that—the fifth-grade music, 
she would like to have her room back. [2593 And since 
she has seniority, she gets it back.

Q. Are these the same teachers who were teaching at 
Barrett in 1968-69 before you arrived? A. Yes.

Q. And— A. Except for the new ones that I received 
this year.

Q. Mr. Smith, you stated that you developed during the 
last summer some special programs. Are those programs 
now in effect? A. Yes, they are.

Q. Would you describe the high potential lab briefly? 
A. The high potential lab is a lab that we have set up for 
youngsters that have ability above that of the normal class­
room work that is required. These labs are ungraded. We 
have fourth, fifth and sixth-graders working in the labs 
and they work in various areas—extended areas in the cur­
riculum.

Q. H o w  many children are in the high potential labs? A. 
Approximately 60.

Q. About how many hours a day do they spend in these 
classes? A. Well, it depends. A youngster may go in the 
high potential lab for one hour in the morning or maybe 
one hour in the morning and one hour in the afternoon.

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1692a

Or the youngster may in two days a week, and we have 
some youngsters that may [2603 go in three days a week. 
They don’t go in there all the time. We have different pro­
grams set up in the high potential labs and it depends on 
the times that they require to go in.

Q. How do the children make up the time that they lose 
from the regular classes? A. Well, my philosophy is that 
if a child is truly high potential, then the things that they 
miss in the regular classroom, they can do at home for 
homework. And consequently they are excused from high 
potential lab five minues early and go to the regular class­
rooms and pick up the assignments that they miss and do 
it for their homework.

Q. Can you give us an example—one example of the 
curricula that might be offered, say, a fourth-grader in the 
mathematics class? A. All right. You mean, what we’re 
offering now in the high potential labs?

Q. Just a quick example. A. All right. We offer crea­
tive writing, reading and geometry.

Q. Geometry that might be for what grade student? A. 
Well, it’s ungraded, fourth, fifth and sixth. However, we 
have one third-grader in geometry now.

Q. Did you have to take over any new space in order to 
create these high potential labs? A. No.

[261] Q. Did you have to obtain any new materials in 
order to outfit these labs? A. Yes, we had to get a few 
books, and that’s about it. It wasn’t any big thing.

Q. Where did you get the teacher? A. The teacher was 
assigned. One of the teachers that we had assigned to the 
building.

Q. As part of the staff assignment to Barrett? A. Yes.
Q. How did you obtain her time? A. Well, if you want 

to call it differentiating staffing, scheduling—whenever the

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1693a

IMC center—and the youngster—this is the library, and 
when the youngsters go into the library instead of having 
two teachers in there, then the teachers—the teacher that 
is relieved can be doing something else.

Q. So it was just more or less by making more efficient 
utilization of the staff you already have! A. Of staffing, 
right.

Q. Are the high potential labs integrated, Mr. Smith? 
A. Yes, they are.

Q. Have you received any favorable comments from 
parents concerning them? A. Yes, I have.

Q. Now, do you also have a program of learning labs? 
[262] A. Yes, we do.

Q. Can you describe them briefly? A. The learning lab 
—we have two, and these are for the—the word I like to 
use is inexperienced youngsters. Some people prefer to call 
them slow. I don’t like the word slow. So I use inexperi­
enced. These labs are set up for the youngster that is 
behind in reading or math programs.

Q. Approximately how many children participate in 
these ? A. Eighty.

Q. Are they integrated as well? A. Those are inte­
grated, yes.

Q. Where did you find the space for these? A. Well, 
we had a teachers’ room upstairs that wasn’t being used 
and so we put one lab in there. And, as I said, we only 
have sixteen teachers there and the teachers agreed that 
one faculty room was enough instead of two. So we have 
a lab in one teachers’ room upstairs and then in the kinder­
garten room we partitioned the back part of it off and we 
have the other learning lab in that area.

Q. Does each teacher in each one of these labs have her 
own deck and blackboard and materials, et cetera? A. 
Yes.

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1694a

Q. Where were you able to find those materials? A. 
Well, we had them around the building. We have the 
£2633 portable blackboards similar to this one right over 
here, so we used them as a partition and set it off and made 
a classroom out of it.

Q. I t’s a question of efficient use of existing materials? 
A. We had the materials there, yes.

Q. What is the actual number of hours a child might 
spend in this learning lab? A. Now, this depends. I t’s 
based upon needs. If a youngster goes into a learning lab 
he may go in there two days a week, three days a week; 
maybe an hour a day, maybe an hour in the morning, may­
be an hour in the afternoon. We have—we teach two dif­
ferent things, as I said, in the learning lab. We have read­
ing and math and a youngster, may go in the morning for 
reading or he may have—we may have a youngster in in the 
afternoon for math, and it kind of depends.

Q. Is there any case in which a youngster might spend 
the whole day in such a lab? A. No.

Q. What might be the maximum? A couple of hours? 
A. I would say an hour a day, maybe three days a week.

Q. And the rest of his time is in the normal classes? A. 
In his regular classroom, right.

Q. What kinds of approval have you obtained from the 
school administration concerning these modifications of the 
[264-3 program? A. Well, I have the wholehearted ap­
proval from the administration and they said, go right 
ahead, and I wrote this thing up and in an instructional 
study and it was approved. A program modification.

Q. Have you been authorized to continue these programs 
next year? A. Yes.

Q. Have you had to request any additional money? A. 
No.

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1695a

Q. Have you received any parents’ comments about tbe 
learning lab kinds of program in addition to the high po­
tential lab? A. The parents are very enthusiastic about 
both. The parents that I  talked to are very happy with 
the situation and I haven’t received any adverse comments 
about the labs.

Q. Have you received any requests from parents request­
ing to withdraw a child from either one of these labs? A. 
No.

Q. Or any requests from parents to reorganize the classes 
because they are integrated or not integrated? A. No.

Q. Mr. Smith, how do you organize the loading of the 
school buses after school? A. I have three teachers on 
duty at 3:20 and we line [265] the youngsters up at the 
doors and the buses are there and then they are ready to 
board the buses and leave.

Q. How long does it take? A. Five minutes.
Q. Did your teachers administer achievement tests 

throughout the school at the beginning of this year—the 
1969 school year? A. Yes.

Q. Were the same tests administered in January, 1970? 
A. Yes.

Q. Have you had an opportunity to review the reports 
of the school scores on these two sets of tests? A. Yes, I 
have.

Q. Was a composite score for the whole school at each 
grade level reached after each battery of tests? A. Yes.

Q. How did the January tests compare with the Septem­
ber tests at each grade level? A. There was improvement 
in all areas. Not all, most areas. Improvement.

Q. Was it improvement that was equal to the three 
months they had been in the school? Or was it more than 
the three months that they had been in school? A. Well,

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1696a

I would say it was generally three months’ improvement. 
The average.

[266] Q. There was no evidence of retrogression? A. 
No.

Q. Of the tests that were given in January, it was the 
same test that was given in December, was it not? A. 
Yes.

Q. So the second test was a completely reliable indica- 
tor of your progress at Barrett! A. Not necessarily, if 
you use the same test twice. It could be.

Q. Children do become testwise! A. Yes.
Q. So the test is not completely a reliable indicator of 

what’s going on! A. No.
Q. Have you administered any tests subsequent to Janu- 

ary, 1970! A. Yes, the regular testing program that we 
have—we have the test in by April 17th this year.

Q. Have you received the results of those tests? A. No. 
Q. Are they expected momentarily? A. I  think so. Usu­

ally we get them in—
Q. Do you have any other better evidence that perform­

ance of children at Barrett is declined or improved? 
Teacher comments, or any kind of reliable evidence? 
[2673 A. Now, will you rephrase that. Academically? So­
cially? What do you mean?

Q. Are we overlooking any other source of reliable evi­
dence about the progress of Barrett pupils? A. I don’t 
think so.

Q. Mr. Smith, do you have any evidence that forced bus­
ing has created hostility in the Barrett classrooms? A. 
In the classrooms?

Q. Yes. A, No.
Q. Do you have any evidence that forced busing has 

impeded achievements in any way in the Barrett class­
rooms? A. In the classrooms, no.

William Smith—■for Plaintiffs-—Direct



1697a

Q. Is there a Barrett PTA? A. Yes.
Q. Has the PTA made any formal expression of opinion 

about forced busing either to you or to the School Board? 
A. They have to me. They have been concerned about the 
busing.

Q. Have you planned any social functions through the 
PTA? A. Other than the executive board meetings, and I 
wouldn’t call that a social function—the executive board 
meetings, we met one time and we met in the Barrett area 
zone and the next time we met at the Lowry zone area.

[268] Q. Are these meetings attended by both Anglos 
and Negroes? A. Yes.

Q. On the first day of school in September of 1969, when 
Barrett opened, was there any evidence of parental hostil­
ity about the busing expressed to you? A. Not hostility. 
Concern, I would say.

Q. Did you then meet with those parents? A. Yes, I did.
Q. And discuss the general situation of Barrett? A. 

Yes.
Q. Was there any incident of any significance, educa­

tionally, that occurred after that meeting that upset the 
program? A. No.

Q. What steps did you take during1 that few days pre­
ceding the opening of school and immediately thereafter 
to ease the transition? A. Sunday before Labor Day I 
went to the school and opened the building. This was so 
the parents could come over and look at the building and 
on Labor Day we were there all day to make sure that 
people wanting to see where the kids were going to school 
and see—and then we wanted to be there, too, and we did 
have-—people would come in—parents would come in and 
we would take them through the [269] building on a tour 
of the gym and of the lunchroom and so forth.

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1698a

Q. Was that program effective so far as yon could tell? 
A. I thought it was.

Q. What did you do on the opening day of school? A. 
Other than registering kids, that was about the biggest 
thing.

Q. Did you have a coffee and doughnut program? A. 
Oh, yes, we did. We had coffee and doughnuts out in the 
hall so that when parents came in they could feel at ease, 
and this was rather difficult in that the school was inte­
grated four days before we opened and we worked those 
four days trying to set up classes and all this stuff and it 
took a while, but we did get all the kids registered by 9 :15— 
9:30 that morning. And I think it makes a—makes it a lot 
easier if the parents can come into a building and if there 
is a big long* waiting line, they can have a cup of coffee 
and a doughnut while they’re waiting.

Q. Who helped you put on the coffee and doughnuts ? A. 
The former Barrett PTA came over and assisted.

Mr. Barnes: That’s all we have.

Cross-Examination by Mr. Jackson:
Q. Mr. Smith, these programs that you have just been 

discussing regarding the coffee and doughnuts and the 
opening [2701 of school—was this necessitated in your 
opinion solely because the school was to be integrated? 
Or was this your general approach for the opening of a 
new school for which you were a principal? A. I think 
this was my general approach. This was my first principal- 
ship and I would have done it.

Q. And it was really unrelated to the question of inte­
gration ? A. Right.

Q. The programs which you have established at Barrett

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1699a

■—as X understand your testimony these are programs which 
you designed and developed almost simultaneously with 
your appointment at Barrett as principal, is that correct, 
or within a period of time after that? A. That’s true.

Q. And I believe you testified that these programs were 
designed not for an integrated school but were designed 
for the school as you then knew it, is that correct? A. 
That’s true.

Q. Is it fair to summarize these programs, Mr. Smith, 
as one principal’s innovative approach to the problem of 
education today? A. Would you restate that?

Q. I  say, is it fair to characterize these programs as one 
principal’s innovative approach to the problems of [271] 
education today? A. I  might say so, yes.

Q. As a matter of fact, the length of time that you have 
had to evaluate these programs is really insufficient to give 
you any definite guidelines as to their effectiveness, is this 
correct? A. That’s true, yes.

Q. Now you mentioned the testing of the students and I 
believe you indicated that tests were given in September of 
1969 and then in January of 1970? A. That’s true.

Q. And were the children who were tested the same chil­
dren in each case? A. We have such a large turnover in 
that many of the youngsters that attended Barrett are 
transients in nature by the fact that they are military, so 
that reason that I test in September is to find out exactly 
where the youngsters were as far as academics. Then, we 
knew who could go into the high potential labs and learn­
ing labs and so forth. We wanted to find out exactly where 
we were before we started. Three hundred brand-new chil­
dren—it’s kind of difficult to just start teaching. And I 
think the teachers realized this, too.

Q. So then I take it from your answer that the group 
then that was tested in January was not the same group

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1700a

that £2723 was tested in September1? A. We had the same 
—basically, the same group but we had a lot of movement, 
too; people that had transferred out, not to other schools, 
but had received military transfers to other parts of the 
world.

Q. And these students had come from various back­
grounds, from various school systems'? A. Right.

Q. Some from Denver, I would imagine! A. And some 
from Denver.

Q. And some from out of state? A. Right.
Q. What was the nature of this test? Is this what we 

have variously referred to as the standardized test, or was 
that a teacher-made test? A. This was the Stanford 
Achievement Test.

Q. Which grade were you testing? A. Second through 
sixth.

Q. You tested four grades? A. Right.
Q. Did you test them in all of the standard subjects for 

the Stanford Achievement Test? A. Yes, we did.
Q. Did you have any opportunity to compare the level 

of a student’s achievement as indicated by the September 
test [273] with any prior test of that student? A. For a 
few—it’s one that had been tested in April of 1969 at other 
schools in Denver, but we received many youngsters from 
out of state and we didn’t have the records.

Q. This movement that you just mentioned—does this 
create problems in terms of achievements of students in the 
schools? A. I don’t think it creates a problem so far as 
achievement is concerned. It creates problems as far as 
getting a group of kids together and following them 
through. For example, if a youngster is in the building 
four months and then all of a sudden his father is trans­

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—-Cross



1701a

ferred to Vietnam or someplace, it’s very hard to do. I t’s 
very difficult. But, with the youngsters that have been in 
school at Montclair, Whiteman and Moore, you can kind 
of follow this along. This is much easier. But we have a 
great mobility.

Q. But don’t you think it means any particular problems 
as far as the child—that child’s achievement is concerned? 
A. No.

Q. Well, what generally speaking, Mr. Smith, is the ex­
perience level of your teaching staff ? A. The average ex­
perience ?

Q. Do you know? A. I would say eight years, the aver­
age.

[274] Q. Now, do you have any new teachers? A. Yes, 
we have four.

Q. By teacher, are you talking about new teachers in 
the Denver Public School system? A. Right.

Q. Based on your experience as a principal in Denver 
Public Schools system, do these teachers appear to be 
capable and competent as those with more experience? A. 
Yes.

Q. Are any of these new teachers presently engaged in 
either your high potential lab or your learning lab? A. Yes.

Q. And do you feel that they do an adequate job in those 
positions? A. Yes, especially the high potential lab, teacher 
experience is excellent.

Q. How do you select a child for entry into the high 
potential lab? A. This is done mainly by the teachers, the 
teachers in the regular classroom. You will have a young­
ster—for example, we have several that they can read a 
book so much faster than the other kids and they get bored 
so we take them and give them a trial basis in the high 
potential lab and usually they work out all right. We try

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1702a

to stay away from test scores if we can. And in some cases 
we have— [2753 well, in one ease we have one youngster 
in the high potential lab and the same youngster is in the 
learning lab. He goes to high potential in math and then 
he is in the learning lab in reading.

Q. Do I understand that the high potential lab from your 
testimony is for fourth, fifth and sixth-grade students ? A. 
Yes.

Q. And I believe I heard you testify, and I may be in 
error—but it caused me some concern that you had one 
third-grader student taking geometry in the high potential 
lab? A. That’s right.

Q. How did he get it if it was for fourth, fifth and sixth- 
graders? A. Because it was on a basis of—this kid is so 
brilliant. He hasn’t any business sitting in a third-grade 
class wasting his time, so we tried him in the high potential 
lab. So he does there a very good job.

Q. So then you consider your high potential lab at least 
theoretically speaking would be open to all student grades 
so that, if there were a case for it, your high potential lab 
as is presently constituted could function in this manner, 
is that correct? A. Bight.

Q. Now, when a child goes into the high potential lab 
[276] he misses some courses that he would otherwise 
have in the—normally, let’s say, if a fourth-grader goes in, 
he misses some courses he would normally have in the 
fourth grade curriculum, as I understand it? A. That’s 
true.

Q. You mentioned specifically social studies, I believe 
and indicated that that child would be given homework 
assignments which he would then have to turn back in to 
his social studies teacher, is that correct? A. That’s right.

Q. Is it always social studies that the child would miss

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1703a

to go into the high potential lab! Or might it be various 
courses? A. No, because the high potential lab—it’s set up 
in the afternoon. And the fourth, fifth and sixth-graders 
generally have social studies and science and art in the 
afternoon.

Q. What about the learning lab? Does the same thing 
obtain there, that a child going into the learning lab must 
miss some part of his regular classroom curriculum? A. 
That’s true.

Q. And is there any uniformity again with the learning 
lab as there is with the high potential lab in terms of the 
class the child would miss? A. Well, generally the young­
ster going into the [277] learning lab will miss probably 
reading or math. And the philosophy is or the theory is 
that if he is behind in reading why, then why have him sit 
in the reading classroom and just sit there. It’s better to 
pull him out of that classroom and put him in the learning 
lab until he is barely able to hold on to a regular classroom 
situation, and then we take him out of the learning lab and 
put him back into the regular classroom.

Q. How many students might be in any one of these 
learning labs at one—at any one time? A. I would say 
eight to fourteen.

Q. And this is one teacher for that? A. One teacher.
Q. I understand from your testimony that you have in 

the high potential labs, writing—creative writing, reading 
and geometry? A. That’s true.

Q. Do you have any other courses? A. Not now, no.
Q. And in your learning lab you have reading and math? 

A. Heading and math.
Q. You also have a free period, do you not? A. We have 

a basic-choice period.
Q. And this is a period where you give each child [278]

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1704a

in the school the opportunity to select one course that he 
can take during that period of time? A. Not each child. 
Each fourth, fifth and sixth-grader is given a choice of one 
subject that they would like to take from 12:45 until 1:30 
each day.

Q. And this choice is made entirely by the student him­
self! A. By the students themselves. The parents have 
nothing to do with this.

Q. The parents don’t get into the business at all? A. No.
Q. Now, have you made any specific requests to the ad­

ministration for any increase in terms of teachers for the 
next school year in order to continue your program in this 
fashion? A. No, but I did make a request to the administra­
tion—if I could keep the teacher ratio I  would be willing 
to take an additional 50 youngsters at Barrett School. 
Bather than lose teachers, I would rather have more kids. 
And we could handle it.

Q. You have, in effect, requested from the administration 
that they assign more students to your school, even though 
—• A. Right.

Q. Do you know what the rated capacity of your school 
[279] is, Mr. Smith? A. I’ve got a sneaking suspicion and 
I ’m going to guess. I’m going to say around 450.

Q. Now, at the present time you have somewhat less 
than 450 students, do you not? A. That’s right.

Q. Are you utilizing all of the space at Barrett School 
at the present time and then some? A. In the rooms?

Q. Yes. A. Yes, we are using all of the space, all of the 
rooms.

Q. Would you say that you are underutilized? A. I don’t 
think so.

Q. Even though you’re not up to rated capacity? A. Yes.
Q. Just one other question. Mr. Smith, since this is an

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1705a

innovative program, if you determined at the end of say 
two years that your program was not achieving those results 
that you hoped it would, I would assume you as an educator 
and principal would want complete freedom then to intro­
duce new programs into school at that time, is that correct! 
A. I think that, if I  found that it wasn’t working, I would 
probably drop it, and this is one of the reasons I did write 
it up as a program modification, because I can’t E280] prove 
it. There are a lot of—there are not a lot, but some people 
wanted to tailgate this program and I said I think it’s edu­
cationally sound but I want to make sure before anybody 
else grabs part of the program because it might not be. 
And if I find that it’s not a good educational program, then 
I will drop it and try something else.

Q. I’m going to have to retract my statement and ask 
you one other question. Did you mention that, so far as 
the loading of the buses, that you have them ready at 3:20 
and that they are loaded then ? Of course, if the bus doesn’t 
happen to be there, then you can’t do that, is that right? 
A. Then we’ve got a problem.

Mr. Jackson: No further questions.
The Court: The achievement levels of the minority 

children are substantially the same aŝ —
The Witness: Your Honor, I can’t say yes or no 

at this point. I don’t have the test scores back yet. 
We did test the youngsters in September and I 
haven’t received the final test scores back. I don’t 
know. But, based upon the two tests that we gave, 
the same form test, in September and January, there 
was progress on both parts; both Anglo and blacks.

The Court: You said that the two special pro­
grams are fully integrated. I  would assume from

William Smith—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1706a

that that the same percentages that are persuasive 
in the school are present [281] in the special pro­
grams !

The Witness: Yes, except in the high potential 
lab. We did not purposely balance the labs because 
we feel that the labs—that should be based upon 
need instead of color. But it so happens that in the 
learning labs they are fairly well racially balanced. 
In the high potential lab, I think we have, so far as 
black youngsters, two or three in the high potential 
lab. But we took it strictly on need and not on race. 
On just these two programs.

The Court: Thank you very much. You may he 
excused.

(Witness excused.)
Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, at this point, other 

than Dr. O’Reilly, who we plan to put on after the 
presentation of the Board’s plans, the plaintiffs have 
nothing further to offer at this time.

#  *  ^  #  *

[282] Robert D. Gilberts, a witness called by and on be­
half of defendants, having first been duly sworn, was ex­
amined and testified as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Ris:
Q. State your name and address, please. A. My name is 

Robert D. Gilberts, 3921 South Hillcrest Drive, Denver, 
Colorado.

Q. And your occupation and profession! A. Superin­
tendent of Schools, Denver Public Schools.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1707a

Q. You have previously testified in this case last August! 
A. Yes.

Q. And your qualifications at that time have been ade­
quately stated! A. I  think so.

Q. And you have continued to be Superintendent of 
Schools since that date? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Have you since submitted your resignation to the 
Denver School Board? A. I  have.

Q. Effective as of what date? A. September 1st, 1970.
Q. And at that time what new position will you assume? 

[283] A. Dean of the College of Education, University of 
Oregon.

Q. You also have a faculty rank of Professor of Educa­
tion? A. Bight.

Q. Dr. Gilberts, shortly after March 21, 1970, were you 
furnished with a full copy of the Court’s memorandum 
opinion and order of that date? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Have you given much thought and study to the memo­
randum opinion and order? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And have you given particular study to that part of 
the memorandum and opinion and order that pertained to 
improving equality of education in certain desegregated 
schools? A. I  have.

Q. In addition to your own personal study, have you also 
called on members of your staff? A. Yes, sir, I have; both 
central staff and the principals in the schools involved.

Q. Do you have certain staff members at the next echelon 
below you who have particularly given this substantial con­
sideration? A. Yes, all of the affected departments in the 
central [284] offce staff have been involved one way or 
another.

Q. And those principal staff members—have they been 
in court during this entire hearing yesterday and today

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1708a

pertaining to remedy? A. Most of them. Not all of them.
Q. Will yon state who is here and their positions on your 

staff? A. Mr. Howard Johnson, the Deputy Superinten­
dent. Dr. Armstrong, Assistant Superintendent for Plan­
ning. Mr. Olander, an Assistant Superintendent for Busi­
ness Services; Dr. Keppe; Dr. Quincy, Director of Research, 
Planning and Budgeting. Mr. Harold Spetzler of the Per­
sonnel. Jerry Elledge was here some time ago. Dr. Beal in 
Research. There may be—they may have been other mem­
bers here from time to time.

Q. All of these individuals have studied the particular 
problem at hand? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Have you conferred with all of these various indi­
viduals in—pertaining to the benefits of their advice and 
thinking as well? A. Yes, sir.

Q. With respect to the principals of the fifteen schools 
designated by the Court in its opinion and order of March 
21, 1970, did you have occasion to confer with those indi­
viduals? [285] A. Yes, sir. My staff did it at greater length. 
As soon as the order was given to us by the Board to meet 
this plan, all of these principals were brought in, a review 
was made of what our objectives were. They were asked 
to submit their proposals, their suggestions. These were 
considered in conjunction with other suggestions from other 
staff and they were involved.

Q. Now, with respect to the initial meeting of these 
principals, each of them were furnished with appropriate 
portions of Part 3 of the Court’s memorandum and order? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Were they asked to give this some thought and at a 
later date submit their own recommendations and sugges­
tions? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did these principals proceed accordingly? A. Yes, 
they did.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1709a

Q. Did you get a substantial amount of information back 
from these individuals on recommendations? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Subsequent to what you have just described with your 
own staff members and with the principals of the fifteen 
schools involved, did you then proceed to put together a pro­
posed plan to be submitted to the Court in this case? A. 
Yes, sir, we did.

Q. Was that plan submitted to the Board of Education? 
£2863 A. Yes, sir.

Q. And were some modifications or changes—-was the 
plan approved by the Board? A. Yes, sir, it was.

Q. Were the attorneys directed to submit that to the 
Court? A. Yes, sir.

Q. The plan itself on the Court’s bench has been marked 
as Exhibit B-A. Is that the plan which you then prepared, 
Dr. Gilberts? A. Yes, sir.

Q. I hand you what’s been marked as Exhibit B-B. Is 
that a copy of the resolution of the Board of Education of 
Denver School District No. 1 to which we have previously 
referred? A. Yes, it is.

Q. Was that resolution adopted on May 6, 1970? A. 
Yes, sir.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct

Mr. Ris: We offer in evidence Exhibits B-A and 
B-B.

Mr. Greiner: No objection, Your Honor.
The Court: It will be received.

(Whereupon, Defendants’ Exhibits B-A and 
B-B were received in evidence.)

Q. Dr. Gilberts, were you subsequently—I believe on 
Friday last week, which would have been May 9th, I believe 
[287] —furnished with a copy of the document entitled



1710a

Plaintiffs’ Memorandum for the Hearing on Relief? A. 
Yes, I was.

Q. And within the limited time available, have you 
studied that as well? A. Yes, I have.

Q. Have you—have you had members of your adminis­
trative staff also review that particular document? And 
particularly the portions thereof within their respective 
specialties? A. Yes, I  have.

Q. Have you been furnished their suggestions and advice? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, with respect to the plans in this particular case, 
whether it be Board plans or plaintiffs’ plan, are there cer­
tain matters of rationale that you yourself think are of sub­
stantial importance that have to be considered as a basic 
foundation in evaluating or formulating such a plan? A. 
Yes, there are.

Q. With respect to the problem of low achievers among 
a group of students, children generally and particularly 
from the lower socioeconomic environment, concerning 
which there has been considerable testimony here, is that a 
problem that is peculiar to Denver? A. No, sir, it is not.

[288] Q. Is it a problem from your own reading, re­
search experience in attending meetings and so forth, that 
is a very common problem in school districts, particularly 
of the larger sizes such as Denver? A. Yes, sir, it is, a 
very common problem.

Q. Is it a complex problem? A. Very complex problem.
Q. Can you state some of the causative factors that enter 

into this problem of low achievers, particularly on the 
basis of the disadvantaged children ? A. Well, there are—

Mr. Greiner: Well, Your Honor, I object. It seems 
like that’s a question which the Court has already

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1711a

determined. I don’t think the purpose of this hear­
ing is to relitigate those questions.

Mr. Ris: I’m not attempting to relitigate, Tour 
Honor. We are trying to get a basic rationale and 
foundation, the factors that Dr. Gilberts believes are 
of consequence in connection with a ease in which 
there is a basis for the plan that he has proposed.

The Court: Overruled. He may answer.

A. Well, there are many different factors that are involved 
in the lack of achievement of these youngsters. There are 
factors related to causal background, certainly, of influence 
on which youngsters relate themselves to the kinds [289] 
of formal instructional process as conventionally offered 
in our schools. The problem of communication. A good 
many of these youngsters come from homes that are not 
verbal. The kinds of opportunities they have to prepare 
themselves to move into a verbally word-oriented instructed 
program is certainly a factor. The kinds of experience that 
these youngsters are provided with would have a great 
deal of influence in terms with their readiness to recognize 
some of the formal reading aspects. The matter of disci­
pline—self-discipline in the classroom and in that kind of 
instructional setting is a major problem. There is the 
problem of health in some cases; youngsters not having 
had adequate nutrition over long periods of time which 
certainly has a great deal of influence over an individual’s 
ability to learn. Dietary problems. Just generally health 
problems. Broken homes. Lack of parental interest. x\ll 
of these factors certainly contribute to the problem. These 
are reinforced in many cases, not only by the home but by 
the community as well.

Q. Are you aware of the fact that there have been many

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1712a

studies made of this particular problem! A. Yes, there 
have.

Q. And the thousands of people that have participated in 
these studies? A. Yes.

[290] Q. By whom have these studies been carried out 
over a period of time? A. Well, there certainly has been 
many, many studies carried out by colleges; universities; 
regional laboratories established by federal offices; other 
studies sponsored by the U.S. Office of Education; founda­
tions; local school systems. I happen to belong to one of 
the larger cities of the country, the Great Cities Research 
Council. There have been many, many articles written and 
many, many research studies reported by them.

Q. Has any one person or any one group of persons or 
any one institution come up with a single answer to this 
complex problem? A. I’m not aware of any single answer 
to the problem that has been accepted widely in the field. 
There are those who feel very strongly that they have, as 
individuals, but as far as the field is concerned and I meet 
with superintendents from larger urban cities at least twice 
a year, and I’m not aware of any.

Q. Doctor, you heard the testimony today and yesterday 
concerning the plaintiffs’ plan for proposed desegregation 
by mandatory cross-transportation as the first step. Now, 
based upon your study of that plan and the evidence you 
have heard here and based upon your own education and 
your own experience and your own knowledge of the Denver 
Public School [2913 system, its pupils, its teachers, its staff, 
and all of the factors that must be taken into consideration 
here, do you have an opinion as to whether desegregation 
as proposed by the plaintiffs is an absolute and necessary 
first step? A. I see no evidence that would lead me to be­
lieve that this is an absolute truth. The fact is, if this is a

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1713a

truth, then all the major cities in this country are beyond 
help. Certainly there have to be other ways of approaching 
the problems of educational deficiencies, because it is going 
to be a long time before integration as such can be applied 
in most of the major cities of this country. New York, 
Philadelphia, and other cities such as this.

Q. Are there other cities that are worse off educationally 
than Denver? A. I believe so.

Mr. Greiner: Objection, Your Honor. I believe we 
are concerned with the problems of Denver; not the 
problems of New York City.

The Court: Well, he is simply saying that—he’s 
talking about the magnitude of the problem. He’s 
just using it in that context. Clearly, we’re not going 
to try to solve the problems of Philadelphia and New 
York.

Mr. Bis: I don’t intend to.
The Court: Probably not solve the problems of 

Denver, either, but we’re going to do our best.

[2921 Q. Based upon your general background and ed­
ucation and experience and your knowledge of the Denver 
situation, including its local economy, the sociological fac­
tors present here in the schools, political and educational 
background of the pupils, what is the first and foremost 
change which might be made, in your opinion? A. I agree 
with Dr. Sullivan’s comments that, if a—that some massive 
changes are necessary in an-—in the entire form of educa­
tion. I don’t know if I  would agree in terms of types of 
changes that he suggested, such as educational parks, but 
it seems to me, as I have looked at this city as a large in­
stitution, one of the first and foremost changes to recon­

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1714a

struct the educational climate which is not going to be an 
easy task because this involves changing of attitudes and 
values and practices on the part of professional staff—• 
certainly on the part of our students, on the part of the 
community, parents, and all of those who have some input 
into the educational process. Now, I think it’s absolutely 
essential, changing this kind of climate at this time and I ’m 
talking about those inputs, parents, community, et cetera, 
a positive kind of supported influence and supported pos­
ture with respect to the changes that are going on in the 
schools. In addition, of course, to changing that climate, 
which is, in and of itself, a very complex thing, and I ’ll talk 
about some of the things later on as I talk about the plan 
that I  [2933 think will go together to assist in that process.

It is necessary, of course, for us to look at new ways of 
approaching program differences; new ways of motivating 
youngsters in terms of the curricula itself. Again, we will 
talk about some of those changes. And I know that two of 
the principals here who have made some of these kinds of 
changes in the schools will talk about them, as well.

Q. Basically, so far as changing understandings and at­
titudes, is that more qualitative rather than quantitative? 
A. Yes, it is predominantly a qualitative change. However, 
I  think it can be influenced significantly by some quanti­
tative changes in which we operate.

Q. Can you break this change in attitudes down, item by 
item? You mentioned pupils; faculty; and community gen­
erally ; parents and other members of the community. Will 
you give us just briefly what you have in mind with respect 
to pupils? A. Well, I think that probably the most sig­
nificant factor in terms of pupils’ attitudes are going to be 
—to get at first as early as possible the kinds of motivations 
that are provided by the home, the family. We have begun

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1715a

working on preschool programs, edncational programs de­
signed for youngsters prior to the common age of entrance 
in our kindergartens. These programs are designed to work 
with parents in helping those parents assume a more posi­
tive role in terms of their youngsters’ education. So this is 
one [294] element of changing the pupils’ attitudes.

Q. Does your plan—part of your plan—is it intended 
to effectuate such changes? A. Yes.

Q. At pupil level? A. Yes, I didn’t quite finish.
Q. Beg your pardon. Go ahead. A. It seems to me that 

another very important element is the format of the educa­
tional process itself. The question of relevancy of course 
is being raised by youth all across this country, at the col­
lege level recently, of course, in a very obvious way. The 
same thing occurs throughout our schools—throughout the 
entire City of Denver, as well. And I believe that there 
are some significant changes in the kinds of option that 
youngsters should be provided once the formal educational 
process begins, and we have in this plan, I think, identified 
some of the elements that should make a difference over a 
time in this direction.

Q. Now, can you proceed on, and in terms at this point 
discuss the matter of changes and changing of attitudes, 
understanding, as to staff and faculty? A. Well, this is go­
ing to be probably just as difficult a task in that professional 
educators have a great deal invested in current practice, 
and it’s going to involve some rather substantial changes 
in the way in which we organize and E295] operate our 
schools; the roles that the professionals play in that proc­
ess. It will have to be supported by some extremely well- 
defined in-service education programs which will allow 
those individuals to modify their behavior in these new

Robert I). Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1716a

kinds of roles and new kinds of situations. I think that 
the entire matter of government, however, how decisions 
are made—the kinds of opportunities that the professional 
has to input at the local level where the problem is ex­
tremely important and in living, and that solution can be 
implemented and ultimately will effect a change in the way 
in which the institution relates to children.

Q. With respect to teachers, is there any objective—

The Court: I ’d like to clarify something. I’m not 
sure that I understand what he’s saying. When he 
talks about the kinds of opportunities—I suppose 
you mean the administrator has in carrying out a 
program? Is that what you’re saying?

The Witness: I ’m talking about the opportunity 
of the entire professional team—the opportunity that 
it has which includes the teachers as well as the 
administrators. I see the need for sufficient differ­
entiation in the process of education so that the 
professional is being used as a professional. Let me 
give you an example, Your Honor, to make it a 
little more clearer.

In the process of reading we assume that the—that 
[296] most of the activities that are necessary for a 
child to read are to be conducted by a professional 
teacher. One of those activities is certainly the read­
ing to a youngster to motivate that youngster to be­
come interested in the process of reading. Also, to 
give him experience with words, with somebody else 
using the words. I believe that that process does 
not necessarily require the talents of a college grad­
uate. I  think designing a program certainly does; 
that some element of that may be there. But that

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1717a

might very well be handled by somebody with less 
than professional training. An education by and 
large—we have used up a good bit of the professional 
talents of our teachers in some rather mundane 
functions in education, as I see it, leaving very little 
t i m e for the professional planning and evaluation. 
The opportunity for professional teachers to deal 
individually with the youngsters, looking at their 
difficulties and trying to tailormake a program for 
them. So what I ’m talking about is—it’s creating an 
attitude change by allowing the professional to func­
tion more professionally in the setting.

Q. Now, as to the teachers themselves, are there any 
reorganization or any changes of planning and so forth— 
are there any problems that exist in the Denver Public 
Schools system that would have to be anticipated and con­
sidered? I’m thinking of seniority and so forth. A. Yes, 
we do have a relationship with our teachers in [297] 
which we are hopefully beginning at least to share some of 
the decision-making in our school system. We have nego­
tiated with our teachers, making some decisions through 
that process. We also have a professional counsel in which 
we talk about any subject in our school system that is of 
interest to each of us. And certainly the teachers as a 
professional organization have a role to play in that proc­
ess.

Q. And as a matter of fact, even though the Court may 
note the record—the DCTA is the Denver Classroom 
Teacher Association? A. Yes.

Q. And that is an independent organization? A. Yes, 
and it is the elected representative organization of the Den­
ver teachers.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1718a

Q. In fact, during this present school year they went on 
strike for the first time in Denver Public Schools, is that 
correct? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, with regard to community acceptance, we have 
already had considerable testimony here, particularly by 
Dr. Sullivan, the community acceptance, change of attitudes 
and understanding of the community is important. Can you 
elaborate on this as that applies to the Denver Public 
Schools system? One, as to parents who are being affected 
by any changes and, two, by the community in general; 
non-parents. [2983 A. I believe I mentioned the necessity 
of the support of the parents in order to assist youngsters 
to be receptive of the educational process. Throughout my 
twenty years of experience as a superintendent it has be­
come pretty obvious that, without the support of the com­
munity parents involved, it’s very difficult to make pro­
grams function well, whatever that program. Consequently, 
that understanding and that support is necessary, no mat­
ter what the change necessary is in terms of operation of 
our schools. A second very critical error is the need for 
understanding and supporting the fact that we rely upon 
the community’s acceptance of what we do and how we 
function, and the financing of our schools. Without funds 
there is very little that we can do. Consequently, we are 
heavily dependent in this area in terms of bringing people 
along so they accept the kind of programs that we propose 
and are willing to support them financially.

Q. And is it this type of support that is very often re­
ferred to as political considerations in the operation of an 
administration of the school district? A. Yes.

Q. We have had several definitions during the course of 
this trial as to desegregation, particularly as compared to 
integration. Are you aware of that differentiation? A. 
Yes.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1719a

Q. Just so that there is no misunderstanding, we have 
[299] been referring to desegregation as a mere transfer 
of students; integration being psychological, emotional, 
philosophical acceptance. Now, keeping those two things 
in mind, insofar as attempting to desegregate or attempt­
ing to integrate, is there a substantial difference in what 
can be forced or not, in your opinion? A. Yes, certainly. 
Desegregation can be accomplished by fiat.

Q. What about integration? A. I think integration is a 
voluntary process of change in which—one, in which peo­
ple reserve unto themselves—and I don’t know how anyone 
can accomplish this except through the process of convinc­
ing people of its importance; of the necessity of their 
accepting this as a goal.

Q. Do you know of any plan that has been created by 
anyone in the country that can be used to be brought into 
a system such as Denver and put into operation on a me­
chanical basis that would take care of any of the equality 
of education of the achievement results that exist in some 
of our schools? A. Each city and each school system has 
a personality with individual characteristics of its own, 
and these have got to be considered on that basis.

Q. And have you considered the Denver situation ex­
pressly in arriving at your proposed solution? A. Yes, we 
have.

£3003 Q. Now, your particular plan has been broken up 
into several parts, is that correct, Dr. Gilberts? A. Yes, 
it has.

Q. The introduction is more or less a summary, is it not? 
A. Yes.

Q. And the first major item is that of voluntary open 
enrollment, is that correct? A. Eight.

Q. Now, during the previous hearing we have had con­

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1720a

siderable testimony concerning the YOE, so we don’t have 
to go into the details of it except that I wish yon would 
summarize what is proposed in this particular plan with 
respect to voluntary open enrollment, which is an extension 
of what has been done in the past and how you think it will 
affect the situation generally, particularly with the educa­
tional opportunity. A. Well, it is really an extension of 
the previous plan which is the current voluntary open en­
rollment plan with the further provision of this element of 
it, that we would effectively guarantee space for any young­
ster who would like to attend school somewhere else in the 
city where the racial composition would be improved. We 
have, of course, before provided transportation for those 
youngsters under the other plan but substantially—the sub­
stantial difference [3013 here is that we are guaranteeing 
space for these youngsters.

Q. And again, is the integrating effect of the VOE a 
continuing qualification of the plan? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And that is one of the intents of the plan? A. Yes.
Q. Again, without going into all of the detail, do the 

matters contained in Exhibit V-A under the caption of Plan 
for Raising Educational Achievements—is this substan­
tially set forth, do you think, in planning in that regard? 
A. I’m sorry. I ’m not sure I  understand.

Q. Does that part of Exhibit V-A under the caption of 
Plan for Raising Educational Achievements substantially 
set forth the overall plan for the voluntary open enrollment 
and the expansion of it as you just detailed? A. Yes, it 
does.

Q. Is the guarantee of space, so far as the plan has been 
projected to this date, is that related to the fifteen schools 
designated in the school designations by the Court? A. 
Yes.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1721a

Q. Now, the next major item that you have taken up in 
the plan—that is a differential staffing- and we have not had 
a great deal of testimony on it, but I wish you would de­
scribe what is meant in this context by the phrase differen­
tial staffing. [302] A. I t’s difficult to talk about differenti­
ated staffing without really examining at the same time the 
kinds of modifications that would occur in the program 
which would be reflected in differentiated staffing. You 
cannot talk about differentiated staffing in a vacuum. It is 
merely a reflection of how one best deals with the educa­
tional task; defined by a given educational program, utiliz­
ing the concepts that I just discussed with the judge. It 
seems to me that an education—we have done a very poor 
job of examining carefully the elements of the educational 
task. Recently some new approaches to this particular prob­
lem have been taken in terms of planning, and budgeting 
systems and systems analysis and I’m sure there are other 
approaches to the problem as well, where we very carefully 
—as carefully as possible define what our behavior and the 
other objectives might be in our educational program and 
then very carefully look at what kinds of steps need to be 
designed to see that those goals are achieved and then 
break those steps down in some way of distributing the re­
sponsibility based upon the ldnds of competencies that are 
necessary. Now, there are a number of differentiative staff 
plans around the city. By and large, they have not been de­
veloped on this basis. There are some that have been. But 
I think, as we develop our skill in examining the educational 
task and as we look at how we might redistribute the talents, 
the abilities, the competencies, we [303] will be able to 
identify effective systems of differentiating our staff. I 
think the differentiated staff has a major implication for 
both the instructional process, that is, what we teach kids

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1722a

and how we teach them, as well as providing an extremely 
important motivational influence and opportunity for pro­
motion and opportunity for input at a higher professional 
level for our teachers. We have an example of this—By 
the way, back in 159, where there is a field-tested differen­
tiated staff program which has been operating I think about 
three or four or five years in Wisconsin—it began when I 
was there at Madison. The program was operated at James- 
ville, Beloit. I was familiar with the Madison problems 
and personally familiar with the Jamesville plan, which is 
the beginning of looking at the problem of differentiated 
staffing.

Q. So this innovation of differentiated staffing or exami­
nation, I should say, is not peculiar to Denver! A. No.

Q. And is it being generally accepted in other school 
districts! A. Two weeks ago at the largest superinten­
dents’ meet in Vancouver, we were looking at the major 
trends in terms of educational change today and differenti­
ated staffing was one of the early major ones. Early child­
hood changes as the second one. This is one of the major 
topics at least among those superintendents that were there.

[304] Q. Is there contemplated that this will have an 
effect on increasing the achievement levels of children, par­
ticularly in disadvantaged areas? A. We believe so.

Q. Now, continuing on with this portion of the plan per­
taining to staffing, could you tell what you contemplate the 
plan to provide with respect to personnel assignment pro­
cedures? A. Well, you’re talking about Page 6 now,—is 
this the item you’re talking about?

Q. Page 53. A. In this section of the plan we discuss a 
number of activities that we think will be important in 
identifying people to teach in schools in the areas that are 
affected by this plan. We talk about elements of an in­

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1723a

service program that we feel will be important in preparing 
them for service in this area of the city. And essentially 
limited to that.

Q. Is it part of the plan, also—does it also include as­
signment of teachers to bring about significantly more inte­
gration throughout the system? A. We have been moving 
on the process of increasing integration through our staff 
throughout the city—the entire city.

Q. And this is nothing new? I mean, this is a continua­
tion [3053 of what you have been doing? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, with respect to increasing experience of teachers 
in the disadvantaged schools and to provide for more sta­
bility of—the less mobility of those teachers, what is your 
plan? A. I feel that the concept of differentiated staffing 
has some implications if we begin to process in these schools 
in terms of attracting people with ability, and talent. I be­
lieve also that providing the necessary planning time for 
those kinds of programs and paying teachers for the time 
will also have an effect on that process. Under the staff 
stabilization part of the plan we talk about incentives that 
really provide as much—much more for the necessity of 
planning educational programs as attracting teachers. Both 
of these are important elements. But we feel that, given the 
opportunity to use these teachers who would have an inter­
est in working in this kind of setting, and allowing for the 
changes that we describe in other parts of this plan, we will 
be able to attract the most competent teachers that we have 
into these programs.

Q. And for the additional planning time that would be 
required for these teachers, you tell us you do provide for 
additional compensation? A. Yes, sir.

[306] Q. How is that contemplated to be handled? A. 
On a pro rata basis, on the regular salary for an extended 
four weeks, I believe it was.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1724a

Q. Would that be four weeks during the summer? A. 
Four weeks during probably the month of August prior 
to the opening of school.

Q. Now, again, there is substantially more detail in that 
portion of your plan under general—the general designa­
tion of staffing that goes in more detail, is that correct? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. Now, the next portion or the next section of the plan 
pertains to improved in-service training for staff and— 
Would you please elaborate on that, if you will? A. Well, 
if we’re going to make some of the changes that are neces­
sary in education that I have alluded to previously, it’s go­
ing to be necessary to help teachers make the kind of ac­
commodations that are necessary to these changes in edu­
cational programs. We have listed on Page 169 a number 
of activities that have already been conducted in the schools. 
Some fourteen different kinds of in-service training pro­
grams that are indicated there. We talk about the extension 
of these kinds of programs, plus the identity of other in- 
service programs relevant to the instructional process; rele­
vant to attitudes and values held by our teachers and their 
ability [3073 to relate to their students. We have talked 
about the utilization of the black educators and the Hispano 
educators to assist us in this process. We feel that the fif­
teen schools have problems which can be best ameliorated 
by the principal and staffing planning and that action at the 
local level, we intend to allocate moneys in our budgets for 
this process, and that in-service planning is really a part 
of the in-service process.

Q. An illustration of individual school planning such as 
Mr. Smith testified to today at Barrett? A. Yes, but ex­
tended much beyond what he was able to do with the re­
sources we gave him.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1725a

Q. But you have a planning on a local level with respect 
to the fifteen schools? A. Bight.

Q. And which would he geared to their particular prob­
lems in this subdistrict? A. Yes.

Q. And you contemplate increasing budgets toward those 
schools and for that purpose? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Is there anything else now on this in-service program 
that you would like to highlight? A. I think the planning 
element is probably one of the most significant, and into 
that planning process obviously [308] there would have to 
be input, the special knowledge and special talents for the 
preparation of these teachers.

Q. Dr. Gilberts, if you were to go into the entire detailed 
planning for in-service training, would it be practicable to 
do so and put it in this particular plan you submit to the 
Court? A. Yes, sir, because a good bit of what will prob­
ably be necessary in this area is in the process of develop­
ment in a number of places in the country. There is a great 
deal of local planning involving people who are going to be 
affected by it that will be necessary. And this is something 
that will need to be worked out by not only other experts in 
the area but our own staff who will be involved in the 
process.

Q. And this takes time? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And development as it goes along? A. Bight.
Q. So could it be spelled out by book, chapter and page 

insofar as this present plan is concerned, in detail, item by 
item? A. Certainly not in the time limits we have.

Q. Now, with respect to the next portion, the school com­
plex concept—

The Court: Before we come to that, I think it 
might be well to elaborate on the actual curriculum or

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants-—Direct



1726a

changes [309] that are contemplated. I ’m sure that 
you couldn’t delineate all of them hut what do you 
know now about possible programs? You said you 
were going to extend the length of service for the 
teachers involved. Would you also, for example, ex­
tend the school year for some students?

The Witness: Yes, sir. We do propose in here 
the extension of our summer school programs offer­
ing that opportunity to the students.

The Court: That would be a thirty-day period 
before school starts?

The Witness: Not necessarily. The summer school 
program for youngsters might be a later June 
through early August program. The timing has not 
been decided. This is our conventional summer school 
period. And I would assume that it might fall in 
that time, but it might not. It might be found advis­
able by the staffs to have this immediately preceding 
school. That’s not been decided.

The Court: What kind of special courses are pre­
scribed in connection with this kind of problem? 
What is the thinking of educators on this?

The Witness: At the present moment I think that 
probably one of the most significant areas in wdiich 
we can proscribe some educational opportunities 
would probably exist at the preschool area. I  was 
just—I have just received this week a communication 
here which is an educators’ dispatch [310] to ad­
ministrators in which they review a number of ideas 
that are presently relevant, I  think, on education. 
For example, it says if you are wondering what pre- 
school children are teaching cognizant psychologists 
today, you might find the following items interesting:

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1727a

“One, the children of the poor often fail to suc­
ceed in school not because of genetic . . . but be­
cause they lack the right kinds of sensory stimula­
tion in the early years.

“Two, traditional tests . .
Well, in the area of developing programs for pre­

school youngsters involving parents and so on, I 
think this is probably a very significant area in get­
ting at some of the early deficiencies of these young­
sters. Precisely how those would be designed and 
how they would be operating, I  really don’t know. I 
don’t consider myself an expert as such in that area, 
but we do have and have had for the last year and a 
half or so people who have been working on pro­
grams in that area and we have begun to pilot test 
those programs.

The Court: These then would work on the basis of 
the Head Start programs, only they would be more 
elaborate, I suppose?

The Witness: Well, I think they would probably be 
somewhat different than the Head Start programs 
in that we would be organized for a much more 
specific objective and at £3113 least what I observed 
in Head Start programs having been organized for— 

The Court: Well, I suppose they would seek, how­
ever, to compensate for the lack of innate knowledge, 
so to speak, that the child has?

The Witness: Yes, sir. Now, then, I could go on 
through the entire curriculum and talk about all 
kinds of specific innovative programs, but I think 
you will hear Mr. Ward later talk about some things 
I consider to be particularly exciting in that school. 
1 believe that the programs that he and his staff have

Robert D. Gilberts-—for Defendants—Direct



1728a

designed in that school to be some of the most excit­
ing, disregarding the fact that the school is black; 
exciting ideas in edncation that I have seen anywhere 
in this country. I think they have tremendous poten­
tial for Manual and for other schools, as well, prob­
ably. I think that you heard Mr. Smith, of course, 
talk about some of the ideas he has. Mr. Morrison 
will talk about some things that are being done at the 
junior high school level. The whole area of educa­
tional program modification in the elementary schools 
is a very complex one. We have some programs 
identified in here that deal with bilingual education, 
which we are having some very good results with.

The people, the staff, are quite enthusiastic about 
the results. Mrs. Polvida (phonetic spelling), who 
is in one of our elementary schools, has an approach 
to teaching [312] youngsters coming from Hispano 
backgrounds, which was reported to the Board a week 
or two ago, and again, it’s difficult to describe these 
programs without being there and feeling and seeing 
what goes on, but all of these kinds of ideas I believe 
have some tremendous implications for really sub­
stantive changes in the process of education. By and 
large, as one looks around the country and reads 
reviews of what has been conventionally identified 
as compensatory education programs, I call them 
coping programs. They really have not gotten at 
some of the fundamental issues that are obvious in 
dealing with members of some of our minority 
groups.

Today there are some new programs that are com­
ing about that I think are a good deal more imagina­
tive and really deal more precisely with the problem.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1729a

The old compensatory programs were largely more 
of the same. We just did more of our reading pro­
gram; more of our mathematics. But the format in 
which this is presented, the climate that is created in 
the instructional setting was not effectively changed, 
and I think that climate is a tremendously important 
factor in learning, obviously.

By Mr. R is :

Q. Well, skipping over to the section of early childhood, 
is it more detailed as to what has been done and what it 
proposes with respect to the youngsters at the elementary 
disadvantaged schools? A. Yes.

[3131 Q. Is there anything more you wish to add to that 
particular section at this point, Dr. Gilberts? A. I don’t 
really think so. I  think I presented some of the things we 
would like to do in these programs that are in the process 
of development. I think they are going to have to have 
significant contributions to be made.

Q. Now, going then to the school complex concept, would 
you state what you contemplate in that and what effect it 
would have on the particular disadvantaged youngsters? 
A. Well, the idea of the complex has very broad implica­
tions, I believe. I have been superintendent of schools now 
in the school system with some 32 teachers, one with some 
1,500 teachers, and a corresponding number of youngsters, 
and it has become quite apparent to me that the larger the 
institution becomes the more inflexible and immobile it is, 
that I believe from an operational or a government point 
of view in terms of both the way in which it affects the 
educational program and the way in which it relates to the 
community which will have to support new forms, new 
systems of organization and operation that have to be iden-

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1730a

tilled. There have been a number of them proposed around 
the country. The complex idea has been tried in slightly 
different forms in different school systems. But, basically 
what we’re trying to do through the complex is, first of all, 
decentralize the decision-making process so that the [3143 
principals and teachers and community that are affected 
by those programs have some immediate and direct input 
into that process which I think is going to be very im­
portant in terms of the kinds of qualitative—again, inter­
relationships—that occur in that setting. The second por­
tion or—another portion of this is how do we identify in 
addition to having to decentralize decision-making regula­
tions with professional staff, and how do we involve them 
more effectively and how do we involve the community, 
and I mentioned, in addition—in the process of relating 
to the schools and institutions, hopefully improved com­
munications between home and the school. This is certainly 
one of the major problems, especially in a large school 
system.

A third thing that we are trying to do within the complex 
is to find new ways of organizing and supporting services 
and special education programs for the youngsters that 
are contained within those complexes and this, of course, 
could cover an extremely wide range of programs from 
diagnostic services for youngsters with learning difficulties 
to cultural arts programs to student exchange programs. 
Well, we have not defined precisely the entire range of 
potential in this area. We have been planning during this 
year and before the year is out we hope to have identified 
through that planning process precisely what will be done 
in the complex. It does indicate where we are at this 
particular time. We hope to [315] involve effectively— 
more effectively the agencies that have input into the learn­

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1731a

ing process, into the families that live in these areas where 
the complexes exist. Somehow to coordinate the services 
provided by welfare agencies and other agencies that pres­
ently are not coordinated in any effective way. I think 
that in the description of this portion of the plan it talks 
about, other things which I don’t know if you want me to 
go through point by point or—■

Q. Well, if von have the basic portions, in the interest 
of time, I think we’ll move on to the next portion.

The Court: I think what wTe ought to hear from 
you as to what you would contemplate that the local 
school would contribute and what this complex would 
contribute, in general at least.

The Witness: I think that, in a general way—I am 
not proposing that the complex remove from the 
local school the opportunity of program changes 
such as will be reported later here today. I think 
that sort of opportunity for internal changes within 
the local schools is certainly—certainly still has to 
exist. The complex does not replace that function. 
But in the complex there are a number of things, 
some of which I did allude to, and on Page 67 there 
are listed some advantages of the complex that we 
think can supplement what can be done in the local 
schools.

Q. What page, Dr. Gilberts? [316] A. Page 76. The first 
of these is that there are obviously potential patterns of 
pupil assignment for the total complex and to encourage 
multiethnic education within the expanded school neighbor­
hood. The utilization of present school facilities in such a 
manner as to provide maximum educational benefits with

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1732a

minimum cost. Unlike the educational park concept which 
would require the abandonment of the present school plan 
—and effectively utilizes most existing facilities in which 
the taxpayers have a large investment. Decentralization 
again of the administrative organization involvement— 
outstanding opportunities for economically providing sup­
porting services to the individual schools.

Increased availability of staff and service personnel by 
minimizing the—

Q. Now, this particular concept then—the children would 
spend some portion of their time in the neighborhood 
school and some time in the complex? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And in a complex, of course, they would then meet 
in classes and other activities with children, from other 
schools that were also in the complex? A. Those are possi­
bilities, yes.

Q. When you refer to multiethnic education, there would 
be at least a mixing that would lead to some change in 
understanding and attitudes, as you discussed previously? 
[317] A. Yes, I would certainly hope that opportunity 
would be provided.

The Court: I still don’t know what they will be 
studying in this center. Are they going to study 
science? Are they going to study art, music? We 
have been given to understand that these are going 
to be cultural expeditions which don’t have any sub­
stance, and I think you ought to clarify that; if it 
does mean more than that. I mean, are they just 
going to take a trek out to look at some paintings, 
you know? Is that one thing? If you have science 
laboratories or something of that sort, where they 
can take chemistry or biology or physics, why, that 
would be another thing.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1733a

The Witness: These are all possibilities, Your 
Honor, but they have not been decided specifically 
for each of these. One of, we think, the important 
elements of the development of the complex is the 
involvement of the professional staff and the com­
munity in that process and they have not quite 
reached the point where they have identified the 
specific kinds of activities that will occur in these 
complexes. It could include all of the things that 
you mentioned. It could include things that may be 
—that maybe neither of us have even conceived at 
this particular time.

The Court: Well, then, I take it that this is sort 
of an untried method?

The Witness: Yes, sir. I think that it is.
[3183 The Court: I t’s just not had very much 

experience.
The Witness: That’s true. There has not. There 

are a number of school systems that are taking this 
concept, applying it slightly different, and Minne­
apolis is using it, a proposal was made in San Fran­
cisco for the use of it, and this is a—there is a com­
plex in operation at the present moment differently 
conceived in Chicago. There is a complex or two in 
Los Angeles. Now, each of these has slightly dif­
ferent elements. But the basic purposes of the com­
plex are the same. Oklahoma City, I think, has at 
least—I think temporarily adopted a desegregation 
plan which embodies this approach and this objective.

By Mr. Ris:
Q. Now, in this complex, Doctor, just to expand a bit 

more, each of your neighborhood schools would have its

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1734a

own staff, its own principals and so forth, is that correct? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. And then would there be a so-called super-principal 
or whatever you designate him to be or a senior principal 
over the entire complex? A. I think at the present moment 
the proposal—or at least what their thinking is about a 
coordinating principal would have the responsibility for 
coordinating the—certain elements of the program in the 
complex. That has not been decided, but there would be 
somebody with that responsibility.

[319] Q. Well, this program is probably set out more 
in detail in your large document, planning equality educa­
tion, is it not? A. Yes, I think it was in a little more detail.

Mr. Greiner: Well, I object, Your Honor. Pardon 
me, Dr. Gilberts. I object. I don’t believe the Board 
is saying that they are presenting Defendants’ Ex­
hibit—I think it’s Exhibit E, Planning Equality Edu­
cation, as a portion of their plan. I think that’s Plan 
B-A as instituted.

Mr. B is: That wasn’t the question.
The Court: He says that some particular matter 

here has presented some detail in Exhibit D. That 
was the question.

Mr. B is: That was the question. That’s the whole 
point, Your Honor. Being that, if each one of these 
subsections was elaborated with every bit of detail, 
why, we would have volume after volume and not 
merely one volume that has been filed with the Court; 
just as a practical matter, you can’t have every bit 
of detail—

The Court: I  have no doubt that it is in more 
detail, Exhibit D. That’s all he asks.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1735a

Q. So then, with respect to this decentralized planning 
that you have previously mentioned, you’re not speaking 
of decentralizing—a decentralized plan such as—or, local 
hoards of education such as in New York City and Brook­
lyn and so forth, are you? [3201 A. No, sir.

Q. And decentralized planning in your complex and the 
various principals and your super-principal or whatever 
you’re going to call him, and the teachers there, and to 
evaluate what is necessary or desirable for this particular 
community? A. Yes, together with community representa­
tion from each of the schools in the complex as wTell.

Q. By community representation, you mean parents or 
other members of the community? A. Yes.

Q, So, rather than bureaucratic directives from Wash­
ington, that you shall do this and do that, you have the 
availability of the complex and the general plan and the 
details implemented by the local individuals to satisfy the 
local needs? A. Yes, sir.

The Court: Now, what’s the main objective here? 
To have more economic use of central facilities and 
central equipment? I mean, that you can’t afford to 
duplicate in every school!

The Witness: I wouldn’t say that’s the main pur­
pose, sir, but that’s one of the purposes that will 
provide that. So far as I ’m concerned, the main 
purpose is to get the schools in the local areas ac­
tively engaged in the process of evaluating their 
educational needs and designing programs that 
[3211 they feel will meet these needs. I  feel that 
process needs to involve the teachers and the princi­
pals in the communities within smaller areas than 
a total city. There are tremendous differences in a 
city this size to try to deal on some grand scale with

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1736a

all of the difficulties in the large city that we have— 
that it has led us inevitably to the bureaucratic ap­
proach, standard applications of solutions. And that 
is not going to solve our problems.

The Court: Nor is its objective to bring about 
integration. Right ?

The Witness: I believe that it will contribute to 
that.

The Court: Well, it’s a by-product.
The Witness: Yes, sir, that’s a part of it. That’s 

another one of the elements. But it’s not the ele­
ment, it’s one of the elements.

The Court: But I  think that its real value is that 
it furnishes a local administrative—

The Witness: I  think that’s probably—
The Court: —influence.
The Witness: —in my mind, the primary im­

portance of it. And I feel that, coming out of that 
kind of a setting we’re going to have better decisions 
with respect to educational programming.

By Mr. R is:
Q. With respect to that part of the [322] plan pertain­

ing to special programs at Cole or Manual, do you care 
to discuss that or yield to the principals? A. I would pre­
fer to have them do it.

Q. Now, with regard to special programs available under 
the Educational Achievement Act of Colorado, Senate Bill 
174, can you tell us generally what that is all about? A. 
A year ago the State Legislature passed a bill, No. 174, 
which provided additional funds for schools in the state 
to develop exemplary programs for the improvement of 
education. The programs that are listed in this document 
are those programs that have been approved under that

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1737a

bill. These programs are also programs that were presented 
to the Senate by onr staff in support of continuing the 
provision of those funds, and I think were largely responsi­
ble for the continuance of that support. These programs 
are Fairview Elementary School, Baker, Cole Junior High 
School. At Cole, at least, I assume that Mr. Morrison will 
talk about that. Here at Fairview School in conjunction 
with personnel of the Elementary Department, they have 
developed a reading program that has been designed to 
capitalize in on the talents of both the teachers and pupils 
in the fields of science, arts, mechanics, sewing, Spanish 
language, cultural and oral communication. The program 
is an interest-motivated approach to improvement of edu­
cational achievement and assistance for youngsters in 
Grades 2 through 6, with emphasis on individualized 
[323] reading instruction. Now, the program sets aside 
ten classrooms as resource rooms or learning—with a 
wide variety of supplementary materials and equipment 
available for teacher and pupil use. It goes on to describe 
this program which meets in the morning for all pupils 
and Grades 2—

It is too early as yet to judge what the results are go­
ing to be but those who are involved in the program are 
quite enthusiastic. At Baker the bilingual program is in­
volving the youngsters that—well, 85 percent of the Baker 
pupils are Hispano and 15 percent of these are bilingual. 
Sixty-seven percent read two or more years below their 
expectancy and this program is capitalizing upon the bi­
lingual aspects of the backgrounds of these youngsters 
to again motivate them for better learning in their schools. 
These programs again are reported by those schools, the 
teachers, as being quite successful in motivating youngsters 
and a report was made to the Board here a week or two 
ago in which all the teachers were involved.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1738a

Q. Do these results—are they used in connection with 
the other schools where similar problems exist 1 A. Yes. 
We will build into each of these programs an evaluation 
system which in time certainly wull help us identify whether 
or not they have implications for better education. As 
we learn whether they do or not, we either will be dropping 
them or expanding them into other schools [324] where we 
think they have some relevancy.

Q. So it is at Fairview, for example—-is that a test site 
then for good reading at the elementary level ? A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. A pilot plan, so to speak? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And of which the favorable aspects of it then will 

be used elsewhere? A. Right.
Q. Is this a constant thing that is going on in the school 

system such as Denver? A. Yes, sir. There are many, 
many programs going on that are being evaluated and, if 
they appear to have value, they will be expanded or recom­
mended for expansion in other schools.

Q. Is there anything else now under the Senate Bill 174 
that you would like to emphasize? A. Well, the Baker 
and Cole program, assisting disadvantaged youths to im­
prove their educational achievement, is a program which 
is again individualized working very closely with youngsters 
who have problems of accommodating to the school, the 
way in which it functions. We provide what is called crisis 
rooms where youngsters that have difficulties in school need 
to cool off some place and go and get assistance—the as­
sistance they need academically or emotionally. We [3253 
have a couple of educational laboratories, a couple of ex­
tension centers, one for each school, where youngsters can 
have an aducational experience, not necessarily within the 
school itself, but in another location. And again, I think

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1739a

that probably in the ease of Cole, Principal Morrison will 
be able to describe it in more detail than I could.

Q. Now, the last section in the plan is entitled Instruc­
tional Guidelines—Innovative Practices. Will you please 
describe what is in this portion of the report? A. Well, 
these—these are a number of programs, some of which 
have been in practice for a while, where we have gotten 
some experience and have had some evaluation. Evaluation 
with others were very early in the planning stage and— 
the first one was a program from which was—which was 
financed under Title I, cultural understanding, where 
youngsters from various areas of the city were brought 
together in a program dealing with a number of different 
cultural arts such as drama, music, general arts, and so 
on, in an integrated setting. These programs have been 
in operation I believe now—probably three and a half 
years.

Q. Is that at the sixth-grade level? A. Yes.
Q. And is it contemplated to expand that? A. Yes, I 

think so. I  think the program has been successful and 
should be expanded for all youngsters in the [326] school 
system. The metropolitan exchange program which is— 
which we have not really placed as much effort on as we 
would like, but by and large, programs that have been 
either developed locally within our schools or in suburban 
schools in which we have exchange students for differing 
periods of time.

Q. This is with other districts surrounding Denver? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. Is that still in the embryonic stage, so to speak? A. 
Yes, due to a number of activities this year, we have not 
promoted it as much as we would like to. I think it has 
a great deal of potential here if we have the opportunity

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1740a

to really begin pursuing it. This could be along the lines 
that Dr. Sullivan indicated in the Boston area or other 
kinds of exchange programs.

Q. Are the nature of the political setups as between dis­
tricts—has that been done by agreement with each district 
in each case? A. Yes, sir. The outdoor education center 
on which is commonly called Ballerette—I believe that 
provides us an opportunity to really get at some rather 
significant changes in the process of education. This center 
is not purely a natural-science laboratory. I t is an op­
portunity, I  believe, for a multidisciplinary approach to 
education in a setting where youngsters can have practical 
experiences, [327] where we can provide for integration 
on a work-oriented basis. We see this as providing op­
portunity in vocational education. We plan to take some 
of the program elements out of the Outward Bound which 
we feel will have many implications for this site, and I 
think is probably another one of the most significant kinds 
of programs that we have identified. A great deal of work 
is left to be done in developing this program as well.

Q. Is this a phase of this, Dr. Gilberts, that you think 
will have a significant effect on the children who attend 
to give it an environment in the circumstances under which 
they are living for the time being to get the understanding 
and change of attitude that lend toward integration? A. 
Yes, I would think the programs we develop in this center 
should be of significant importance in promoting integra­
tion.

Q. Is that one of the objectives? A. Yes. We have al­
ready talked about expanded summer school programs. We 
certainly feel that an expansion in many areas is necessary 
here dealing with basic skills, innovative programs, and 
cultural arts, recreation, job training, work experience, such

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1741a

things as that. We have an after-school program which is 
presently financed with federal funds. The Denver Public 
Schools open art centers which were planned to attract 
cross-cultural attendance by offering exemplary [3283 in­
struction in fine and graphic arts. The Denver Public 
Schools after-hours program in recreation and vocational 
areas will be continued. And these programs make it pos­
sible for boys and girls and the faculty to participate in a 
valuable integrated activity.

Another program which is a joint program with the 
Jefferson County Schools is a metropolitan youth oppor­
tunity center which is a school which has been provided for 
youngsters that have dropped out of school, not completed 
their high school. They can either finish their academic 
programs for high school diplomas or work on vocational 
skills or an—a combination of both.

Q. Is this actually being done! A. One site is at Kala- 
math and just off Colfax. Another one is in Jefferson 
County. It’s out past—it’s out past the lake there. I can’t 
think of the address of that, but the enrollment in that 
paricular school has skyrocketed in the last two years.

Q. Is this to bring kids together who dropped out back 
into the system? A. Yes. The educational center that is 
referred to here as a secondary center in which we hope to 
provide a fairly wide range of educational offerings, both 
vocational and academic, and will attract youngsters from 
all over the city. We see this center as not being a full­
time enrollment [329] center for children, students at high 
school level, but part time, based upon the programs that 
they might elect. We believe that we can put together a 
program here which will attract youngsters from all over 
the city and will provide another opportunity for a broad 
range of social and economic and cultural backgrounds.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1742a

We are in the process of making some major changes in our 
area of vocational education in all schools, not just in this 
area, but I  believe the opportunity to provide job skills at 
the junior high school level is quite important. We have a 
number of programs that have been developed, again, and 
I think Mr. Ward probably talked about the program—a 
program or two they have there. We have some cooperative 
educational programs that are presently undertaken by 
business and industry involving youngsters from all the 
high schools. I think these are important learning oppor­
tunities for youngsters. We have been working in the area 
of curriculum, on Page 157, in providing changes in our 
social studies and history classes dealing more adequately 
with the contributions of minorities. We have purchased 
books, films, film strips and a number of items to supple­
ment these changes and have been encouraging and working 
with staff members to deal across the city with these issues. 
The item on intensified educational programs relates to 
compensatory programs that—some of which we have al­
ready talked about and others which will probably need to 
be [3303 redesigned. The college-Manual High School proj­
ect is one in which we have begun a relationship with the 
University of Northern Colorado, I guess it is now, in 
developing some programs at Manual and again I think 
Mr. Ward talked about these better than I. The last item, 
I believe, other promising innovations, really is a review 
of this program that I  referred to earlier which has been 
field tested in Wisconsin and a number of different school 
systems and one which we feel will make contribution to 
looking at the problems of differentiated staffing and indi­
vidualized instruction.

Q. All right, sir. Based upon your background, your 
experience, education, your knowledge of the whole situa­

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1743a

tion here at the Denver Public Schools, do you have an 
opinion as to whether this program has the probability of 
success to improve the education in the schools as indicated 
by the Court?

Mr. Greiner: I object, Your Honor. I don’t think 
there has been a proper foundation laid as a basis 
upon which the superintendent can tell this Court 
that these plans will in fact work or even have a 
probability of working.

Mr. Ris: That isn’t the question.
Mr. Greiner: Well, I think there has to be some 

foundation for the superintendent’s opinion.
The Court: Overruled. We will permit him to 

answer.

[3313 A. Yes, sir. Based upon my experience and my read­
ing in the area, I think they have the possibility of success.

Q. Do they have a probability of success? A. Yes, sir.

The Court: There’s quite a difference, you know.
The Witness: Excuse me. Yes, sir, I ’m sorry, I 

meant the probability.
The Court: In law.
Mr. Ris: A great difference.

Q. Now, I would like to refer to the plan as presented 
by the plaintiffs. As you indicated, you spent some time—

The Court: Before you get to that, this idea of a 
center or cluster—do you contemplate needing new 
building for this, I  assume?

The Witness: I believe so, sir. However, we have 
the opportunity right off the bat at the cluster sur­

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1744a

rounding Cheltenham, using the old facility, which 
is being vacated because of a new school that we’re 
building there. I believe that some additional facili­
ties will have to be provided at least in some loca­
tions for some elements of the program.

The Court: Where do you have facilities that you 
could use presently?

The Witness: Well, as I say, I think that the 
Cheltenham School right now, the vacated building 
will provide us with some facility there. There is no 
question but that, [332] as Denver goes on down the 
road there is going to have to be a bond issue passed 
and we’re going to have to have additional facilities, 
and when that is done, assuming a provision will be 
made for additional space for programs that will be 
developed here—

The Court: A center of this kind or a campus 
would call for a good deal of ground and a substan­
tial amount of space, wouldn’t it?

The Witness: Not necessarily, sir. It depends 
upon the kinds of programs that are developed. I 
think that probably the space that would be required 
at least for the programs that we could envision at 
this point would not require a great deal of addi­
tional space.

The Court: Well, it’s very vague as far as I’m 
concerned. I don’t know where you would do this. 
I don’t know how much time would be required to 
develop it. This is a long-term program that would 
take ten years to get off the ground.

The Witness: We hope to have it in operation 
next fall for some elements of Complex 1 and 2. We 
have been planning all this year. Those elements 
that are recommended to us by the planning group

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1745a

we hope to have in operation next fall. I would 
assume that the planning process would continue 
and we would continue to develop the program. I 
would hope that certainly within several years we 
could have [3333 a pretty well-developed program 
in these two schools. Now, if the concept has validity 
and I think some of these things are going to have 
to be tested and measured like any kind of an edu­
cational program, it seems to me the experience we 
have had in the planning of Complexes 1 and 2 
should shorten the planning process for other com­
plexes if we feel this is the direction we should go.

The Court: Well, then, you don’t feel at this time 
that this would fill the bill, so to speak, as far as 
integration or improvement of the program as far 
as either one is concerned! In other words, at this 
point you would be experimenting and testing with 
this concept ? Hoping that it would—

The Witness: I  believe—my professional judg­
ment is, after twenty years in this business, that this 
will make a difference. Now, that is different than 
having proved that. And I think that we are un­
fortunately in the position as educators that a good 
many of the things that we talk about are unproven. 
We’ve got to test them.

The Court: You wouldn’t want to put all your 
eggs in one basket! You would want to try out a lot 
of other programs at the same time, I assume?

The Witness: Exactly. Right. If you will read 
this, you will find that there are many, many other 
kinds of approaches that are going to—that are go­
ing on at the £334] same time.

The Court: Okay. We will take a short recess now.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1746a

(Whereupon, the trial recessed at 3:20 p.m. and 
resumed at 3:40 p.m.)

By Mr. Ris:

Q. Dr. Gilberts, with respect to the plaintiffs’ plan which 
you have heard explained this morning by Dr. Bardwell and 
the exhibits that were admitted into evidence, could you tell 
us your opinion with respect to that particular plan? A. 
Yes, sir. I  think this plan is based upon some unproven 
assumptions. Dr. Coleman indicated that the perfect in­
fluence on achievements, academic achievements, was a fac­
tor of socioeconomic difference.

The Reporter: Your Honor, may I have that an­
swer repeated?

The Court: The reporter is having a little trouble 
getting everything you say. I think the problem 
arises from the fact that both of you are reading, 
and when you do this you drop your head. I don’t 
know how we can remedy this but I believe, if you 
would speak up a little and if the witness box were 
brought around a little bit or else we could swing it 
around—-

(Colloquy not transcribed herein.)

A. As I was saying, Dr. Coleman has indicated that the 
perfect influence on academic achievement is a factor of 
[3353 socioeconomic difference and not racial or ethnic 
consideration, and based upon my reading from this par­
ticular area the evidence is even a little thin on the matter 
of perfect influence in terms of academic achievement just 
based ujjon socioeconomic difference. I don’t believe that 
I could in clear conscience as an educator recommend the

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1747a

approaches that are proposed by the plaintiffs on the scale 
that they propose them at this time on the evidence that I’m 
aware of in the field.

This plan is a mathematical solution to a problem which 
has human dimensions. And I think that a good many of 
the human factors have been ignored. I think that human 
factors involving individual students as it relates to the 
continuity and enrollments, in other words, the moving 
along of the youngster through the schools with his friends 
and his neighbors has been ignored. It seems to me that 
there are some unrealistic recommendations in the plan 
in terms of numbers assigned to some of our schools, and 
I am not sure whether or not the kind of distribution that 
has been proposed here provides a balance throughout 
each of the grade levels. Certainly it does not take into 
consideration the need for teachers in terms of dealing 
more professionally with their responsibilities as teachers. 
I think that the parents and members of the community 
by and large have not been considered in terms of their 
relationship to the school or the community [3363 support 
for the schools. It seems to me that the proposals at the 
junior high and senior high school levels could destroy 
some of the new programs which are being developed 
which I consider quite unique and exceptional in this 
country and you will hear of several of them this after­
noon. Certainly they have indicated a need for some of 
the things that we have in our plan in terms of in-service 
and some programs such as this, and I certainly would 
concur that these are important. I have some concern as 
to whether and how one would be able to provide some of 
the compensatory programs which have been indicated as 
necessary and with expanded—an expanded pupil base, 
with these youngsters being placed in need of compensa­
tory programs in many more schools in classes involving

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1748a

many more youngsters. I think it’s quite likely that this 
might not only be more—might not be only more expensive 
but it might even be more difficult to design.

The Court: Do you think there is some merit in 
the proposition that, if they are in an environment 
in which they must compete, that there is more 
incentive for them to follow up these compensatory 
programs so that they can compete?

The Witness: Well, what I am saying, Your 
Honor, here is—

The Court: In other words, the compensatory 
programs in the abstract seem to fail. I mean, the 
evidence £3373 indicates that is not too effective 
over a long-term basis particularly; that the chil­
dren, when they return to their environments or 
their home environments are inclined to forget what 
they have learned. Rather, they haven’t assimilated 
to the point where they could use it. Doesn’t that 
seem to be the basic weakness of this compensatory 
approach so far?

The Witness: I  think that in general this may be 
true, but the same thing can be equally true and there 
is proof to substantiate the different points of view 
that the same thing could occur in an integrated 
setting. Now, it may not be—I’m not aware of any 
proof that would indicate it wouldn’t be true, but—

The Court: Well, I just mention it in connection 
with your saying that the compensatory programs 
might fail—might fall by the wayside.

The Witness: No, what I  said was—
The Court: —in this kind of— If you do pro­

ceed to integrate the schools, because the—I gathered

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1749a

from what you said that there would be—an ac­
celerated effort in the classroom, that it would just 
be about impossible for the person who was there 
to keep pace and also to take compensatory educa­
tion. I mean, I sort of gleaned that from what you 
said.

The Witness: That wasn’t what I was referring 
to, but that might be a problem as well, Your Honor. 
What I  was £338] referring to was the distribution 
of the resources that would be necessary to provide 
the compensatory education and a much expanded 
base; pupil population base. Now, that’s something 
which, of course, one wouldn’t know until one de­
signed the compensatory programs. But it would 
seem logical to me that that certainly—that cer­
tainly compensatory programs, if they’re going to 
be effective in an integrated setting, would probably 
in some way involve more than just the youngsters 
that would be coming in, let’s say from the area 
where compensation wTas necessary and that could 
provide, as I say, a problem in the economic dis­
tribution of the resources within the school system.

The Court: One other point that Dr. Sullivan 
made—that when you get a group of homogeneous 
origin together, that sort of brings out the worst 
rather than the best in them when they are all to­
gether.

The Witness: Certainly I wouldn’t disagree with 
that.

The Court: Sort of like a convention of lawyers. 
Individually, they’re great, but—individually they 
are, you know, very intelligent. But you get their 
group decision and it might not be too good. Some-

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1750a

how or other the psychology of their all being to­
gether doesn’t add to their wisdom. It sort of de­
tracts from it, perhaps. The same might be true of 
other groups.

[3393 The Witness: I wouldn’t disagree abso­
lutely and totally with that position, Tour Honor, 
but I think there can be exceptions to it. I think 
perhaps it can be designed to change that particular 
attitude and that particular orientation in some of 
these schools. Again, I ’ll let you listen to some of 
these programs at Manual and Cole.

The Court: Also, isn’t there sort of a degree of 
comfort when you have those you are accustomed 
to around you? You don’t need to put forth extra 
effort and you don’t do it. I mean, there is a tendency 
along that line, as human beings; and don’t you think 
that these are sort of predicates for this?

The Witness: I  think these things might be true. 
I don’t think they necessarily are true. I think there 
can be circumstances where they are not true. And 
I think those circumstances can be designed into 
educational programs.

Now, I don’t think, as I indicated earlier, that we 
have identified any pat solution to these problems, 
but it seems to me that there are some potentials 
in the areas that are now beginning- to develop that 
may allow us to do that. For example, Your Honor, 
two years ago at Cole Junior High we had a prob­
lem which nearly caused us to close that school in 
terms of attitudes. The very thing you’re talking 
about. Now, some two years later we have a situ­
ation that’s quite different.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1751a

The Court: Was that when Mr. Morrison was 
installed?

[340] The Witness: Yes, sir. Now, this is an 
example in change in climates and attitudes after— 
or that reflected on the educational program. That 
sort of thing I believe could occur in these schools 
with the right kind of leadership; with the right kind 
of programs and so on.

The Court: But you look forward to this integra­
tion step as the only possible solution to avoid 
polarization of the races, do you not?

The Witness: Absolutely.
The Court: You don’t want to have separate 

cultures, do you ?
The Witness: Certainly not. I believe that integra­

tion can come in many different kinds of form. I 
don’t think one can identify one way of doing it 
and say that that is the end, that’s the only way it 
can be done; I  think that integration can be accom­
plished—and I am talking now about the psycho­
logical, philosophical definition that has been de­
scribed here. I think it can be aided by many kinds 
of activities, a good many of which will probably 
go on outside of the school through other institu­
tions and through other kinds of activities. I think 
that integration is an essential. It’s not important. 
It’s an absolute necessity. It has to occur. That 
definition which is in this case. I  would remind the 
judge that I  did recommend—

The Court: Higher education has been integrated 
[3413 since—oh, for twenty years.

The Witness: Eight.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1752a

The Court: I suppose longer than that in most 
parts of the country, and everybody would feel that 
it was pretty ridiculous to have a Negro college and 
a white college in the North and West, wouldn’t 
they!

The Witness : I think so, yes.
The Court: I mean they would just think it would 

be absurd.
The Witness: What I’d like to point out, Your 

Honor, is that I did recommend last spring a con­
siderable amount of change affecting the—affecting 
literally thousands of youngsters in the school sys­
tem which the Court sustained and at that time I 
indicated there were two reasons why I felt that 
was important: number one, to see whether or not 
that kind of a move in that area could in fact stem 
the tide of resegregation which was occurring in 
the northeast area of the city; secondly, to provide 
us a basis upon which to gain some more experience 
to see whether or not the claims for integration 
could in fact produce what is claimed for—

The Court: Well, has it been successful?
The Witness: I think, by and large, it has been. 

However, our evaluation that we are undertaking 
this year is not completely completed in terms of the 
evaluating measures that we’re going to be using. 
I have—it seems to me that [342] it’s going to 
take more than one year to really judge whether or 
not it’s going to be effective.

The Court: For example, at Smiley which was a 
real testing ground—hasn’t that been a successful 
experiment, by and large?

The Witness: As far as my subjective judgment—

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1753a

The Court: Because there was more feeling and 
more resistance there perhaps than any other place.

The Witness: If we’re talking about academic 
achievement and equating this with success in schools, 
then we have yet to see the evidence as to whether 
in fact it does or does not do it. I have some biases. 
I think, by and large, the operation of that school has 
been successful but I don’t have the objective mea­
surement upon which I could recommend we do this 
to the entire city at this time.

The Court: Oh, I  see what you mean.
The Witness: This is my point.
The Court: I  see what you mean on that. But the 

parents’ attitude and so on in that area of the city 
I think were pretty much resistant to this movement 
and at this point they have settled down a good deal, 
have they not?

The Witness: I  believe so. But I don’t have much 
-—as much information on that as I ’d like to have.

The Court: You don’t feel the pressure, I don’t 
suppose, that you did.

[3433 The Witness : Sir, I can’t tell the difference 
between the pressure from one day to another. 
There is always pressure; all kinds of sources.

The Court: Well, that’s the hazard of your oc­
cupation.

The Witness: Right.
The Court: From that particular source you 

don’t—
The Witness: Yes. I have been receiving current 

pressure on problems at Smiley.
The Court: So you’re not prepared to say that 

it’s either successful or unsuccessful?

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1754a

Tlie Witness: No, sir. I think that a good deal 
of more careful evaluation in my subjective judg­
ment at this point is indicated.

The Court: You wouldn’t recommend it be aban­
doned at this point, I don’t suppose?

The Witness: No, sir, I would not.

By Mr. R is:
Q. In this regard again, you’re speaking of—you still 

don’t have any objective evidence from Smiley? A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. Are you speaking in terms of the testing results? 
A. Not only Smiley but all of the schools and all of the 
youngsters that were involved in this program.

Q. Or that Smiley—the fact that they were bused out 
[344] of the Smiley Subdistrict or into the Smiley Sub- 
district? A. Eight.

Q. Do you have any evidence at all from testing from 
these that there has been any improvement on those who 
were bused out? A. Not as yet.

Q. Is that what you mean by that, that you have no 
objective evidence? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, again getting back to what we discussed previ­
ously, before, is this the type of innovation or the type of 
thing that you say you recommended for that particular 
area on a testing basis, a trial basis? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And if it succeeds, then you will recommend it be 
expanded into other portions— A. Yes, sir.

Q. And—now, as to transportation, is transportation 
per se a problem with you, Dr. Gilberts, in busing? A. 
Yes.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1755a

Q. I ’m not speaking of just the— A. Just general—
Q. General transportation? A. Yes, sir. This has been 

one of my major projects, I guess, through some twenty 
years of—well, seventeen years [3451 of my experience.

Q. And the evidence previously has been in the trial that 
without any mandatory busing you’re— you are already 
busing some 12,000 students. That was the figure as I re­
member, was it not? A. I believe that’s correct.

Q. But that is considered by you to be a permanent 
thing that is desirable or was it a temporary transient 
thing to get more money? What is the background of that? 
A. Well, the background is that Denver has not had a 
bond issue since 1955 and we have tried to build building’s 
on a buy-as-you-go basis and I think the assumption has 
been all along that certainly space will ultimately be pro­
vided in areas where there is no space.

The Court: Is busing 12,000 students from these 
newly-annexed areas and distances beyond walking 
distances and so forth—has it been contemplated 
to be a permanent condition that you intend to leave 
there forever?

A. I don’t believe it’s been contemplated at this—that this— 
Q. Ag*ain, just a temporary expedient until more funds 

are available? A. Yes, sir.

The Court: You hope it won’t be a permanent fix­
ture, I  take it?

[3463 The Witness: Yes, sir. I think that pro­
grams—that plan for transportation, especially in 
urban settings poses unique kinds of problems and 
probably ought to be minimized as much as possible.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1756a

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct 

Q. And then yon—

The Conrt: Certainly not desirable, per se.
The Witness: That’s right.

By Mr. R is:

Q. Dr. Gilberts, as far as any specifies of the plan are 
concerned, is there anything specifically you wish to dis­
cuss with the Court in the matter of the critique here? 
A. I had one final point that I didn’t get an opportunity 
to make. It seems to me that in this plan it proposes to 
eliminate some programs which in my judgment have a 
great deal of significance in terms of educational improve­
ment in the future, not only for this area but in general 
and we can’t ignore our responsibilities for that improve­
ment for all youngsters. We have had not as much time 
as I would like to review this plan, but I have had my staff 
go over it. I have read it myself—

The Court: You mean when they talk about utiliz­
ing funds that are devoted to particular programs 
that you now have—

The Witness: Yes, sir.
The Court: —you feel that the unbalance in the 

[3471 programs-—that the programs might be more 
valuable than the integration—the busing program?

The Witness: I consider them important things 
to be doing for the school system, looking at some of 
the specific concerns that members of the staff have 
identified, under proposed Plan 1, wherein twelve of 
the Court schools—designated by the exchanging 
students with seventeen predominantly Anglo schools 
—these are a few of the points that were raised that 
I  think are significant.



1757a

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants-—Direct 

By Mr. R is:
Q. And with which yon would agree? A. Yes.
Q. Go ahead. A. In some cases the number of pupils 

involved in busing from one school to another is negligible 
and Bradley will send only a small number, and this was 
discussed this morning, but the matter of adjusting indi­
viduals is a lot different than adjusting numbers. It’s 
easy to say there are four kinds and, well, okay, we can 
accommodate them. But how do we identify—how do we 
make decisions when those are not the four we are going 
to take and we take eight somewhere else and so on. These 
are complicated human decisions to make, wThich cause great 
difficulty. It’s much easier to do this on a computer than 
it is in the community. There is no assurance that the 
interchange of pupils will provide the necessary numbers 
of pupils at each grade level.

[348] Q. Can you elaborate a bit on that? What do you 
mean by that? A. Well, I’m assuming that the intent at 
least here was to integrate not only the school but each of 
the classrooms as was discussed yesterday. I  can’t tell— 
and my staff can’t apparently tell from reading this whether 
or not that consideration has been taken into account. How 
do we go about—on Grades 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6—that there is a 
reasonable distribution to produce the results that they 
have indicated? In order for me to quote, as outlined in the 
transportation schedule, an arbitrary method of selection 
must be designed. For example, if “geographical areas were 
used and annual adjustments . . . might be necessary, which 
could result in pupils attending several schools during at 
least the elementary program and probably beyond that.” 
In other words, it could cause us to have to move young­
sters about more than we would like. And “No. 7, rather 
than another item here—it not clear that we plan—how the



1758a

average achievement factors were determined.” Conse­
quently there is a question on the validity of the projected 
average achievements. Another item, in some cases these 
plans—this plan does not take into consideration the human 
element or the actual limitation which exists in the school. 
For example, Bryant-Webster has four Negro pupils, three 
of which are to be assigned, and here again we get into these 
difficult human kinds of problems to [349] deal with. A 
leveling of achievement scores of low-performance schools 
would be due to moving in high achieving pupils and moving 
out low-achieving pupils. The population shift rather than 
improved test scores of low-achieving pupils. The plan 
tends to mask the extremes of achievement without actually 
improving performance.

The Court: Well, at the outset that was explained 
that you couldn’t expect any improvement in the low 
achievers as of the day that the exchange occurs.

The Witness: Maybe—it may be argued that the 
capacity of a school facility as reported by school 
authorities is not an accurate reflection of the school’s 
ability to properly accommodate the educational pro­
grams and we discussed this one morning, as well, 
considering delivering and picking up of pupils, there 
would be the possibility of some kindergarten young­
sters could be on the bus almost as long as they would 
be in class and consideration must be afforded the 
impact of this plan on the federal and state assistance.

Now, how do we redistribute them and reallocate 
them to provide the help that they were intended to 
provide ?

On Plan 2, this involves the pairing of elementary 
schools. This plan requires additional expense—an

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1759a

additional expense not considered by the plaintiffs, 
and there was mentioned this morning the modifica­
tion of facilities. You can’t take care of kindergarten, 
first, second and third-grade £3503 youngsters in the 
exact kind of facilities that one would with the fourth, 
fifth and sixth grade. There are differences in cer­
tain appointments in the room that would have to be 
changed.

Q. Such as what? A. Well, a simple example would be 
the blackboard. We have youngsters that work on the board 
in the classroom. Primary youngsters—the board is much 
lower for them to reach than the older youngsters. Seating 
is a problem, of course, that could be accommodated by 
moving seating from one school to another, so that is not a 
particular big problem. But, sizes of bathroom facilities 
and such things as this pose a problem with primary young­
sters. I think that some of the same concerns that I ex­
pressed in Plan 1 would probably apply in this one as well. 
And Plan 3 and Plan 4, here again, it’s just a matter of 
expanding the application. Therefore, the problems aren’t 
really changed.

The Court: How long would it take to implement 
this plan—a plan of this kind?

The Witness: Well, I  think that Dr. Sullivan’s 
estimate of two years is a fairly realistic one. It 
might take longer than that if wre were to accomplish 
the objectives identified by each phase of this plan­
ning process, community acceptance and so forth and 
staff preparation, et cetera.

The Court: I ’m not talking about this exact plan.
[351] The Witness: Well, any modification of it—

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1760a

The Court: You might feed a few additional items 
into the computer, you know, in order to come up 
with—in order to introduce some human aspect,. But, 
you said it would take two years to accomplish a 
program of this magnitude, you think.

The Witness: I would assume that Dr. Sullivan’s 
estimate of time with his experience would be fairly 
accurate.

The Court: Do you think that there could be an 
integration program that would be more efficient, 
that would accomplish the same objectives and 
wouldn’t require 6.5 miles each way of transporta­
tion, for example? Have you thought of it in that 
light?

The Witness: Yes, sir, I have. And I think the 
approach they have taken here in terms of efficiency 
by reducing—assuming they’re shooting at the racial 
composition, they are probably as efficient a means 
of doing it, again in terms of numbers, distribution 
of kids, as you could come about. I can’t think of 
any that would be simpler to apply, using this cri­
teria of what they are proposing.

The Court: Does the staff agree with that?
The Witness: I believe so, so far as I’m aware.
The Court: Although, this cluster or campus idea 

would cut down substantially on transportation?
The Witness: It would, but it doesn’t meet the 

[3523 criteria that, the plaintiffs have established in 
their plan. I think it meets other criteria that are 
more in—more important in my mind. And under 
that definition, under those criteria, then I think it 
will accomplish the end that we’re looking for.

The senior high school level I would just comment 
that the boundary changes are not defined sufficiently

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1761a

that one can absolutely be certain of the problem. 
But certainly it would cause attendance problems by 
elongating districts and so on. I  would have some 
concern that it would certainly upset the factors that 
were involved in the initial resolution that the judge 
has sustained and I think this could pose a problem. 
Walking distances can be problems. The only stu­
dents in the northeast tip of the city near Smith 
School would be more than two miles from their 
senior high school. It is not consistent with the fact 
that some present South students living near Wash­
ington Park, live nearly four miles from Manual. I 
believe you mentioned that—this morning, Your 
Honor—since numbers of pupils being transferred 
to Manual are not given, no comparisons can be made 
of the capacity of the high school involved, sending 
Anglo pupils from East to Manual and minority pu­
pils to East, would increase proportions of minority 
pupils at East, was the thing I was mentioning. No 
plan is offered to ameliorate the resegreation which 
could occur at East. North High School was pres­
ently [353] overcapacity and transfers could cause 
some problems. And then I would reiterate that I 
think that some of the items that they have measured 
or identified as those things that could be conveniently 
left out of any kind of our planning in my judgment 
is not true. I don’t believe that Denver can afford to 
ignore looking at those concepts and testing and 
evaluating them.

Q. Will the adoption of the plaintiffs’ plan constitute a 
gamble, in your opinion, Dr. Gilbert? A. Yes, sir, I cer­
tainly think it would.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1762a

Q. As between the two plans, considering your back­
ground, your experience and the circumstances that exist in 
Denver, which plan do you think has the greater probability 
of success in improving education in the fifteen schools? 
A. I  believe that what we have proposed would indicate 
better probability of success.

Mr. Ris: You may examine.
The Court: I ’m not clear on your plan for eventual 

integration. How it would really take place. You 
said that this is the only solution eventually.

The Witness: Well, sir, the definition of integra­
tion used here in the case is that integration is a 
psychological, social, philosophical kind of process 
for individuals where individuals accept one another 
for themselves. With no bias exhibited as a result 
of race, color or creed, et cetera.

[354] Now, it seems to me that there is a—this is 
a state of mind. That is, not necessarily a state of 
how one distributes within our society. Now, sir, if 
that is our end, if that is our ultimate end is to truly 
open our society so that all individuals can live and 
operate with that kind of philosophy, it seems to me 
there are many ways that we are going to go about 
doing that, not all of them are going to occur in the 
school. Certainly, they are going to occur in busi­
ness. They are going to occur in oother governmental 
institutions. They are going to occur in our daily 
life, so I’m not saying that ultimately our society 
has to be totally desegregated, which is the physical 
aspects of the distributing of people of different 
ethnic and racial backgrounds, equally throughout 
our country. I’m not sure that has to be the end. I

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Direct



1763a

think the free and—and the option to do that if one 
chooses to move where he pleases, live where he 
pleases, work where he pleases, is the ultimate end. 
I’m sorry. I  don’t necessarily accept the fact that 
we have got to have people distributed physically in 
that manner. Therefore, I say that the programs 
that we are proposing, carried out appropriately and 
developed appropriately, will contribute to produc­
ing that end result along with other things that I 
have mentioned.

The Court: But you don’t have any plan or—I 
misunderstood you. I  thought that you anticipated 
that [3553 eventually this isolation of schoolchildren 
would be eliminated?

The Witness: Well, I  think eventually it will and 
I think it will be eliminated on the basis of choice 
of the individuals involved. I’m not putting a time 
on the eventual—I don’t know when that will be.

The Court: Very well.

Cross-examination by Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Gilberts, I guess—unless I indicate otherwise, my 

questions are going to be directed to the fifteen schools 
which the Court has selected for relief in this case. Since 
the Court has selected the schools, Dr. Gilberts, what kind 
of examination has been made of those schools with regard 
to the conditions that obtained in those schools ? What has 
your staff done ? A. What do you mean by conditions ? All 
factors involved in those schools ?

Q. Well, now you already knew something about those 
schools. A. Exactly.

Q. A lot of the data is right in the Court’s opinion of 
March 21st, is it not? A. Right.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1764a

Q. Now, we have heard during the course of the trial 
[3563 for example a great deal of testimony primarily from 
Dr. Dobson—and I believe you were present when he testi­
fied—regarding the psychological environment of these 
segregated schools. Do you recall that testimony? A. Yes.

Q. Do you recall that it was Dr. Dobson’s opinion that 
it was the schools themselves that caused the unequal edu­
cational opportunity that existed in the schools?

Is that right ?
A. I’m sorry. I don’t recall that. I don’t recall him saying 
that.

The Court: Well, he wasn’t here the last time.
Mr. Greiner: I believe—
The Court: He didn’t hear him testify.
The Witness: Last summer I was here at the 

hearing.

Q. But you were not here this spring when Dr. Dobson 
testified? A. No, sir.

Q. Now, have you done anything to—

The Court: That’s what he said, though, in effect.
Mr. Greiner: Yes.

Q. Have you done anything to study whether or not 
those psychological conditions, low student self-esteem, 
feelings of hopelessness, lack of experience with ever suc­
ceeding, no control over one’s destiny, teacher attitudes 
which don’t [357] expect the minority child to attain any 
level of meaningful achievement—have you done anything 
to check to see whether those factors do exist in these 
schools? A. Not on terms of any kind of basic research 
here in our school system. Certainly we have been reading

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1765a

the literature that comes out and are aware of some of the 
feelings of various people in the profession, various pro­
fessions, that these are factors.

Q. Now, I assume, Doctor, that an integral part of your 
plan would be to test the children in these integrated 
schools, since you’re going to leave them there basically. 
Are you going to test them for these psychological atti­
tudes? A. Yes, I think that certainly any plan of evaluation 
of any kind—any kind of an educational program would 
have to involve examining those elements.

Q. What tests are you going to use? A. I ’m sorry. I’m 
not an expert in that particular area and couldn’t identify 
what tests would be used.

Q. Where is that in your plan? A. I think we have 
alluded in the plan to evaluation systems. We have not 
talked about precise kinds of evaluation. Those are part 
of the plan in terms of future development.

Q. Who is going to do it? A. Well, I assume my own 
research and development department will have a fairly 
important role in that process. [358] The psychologists and 
the psychiatrists and social workers will probably have 
some input into that. I think we will use experts in the 
field of testing in these areas beyond our own staff. I would 
assume all these resources would be used.

Q. Has your staff ever done it before? A. I couldn’t 
answer that. I don’t know what individual members of my 
staff have done in this area.

Q. Now, as I recall, we’ve got about 9,000 minority chil­
dren in these schools, Doctor. What would it cost to test 
those children? A. For what?

Q. For the presence or absence of these psychological 
attitudes? A. Well, again, I said I ’m not an expert in this 
area. The forms of evaluation as I  am aware of—some of

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1766a

which could be very expensive if they are individually ad­
ministered.

Q. Now, this is a part of your plan? A. I say, this would 
be a part of the plan.

Q. Well, is it or is it not? A. It is in the state it is right 
now, but it would be a part of the evaluation system that 
would be designed.

Q. And you agree it’s an important factor? A. Sure.
[359] Q. Are you making a commitment that it will be 

—that it in fact will be done? A. Well, sir, I’m not able 
to make a commitment considering the fact I’m leaving 
here September 1st, but I think any responsible profes­
sional would see that it was a piece of the evaluation proc­
ess.

Q. Where is the Board’s commitment that this facet or 
program is going to in fact be undertaken? A. Well, the 
Board has accepted the fact that we’re making this proposal 
a piece of which is evaluation, and I would assume that 
they would leave the professional judgment of what kind 
of evaluation that would be necessary to us. They usually 
do.

Q. Now, you have attempted to evaluate certain costs, 
that is, your plan for relief that these schools will entail. 
Can you point to one of those costs? A. Of evaluation?

Q. Yes. Where is the cost of this testing program re­
flected in your figures? A. Well, in the first place, this 
would be something which wnuld be done in succeeding 
years. It wouldn’t be done in this budget year and there 
is no identification of testing costs in here other than those 
funds which we provide in our budget for testing. I do not 
have that available, but there are funds that are used for 
tests and evaluation both in the [360] Department of Re­
search and Development and Testing Services.

Robert D. Gilberts—■for Defendants—Cross



1767a

Q. You’re not trying to—■ A. Excuse me. I t’s very 
difficult to make an estimate of the costs in the area of test­
ing when one doesn’t know what the total design of that 
testing process is going to be, which we don’t. And I have 
just admitted that. It needs to be developed. Once it is 
developed, the estimate of cost can certainly be developed 
too.

Q. Well, before you can start solving some of these prob­
lems that exist in a minority school, you first have to find 
out whether or not the problems exist, don’t you? A. I 
think we’re quite aware of the problems that exist in the 
schools.

Q. Well, are some of the problems which I have described 
—do they exist? A. I think—yes, they do.

Q. Are you going to have to test to confirm the presence 
of those problems in the schools then! A. I think we’re 
going to have to test probably more to see whether or not 
we have corrected them than whether they exist. I think 
they exist without a great deal of question. But we will 
probably have to do that to provide a research base, yes.

Q. Now, you’re familiar with the literature, I  take it, 
relating to these segregated schools, are you not? [361] 
A. Reasonably so.

Q. And you’re awTare of the fact that there is literature 
to the effect that these segregated schools simply reinforce 
all of the so-called cultural deprivation which the minority 
child brings to this seg'regated school? You’re aware of that, 
are you not? A. Yes.

Q. Do you agree or disagree with that proposition? A. 
I think in the forms in which these schools have existed, 
this is true. I  think there are ways, though, to have—ways 
of countering that within the school setting. And again I 
think you will hear about some of these later from members 
of our staff.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1768a

Q. Now, you’re aware, Doctor, that when the plaintiffs 
talk about integration, they’re talking about a concept which 
has as its premise the mixture of various racial and ethnic 
groups in the city in the schools? A. I thought the first 
step was desegregation and the second step was integration. 
Yes. If you mean in this context, I’m aware of it.

Q. As I understand it, when you talk about integration, 
there need be no mixing? It’s simply a change of attitudes 
and elimination of racial prejudice? A. No, I think that 
each are needed.

Q. Well, when one reviews the plan that has been [362] 
submitted in response to the Court’s request by the Board, 
I  see references to integration. For example, in—this plan 
has embraced a program of voluntary open enrollment with 
space guaranteed, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. And the heading of that is a plan for raising educa­
tional achievement, is that right, Page 16 of your plan? So 
I take it you feel there is some correlation between the inte­
gration that would follow from YOE and the raising of 
educational achievement, is that correct? A. I believe that 
that is sort of a general introductory statement.

Q. For the whole YOE program, right? A. Well, not 
only for that, but for the rest of the plan as well.

Q. Well, it’s under the YOE tab, isn’t it? A. I realize 
that.

Q. Well, is that a misnomer? A. Well, as I recall in 
reading this it had implications for all of the elements of 
the plan and that may have been where the tab was put. I ’m 
not sure.

Q. Well, is there a relationship between the VOE pro­
gram as it applies to these fifteen schools and improving the 
educational opportunities of the minority children that par­
ticipate in that program? [363] A. There may be.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1769a

Q. You’re not sure! A. Not absolutely.
Q. So it’s a gamble? A. Yes.
Q. But it’s a gamble which you are recommending! A. 

Yes.
Q. Do you have any idea of the kinds of participation 

that you’re going to get out of these fifteen minority schools ? 
Have you made any kind of survey at all! A. Not as yet.

The Court: Do you have any predictions as to the 
extent to which this will be utilized if it is on a free—

The Witness: I think—
The Court: I don’t like this descriptive phrase 

that you have here. It ought to be called free transfer 
program or something like that.

The Witness: We’ll be glad to change it.
The Court: It would be a bit more descriptive.
The Witness: I think it probably would be. In this 

particular section my recollection is, and if I ’m 
wrong somebody can correct me, that we have ap­
proximately 1,500 youngsters involved in the volun­
tary open enrollment plan right now.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. In these fifteen schools? [364] A. No, in the entire 

city.
Q. How many in the fifteen schools? A. I’m sorry. I 

can’t answer that. But to answer the Judge’s question, this 
increased, as I recall, approximately 500 from the previous 
year and this increase was accomplished with what I would 
consider a very minimal amount of information and making 
the knowledge available to people that such an option was 
there. How much a concerted effort of informing people 
if they would choose to—what they would choose to do on

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1770a

this option was available, what it would accomplish, I don’t 
believe, Your Honor, I could honestly make an intelligent 
estimate.

Robert D, Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross

The Court: But you do agree that it would have to 
be an organized effort through the PTA or some 
other citizens’ group?

The Witness: I certainly think that kind of plan 
would enhance its chances of getting more young­
sters, including the ones from the fifteen schools that 
Mr. Greiner is referring to.

By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Well, this kind of VOE that would guarantee space— 
that is a privilege that is restricted to the minority children 
in the fifteen schools, is it not? A. It is a specific provision 
for these fifteen schools. I  don’t believe, in operation, the 
limitations that existed in the previous plan have been a 
practical 13653 problem. I think that, by and large, we have 
been able to accomodate all the pupils who have asked for 
such transfer. Now, there may be some exceptions.

Q. Well, then, is the space guaranteed in your mind? Is 
it going to contribute then substantially to the increased 
participation in VOE? A. I don’t believe that it will con­
tribute nearly as much as the matter of making the informa­
tion available and so on. It may have an influence, possibly. 
I  can’t say how much.

Q. Now, as I understand it, if a minority child in one of 
these fifteen schools happened to pick an Anglo school which 
was at more than 100 percent of capacity, the child would 
be allowed to go into that school and presumably an Anglo 
child in that school would get bumped, is that right? A. 
No, I  don’t believe so.



1771a

Q. Well, what does space available guaranteed mean? A. 
Well, it means that they will be assured an enrollment. 
There are, as I recall, in the plan provision for three op­
tions, three choices, and within those three choices space 
will be provided.

Q. It’s not an absolute—■ A. In the event that there is 
need, additional space could be provided for the school of 
mobilities, as you people had proposed. Certainly, the po­
tential addition of space, [366] as we receive funds, I hope, 
for additional buildings, and there is also a possibility of 
extended days which allows some latitude in terms of en­
rollments and such things as this.

Q. Now, this is a program that is going to be implemented 
on September 1970, is it not? A. Right.

Q. Now, that’s for a—for the budget year which has al­
ready been established, is it not? A. Right.

Q. Now, where is the money in the current budget com­
ing from to fund the YOE program? A. You mean on— 
in terms of transportation?

Q. Yes, first. A. Well, I  hope that there are funds in 
the transportation budget, what with adjustments of routes 
and so on, that will accommodate it. If there are not suf­
ficient funds in there it will be necessary for the Board 
then to consider transfer of funds from other budgetary 
areas to take care of whatever the needs are.

Q. Do you have any idea at all, Dr. Gilberts, of how 
much participation you could stand under your current 
budget before such transfer of funds would be required? 
A. No, I do not.

Q. Now, as I  understand it, then, the guarantee is just to 
guarantee that the child’s first, second or third choice [367] 
will be accommodated, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. There is no guarantee that his first choice is going to 
get accommodated? A. No.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1772a

Q. So it’s a conditional guarantee, is that right? A. Yes, 
sir.

Q. And I take it that, if the Anglo school is over-capacity, 
then what you’re going to do is simply increase the capacity 
of the Anglo school, is that correct? A. Well, either in­
crease the capacity as I  indicated by mobile units or look 
at modifications of the program itself and I suppose that is 
increasing the capacity, yes.

Q. Now, then, if you’re talking about an Anglo school 
that is at your capacity limitations as you have established, 
for every 30 minority students that transfer into that school, 
if you go to—go the mobile-unit route, that is a capital 
cost of how much? Those mobiles aren’t cheap, are they? 
A. No. I’m sorry. I would be guessing if I gave you the 
figure.

Q. Well, the figure is in evidence as to what the District 
has paid for mobiles? A. Yes, it is.

Q. And what it will cost to install them? A. Yes.
[368] Q. Now, what about additional construction? What 

provision do you have for additional construction in Sep­
tember of 1970, should it be found necessary? A. I believe 
that in January 1971 that the moneys that are available 
under the two-mill levy will become available for assign­
ment by the Board of Education. There is also the possi­
bility, of course, of increasing that two-mill levy to some 
other number of mills to meet our needs. Now, that can’t 
be done until January. There is no way that we can, except 
by moving facilities, maybe—we already have mobility in 
the mobiles in the fall to make the additions.

Q. What kind of project could that two mills be used 
for? Any restriction on the use of that kind of money? A. 
Yes, there are. It needs to be used for new construction. I 
don’t know—there are some restrictions, but it’s generally 
new construction of equipment.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1773a

Q. Equipment? A. I believe so.
Q. Can it be used for compensatory education equipment? 

A. It could be used for any equipment, I  believe.
Q. Can it be used for teacher training? A. No.
Q. Or for hardware? A. Capital expenditures.
Q. You’re quite sure of that? [369] A. Yes.
Q. Then you mentioned increasing the two-mill levy. Is 

that a procedure whereby you go to the public with a 
proposed budget? A. No, sir.

Q. How do you increase the two-mill levy? A. The Board 
of Education has the authority to increase capital expendi­
tures at its discretion.

Q. With no limits? A. I don’t believe there is a legal 
limit. There is a practical political limit, I suppose.

Q. Why does the Board ever bother to have bond issues 
if the Board can just keep raising the mill levy? A. Because 
when one makes substantial capital expenditures, it’s not a 
very sensible kind of economics to pay for those out of the 
immediate pay-as-you-go. The more appropriate approach 
is to amortize your costs over a longer period of time. This 
is the general reason the school systems across the entire 
country use bond issues.

Q. I see. So, bond issues provide for deferred payment? 
The increase in the two-mill levy is for immediate pay-as- 
you-go type of—A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, the mobile units that you refer to on Page 5 of 
the summary of your plan, are those mobile units in [370] 
existence today? A. Some of them might be.

Q. You don’t know? A. Well, for example, with some 
of the changes that could occur at some of the schools 
presently having mobile units—if students would transfer 
out of these schools they would be available. If they do 
not, they would not be available. Now, if there is a need

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Gross



1774a

beyond the availability of them for whatever reason, then 
we would have to provide funds.

Q. Well, Dr. Gilberts, in assessing the amount of space 
currently available in what would be the Anglo receiving 
schools, would you tell us, for example, at the elementary 
level how many spaces are currently available on the basis 
of 1969 and 1970 enrollment? A. I’m sorry. I could not do 
that.

Q. There isn’t even a thousand spaces, is there? A. This 
is based on rated capacity.

Q. Eight. Well, aren’t you using—when you say extend­
ing building capacity ten to fifteen percent, what kinds of 
capacity are you extending? Is that rated capacity? A. 
Yes.

Q. So you’re using rated capacity, are you not? A. As a 
base, yes.

Q. Well, then, we’re using the same basis. But you [371] 
couldn’t tell me, based on rated capacity, how much space 
is available in those Anglo schools? A. Not without ref­
erence.

The Court: He might be able to compute it tonight 
and give it to you tomorrow.

Mr. Greiner: I think that might be helpful, Your 
Honor.

The Court: Very well. It might be helpful for me, 
too.

Mr. Ris: Do you have in mind what he wants?
The Witness: Yes.
The Court: This would be an estimate of how 

many pupils could actually be accommodated in a 
program of this kind.

Mr. Greiner: Before we had to look at construc­
tion or mobile units or some increase—

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1775a

The Court: —before we at least have to look at 
new buildings. I don’t know about—I say “we”, may­
be the School Board doesn’t appreciate that. But 
certainly I think that it would be well to have some 
idea as to the number of students at every level who 
could be accommodated in a program of this kind.

The Witness: Yes, sir. I  can provide that to you 
by tomorrow morning, I’m sure.

The Court: Very good.

By Mr. Greiner:
[3723 Q. Now, Dr. Gilberts, I  notice with regard to the 

Hallett School that Hallett was exempted from the benefits 
of this VOE program. Why was that? A. Because in the 
Hallett School we have a special program already under 
operation covered by resolutions this spring providing for 
an integrated school.

Q. Well, Hallett is not an integrated school, is it? It’s 
not a predominantly Anglo school, is it? A. No.

Q. Pardon? A. No.

The Court: You mean there is some activity there, 
I guess. There is some movement at Hallett, at least, 
isn’t there?

The Witness: I just can’t recall right off the top 
of my head.

Q. My recollection is that Hallett has got about 35 per­
cent Anglo enrollment. Would you agree with that? A. I’m 
not sure.

Q. Another thing I wasn’t clear on, Dr. Gilberts'—I take 
it that the new VOE program would apply to Manual High 
School, since Manual was one of the Court-designated 
schools, is that correct? A. Yes.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1776a

Q. So you would actually be transporting senior high 
[373] school students away from Manual? A. If they 
choose to go, yes.

Q. And the whole concept of this VOE with space guar­
anteed is one-way busing, is it not? It’s busing the minority 
students away from minority schools? A. Not necessarily. 
A student from a predominantly Anglo school could volun­
teer to go to Manual.

Q. On a space-available guarantee? A. On the same 
criteria that it’s guaranteed in the other districts.

Q. I understand, Dr. Gilberts, that there is some sort of 
a ceiling imposed by state law on increases in the schools’ 
budgets of six percent from year to year? A. Some limited 
portions of the budget, yes.

Q. Now, what parts of the budget are exempted from that 
ceiling, Doctor? A. Well, those portions of the budget that 
relate to capital expenditures; those portions of the budget 
that relate to vocational education; those portions of the 
budget that relate to special programs. Well, roughly that 
equate with Title I programs of the federal program.

Q. Compensatory programs? A. Compensatory pro­
grams, right.

Q. Anything else that is exempted? A. I  have missed 
something. I can’t recall what it is. [374] I think those are 
substantially the ones that are excluded.

Q. Now, at Page 21 of the plan, Dr. Gilberts, I  assume 
that you’re talking now about the minority students in the 
schools. You say, “Few would deny that intensive programs 
can prepare students academically to meet the demands of 
our society”. Now, to date, Doctor, I  take it you would 
agree that those schools have not done the job of preparing 
students academically, those minority students, would you 
not? A. I don’t think they have been done as well as they 
can and should.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Gross



1777a

Q. Well, these are schools that are all achieving at, I 
think, an average of about the 22nd percentile, is that 
right ? A. Right.

Q. So those schools have failed so far, have they not! 
A. Those schools have not produced the results that we like 
to see. And that, of course, is a national phenomena. Again, 
youngsters from lower socioeconomic backgrounds have 
this reflected achievement in all schools throughout the 
entire country.

Q. Now, you say that also in this—in the same page that 
integration is the value which must be cherished as an 
objective, and I take it that there you’re talking about your 
kind of integration, namely, altitudinal change, is that 
right! [375] A. I’m talking about the definition that has 
been used here. I think you used that, too, did you not!

Q. No, my kind of integration assumes a.—a desegrega­
tion to start with. A. I’m sorry.

Q. Now, also on that same page, you say that tantamount 
to such a plan is the provision of leadership which will 
result in the deliberate improvement in the educational 
process, and result in the lasting integration of the Denver 
Public Schools. Now, what kind of integration are you 
talking about there? A. I think it is misused in that par­
ticular place.

Q. What are you talking about there? A. I’m talking 
about the kinds of integration that you have described here, 
promotion of mutual respect, understanding, elimination 
of unwarranted fears, and—

Q. What I’m talking about there is an integrated setting. 
A desegregated setting. Is that what you’re talking about ? 
A. I’m talking about this as a general condition within the 
community.

Q. I see. Well, is there any particular program in this

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1778a

plan, Dr. Gilberts, other than the voluntary open enrollment 
that directly and immediately addresses itself to the elimi­
nation of the racialization that exists in these [3763 fifteen 
schools? A. Not directly, as you have in your plan.

Q. What about indirectly? A. Yes, I think indirectly in 
terms of the kinds of programs we have designed or will 
design, in terms of opportunities for these youngsters to 
have experiences in an integrated setting by your defini­
tion, special programs and so on, the opportunities for 
these youngsters to develop a sense of self-importance, of 
self-direction, et cetera, within the schools due to programs 
or as a result of programs that can be developed, and I 
think these will contribute to my definition of integration.

Q. Dr. Gilberts, these problems that you have just de­
scribed, the frustration, the lack of control over one’s des­
tiny— Now, those are all attitudes which have been known, 
to exist in these minority schools for a number of years, 
isn’t that right? This isn’t a brand-new discovery, is it? 
A. Eight.

Q. And for a number of years there has been a massive 
effort, particularly under Titles I and III of the federal 
act to remedy those deficiencies in those segregated schools, 
has there not? A. Yes, there is.

Q. Some $4 billion has been spent? [3773 A. Yes.
Q. And yet those programs have not been successful? 

Would you agree with that? A. No, I would not agree 
with that. I think that is a generalization that is unwar­
ranted by the evidence that’s available. I think many of 
the programs have been successful. I think many of them 
have not. And I indicated in my earlier testimony that I  
felt a good many of those initial programs once created 
and-—were what I called coping education rather than really 
compensatory education. I think there is the potential

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Gross



1779a

of developing programs that will be more successful than 
many of those that have not been.

Q. Now, relating that feeling to these fifteen particular 
schools, what is the basis for that optimism! A. Well, I 
think a certain amount of experience which has accrued 
in the last few years in the process of looking at how we 
begin approaching educational change, is a part of it. 
I think the fact that there are some new ideas in terms 
of how we begin approaching this process of educational 
planning have some implications for it.

Q. What is the new idea! A. I  think the new ideas that 
have not been applied in very good form, at least, through­
out the country is the involvement of the people at the 
local level who have immediate knowledge of what the 
problems are in conjunction [378] with those people who 
have certain specific kinds of expertise. Many programs 
have been designed at a systemwide level, not taking into 
consideration variations of staff, facilities, commitments, 
et cetera, and I think this will make a difference.

Q. Is there any evidence that it will make a difference? 
A. There is at least as much evidence that it will make a 
difference as there is that your desegregation will make 
a difference.

Q. Is that right? A. I think so.
Q. Well, would you cite for me some studies, some data 

about the success of what you’re proposing, Doctor? A. 
Well, I ’m sorry that I can’t cite specific ones because there 
is a great deal of literature available in this area. Some 
of it is fair, some of it is poor. Some of it is maybe better 
than fair. But I know that there have been research and 
studies that I have read and I ’m sorry I can’t cite them. 
And these are dealing with programs—programs dealing 
with compensatory in nature and that have shown success

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1780a

in the evaluation. I wish I could be specific but I ’m sorry 
I can’t.

Q. You can’t identify one of them? A. Not by citation, 
I cannot.

Q. Isn’t there anybody on your staff that might be able 
to furnish evidence? [3793 A. I’m not sure.

Q. Who on your staff concerns himself with evaluating 
the efficacy of compensatory educational programs? A. 
Well, there are right now two departments; one is the 
Department of Federal Programs—

Q. Who heads that up? A. Bob Hirsch.
Q. Who is the other person? A. The other department 

that has something to do with this is our Department of 
Research and Planning—the Budgeting, Research and Plan­
ning Department, Dr. Brizinsky (phonetic spelling).

Q. So perhaps Dr. Brizinsky or Mr. Hirsch—he was the 
other person? A. Yes.

Q. And Mr. Hirsch—perhaps he may be able to help 
you out on an indication of which of these new programs 
have been successful? A. Perhaps?

Q, Now, do you have any recollection as to the types 
of—I understand that you have a feeling that each school 
community, each school district has certain unique attri­
butes, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. I take it you also agree that each urban school [3803 
district has certain common characteristics with other 
urban school districts, is that right? A. Yes, certainly.

Q. Now, do you recall the kinds of school districts that 
these successful compensatory programs were tried out in? 
A. Well, I  can think of one. Dr. Shepherd’s work in St. 
Louis is—was one that I—and I can’t cite the research, but 
I  think that in that particular case in a midwestern large 
city there have been evidences of success. I think there

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1781a

are other programs that probably are fairly representative 
of a cross-section of the largest cities across the country 
where individual programs have been evaluated as having 
been successful.

Q. Now, what do you mean by successful? What criteria 
do you use? A. Successful in terms of achieving the ob­
jectives that were established as the reasons for the pro­
gram.

Q. Now, I take it some compensatory educational pro­
grams are not even directed, are they, at improving student 
achievement and particular skills? A. Yes.

Q. Is that correct? A. That’s correct.
Q. In other words, not all compensatory programs are 

directed towards teaching minority children to read better, 
[381] are they? A. That’s true.

Q. Or to understand mathematics better? A. That 
monopoly will be an outgrowth of most of them, I  believe, 
though.

Q. Now, with regard to the area of improved achieve­
ment, is it your recollection that some of these successful 
compensatory programs have been successful in the area 
of improving achievement? A. It is my recollection that 
they are.

Q. Have other successes been in the psychological areas, 
is it your recollection? A. I can recall a few I have read 
about, yes.

Q. But I take it the basic thrust of this plan aside from 
this new program of open enrollment, the basic thrust is 
that the racialization that exists in these schools can 
be allowed to continue, yet the problems in those schools 
can be solved, is that right? A. I think the basic thrust 
in this plan is that we believe that through some of the 
changes here within the settings of those schools we can

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



178,2 a

make sufficient changes to improve achievements of these 
youngsters and in effect the other aspects as well; psycho­
logical solving of these things you were talking about.

Q. Segregated settings, racially isolated settings! [3823 
A. Yes.

Q. So you’re going to create schools which are separate 
but equal? A. I’m not going to create them. I ’m going to 
offer programs within these schools that I think will have 
an effect in my judgment.

Q. And they’re going to be separate schools, aren’t they? 
A. I’m not going to create them. They are separate schools.

Q. You’re going to continue them, is that right? A. At 
this point in time there is no recommendation for dis­
tinguishing them.

Q. Well, I  don’t see even a prospective recommendation 
for discontinuing them in this program. A. There is none.

Q. Now, was the Board’s approval of this plan unanimous 
at the Board meeting the other day? A. No, sir.

Q. What was the vote? A. Four to two.
Q. You said that you consulted with the fifteen princi­

pals in these schools, is that correct? A. They were 
brought in and worked with my staff.

Q. How long did that consultation take place? [3833 A. 
I was not present so I can’t tell you.

Q. You don’t know whether it was a short meeting or a 
long meeting? A. No, I  don’t.

Q. Do you know who on your staff actually conducted 
those meetings? A. Dr. Keppe was primarily in charge 
and other members of his staff.

Q. Were the principals asked to give their views as to 
how some of these problems might be solved in their schools? 
A. Yes, I believe so.

Q. Was the question of desegregation of those schools

Robert D, Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1783a

raised by any of the principals to your knowledge! A. I 
have not seen all of these individual and specific recom­
mendations of the principals, so I really can’t answer that,

Q. Was desegregation of those schools even one of the 
alternatives that was even considered in the discussion with 
the principals, to your knowledge? A. I have no knowl­
edge of that.

Q. Did you seek the opinion of the principals as to 
whether desegregation in an integrated setting might he 
more effective than compensatory programs? A. I can’t 
answer that either.

[384] Q. Now, again, as I understand it, you feel that 
one of the problems with the plaintiffs’ plan is that it’s 
ramming mixing down the throat of the community that is 
not yet willing to accept it, is that right? A. I indicated 
that I felt that the basic problem was that it is based on 
an assumption that I believe is inadequately proven at this 
particular point in time for the kind of application that 
you’re recommending.

Q. But I take it that at least on some kind of scale, for 
example, when you formulated Resolutions 1520, 24 and 
31, that you felt that there must have been some validity 
to that kind of an approach, is that correct? A. I think 
I explained that a little bit earlier. There are two basic 
reasons why I recommended that. One was to see whether 
or not it would have an effect on desegregation in an area 
of the city; in making, I think, greater efforts to try to 
stem the tide, and the second, to provide a broader base 
upon which to evaluate; whether or not that kind of integra­
tion really would make a difference academically.

Q. And there was a third reason. And that was the 
Board—that the Board actually directed you to prepare a 
plan which at least in part implemented the Noel Resolu­

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1784a

tion! A. Yes, there was a Board direction; however, I 
would have provided it without that direction.

Q. Well, Resolutions 1524, 24 and 31 were not a part, 
[3853 were they, of planning equality education? A. They 
were not in the specific form, but in planning equality 
education I indicated I felt it was important that we pro­
vide an opportunity here—or provide some kind of sug­
gestions for stabilizing the enrollment in those schools in 
Northeast Denver. That was part of it. That was an out­
growth of that element—of that development of that ele­
ment.

Q. A more specific plan than your original plan had 
contained? A. Yes.

Q. What are the programs which are now in existence, 
Dr. Gilberts, for evaluating the success of Resolutions 1520, 
24 and 31? A. I ’m sorry. I can’t describe it in detail. 
My research department has worked them out with the 
assistance of some of the colleges—or one of the colleges 
or universities in this area and I’m sorry I can’t give you 
details.

Q. Can you give us some of the general concepts that 
are being employed in that evaluation process? A. Well, 
I ’m not sure it would be inclusive. Certainly the achieve­
ment aspects are an important part of it. I think the at- 
titudinal aspects have importance, and I think that they 
are a part, but there may be others.

[3863 Q. Now, there is some sort of testing being done 
this year to try to get the pulse of the attitudinal changes 
that are—that have been brought about by this program? 
A. I can’t say for sure but I think probably so, and certainly 
I ’m not looking at this as a one-year evaluation process. 
It’s going to take longer than that.

Q. Well, when are you going to start evaluating? A. We 
have begun.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1785a

Q. Now, community support for a plan you have indi­
cated is one of the major important components of any 
plan that is going to be successful, is that right? A. I 
believe community support in any public school system is 
extremely important.

Q. How do you get community support for a plan of 
desegregation and integration? A. Well, I suppose you 
would get support by proving to people this was an im­
portant thing to do; that it in fact achieved results, provide 
time for them to understand and accept, by and large, the 
tenets of that proposal.

Q. How long do you think that would take? A. Well, I
suppose it would be quite different in different communi­
ties. And depending upon the kind of plan. But I just 
indicated to the judge recently that I  thought that probably 
as Dr. Sullivan’s suggestion, you have two years of concen­
trated effort, that would be possibly [3873 realistic to 
apply that to the Denver system. Really, I don’t know.

Q. Now, Doctor, where in this plan has the Board sub­
mitted their—a provision for even the beginning of that 
kind of effort to change community attitudes? A. As it 
relates to desegregation?

Q. Yes. A. Well, I think that the elements of evaluation 
and—not this plan but part of a provision of the plan which 
is in existence under the three resolutions you have talked 
about, is a place to begin developing some of the data I 
think that will be important if it proves out to be successful 
for selling it in the community.

Q. But there is nothing in this plan about that, is there? 
A. No, there is not.

Q. Now, there are multiple provisions here regarding 
in-service training of staff, for example? Now, are those 
provisions directed only at these fifteen schools? A. No.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1786a

Q. Wliat portions of them are directed towards solving 
some of the problems of these fifteen schools! A. Well, I 
think all of them have implications for solving some of the 
problems of these fifteen schools but £388] they also have 
implications for other schools than these fifteen schools.

Q. Dr- Gilberts, if I understand—this school district does 
not have an unlimited amount of money at its disposal, 
does it? A. No, it certainly doesn’t.

Q. Well, is it necessary to correct the problems in these 
fifteen schools to implement district-wide programs? Isn’t 
that a basically—basically a district-wide plan, a total con­
cept of education for Denver? A. I think there are some 
things in the plans that have implications for the total 
systems. They grow out, by and large, of our planning 
quality education. We think it has implications both for 
these fifteen schools and the other school systems in our 
community. I  don’t know how you separate these ideas 
in saying that these are only relevant to fifteen schools. I 
think they have relevancy beyond that.

*  *  *  *  *

[394] * * *
By Mr. Greiner:

Q. Dr. Gilberts, you recall one of the questions that came 
up during your cross-examination yesterday was the ques­
tion of how many spaces are available for the new open 
enrollment program. I have been handed a resume that 
reflects your understanding. Do you have a copy of that 
in front of you? A. Yes.

Q. I ’d like to ask you a few questions about it. First 
of all, with regard to the spaces available on the basis of 
normal capacity at the elementary school level, that shows 
878 spaces, is that correct? A. Yes.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1787a

Q. Now, of those 878 spaces, are they all in predomi­
nantly Anglo schools? Do yon know? A. I think this in­
cludes all of the elementary schools in Denver. That’s my 
understanding, at least.

Q. So that then would include the Court-designated 
schools? A. Yes.

Q. And would also include plaintiffs’ target schools, these 
ten other schools? A. Yes.

Q. Now, a black child wouldn’t be allowed to transfer
[395] into any of those schools under your program, would 
he? A. No.

Q. So, as far as the availability of space for minority 
children is concerned, how would that 878 spaces be af­
fected? Do you know? A. I have a modified sheet like 
you have here which is—which has removed the capacity 
available in the twelve Court schools, and that reduces the 
capacity at the elementary level— Shall I read these to you?

Q. Yes. A. At normal capacity it is reduced by 258, 
leaving 620. Ten percent is reduced by 1,019, leaving 5,363. 
And a plus 15 percent is reduced by 1,676 leaving a capacity 
of 7,457.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross

The Court: None of this makes any sense to either 
the record or me, you know, because I don’t know 
what he’s talking about; these figures.

Mr. Greiner: This goes to the question, Your 
Honor, of—

The Court: I know that, but he’s reading from a 
document that we don’t have before us, so we don’t 
know what he’s talking about.

Mr. Greiner: There is an extra copy we might 
have marked for identification.

The Court: We just don’t know what these figures



1788a

[396] represent that he’s reading, the various fig­
ures. I have the 878 reduced by the number of spaces 
that esist in the so-called Court schools.

Q. Leaving a balance of how many spaces? A. 620 
spaces.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross

Mr. Greiner: Now, we have marked this piece of 
paper Exhibit 517.

Q. Is that right, Dr. Gilberts? A. Yes.
Q. So that subtraction that you have just made reflects 

the fact that the so-called Court-designated schools are not 
predominantly Anglo schools, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. Now, there are other schools in the District at the 
elementary level that are also not predominantly Anglo, is 
that also correct? A. Right.

Q. For example, we have some 5,000 students in the 
so-called plaintiffs’ target schools, is that right? A. Yes.

Q. Or about ten percent of the elementary school enroll­
ment, is that right? A. I believe that’s correct.

Q. So that, if we were to further reduce these capacity 
figures by subtracting other predominantly Anglo space, do 
£3973 you have any idea as to how much of a further re­
duction would be required? A. I’m sorry. I  don’t have 
that information available and I would just be guessing.

Q. But, even just taking into consideration the Court- 
designated schools, the available space is brought down 
below the total number of minority students in the Court- 
designated schools. Isn’t that right? A. Yes.

Q. Because there are about—some 9,000 minority chil­
dren in these Court schools? A. True.

Q. Now, have you made a similar adjustment with re­



1789a

spect to the asserted available capacity of the junior high 
school level? A. Yes.

Q. What is that adjustment, please? A. The normal 
capacity reduced by 737, leaving 1,088. The plus ten per­
cent is reduced to 3,048. The plus 15 percent is reduced to 
4,029.

Q. Now, I take it then that those figures that you have 
just read me as being net figures, those figures still include 
capacity at Morey Junior High School, don’t they? Be­
cause Morey is not a Court-designated school? A. I  would 
assume that is true, but I don’t know that [398] to be a fact.

Q. And Morey, of course, is not a predominantly Anglo 
Junior High School, is it? A. No, it is not.

Q. So perhaps there is a further reduction that would 
have to be made in that 4,000 figure, is that right? A. Pos­
sibly.

The Court: These figures are within the rated 
capacities of these schools?

The Witness: Sir, the rated capacity is defined 
as the capacity normal here and then the plus ten 
percent is adding a ten-percent factor onto that, and 
a fifteen-percent factor on that. The base is a nor­
mal capacity.

The Court: So these figures then contemplate that 
you’re going to be using these schools substantially 
over capacity?

The Witness: Yes, sir. As we said yesterday, we 
felt that we would probably have to provide space 
through mobiles, possibly, to modify schedules to 
possibly add on to these buildings to produce the 
space that could possibly be necessary.

The Court: And you would do this with mobile 
units?

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—-Cross



1790a

The Witness: It could be clone.
The Court: Or whatever else yon can muster, is 

that right?
[399] The Witness: Yes, sir. These ten and fif­

teen-percent capacities we feel we can operate with 
pretty much—pretty much within the existing facili­
ties. If we went beyond this we would then probably 
have to begin providing additional space through 
adjustments in schedules or additional facilities.

The Court: This doesn't take into account possible 
double sessions?

The Witness: No, sir, this does not.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Gilberts, have you made a similar adjustment on 

Exhibit 517 with respect to the senior high schools? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. And would you read those figures for us, please, the 
net figures? A. The capacity normal is a deficit here of 
337 pupils over capacity, as I read this. This is adjusted 
to 478.

Q. Is that plus or minus ? A. Minus, I assume; an addi­
tional minus of 141. The ten percent is 1,697, a minus of 
297, leaving a capacity of 1,382. The plus fifteen percent 
is a minus 375 with an adjusted capacity of 2,311.

Q. Now, one other question with regard to these net 
figures, Dr. Gilberts. Do the net figures now reflect the 
[400] fact that some of these available spaces are cur­
rently being filled by students participating in the District’s 
regular VOE program? A. Yes, I believe they do.

Q. They do? A. Yes.
Q. Now, one of the other questions—there was a ques­

tion with respect to the description of the new YOE pro­

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1791a

posal, Dr. Gilberts. We are assuming, and I ’d like you to 
confirm this, that there is a racial balance condition being 
imposed under this special YOE program. Is that correct? 
A. There is a paragraph, I believe, where it mentions 
that we will try to keep a ratio of some sort. I don’t be­
lieve it’s defined precisely.

Q. But I am right in my assumption, am I not, that under 
the new YOE, a minority child couldn’t transfer into a 
predominantly minority school? Is that right? A. That’s 
correct.

Q. I’m going to be referring to the Board’s plan, Dr. 
Gilberts. Do you have a copy of that in front of you? A. 
Yes, I  do.

Q. Now, before we leave YOE, I assume that if a minor­
ity child transfers into a predominantly Anglo school that 
you feel that it will be necessary to undertake some pro­
grams in that receiving school in order to properly [4013 
prepare the school for the minority child, is that correct? 
A. Yes.

Q. And what kinds of programs do you conceive as being 
necessary in these Anglo receiving schools? A. I think 
essentially the same kinds of programs that are going to 
be necessary in those schools that are predominantly min­
ority.

Q. Well, could you be a little more specific, please? A. I 
suppose the information that we have included under our 
in-service education, those areas would be covered. Those 
areas would include the nature of the minority community, 
the child and his problems, his strengths, his weaknesses in 
terms of our program, teaching techniques that it may be 
appropriate to be used with these youngsters. Certainly 
understanding of the cultural, social heritage of the groups 
that are brought into the school.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1792a

Q. So this is a program directed not only toward teach­
ers in the Anglo receiving schools but it is also directed 
towards the Anglo students in the Anglo receiving schools, 
is that correct? A. Yes, it would have to be.

Q. And I take it that your description of what is to be 
done in the Hallett program receiving schools is a pretty 
accurate description of what you have in mind for all Anglo 
receiving schools, is that correct? [402] A. I’m not just 
sure exactly what you are—the one in the plan here that— 
or, which description are you talking about?

Q. As I recall, and correct me if I’m wrong, the proposal 
contemplates an allocation of certain of these minority 
schools. A. For in-service?

Q. For in-service, or for anything else, as I understand 
it. A. Planning.

Q. Additional salaries, for example, extended school 
year; that type of thing. A. Yes.

Q. I’m looking here now to see if I can find the exact 
place. Well, at any rate, you do talk about this—in this 
plan, what you’re going to do with the Hallett program 
receiving schools, and as I  recall the proposal it is to give 
the Hallett plan receiving schools approximately one-half 
as much aid in terms of dollars as that which is going 
to be directed towards the Court-designated schools, is 
that correct? A. I ’m afraid you’ll have to refer me to the 
place in the plan here that you’re talking about.

Q. If you would look, please, at Page 66' of your plan, 
down towards the middle of the page, it reads: “Budget 
[403] allotments should be made to the schools which 
will receive the Hallett pupils at the same rate as that 
recommended for the twelve minority schools except that 
the time involved for the extended work year would only 
be one-half as long or a period of two additional work

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1793a,

weeks per year. It is estimated that the total cost for 
these receiving schools for this purpose would be $114,- 
500.” And that is the cost, I believe, for ten receiving 
schools—no, nine receiving schools, is that correct? A. 
I ’m afraid I don’t see where you’re reading.

Q. Page 66. A. Yes, that’s correct.
Q. So, if you divide nine into 114,500, you get some­

what over $12,000 per school, is that right, per receiving 
school? A. Yes, I presume you’re correct.

Q. Now, you’re going to have a multiplication, are you 
not, Dr. Gilberts, of Anglo receiving schools under the 
Board’s concept of special open enrollment? A. I wish 
you would define what you mean by that a little more.

Q. Well, for example, there is not going to be any limi­
tation placed—well, let’s take an example. Approximately 
how many predominantly Anglo elementary schools do 
we have in the District? [404] A. I’m sorry. I don’t have 
that figure right at hand.

Q. How many elementary schools do we have in the 
District? A. Eighty-six—87.

Q. And would you say that about half of those are pre­
dominantly Anglo? A. Yes.

Q. So let’s say there are 42 predominantly Anglo 
schools. Now, under your program of special open en­
rollment, a minority child could transfer into any one of 
those 42 schools, is that correct? A. Correct.

Q. So it’s possible that you may have 42 receiving 
schools that are going to require these special receiving 
school budget allocations, isn’t that right? A. That’s pos­
sible, but it seems to me that one would have to apply a 
little bit of judgment with respect to the nature and the 
size of the problem. If there are two or three youngsters 
transported into one of these receiving schools I doubt

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Gross



1794a

very much that the investment there would have to be as 
great as it would in a school where substantial numbers 
of youngsters are transported.

Q. But you don’t contest the fact that some sort of 
program is going to be required? [4051 A. Yes.

Q. Even for one minority child? A. I think some kind 
of program, yes.

Q. So, actually, you have a potential for more receiving 
schools under your proposal of open enrollment than un­
der the most comprehensive of the plaintiffs’ plan? A. 
We already have that potential under the plan we pres­
ently have.

Q. Now, I ’d like now to call your attention to Page 6 
of the summary that is entitled Staff Stabilization. Now, 
over in the right-hand column there is a figure given for 
the estimated cost of 1970 under the voluntary incentive 
program of $633,000 per year. Out of that 633,000 how 
much of it is going to be spent for two of the items—or 
three of the items over here in the left-hand margin? For 
example, how much is going to be spent on superior mate­
rials? A. I ’m afraid I couldn’t define that at this point.

Q. How much is going to be spent on special programs? 
A. I can’t define the precise costs in any one of those 
elements at this time.

Q. Now, if I  understand, that $633,000 figure reflects 
the fact that in these twelve minority schools—there are 
fifteen minority schools designated by the Court—there 
are 633 teachers, is that right? A. Yes.

[4063 Q. And it contemplates that each one of those 
teachers would receive an extra $1,000 per year for addi­
tional—for this additional four-week work period, is that 
correct? A. That’s certainly a possibility.

Q. So it’s one of the possibilities that all of this $633,- 
000 is going to be—going to go toward teacher salaries?

Robert D, Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1795a

That’s one possibility, is that correct? A. It’s a possibil­
ity, yes.

Q. Now, as I understand it, another possibility is up 
to one-half of that amount, depending on a decision made 
at the local school level, up to one-half of the amount 
would be allocated for other purposes, is that correct? A. 
Yes.

Q. But any such allocation would automatically cut 
down, would it not, the amount of funds available to pay 
teachers for this extended work year? In other words, 
you can only—you can only use this $633,000 once, not 
twice? A. Certainly that would be true if it were spent 
on some of the programs that are identified here.

Q. Well, for example, if money were spent on superior 
materials, it wouldn’t be available for teacher compensa­
tion, would it? A. Right.

Q. And if money were spent on special programs, would 
[407] it also be available to pay teachers for their four- 
week extended period? A. These special programs could 
involve teachers, yes. It could be available for extended 
employment.

Q. How about pre-visitation to assigned schools? A. I 
think that would be a matter of additional pay for 
teachers.

Q. And the orientation program? A. That, too.
Q. So some of this is to pay teachers for the extra 

time? A. Right.
Q. Some of it is available for other resources. Now, 

this $633,000—is this to pay teachers only in the Court- 
designated schools? A. Yes, I believe that’s correct, the 
way it was written in this proposal.

Q. And then you contemplate spending an additional 
$114,500 in the Hallett receiving schools, is that correct? 
A. Yes.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1796a

Q. And then we have also, I think, agreed that you’re 
going to spend something like—we don’t know how much 
—for the other Anglo receiving schools, is that correct? 
A. Yes.

Q. Now, the orientation program is a separate expense 
[4083 under this itemization, is that correct, on Page 6? 
A. Yes.

The Court: What’s your point? In that this is 
going to be expensive?

Mr. Greiner: Very, very expensive, Your Honor, 
and a lot more expensive.

The Court: You’re not really worried about the 
costs here, are you? I mean, that’s not a real prob­
lem? I mean, this is not a great issue from your 
standpoint ?

Mr. Greiner: Well, not only I am not worried 
about the cost but evidently the defendants aren’t 
worried about the costs, either, Your Honor.

Q. Now, this orientation program of $15,000, that’s a 
thousand dollars per Court-designated school, is that cor­
rect ? A. Bight.

Q. Is it going to be necessary to have similar orienta­
tion programs in receiving schools? A. Again, I say this 
would depend upon the number of youngsters and individ­
ual—the individual school’s evaluation of whether or not 
this would be necessary.

Q. Now, turning your attention to Page 7, differentiated 
staffing, I wonder if you could distinguish for me the dif­
ference in concept between that of a paraprofessional and 
a teacher aide. Is there a difference? [4093 A. Well, I 
think there is no difference that one could identify that 
would hold true across the entire country. These terms

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1797a

are used in a number of different ways in a number of 
different school systems.

Q. How are you using it? A. I would use the para- 
professional as somebody who has some specialized train­
ing. Let me give you an example. For example, an indi­
vidual who had been trained as a technician in the use 
of audiovisual instruction materials would probably be a 
paraprofessional. I  suppose that one could consider indi­
viduals who have had degrees in various academic areas 
who would assist teachers, work with them, as a parapro­
fessional and not a certified person—but somebody comes 
in as an aide to the teacher. I ’m sure there are other kinds 
of positions.

Q. I think that clarifies the question. Now, in the im­
plementation of your differentiated staffing program, and 
bearing in mind your current contracts with D.C.T.A., is 
differentiated staffing now entirely compatible with the 
current school district contract? Or, is some sort of nego­
tiation and agreement of D.C.T.A. going to be necessary? 
A. I think that certainly some conference and involvement 
with the D.C.T.A. will be important. I think the Board 
has the authority to move in this direction if it chooses 
but obviously the professional organization has an interest.

[410] Q. So you wouldn’t force this down the D.C.T.A.’s 
throat? A. My impression, I would not. We have dis­
cussed this over the last year or two and people I have 
talked with at least are interested in examining—

Q. Because, in essence, it’s going to make the teacher’s 
job a little easier, isn’t it? A. I don’t believe so. I  don’t 
think it would make it—I think it would make the teacher’s 
job more difficult.

Q. By giving the teacher more assistance? A. No, by 
giving the teacher more responsibility in more difficult 
areas of professional—

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1798a

Q. Now, with regard to, first of all, paraprofessionals 
and bearing in mind the character of the Court-designated 
schools, can you give us at least an estimate, Dr. Gilberts, 
of how many paraprofessionals are going to be required 
in these schools? A. No, I don’t believe that I can. I did 
try to describe yesterday how I felt one would arrive at 
effective—an effective system for differentiating. If one 
were to take the model that is proposed in the—in back 
here, under those circumstances, I  could give—

Q. That’s all I  want. A. —that’s the kind of solution 
of the plan that we will be pursuing.

[4113 Q. Well, if you were to apply this reference that 
you just made, how would you come out? A. Well, let me 
—I really don’t believe that I can give you an intelligent 
estimate. Let me cite an example of where differentiated 
staffing is being used locally which you could examine, if 
you choose, in Cherry Creek where they have differenti­
ated staffing in such a way as to staff the schools within the 
regular budget for elementary schools. Now, that’s pos­
sible. I t’s been done.

Q. Do you think that’s going to be feasible in these 
minority schools, Dr. Gilberts? A. I think within the 
budgetary limitations that we are proposing for these 
schools with existing support programs, yes.

Q. You might say that the Cherry Creek School District 
has a minimum number of minority pupils, is that correct? 
A. I certainly would agree with that.

Q. And as I understand it, this differentiated staffing 
concept, as you are proposing here, is somehow directly 
tailored to the problems of minority schools, is that correct? 
A. Eight.

Q. So, is the Cherry Creek example really even relevant 
here, Doctor? A. Well, only relevant in that an existing

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1799a

educational program was taken. The staff was differenti­
ated to deal with 1412] the educational task that was there 
within the budget already provided. We already have 
budgetary provisions in many of these schools that are in 
excess of many of the other schools in the city. And un­
der this circumstance, I think it’s quite likely that we could 
stay within it. Now, possibly—we won’t know until we be­
gin working with the problem.

Q. So the concept would be to remove numbers of pro­
fessional teachers from these Court-designated schools and 
add paraprofessionals and teacher aides, is that correct? 
A. I don’t know whether that would be true. It might be.

Q. Well, you would have to do that to stay within the 
current budgets? A. We already have aides in many of 
these schools.

Q. Do you have enough? A. No, we’re proposing more.
Q. And do you have paraprofessionals in these Court- 

designated schools today? A. Very few.
Q. Now, one area that I couldn’t find a description of on 

Page 7 is master teachers. And there is an allocation of 
$212,000 for master teachers. What does that figure rep­
resent? A. Well, this represents additional pay for addi­
tional responsibility for individuals who would assume lead­
ership roles and instructional programs—I believe if you 
look at E413J the end of this proposal, the program which 
is on Page 159, it would give you a general idea of what 
is being referred to. On Page 160 it talks here about the 
unit leader, teachers, instructional aids, clerical aids. Now, 
these are arbitrary decisions with respect to how one dif­
ferentiates. I am not sure that particular description is 
what ultimately would be the description used. You’ve got 
to keep in mind that we put this plan together in about a 
week. The complete development of some of these concepts

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1800a

is going to take time. Many of the elements—nearly, if not 
all of the elements within this proposal were in certain 
stages of consideration. I t’s not possible for me at this 
point to even be assured that this is the kind of organiza­
tional structure that will be appropriate under differenti­
ated staffing. This is what my staff recommended to me. 
I have a fairly sizable staff. Each of these elements, work­
ing on these plans that are in here—in this period of time 
it wasn’t possible to work out the kinds of interrelation­
ships, the kinds of definitions, the kinds of program descrip­
tions we would like to have.

Q. Now, at Page 160, the diagram there that shows five 
of these unit leaders in the elementary school—that’s the 
diagram of the model which Denver is going to follow, is 
that right? A. This is a diagram of a model that Denver 
is going to test.

[4143 Q. So that there might be as many as 60 of these 
master teachers in the Court-designated schools? Twelve 
times five? A. I think that’s entirely possible.

Q. And then you would allocate this $212,000 among those 
people? A. If there were that many and if that were an 
appropriate sum of money for the additional responsibility 
in time and employment, yes, that’s probably what would 
be done. We wouldn’t arrive at their salary—which, tak­
ing this amount and then dividing the number into it—I’m 
sure we would arrive at some more logical system than 
that.

Q. So it’s not going to be a per capita distribution? A. 
I don’t know.

Q. Now, I understand from Page 7 that in these minor­
ity schools you are not going to—the District overall is not 
going to need any more psychologists or social workers, is 
that correct? A. I don’t think that decision has been made.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1801a

Q. Well, I see here that there is no provision budgetwise 
for hiring additional psychologists or social workers. A. 
I’m sure we have not reflected every consideration in what 
will have to be there in the future.

Q. Well, you infer by assigning these that you can meet 
these needs'? [415] A. We think so.

Q. So you’re not sure? A. No. No, we’re not sure.
Q. Now, the extended work year at the bottom of Page 7 

which is given as a $114,500 price tag, is that included in 
the $633,000 figure that we find on Page 6? Or is that in 
addition to it? A. It could be. It is not necessarily. If 
this plan were to operate in one of the schools that we’re 
talking about, then certainly we wouldn’t need two sums 
for extended school year.

Q. Now, turning your attention to the improved in- 
service training program, could you describe very briefly 
for the Court the kinds of in-service training programs that 
were developed for teachers and were attended by teachers 
last summer that related to the implementation of the reso­
lutions? A. I’m not sure I can do this inclusively. There 
were several, I can remember. There wms one conducted 
at Colorado College, I believe, which was an extension of 
the year before. Last summer there was a—

Q. Pardon me, Doctor. What was the subject of the ses­
sion at Colorado College? A. I’m sorry. I  can’t recall 
exactly but it had to do with the cultural contributions of 
the minorities.

[416] Q. At Page 69 of your report there is a list. Per­
haps that would refresh your recollection. A. Thank you. 
It doesn’t indicate where these were held so it would be 
difficult for me to judge which one is which.

Q. But I take it, referring to the list on Page 69, Dr. 
Gilberts, that these are all in-service programs that really

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1802a

relate quite directly, don’t they, to the problems of teach­
ing minority children? A. Yes, I think so.

Q. So the School District has already worked up a lot of 
things—a lot of this in-service training program, has it 
not? A. These you see listed, at least, yes.

Q. Now, in the past was a teacher’s attendance at an 
in-service training program mandatory or voluntary? A. 
It was voluntary.

Q. And do you think, Dr. Gilberts, bearing in mind these 
special problems at these Court-designated schools, do you 
think it is reasonable to require that every teacher in those 
schools be required to attend these in-service training pro­
grams? A. Yes, I do.

Q. And is that contemplated in your plan? A. It would 
be, yes.

[4171 Q. If you make such a requirement, do you also 
then get a concomitant obligation to pay the teacher or 
give the teacher time off to attend the program? A. Yes, 
and this is contemplated in the extended school year. Some 
of the provisions that are already reflected in the budget.

Q. So all teachers in the target schools are going to be 
required—in the Court schools are going to be required to 
attend these sessions, is that correct? A. Eight.

Q. Now, in view of the achievement levels and the simi­
larity of problems at such schools as the ten additional 
schools which the plaintiffs would like to see included in 
relief, would it also be a good idea to have the teachers in 
those schools attend this on a mandatory basis? A. Yes.

Q. And that, of course, would increase the cost of the 
program in terms of teacher time off, is that correct? A. 
Yes. And those also would—those will be things that will 
be required no matter what we do.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1803a

Q. Now, you say that, for September of 1970—and I am 
on Page 8—that improved in-service training will be im- 
plementd to the extent of currently budgeted available 
funds. What does that mean in terms of dollars, Doctor? 
A. I ’m sorry. I  can’t tell you what is left in that [418] 
fund for next fall.

Q. Do you have any idea? A. No, I don’t.
Q. I  take it that your estimate was that it would cost 

about $100,500 to fund a similar program in 1971, is that 
correct? A. I think this is a mistake. I think this was 
supposed to be $200,000, and somehow in the reproduction 
of this document, it was not changed.

Q. So that cost there should be $200,500? A. It should 
be $200,000, period.

Q. I  see. All right. Now, Doctor, that contemplates 
mandatory participation by teachers in all of the Court- 
designated schools, is that correct? A. Yes, and other 
schools as well.

Q. Oh, and other schools as well? A. Eight.
Q. So this is going to be a district-wide program? A. 

Yes.
Q. Does it contemplate that teachers in all of the Anglo 

receiving schools would also be required to attend these 
programs? A. Yes.

Q. And what estimate of that $200,000 do you allocate 
to that part of the program? [4193 A. Well, in view of the 
fact that a good bit of these programs could be made avail­
able in the Court-designated schools during the additional 
time period that has been provided for employment, I would 
assume that most of this could be spent in that direction.

Q. Now, what about the human relations seminars and 
the workshops in the history and cultural aspects of mi­
norities—how much is available this year for that program?

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants'—Cross



1804a

A. As I indicated to you, I ’m not sure what’s left in the 
budget and how much is committed to these programs.

Q. Can you give us a ball park figure! A. No.
Q. Can you assure us that there are sufficient funds to 

adequately run these programs! A. I  don’t believe that I 
could assure you of that at all. As a matter of fact, I ’m 
sure in terms of what we contemplate in the succeeding 
years when we can budget for these funds, there are not 
enough funds to do what needs to be done.

Q. Now, programs directed toward the special problems 
of teaching disadvantaged pupils aren’t scheduled to begin 
under this timetable until a year from this coming Septem­
ber, is that correct! A. "Well, it appears that way on this 
schedule. It E4203 doesn’t make that much sense to me that 
that would be the case. I  would assume that these would 
begin immediately after funds are available when we have 
budgeted for them.

Q. Now, the cooperative workshops put on by black edu­
cators and the Hispano teachers—that’s a program that’s 
already in existence, is it not! A. It is being contemplated 
for this fall.

Q. And this is a separate cost for that program? A. I 
think that’s included in the amount of moneys in the in- 
service budget that we have included for this year.

Q. Now, I ’d like to call your attention, Dr. Gilberts, to 
the school complex concept which is summarized on Page 
9. First of all, you have in mind, I take it, the identity of 
the Court-designated schools, do you not! The Columbine, 
Bryant-Webster, Elmwood, Fairmount, Fairview, Green­
lee, Hallett, Harrington, Mitchell, Smith, Stedman and 
Whittier. Now, as I understand it, it is your proposal to 
implement first, Elementary Complexes 1 and 2, is that 
correct! A. Yes, we are working on those this year.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1805a

Q. Now, how many schools are involved in Elementary 
Complex 1? A. One. Wait a minute—-

Q. What’s the total number? A. Not in Complex 1. One 
in Complex 2.

Q. I ’m sorry. What’s the total number of all kinds
[421] of schools contained in Complex 1? A. Eleven.

Q. And of those eleven schools there is only one Court- 
designated school, isn’t that right? A. Yes.

Q. And that’s Hallett, is that correct? A. Right.
Q. Now, how does the implementation of Complex 1 in 

your view afford relief to any of the other schools which 
the Court has designated? Does it? A. Not in a direct 
way, but as I indicated yesterday, I believe that this con­
cept has some important implications for all the schools 
in Denver. I believe that the things that we will learn out 
of the planning of these complexes will have some implica­
tions not only for the Court-designated schools but all the 
schools in the city.

Q. Now, when we turn to Elementary Complex 2, what 
is the total number of schools in that complex? A, Twelve, 
I  believe.

Q. So in this complex—and there is only one Court- 
designated school in that complex, is that correct? A. 
True.

Q. So in the implementation of Complexes 1 and 2, you 
are dealing with 23 schools? A. Yes.

[422] Q. Only two of which are Court-designated 
schools ? A. Exactly.

Q. Now, as I  understand the complex theory, one of its 
premises is decentralization, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. And you look to this committee of teachers, staff and 
local community representatives to sort of put the meat on 
the skeleton of the complex concept, is that correct? A.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1806a

Along with central office personnel and any kind of re­
sources that they should ask for.

Q. Now, am I correct in my understanding, Dr. Gilberts, 
that these kinds of committees composed of teachers, staff, 
community representatives and so on, were in fact desig­
nated for Elementary Complexes 1 and 2 sometime last 
fall! They do exist, is that correct? A. The planning com­
mittee ?

Q. Yes. A. Yes.
Q. When were they appointed? A. I ’m sorry. I  couldn’t 

give you the exact time, but last fall I think is reasonably 
accurate.

Q. And they have been meeting and working continu­
ously since then, have they not? A. I believe the heavy 
effort on this began probably in about December, but I 
could be mistaken.

[423] Q. And have you had any kinds of input or out­
put from those committees? Are you familiar at all with 
what they have planned so far? A. Yes.

Q. How much integration has been planned so far in the 
schools of Complex 1, Dr. Gilberts? Do you understand 
what I mean? A. Yes. I ’m sorry. I  just couldn’t be sure 
that any has been planned in terms of special programs. 
As I recall, and this is from recollection, I may have missed 
something—that in the complexes are some ideas that have 
been developed at this point. The instructional centers, 
diagnostic learning center approach, the cultural arts type 
program, all of these could provide for some integration 
within the programs.

Q. But that would go only to relieve the minority chil­
dren of Hallett, isn’t that right, in Complex 1? A. As far 
as the Court-designated schools, yes.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1807a

Q. As a matter of fact, Hallett is the subject already of 
a special program, is it not? A. Yes.

Q. Now, what about the input and output with regard to 
elementary Complex 2, Dr. Gilberts? What sort of inte­
gration is currently being provided for that complex? A. 
Essentially the same as in Complex 1 at this [424] point.

Q. In other words, none? A. Only through special pro­
grams.

Q. Now, Elementary Complex 5, the planning for which 
starts in January of 1971, and implementation in Septem­
ber of 1971—is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. In other words, this is another program that is a year 
off, is that right? A. Yes.

Now, it contains some more of the Court-designated 
schools, does it not? A. Yes.

Q. For example, Columbine, Harrington, Mitchell, Smith 
and Stedman, is that right? A. Eight.

Q. Now, as I go down that list of schools of Elementary 
Complex 5, Dr. Gilberts, am I right that those are all pre­
dominantly minority schools? A. Yes.

Q. Well, where do the children in the schools of Complex 
5 get their integration experience? A. I  wasn’t aware that 
the Court ordered us to produce a plan of integration. The 
plan to improve educational quality in these schools. There­
fore, that plan is not [425] necessarily aimed primarily at 
integration.

Q. Well, it’s not aimed at all at integration, is it, Dr. 
Gilberts? A. In this particular case, if these are the only 
schools that will be involved, you are right.

The Court: Well, this Complex 1 and 2 ,1 thought 
you said was put together long before I issued any 
judgment.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1808a

The Witness: Yes, sir. It began last fall—the 
planning began last fall.

The Court: So you were not offering this in re­
sponse to any order that I issued?

The Witness: No, sir. But we certainly have been 
planning to improve the educational quality in these 
schools before you issued an order.

The Court: Well, I thought you just said now 
that you thought I was seeking to improve the qual­
ity of education and that is what this has to do with ?

The Witness: No, I ’m just showing that this is a 
response that we think will have an effect on that; 
that’s already begun.

The Court: Well, then, your famous Exhibit 20, 
one of the important objects is to bring about some 
integration?

The Witness: Yes.
The Court: And you have just abandoned that in 

these two programs?
[426] The Witness: Not totally.
The Court: Well, it’s just so minimal it doesn’t 

amount to a thing. How do you explain that? I 
can’t understand what your thinking is. What’s the 
use of doing it if you’re going to do it this way?

The Witness: Well, I first began my presentation 
yesterday—I said I felt that one of the major needs 
in education in terms of improving the quality of 
education, and this includes these schools and other 
schools as well, is to reconstruct the climate of the 
educational institution itself. Now, this is a good 
deal more than integration. This involves the kinds 
of programs that are developed.

The Court: True.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1809a

The Witness: It involves the kinds of input the 
staff has. It involves the kinds of attitudes the com­
munity has. It involves a host of things. One of 
which can be certainly desegregation. No question 
about that. Now, I believe—

The Court: Well, you wouldn’t put a new system 
together that would perpetuate—

The Witness: Sir, we are not changing the schools 
that exist within the city in this complex. Possibly 
I didn’t get that across. We are using the existing 
facilities that are presently there. We are not 
changing that. We are merely putting them to­
gether in an organizational structure [4273 which I 
think will allow us to free up the educational proc­
ess to do some of the things that I  have been talking 
about. We’re not changing the physical structure of 
the school system; merely the operational structure 
of it. Now, I  think that’s a significant requirement 
in the improvement of education and I think it’s 
significant in all the schools of the city. That is my 
professional judgment.

The Court: Well, that may wrnll be, but it makes 
very little contribution in this kind of setting. That’s 
all I  can say.

The Witness: Well, it doesn’t make a contribu­
tion—

The Court: I  mean, this is what we’re concerned 
with. I  submit that we are definitely concerned with 
these complaints of discrimination. I mean, that’s 
what we have been trying here, I take it, for almost 
a year, off and on.

The Witness: Sir, if you look at the entire plan, 
there are all kinds of things that I feel will change

Robert D. Gilberts-~for Defendants-—Cross



1810a

the educational climate. I thought in your decision 
you had asked that educational achievement be im­
proved in these schools. That was the direction that 
I read in that. In my judgment the things we are 
talking about here will contribute to that end. Now, 
not this alone. I  think this is only a piece of it. I 
think all of the other elements that we talked about 
will also contribute to it. I think when you have an 
opportunity this morning to listen to Mr. Ward and 
to Mr. [428] Morrison, our elementary principal, 
you will see some things that are going on that 
are qualitatively oriented to better education. I 
guess -what I’m saying is that one can’t assume that 
one can solve this problem by any one approach. 
You’ve got to use a very broad approach to chang­
ing the character of education. And certainly de­
segregation is only one of those.

The Court: Well, what I’m expressing really is 
that your whole cluster approach is described in 
Exhibit 20 was designed in response to a demand 
for integration and in this you say, “Well, you get 
the best of two worlds. You have a home school. 
At the same time you achieve this integrating ex­
perience in a campus atmosphere.” These evidences 
would indicate to me that the thread that runs 
through all of his would be to bring about some 
kind of integration and either you didn’t anticipate 
this at all or somebody put it in here without your 
knowledge or else you abandoned your former prin­
ciples. That’s all.

The Witness: There are some other schools in 
Complex 2 not identified by the Court that certainly 
will provide some integration in those cases. The

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1811a

important schools that the Court has identified are 
only two, as is indicated here. But there are other 
schools in which this can occur.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Gilberts, Elementary Complex 5 [429] and the 

schools contained therein, those are the same schools that 
were put in Complex 5 in Exhibit 20, Planning Equality 
Education, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. Now, is my recollection also correct, Dr. Gilberts, 
that when you originally drafted—or in Exhibit 20—actu­
ally I think it’s Exhibit D, Planning Equality Education, 
that in Complex 5 you were going to leave the minority 
children in those schools for Grades K through 3? A. Yes.

Q. And then you were going to mandatorily transport 
them into Anglo schools, isn’t that correct ? A. That was 
my original recommendation.

Q. And you have abandoned that concept completely? 
A. I have not abandoned that concept.

Q. Well, it’s not in the plan, is it? A. No, it’s not.
Q. Well, does it continue to exist somewhere? A. No, 

it does not exist in any other way than my recommenda­
tions.

Q. So that concept has been abandoned, hasn’t it? A. I 
don’t believe it’s been considered as a separate issue.

Q. Now turning your attention, Doctor, to early child­
hood education, as I  understand it, the Head Start program 
[4303 which centers upon three- and four-year-olds is now 
being conducted in 18 separate places in the city and en­
compasses about 600 children, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. Now, which schools do these children go to? Do you 
have any idea? A. I  couldn’t recall that.

Q. In other words, this Head Start program is not specif­
ically tailored in particular to teach children or to reach

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1812a

children who are ultimately going to end up in these twelve 
minority elementary schools that the Court has designated? 
Isn’t that right? A. These programs are tailored to young­
sters that qualify under the Title I area of the city, which 
is determined by parental income and so on, I believe.

The Court: Where are you now?
Mr. Greiner: Page 10, Your Honor, of their plan.

Q. What is the Title I  area of the city, Dr. Gilberts? 
Can you roughly describe it for us? A. Well, I think that, 
by and large, with the exception of south—part of a south 
central area, generally beginning with—well, with the dots 
you have following in that general area around that part 
of the city.

Q. Well, referring now to what has been designated in 
the Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 415, which is a map of the school 
E4313 district—for example, is Smedly in the Title I area? 
A. I believe so but I could not be absolutely certain.

Q. Bryant-Webster? A. Yes.
Q. Garden Place? A. Yes.
Q. Elyria? A. Yes.
Q. Swansea? A. Right.
Q. How about Harrington? A. Again I’m not sure but 

I  think so.
Q. Somewhere here in the east is a divided—a dividing 

line, is that right? A. Yes.
Q. Do you know whether or not Stedman, Hallett or 

Smith are Title I schools? A. I believe so. I think there 
are some programs in those schools.

Q. Under Title I? A. Again I can’t be absolutely cer­
tain.

Q. What about down in southwest—the southwest sec­
tion here, Pairview, Greenlee? A. Yes.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1813a

Q. Elmwood? [432] A. Right.
Q. Fairmount? A. Yes.
Q. Now, as I understand it, Title I has an economic 

premise to it, doesn’t it, Dr. Gilberts? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is the economic premise? A. $3,000 income, as 

I recall.
Q. So there is a very high correlation, is there not, 

between these minority schools that we have just listed 
and low socioeconomic status? A. Yes.

Q. In fact, every one of those schools is low socioeco­
nomically, is it not? A. Yes.

The Court: Now, the school facilities are not 
necessarily used for the Head Start program, are 
they?

The Witness: No, some are outside the school 
facilities.

The Court: They are just put in neighborhoods?
The Witness: Right.
The Court: That probably are involved in—they 

probably are involved in a particular school area, 
but, as I  understand it, these are conducted in store 
buildings or whatever they have available, is that 
correct?

[433] The Witness: Yes.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Now, as I understood—is it your understanding, Dr. 

Gilberts, that these Head Start programs are directed 
throughout the geographic area that we have just been de­
scribing? A. In general, yes.

Q. Now, are there children, Dr. Gilberts, who qualify for 
Head Start but who can’t be accommodated into the pro­
gram? A. Yes.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1814a

Q. Can you give me any idea of how many children must 
be turned away each year under the current funding? A, 
Again, this would be a guess on my part. I can’t give you 
that figure.

Q. Well, can you tell us if half the children who need 
it are getting it? A. No, I don’t believe I could. I don’t 
believe I could hazard that guess.

Q. Is there anybody on your staff that could?

The Court: I think we can take notice of the fact 
that there are many that are not getting it. I  mean, 
do you need the exact number?

Mr. Greiner: No, I don’t think so, Your Honor. 
I’d just like to get some idea.

The Court: I  think it’s a matter we can take 
judicial notice of; that it’s not an adequate program 
in [434] terms of the demand.

The Witness: Yes, that’s true.

By Mr. Greiner'.
Q. Is that correct, Doctor? A. Yes.
Q. Now, there are 90 children currently participating in 

the early childhood educational centers, is that correct? 
A. Yes.

Q. And as I understand the marginal comments on Page 
10, this is a program that is not funded by public funds 
at all? A. The early childhood education program is a 
pilot program and it is being funded by Denver Public 
Schools.

Q. Now, no federal funds, though? A. No federal funds.
Q. Is federal funding possible? A. Not unless we would 

get a special approval of this under Title I.
Q. Now, again, with only 90 children in the program, I

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1815a

take it there is no doubt that there are many, many hun­
dreds of children who might need this program but who 
are not getting it? A. Exactly. This is a pilot program. 
This is the first year we have operated it. It is an outgrowth 
of the committee that was—that was recognized in 1968, the 
design program.

Q. And the same is generally true, is it not, of the
[435] follow-through program where you have only 370 
children affected? A. Yes.

Q. And the other follow-through program, Garden Place 
and Gilpin, where you have 100 children? A. Yes.

Q. And then the national follow-through which is now 
a proposal—that would increase the coverage at Garden 
Place and Gilpin from 100 to 200 children, is that correct? 
A. Yes, I believe so.

Q. Now, what kind of expansion of coverage for Head 
Start, early childhood educational centers, follow-through 
—what do you contemplate in the way of expanded cover­
age? A. I believe that these programs, as I indicated 
yesterday, are going to be of extreme significance regard­
less of what kind of other programs go in this school sys­
tem, and, as you have pointed out, these are by no means 
covering the needs in the city, and there will have to be 
substantial increase in funds for these programs.

Q. Now, do you have any information that indicates that 
these additional increased funds are in fact going to be 
available? A. No, sir. That will be an individual yearfy 
budget problem.

Q. Now, you will recall that Dr. Sullivan mentioned
[436] something about the $500' million which the Presi­
dent has allocated for desegregation and for the education 
of minority children. Does anywhere in your plan—do you 
reflect any of such moneys becoming available to Denver?

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1816a

A. Only possibly in the educational center at the secon­
dary level, and that is only a possibility. It has not been 
determined that that will be what we will apply for. As 
soon as we have more adequate guidelines which somebody 
informed the Court the other day are in the process of be­
ing developed, we will know what it is we can apply to.

Q. Yes. I  believe it was Dr. Coleman who was talking 
about that; not Dr. Sullivan. A. Yes.

Q. Do yon have any idea when these moneys would be­
come available? A. It is my impression that the early 
funds will become available for next fall.

Q. And do you have any idea how much of those funds 
Denver might expect to receive? A. There is no way to 
know until we have programs designed, and that can’t be 
done until guidelines are available, and it will be on an 
individual program basis.

Q. Now, I take it that you do not have a lot of personal 
knowledge about the particular programs that are going on 
at Manual, Baker or Cole, is that so? [4373 A. Not nearly 
as extensively as Mr. Ward or Mr. Morrison would have.

Q. When did you first find out, Dr. Gilberts, about the 
kinds of programs that were being put on at Manual? A. 
Well, they began, really, the first year I  was here.

Q. I ’m asking you when you first became personally 
aware? A. I became personally aware of the beginning 
program—some of the things Mr. Ward was thinking about 
the first year I  was here.

Q. And have you had occasion to visit these programs 
while they have been in operation? A. No, I have not.

Q. What about visitation at Baker or at Cole? A. I 
have been in the schools but not specifically for that pro­
gram.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1817a

Q. So we will direct, then, our questions about those 
programs to those persons. Now, the Educational Achieve­
ment Act of Colorado—the Senate Bill 174, as described on 
Page 14, as I read Senate Bill 174, the funds allocated by 
the State Legislature were directed toward the improve­
ment of reading, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. Now, how many children in Fairview in this interest- 
motivating program—how many of the children in Fairview 
[438] participate directly in the Fairview program? Is 
every child in Fairview participating? A. This is Grades 
2 through 6.

Q. And every child is participating? A. I believe so but 
I ’m not absolutely certain of that.

Q. And how many children is that? A. I’m sorry. I 
don’t have that figure.

Q. Fairview is one of these Court-designated schools, is 
it not? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, this program was implemented at Fairview 
when? A. Well, I believe it began in late or the middle of 
this year, and—the funds were not certain until after 
school had begun and after school had opened.

Q. Now, there are 825 children, I am told, at Fairview. 
And is it your impression that all 825 children are fully 
participating in this program ? A. That is 825 in all grade 
levels ?

Q. Yes. Total school population. A. Well, it wouldn’t 
be that because there is just Grades 2 through 6.

Q. Do you know how many first-grade and kindergarten 
there is at Fairview? A. No, I don’t.

Q. We’re talking about some 500 children perhaps? [439] 
A. I don’t know.

Q. Now, what is the new concept being employed at Fair- 
view? How does the Fairview program differ from pro­

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1818a

grams which you can characterize as coping programs ? A. 
Well, I  think that these programs are rather unique in the 
sense that they are very much individually—the youngsters 
are very much individually handled. They are dealing with 
high-interest areas. They are using the talents of teachers, 
I  think, in a creative way. The staff at Fairview is using 
individualized reading instruction; multimedia communica­
tions ; communication with the parents and home, in a way 
that I think is at least—or on this report is producing 
results that they are looking for.

Q. Now, Doctor, there is nothing new about the concept 
of ungraded classes, is there? A. No, there is not.

Q. There is nothing new about the concept of individual­
ized teaching methods, is there? A. Well, I don’t know. 
There is nothing new in the concept of it, I guess, but I 
think the application of it one may question.

Q. And multimedia communication, that just means using 
films and tape recorders and things such as that, isn’t that 
right? A. In general, yes.

E440] Q. And that is something that’s been going on for 
a long time, isn’t it? A. Yes.

The Court: I don’t suppose there is any guarantee 
you will come up with something brand-new in any of 
these programs. Are they effective? I expect that’s 
what we’re interested in.

The Witness: I think the manner in wdiich they 
are put together and the way in which the staff has 
committed the program is extremely an important 
element of it, and that is dependent upon how the 
programs are developed and implemented in a large 
way.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1819a

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross 

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Now, have you figured out a cost per child of the 

Fairview program? A. I have not, no.
Q. Well, you’re spending $110,671. And, even if every 

child in the school, some 800 were in the program, that 
would be over a thousand dollars a child, would it not? 
A. On that basis, it would, yes.

Q. Or would it? No, it would be over—it would be over 
$120 a child, is that right? A. Right. I shouldn’t agree 
with you so quick.

Q. I’m like Dr. Bardwell. My arithmetic isn’t very good.

The Court: We’d better get a computer in here.

[441] Q. Is that a pretty expensive program, Doctor? 
A. No, sir, not for the problems that are involved with 
these youngsters.

Q. Well, that’s in addition to the school’s normal bud­
get, is it not? A. Yes.

Q. And say, if there were 500 children in the program, 
that’s about $200 per child, is that right? A. If there were 
500, approximately, yes.

Q. Now, if you spent $200 per child every year for all 
of the 9,000 elementary minority children in the Court’s 
schools, how much money is that? A. A lot of money. 
And if we don’t, no matter what kind of program we have, 
we’re not going to meet the problems that are before us. 
The city is going to have to do that in one form or another.

Q. Where is the money going to come from for these— 
this expensive program, Doctor? A. Well, by and large, 
under present conditions it’s going to come from the prop­
erty taxpayer, some support from the state and some from 
the federal government. And unless those other two forms,



1820a

federal and state support, are increased substantially, this 
city is going to be in the same kind of trouble that other 
major cities are across the country. But, as I said, I don’t 
care what kind of program [442] you implement, these 
kinds of funds are going to be necessary.

Q. Now, as I  understand it, Senate Bill 174 expires by 
its own terms after next school year, is that correct? A. 
Yes.

Q. So the source of this money, at least the current 
source of this money is going to disappear, is that right? 
A. Not necessarily. It might be extended.

Q. But we don’t know that? A. That’s right. That 
would not necessarily have any implication for these pro­
grams because these are funded as pilot programs; inno­
vative programs, to test whether or not they have general 
application. It was not intended to finance those programs 
that will be generally applied throughout the school system. 
So, we have the financial problem, I ’m sure.

Q. Now, do you have any idea how much the expenditure 
of these $110,000—how it was broken down between equip­
ment and teachers? A. Well, on Page 136 there is a bud­
get breakdown, approximately $30,000 for salaries and 
about $43,000 for supplies and materials. Equipment, an­
other $28,000.

Q. Now, these are the same kinds of expenditures that 
would have to be made in each of these twelve Court-desig­
nated schools if this program were to be implemented, is 
that correct? [4433 A. Yes.

Q. But you don’t contemplate any expansion of that 
program out of Fairview next school year and into any of 
the other Court-designated schools? I t’s not in your plan? 
A. It’s not in the plan. Whether it will be in our budget 
or not is a question yet to be determined. We are in the

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1821a

process this year of completing our development, our long- 
range planning system, and this involves some of the 
things we have tried to do in a big hurry, but on a much 
more comprehensive and intensive basis than we could do 
in this period of time, and I am sure we will add a number 
of things that need to be included in that budget that are 
not included in this plan.

Q. Now, Dr. Gilberts, I asume that you have the—you 
have established some sort of a procedure for evaluating 
the effectiveness of the Fairview program, is that correct? 
A. I believe that an evaluation is one of the requirements 
of the plan.

Q. Now, what kind of objective criteria have been es­
tablished as an objective of the Fairview program! A. 
I’m sorry. I have, as I explained before, a good many 
people on my staff who were responsible for literally hun­
dreds of different programs in this school system. There is 
no way I can be familiar, sitting here off the top of my 
head, talking about those kinds of specifics; I just don’t 
[444] have it available.

Q. So you don’t have in mind what the particular objec­
tives of the Fairview program are! A. Certainly the basic 
objective is to improve the youngsters’ academic achieve­
ment in school through reading, as the bill implies.

Q. But you don’t know what goal you set for yourself? 
A. I couldn’t describe it precisely, no, not without reading 
the plan.

Q. Well, then—

The Court: Well, I  take it that the whole mission 
of the program at Fairview is to improve the per­
formance of these students, is that right?

Robert D. Gilberts-—for Defendants—Cross



1822a

The Witness: Yes, sir. Eight. But I  thought he 
was asking for a more precise definition of goals 
than that.

The Court: One of the faculty there wrote me a 
letter after the opinion telling me in some detail 
what they’re doing there and saying that, if I’m go­
ing to be an expert, I  ought to go down and see 
what’s happening.

The Witness: Sir, I think that’s a very good idea. 
I’d certainly like to invite you to see some of the 
programs in school.

The Court: You ought to visit some of them, too, 
I  think.

The Witness: I think that would be very nice.
E445] The Court: Maybe we could do it together.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. Gilberts, on Page 143 of the plan, we were talk­

ing about the innovative practices—it says the strenuous 
efforts are required to eliminate factors that result in a 
negative self-image of a child and a feeling of inferiority. 
Practices that underestimate the child’s learning capacity. 
Now, is it true, Dr. Gilberts, that this kind of environment 
exists today in these minority schools? A. Yes, to some 
degree.

Q. Now, in the cultural arts program, as it’s currently 
being run, you are spending $165,000 on the program, as 
I understand it, is that right? A. I believe that’s correct.

Q. Now, we’re on Page 15 of your plan. Now, last year 
can you tell me how many Anglo children participated in the 
cultural arts program? A. No, I can’t.

Q. Can you give me the total number of children that 
participated in it? A. No, not off the top of my head.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1823a

Q. The cultural arts program is now being implemented 
only for 6th graders, is that right? A. Yes.

Q. And is there any—is every 6th grader in the school 
district participating? [4461 A. No.

Q. How many 6th graders of the school district are par­
ticipating? Can you give me even a rough proportion? 
A. It would be strictly a guess. Half. That’s a guess.

Q. Now, one of the objectives of the cultural arts pro­
gram, as I  understand it, is to bring children of ethnic 
and racial groups together in an intercultural experience, 
is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. And this is a form of real integration—in other words, 
you have these different children there physically present, 
one with the other, is that right? A. Yes.

Q. Now, in the cultural arts program, when we look at 
one minority child’s participation in it, how many hours 
of such integrated experience does he get out of the cul­
tural arts program? A. I believe it’s a week’s participa­
tion; a week-long participation.

Q. For a full school day? A. No, because there is trans­
portation involved. A large portion of the day, as I recall.

Q. So he gets maybe twenty to twenty-five hours of ex­
perience? [4473 A. That’s possible.

Q. And gets it in the 6th grade? A. Eight.
Q. Now, the outdoor education center—the Bailerette 

program—as I understand, in order for the District to 
maintain its right to the development of Ballerette, it made 
a commitment that over a five-year period it had to invest 
a half million dollars in the site, is that correct? A. Cor­
rect.

Q. Through this current budget year, Dr. Gilberts, how 
much has been allocated to Ballerette, total? A. I’m sorry. 
Again I couldn’t be—

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1824a

The Court: During this current budget year, how 
much has been allocated to Ballerette? That’s your 
question, is that right?

Mr. Greiner: I was thinking in the development 
of Ballerette—as it started a couple of budget years 
ago.

The Witness: Last year, I think, was the first 
year that we made our—that we budgeted our costs.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. And for this current budget year, Page 15, that shows 

that there is $247,000 allocated, is that right? A. Eight.
Q. Now, was some money allocated last budget year? 

A. Yes.
[448 J The Court: This is what I can’t recall.

Q. Can you give us a ball park figure on it? $100,000? 
A. Pardon?

Q. $100,000? A. A little over a hundred thousand. I 
guess it’s a hundred and sixty or seventy thousand; there­
abouts.

Q. So then this is the second budget year of the pro­
gram and by the end of this budget year you will have 
allocated four hundred of the necessary five hundred thou­
sand dollars, is that correct? A. No, sir. That’s not nec­
essarily correct because this $500,000 commitment was a 
capital expenditure commitment. These figures include op­
erational costs and this is not a part—that does not respond 
to the needs of $500,000.

Q. It doesn’t? A. No.
Q. What does? A. That portion of that figure and 

whatever portion of the estimated one hundred sixty or 
seventy thousand that was allocated for capital expendi-

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1825a

tares on site development, buildings, et cetera, sucb things 
as these.

Q. For what other purpose is this money being used for? 
A. I ’d have to see the budget. Part of it is for staff, plan­
ning staff, development, part of it is for educational pro­
grams that will be conducted. Essentially those other two 
[4493 items.

Q. When is Ballerette going to open? A. Well, we hope 
to have some programs beginning this next fall. We had 
hoped that we could do it last fall but, due to some prob­
lems that occurred at that time, we didn’t get it off the 
ground the way we expected.

Q. What is your time schedule for having Ballerette in 
full operation? A. I  would say that it would be a mini­
mum of five years and probably a fullblown operation, it 
could be more than that.

Q. Well, now, when it’s in full operation-—or let’s say 
about five years from now, and with a frame of reference 
of a single given minority child, Doctor, in the operation 
of the Ballerette program, how often would that minority 
child get to Ballerette? A. Well, this is a guess and an 
estimate based upon a supposed program which is not 
designed and approved as yet. But I would say probably 
an opportunity in a regular program of at least twice, 
maybe three times during the school year for a period of 
a week or so. In addition to that—

Q. Pardon me. I  will let you finish your answer, but 
that is three times in twelve years? A. Well, no, I  don’t 
believe it would be quite that. I  would say probably three 
times within, say, six years of the [4503—-well, it could 
be twelve years, yes. It could go lower than that.

Q. Please continue. I didn’t mean to cut you off. A. 
There will be some other programs that will be special in

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1826a

nature; vocation oriented, as we are presently contemplat­
ing, at least; resident opportunities for some youngsters 
to participate in the management and operation of that 
center. These would be fairly small numbers of pupils, 
hut for the bulk of the pupil population, probably wThat I 
originally indicated.

Q. So then we are looking at the experiences which Bal- 
lerette offers to give minority children for these intercul- 
tural experiences—it really doesn’t amount to much, does 
it, Doctor? A. Well, I think that the quality of the pro­
gram will have something to do with how much it amounts 
to, if you’re talking about—surely the time—it’s not a great 
deal of time, twelve years.

Q. Now, what does the Metropolitan Youth Opportunity 
program do? A. Well, this is an institution that was de­
veloped primarily to recapture youngsters that had dropped 
out of school. It provides opportunities both in terms of 
academic offerings, allowing people to finish their high 
school education. It offers, also, some vocational offerings.

[451] Q. And that is to continue as presently con­
structed? A. We have some thoughts of expanding this 
operation into another location or two. Nothing is decided 
on that, as yet.

Q. Now, one of the other concepts described as individ­
ually-guided instruction—now, it is scheduled for imple­
mentation in 1971, is that correct? Looking again at Page 
15. A. Yes. This would be as soon as our budget year is 
begun or we have the funds to finance it.

Q. Now, as I recall, the $200-per-school-year figure is 
based on the assumption of a given standard-sized, school, 
is it not? A. Yes.

Q. How many classrooms was it? A. I ’ll have to refer 
to it.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Gross



1827a

The Court: This would be a counseling program, 
wouldn’t it?

The Witness: Pardon?
The Court: Wouldn’t this be a counseling pro­

gram ?
The Witness: Well, that would be a part of it, 

sir. It includes the entire instruction of the young­
sters in the school, skills as well as that.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. A 24-room school, Page 169! Now, applying that 

criteria to the Court-designated schools, £452 J are some of 
those schools smaller than 24-room schools? A. Yes.

Q. How many of them? A. I’m sorry. I can’t answer 
that.

Q. Well, have you made any attempt to tailor this budget 
allocation of these particular schools in terms of their size? 
A. No, I think it has taken the figure of 16,200 as the 
standard.

Q. So it may be a greater amount or it may be a smaller 
amount, depending’ on the size of the school? A. Yes.

Q. And it also depends on the number of teachers in the 
school, does it not? A. Yes.

Q. Because most of that money goes for some sort of 
additional teacher compensation, is that right? A. Yes.

Q. Now, is that teacher compensation money—is that the 
same as that master teacher figure that we have talked 
about earlier? A. It could be.

Q. But not necessarily? A. Not necessarily, but it could 
be, yes.

Q. On Page 157, under Programs to Build Understand­
ing, [4531 you’re going to establish programs to build 
understanding of the contributions of Negroes, Hispanos,

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1828a

and others to your common culture? And some of these 
programs have already been implemented. Now, how does 
that program work in a 90-percent Anglo school? A. 
Well, it has become part of our curriculum in social sci­
ences primarily.

Q. But there aren’t any real live Negroes or Hispano 
kids in that school, are there? A. No, we don’t have any 
real live nuclear reactors in our schools either, but we 
study about them.

Q. So you teach human relations through book learning, 
is that right? A. I think you can develop an understand­
ing of the contributions of these groups that way, yes.

Q. Do you think a little physical—bicultural physical 
presence, interreaction, might also be beneficial, Doctor? 
A. Yes.

Q. Now, the resolution that the Board of Education 
passed when it authorized the presentation of this plan 
in response to the directions of the Court, which is Defen­
dants’ Exhibit Y-B, as I  read that resolution, I get the 
definite impression that regardless of what the Court does, 
vis-a-vis relief in this case, the Board of Education is going 
to go ahead and implement that plan, anyway, is that right? 
[4541 A. I don’t know.

Q. Well, I ’m looking for the language of the—

The Court: Really, I don’t think he should be 
called upon to answer for the Board. If it says so, 
why, it does, I expect.

Q. Perhaps I misspoke, Dr. Gilberts. On Page 3 of the 
Board’s plan being presented here—

Mr. Ris: The resolution speaks for itself, Your 
Honor, and I don’t think Dr. Gilberts—

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1829a

The Court: We will all agree that it says regard­
less of the outcome of this litigation this Board re­
affirms its intent to continue improvement in the 
quality of education offered to all the children of 
Denver.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Now, Dr. Gilberts, as I understand it,—and we have 

gone through now most of the details of the Board’s pro­
posal, and we find that of the fifteen schools designated by 
the Court, we’re going to have some special programs 
which already were in existence at Baker and Cole and 
Manual; that is, three schools. And at Fairview. That’s 
four schools. Now, how many other of these fifteen Court- 
designated schools under this plan for the opening of school 
this coming fall are going to get something out of this plan! 
A. Well, as I indicated earlier, what we can do this fall 
is pretty well limited to the funds that have already 
[455] been budgeted.

The Court: What he’s saying is, he is suggesting, 
I think, that this is merely a description of what 
you’re now doing in the schools. It’s not any—

The Witness: No, sir. I t’s not. I think when we 
talk about the increase in planning and in-service 
time, this is to a great—this is a great expansion 
beyond what we’re doing right now. When we talk 
about some of the programs that we feel have impli­
cations for these schools, there obviously has to be 
a wider implementation in those plans in other 
schools. Differentiated staffing as a concept is cer­
tainly something that has implications for these 
schools. I  believe I mentioned in-service—

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1830a

The Court: Well, is that really what your inquiry 
was, Mr. Greiner ?

Mr. Greiner: No, not really, Tour Honor. What 
I wanted to try to determine was this plan as it is 
now being presented—I wanted to see exactly how 
it related to the Court-designated schools with re­
gard to the opening of school next fall.

The Witness: It seems to me that anyone who has 
any understanding of the problems involved in get­
ting at improvement in the quality of education 
would understand that one just does not snap one’s 
fingers and expect those changes to occur automati­
cally. There is a great deal of time in [456] develop­
ment of programs, training of teachers, the implica­
tions of these programs. There is no way one can 
next fall move into—move these programs to the 
nature we have talked about here or what—or expect 
to implement them completely and totally and effec­
tively. That can’t be done. That’s not the way 
schools operate, and it just isn’t going to apply—

Q. Do you know how much time southern school boards, 
Dr. Gilberts, are being given by the courts to implement 
integration and desegregation programs these days?

* * * * *

Q. Dr. Gilberts, I  take it that in these minority schools 
and the Court-designated schools that teachers in those 
schools have to spend a good deal of their time enforcing 
classroom discipline, is that correct? A. I don’t think I 
could make that general statement.

Q. Do you have crisis rooms in Anglo schools? A. Not 
probably in the same definition that we have in some of

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1831a

these schools, but I think we have some of the same kinds 
of problems.

Q. Now, as I understand it, you have resigned as Super­
intendent of Schools and a new superintendent will take 
C4573 over September 1, 1970, is that correct! A. Eight.

Q. Now, it’s possible, is it not, Dr. Gilberts, that the new 
superintendent may not agree at all with your complex 
theory, is that right? A. I t’s possible. However, this is a 
matter of Board policy and the Board is committed to 
explore this idea, and I ’m sure the new superintendent will 
do that.

Q. But there may be a lot of changes in concepts with 
the new superintendent, is that right? A. I  don’t think I 
could answer that.

Q. Now, as I understand it, it’s the position of the de­
fendants and it is your position that these minority chil­
dren come into these minority schools with a lot of environ­
mental and family background type of problems? Now, 
for example, the limited education of the parent is one, is 
that right? A. Yes.

Q. Now, what in this Board proposal, what particular 
program speaks to that deficiency? A. Well, I  think there 
may be several that can. Certainly the early childhood edu­
cational program is aimed at that among other parental 
deficiencies the youngsters may have. It seems to me that 
as the complexes develop that there can be programs de­
veloped within those that would deal with this.

,[458] Q. How does that relate to limited education of 
the parent? A. Well, I don’t believe that there is anything 
we can do about limited education of the parents, but I 
think that we could offset some of the deficiencies that are 
a result of that by additional programs in schools.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1832a

Q. What about lack of reading materials in the home? 
A. Again, I think that some of the early childhood pro­
grams speak to that issue.

Q. Is anything in your program going to put reading 
materials in the minority child’s home? A. Conceivably, 
yes.

Q. What about the problem of limited verbalization with 
the child? A. Again I think early childhood programs 
would have something to do with providing additional ex­
perience for the child in this area. I also believe that some 
of the new programs like the Fairview program and some 
others that are being used in the schools can provide for 
some assistance in that area.

Q. How about poor language patterns in the family? A. 
Again, I  think these same programs may have some impli­
cation for those deficiencies.

Q. And a feeling of inadequacy by the parents ? A. I t’s 
difficult to overcome that, but again, as I [4593 say, I think 
some of the programs that we have identified may help off­
set some of those programs.

Q. The negative attitudes towards schooling by the 
parents? A. I think in this particular area the involve­
ment of parents, the development of programs that are 
motivational, not only to kids but to the parents, can have 
quite a bit to do with the problem.

Q. Do you think these minority parents like desegregated 
schools, Dr. Gilberts? A. I don’t think I could answer 
that.

Q. You can’t? A. No, I don’t think I could.
Q. You think minority parents prefer segregation over 

integration? A. I would say I don’t believe I am in a posi­
tion to answer for minority parents.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1833a

Q. What about small vocabulary on the part of the par­
ents? A. Again, as I say, the programs that we are talk­
ing about will be designed to help offset some of those early 
deficiencies that the youngsters experience.

Q. How about the parents’ distaste for reading, for con­
versation and for nonverbal outlets for frustration!

The Court: What page are you on?
Mr. Greiner: This is Mr. Manley’s cross-examina­

tion [460] of Dr. Dodson, Your Honor, from the 
transcript of the summer preliminary injunction 
hearing.

Q. How about the parents’ aversion to study or reflec­
tion? A. Again I respond the same way.

Q. And the absence or limited use of writing materials 
in the home? A. My response is the same.

Q. What about the broken family that this minority child 
comes from? A. I  don’t know any program that can com­
pensate for those kinds of problems, totally.

Q. How about the absence of father figures? A. I be­
lieve again that there are some ways in which the school— 
if it approaches the child properly and provides motiva­
tion for him, can to some extent substitute for some of 
those problems.

Q. Well, I take it that you believe, don’t you, that many 
of these minority children come into these schools with 
these kinds of problems that I have been describing? A. 
Yes.

Q. And I believe that you agree that not all of those 
kinds of problems can be solved by these programs that you 
are proposing, is that right? A. Ho, I ’m sure that we 
can’t solve all the problems.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Cross



1834a

[461J Q. Now, do you have any opinion, Dr. Gilberts,
as to how an integrated school environment with a heter­
ogeneous student body might help give these minority chil­
dren some of these experiences, some of these role models, 
some of these feelings of self-confidence and expectancy to 
succeed? The Anglo children have those feelings, don’t 
they? Some of them? A. Not all of them.

Q. Do you think that might make a valuable contribu­
tion to these minority students? A. I suppose to some of 
the youngsters it might. As I maintained before, I think 
there are some other ways of getting at those problems.

Mr. Greiner: We have no further questions.

Redirect Examination by Mr. Ris:
Q. Dr. Gilberts, do you know of any evidence that man­

datory busing would provide for lack of reading materials 
at home? A. No, sir.

Q. Or would substitute for negative parents’ attitude 
toward the schools? A. No, sir.

Q. Or would substitute or provide for the lack of the 
father figure at the home or these other things Mr. [462] 
Greiner was just talking about? A. No, sir.

Q. Dr. Gilberts, generally, there are how many schools 
in the system? A. 127.

Q. How many employees? A. 7,000, total.
Q. How many pupils? A. 96,000 plus.
Q. As superintendent, are you able to keep track of all 

of the various statistical figures? A. Unfortunately, no.
Q. And be personally familiar with every detail of every 

program that is going on, whether it be at Pairview or 
Cole or wherever it might be? A. No.

Q. Do you have men who do keep on top of the specifics? 
A. Quite a few of them.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Redirect



1835a

Q. Major staff people here available? A. Yes, there are, 
but there are many more than these.

Q. One thing I neglected to ask you during your direct 
examination, —• and so this would not particularly be in 
redirect, but if I may, did your staff analyze Plan 1 in the 
plaintiffs’ proposal to determine how many buses would be 
required just as a proposal now—as the proposal now
[463] stands? A. Yes.

Q. Additional buses? A. I  believe that the estimate was 
that, if they did not duplicate the use of vehicles, just use 
the vehicles that were assigned to special areas, it would 
require 147 buses.

Q. Then did they further study to determine if—for the 
target schools and the hours and using a bus on more than 
one route—

The Court: How many buses in Plan 1?
The Witness: 147.
The Court: Additional ?
The Witness: Additional, yes. By doing the things 

you have described, it would probably—and this is 
purely an estimate—we probably could get by with 
65 additional buses.

Ry Mr. R is:
Q. And this would necessitate in some schools having a 

starting time of eight o’clock and in other schools a starting 
time of nine o’clock? A. Or some similar arrangement.

Q. This would also necessitate, of course, additional driv­
ers? A. Yes.

Q. Additional mechanics? A. Yes.
[464] Q. Additional parking space? A. Yes.
Q. Additional driver training? A. Yes.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Redirect



1836a

Q. And a host of other allied matters? A. Yes.
Q. Now, through some of the testimony, Dr. Gilberts, 

there has been some indication that one of the problems 
that a minority child has is that he has a lack of sense of 
power or destiny as to what he can do and what he can’t 
do and to what school he can go and to what school he 
cannot go. A. I believe that was testified to by Dr. Dodson 
last summer.

Q. And that one of the things that the—that voluntary 
open enrollment obviates is to the extent that parents—that 
the child or Ms parents for him can select another school? 
A. I would suppose some—

Q. Now, with respect to the Hallett program, that has 
been an exchange voluntary program, has it not? A. Yes.

Q. And with special emphasis given on that one school? 
A. Yes.

Q. On Page 40 of the Exhibit Y-A, there is a chart. Does 
that chart reflect the changes that have occurred in the
[465] participants? A. Yes.

Q. And does that chart reflect the Anglos who are bused 
into Hallett and the blacks that are bused out? A. It indi­
cates the number of Anglos and Negroes in Hallett School.

Q. And does it show also the in and out numbers? A. 
Yes, it does.

Q. And have the numbers of Anglos coming into Hallett 
increased each year? A. Yes, it has.

Q. And what was it the first year? A. 76.
Q. What was the second year? A. 132.
Q. And how many whites are there this year? A. 290.
Q. Could you give us the same figures for those being 

bused out, the Negroes? A. In 1968 it was 634. In 1969 
it was 575.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Redirect



1837a

Q. Now, in preparing your plan, Dr. Gilberts, there has 
been submitted to the Court as Exhibit Y-A—did you draw 
upon your past thinking or past experience as well as in­
novative things strictly pursuant to the Court’s memoran­
dum opinion of March 21? [466] A. Yes.

Q. So that everything in that plan is not brand-new and 
had never been considered before? A. No, it’s not.

Q. Are there things in there that you considered before 
and had plans on which—but which had not been approved 
or accepted by the Board? A. Yes.

Q. So it’s correct then that there is a compilation of a 
mass of experience to which was added additional items 
which you understood would be required in accordance with 
the Court’s memorandum opinion? A. Yes, it was.

Q. And is any one portion of this plan intended to be an 
entity in itself? Or does it all have to be considered to­
gether.

Q. Do you have the Exhibit 517 before you? A. Yes.
Q. You indicated that the adjusted figure, ignoring the 

spaces in the twelve Court-designated elemental schools, 
that there would be 620 spaces available. Correct? A. Yes.

Q. In the elementary schools for transfer out of the 
twelve schools. Now, if you added the ten percent over­
capacity [467] in the other elementary schools, what would 
be the figure? A. 5,363.

Q. Available spaces? A. Yes.
Q. And if it were 15 percent, how many available spaces 

in the other schools? A. 7,457.

The Court: Has that summary sheet been intro­
duced into evidence?

Mr. Bis: I  don’t think it was ever offered.
The Court: I  have not seen it.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Redirect



1838a

Mr. Greiner: We would offer it.
Mr. Ris: We have no objections.
The Court: Very well, it will be received.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 517 was re­
ceived in evidence.)

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Redirect

By Mr. R is :

Q. Dr. Gilberts, as there were whites transferring out of 
those other schools—that would also make available addi­
tional space available? A. Yes, it would.

The Court: Do you think there is any reservoir of 
white students to be had to transfer voluntarily to 
black schools?

The Witness: I think there are some; it would be 
difficult to estimate.

[468] The Court: Pm sure you put on quite a 
drive in order to get this Hallett program off the 
ground.

The Witness: Yes, but that was in a very limited 
area in Southeast Denver and not really going be­
yond that area.

The Court: Is there any indications that you could 
get high school people to make this kind of a switch 
voluntarily? Do you anticipate there’s going to be 
any sizable number of openings from this source?

The Witness: As I indicated, I feel that the pro­
gram has to be promoted if it’s going to be success­
ful. People have to know about it. A year ago when 
the voluntary open enrollment plan began there was 
a considerable amount of interest at the senior high 
school level especially and I believe that, with con­
tinued emphasis in this area, that there probably



1839a

would be a substantial number of youngsters that 
would be interested.

Tbe Court: But, anyhow, you’re going to go for­
ward on tbe assumption that you’re going to have 
to accommodate these people with existing openings ?

The Witness: Yes.
The Court: And create some more, if you need 

to, is that right?
The Witness: Yes, sir, if we need to.

By Mr. Ris:
Q. Now, with respect to the questions 1469] that were 

asked you by Mr. Greiner on budgetary matters pertain­
ing to in-service training, compensatory education and so 
forth—now, do you recall that Dr. Bardwell testified yes­
terday that in effect they would adopt some of these same 
programs as ancillary matters to their programs ? A. Yes.

Q. Would the budgetary requirements be any different 
if they were part of the plaintiffs’ plan as compared to part 
of the defendants’ plan? A. I think that they might be 
higher. Because there would be more schools involved.

Q. Now, with regard to Complexes 1 and 2, are there 
in some of those schools involved in those complexes some 
Negroes and some Hispanos? A. Yes, there are.

Q. So when you take the groupings of the schools as a 
whole, there is a substantial mixture of races? A. Yes, I 
think there is.

Q. Now, Dr. Gilberts, yesterday in response to questions 
by the Court in regard to Northeast Denver and the schools 
that were affected by the temporary injunction, have there 
been any problems in connection with the transportation of 
pupils in the exchange of students—student personnel in 
the affected schools? A. Yes, there is.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Redirect



1840a

E470J Q. Could you tell us what some of those problems 
have been? A. Well, the problems have largely concen­
trated to the junior high school level and they tend to fall 
into the areas of transportation, the moving of youngsters 
back and forth to schools. We have had quite a lot of diffi­
culty in terms of behavior on our buses, on these routes. 
We have had quite a number of incidents that we have a 
file on in our office indicating difficulties in terms of human 
relations which we certainly hope to promote in these 
schools.

Q. Are you still talking now about—during the busing? 
A. No, I ’m talking about in the school itself.

Q. What type of incident reports come to you in this 
connection? A. Well, usually incidents relating to rela­
tionships between whites and blacks in the schools involv­
ing all kinds of interpersonal relationships; fighting, et 
cetera.

Q. Have you had any communications from either pupils 
or the parents in connection with this? A. Quite a few. 
We have a rather thick file on it.

Q. With respect to the program itself or the results, I 
should say, you indicated yesterday it was too early to 
assess the results. A. Tes, sir.

Q. So objectively, as you indicated, this would be a 
[471] pilot program? And it was your thinking originally 
and objectively then, so far as academic results or achiev­
ing—achievement results—you still don’t know? A. We 
have no results yet.

Q. So then, insofar as the actual operation, you have 
had various problems. So, there are some pluses and some 
minuses, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. It’s certainly not been exactly a Sunday school picnic, 
so to speak? A. No.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Redirect



1841a

The Court: I suppose you would have the prob­
lems if you were busing them on a voluntary basis, 
too, wouldn’t you!

The Witness: I don’t believe that we would. We 
do bus some on a voluntary basis and my feeling is 
that the problems have been largely confined to 
those areas in which we have transported blocks of 
areas out into the schools at junior—at the junior 
high school level. Now, those buses may also include 
some voluntary pupils.

The Court: Why would it be different!
The Witness: Well, I  think that there has been 

certainly some feeling on the part of those that were 
transported that this was not exactly what they 
wanted to do. I think that some of the youngsters 
found the environment hostile [4723 where they 
found themselves. At least, in their minds. And 
the incidents that have occurred I suppose are fairly 
representative of the kinds of problems that are go­
ing on around the country. This problem is one 
which has been true in many other cities as well. I 
think, though, largely—probably it comes from the 
feeling of these youngsters being moved to schools 
that they were—that were not of their choice and 
at that level youngsters, junior high school young­
sters are very volatile youngsters to begin with.

The Court: You mean both black and white stu­
dents !

The Witness: Yes, all adolescent youngsters of 
this nature, the combination of these things has pro­
duced some problems.

The Court: Well, the problems wouldn’t be dif­
ferent if you were mandatorily moving them to re-

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Redirect



1842a

lieve the overcrowding, I  don’t suppose. Wouldn’t 
every element you mentioned be present in this kind 
of a situation, too?

The Witness: Yes, sir. I  think that, if this were 
done for that reason too, you would have the same 
kinds of problems. Most of our busing for relief of 
overcrowding has been at the elementary level and 
not at the junior high school level.

By Mr. Ris:
Q. Have you had any increase in disciplinary problems 

in the classroom? A. Yes.
[473] Q. And can you give us some further elaboration 

on what the problems have been? A. Well, I  had communi­
cations from various faculties in the city, reporting their 
reflections on the same kinds of incidents that I  have re­
ferred to in a general way. That there have been concerns 
expressed on the part of the teachers as to how they are 
to handle—cope with the disciplinary problems that de­
velop. Certainly a desire to make the experience success­
ful, a sort of concern on their part as to how to react to 
these situations in a way that doesn’t cause problems with 
other youngsters so far as discipline is concerned in the 
schools. I believe that generally covers the problem.

Mr. Ris: That’s all. Thank you.

Recross-Examination by Mr. Greiner:

#  #  #  # *

[4783 * # *
Q. Now, you said that you would need a minimum of 67 

additional school buses to implement Plan 1 of the plain­

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Recross



1843a

tiffs’ plan? A. That was Mr. Olander’s estimate, at the 
lower limits, if we duplicated routes and dual use of the 
bus.

Q. And Plan 1 of the plaintiffs calls for the transporta­
tion of somewhat less than 9,000 school children at the ele­
mentary level. Do you recall that? [4791 A. 8,380.

Q, And Plan 2 calls for the transportation of how many 
elementary school children? A. I have here 11,109.

Q. Now, under Plan 1 of the plaintiffs, we would be 
transporting less than 9,000 elementary children. If yon 
have complete participation in the minority elementary 
schools of the limited open enrollment program, you would 
be transporting about 9,000 minority children into these 
Anglo schools, wouldn’t you? A. I’m not sure of that fig­
ure but if that is the total number, that’s the total potential, 
I suppose.

Q. So your capital requirement for buses would be ex­
actly the same? A. The problems of transportation would 
be relatively the same.

Q. And the annual budget for the School District is what? 
About $100 million, Dr. Gilberts? A. Eoughly.

Q. And buses cost about $9,000 apiece ? A. Smaller units 
do. The larger ones are twelve, thirteen thousand.

Q. What does a smaller unit carry? A. Sixty-five pas­
sengers. The larger ones are seventy-five and up, as I  re­
call.

[480] Q. So, if you had to buy 67 buses at $9,000, that’s 
$603,000? Do you agree with that arithmetic? A. That 
arithmetic I think is right.

Q. That’s about half of one percent of the School Dis­
trict’s budget, is that correct? A. That’s correct.

Mr. Greiner: No further questions.
Mr. Eis : That’s all.

Robert D. Gilberts—for Defendants—Recross



1844a

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct 

(Witness excused.)
Mr. Jackson: Call Mr. James Ward.

J ames D. Ward, a witness called by and on behalf of de­
fendants, having first been duly sworn, was examined and 
testified as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Jackson:
The Court: Please state your name, address and 

occupation.
The Witness: James D. Ward. I live at 2618 

Adams Street. Pm the Principal of Denver Manual 
High School.

By Mr. Jackson:
Q. Mr. Ward, how long have you been Principal at Man­

ual High School? A. Pm completing my fourth year.
Q. And how long have you been with the Denver Public 

Schools? A. Twenty-two years.
[481] Q. Immediately prior to your taking over the 

principalship at Manual, what was your assignment? A. 
Principal at Wyatt Elementary School.

Q. Was Manual your first senior high principalship? A. 
Right.

Q. What generally, Mr. Ward, is the racial and ethnic 
composition of the school student body at Manual? A. 
Out of the student body of 1,500 original registrations, 
perhaps 69 percent black; 27 percent Hispano, and the rest 
other.

Q. How would you generally describe the socioeconomic 
status of the area from which these students come to school? 
A. It would be low.



1845a

Q. For all students? A. A large majority.
Q. At the time you arrived at Manual in terms of cur­

riculum then being offered at the school, did you find that 
it was the equivalent of the general curriculum then being 
offered at other Denver High Schools? A. Basically the 
same.

Q. And if we may refer to the traditional concept of a 
high school curriculum as the three R’s type of program 
which is offered in most high schools, that’s a program 
offered at Manual? A. Yes.

[482] Q. In addition to the regular high school curricu­
lum there has been some testimony throughout this trial, 
and I’m certain that you have heard some of it as you have 
been seated in the courtroom these last two days about 
some special and specific programs which are presently 
under way at Manual. You have heard that testimony? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. Mr. Ward, these programs are, as you are testifying, 
in addition to the regular academic programs at Manual? 
A. Yes.

Q. How did you first approach this question of devising 
or innovating new programs for Manual? A. Well, when 
I was assigned to Manual I took a look at the curriculum 
offerings and, knowing the economics of the area, some of 
the problems we were having in the East Side area, I felt 
that the basic traditional program at Manual was not meet­
ing the needs of certain students, a significant number of 
students at Manual. And when we talked with business 
agencies about hiring Manual graduates, we were concerned 
about their opinions and we found that many of our kids 
were not—they were having to seek lower types of employ­
ment once they graduated from Manual. So we came up

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1846 a

with the idea that if we could establish what we would 
call a Head Start approach to do some—actually some train­
ing in the skills that were necessary to go into certain 
[4833 fields, to do some changing in the academic disci­
plines that were offered to make them more relevant to 
students, perhaps we could do something with this problem.

Q. How did you identify these students in the first in­
stance! A. I might explain the program at Manual is a 
three-phase program. It begins with sophomore orienta­
tion; juniors, we go into what we call a more in-depth 
program where the students then select the area that he 
wishes to go into, and then in the senior year we go into 
the co-op approach which is part time in school and part 
time on the job. We presented the program to the incoming 
sophomore class at the 9th grade level. We went over to 
the junior highs and talked to them and told them what it 
was. We had parent meetings to explain the program, let­
ting’ parents know that it wasn’t purely a vocational pro­
gram; that there would be opportunity for students. We 
went into the program and explained to them that if they 
desired to go into college, they would possibly be required 
to go to a junior college because we would be taking time 
from the—they would be taking time from the regular pro­
gram. It was purely on a voluntary basis from the stand­
point of the kids. They were able to make the choice. If 
they wanted to go in. But at the sophomore level to have 
a chance to explore five or six areas before they went in, 
before they decided to go into the program. [484] It’s 
not a track program.. Students can either be in it or out 
of it. It’s entirely up to the student.

Q. Backing up for just a minute, Mr. Ward, in terms 
of examining some of the problems which you faced when 
you came to Manual, you mentioned the problem of em­

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1847a

ployer reluctance to employ Manual graduates. Were you 
also at that time aware of certain community resentment 
toward this school? A. Tes.

Q. Did you talk to students who had at that time either 
dropped out of school or ones that you could identify as 
being potential dropouts from school? A. Tes.

Q. Did you discuss with the students as well as the 
community some of the problems which they were experi­
encing with the school? A. Yes. May I add a statement 
here, please?

Q. Certainly. A. One of the concerns we had when we 
began this program at Manual was that the school would 
not be identified as a vocational school. We went to some 
length in attempting to explain this to both the parents 
and the students. In the initial program, in an attempt 
to get at the dropout problem—this was a program that 
we first attempted which was what we call a hard-core 
counseling program where we put additional counselors 
into the field to go out and work with kids who [4853 had 
dropped out or who were potential dropouts. But one of 
the things we found, there was not a strong interest on the 
part of the kids to go back into basically the same pro­
gram. And that they had desires and wants to learn some­
thing that they felt would be beneficial to them upon grad­
uation. So the program that we began, which was, as we 
called it, the vocational skill program, was geared as a 
holding program, a program with holding power, attempt­
ing to keep kids interested in school and to humanize the 
school in the eyes of some students.

Q. Was this program which you started—had you iden­
tified students solely on the basis of their race and having 
particular problems? Or did this deal generally with all 
of the students at Manual at that time? A. No, we don’t 
identify any by race.

James D. Ward—for Defendants■—Direct



1848a

Q. Were you concerned also with the academic achieve­
ment at Manual as measured by a standardized test score 
at that time? A. Yes.

Q. Did you consider this in terms of the establishment 
of your program? A. Yes. I  personally looked at the 
academic achievement, one of the necessary ingredients is 
highly-motivated kids or at least motivated students. And, 
as far as I ’m concerned, you don’t get motivated students 
until they are [4863 interested in school. And if we could 
put in programs where kids would be interested in it and 
stay in school and see the needs for going to school, then 
we can possibly look at a higher academic achievement 
record.

Q. And this is what you meant when you talked of mak­
ing your school program more relevant to the students? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, in order to conserve a little time, Mr. Ward, 
your first effort was basically within the vocational skills 
program, was it not? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And could you explain to us generally the philosophy 
behind that program and some of its facets? A. Well, I ’m 
sure those who read the report have read or at least under­
stood that our basic philosophy at Manual is all education 
for career; that this is why kids go to school. To become 
effective in later life, to be able to be productive, and we 
have gone on this philosophy to point out that there are 
many levels for achievement, many ways kids can go, and 
we also attempted to use this approach to help the commu­
nity take a look at vocations as not something dirty; that 
if you can’t do it here, you do it there. We also built into 
our program the vocational programs more than what we 
call just the skill programs. For example, in trades we 
are more concerned than a hammer and saw program. We

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1849a

devised [4873 the program where we took two of the aca­
demics and put the teachers right into the trade programs. 
In other words, there is an English teacher and a math 
teacher right in the program working with the vocational 
teacher, with the carpenter, as a team. The job of these 
people is to find ways as they see the program to develop 
—to make changes in the offerings, in English and math 
and these kinds of things, to make it relevant to what the 
kids are actually learning in these particular areas.

We also assigned two of our strongest counselors into 
the academic program—into the vocational program, those 
who had vocational backgrounds and who could work with 
the kids, and their job, too, was to be involved in the total 
program. And this is one of the ways that we see educa­
tion as being important in that you have to—you’ve got 
to get the teachers concerned with the discipline and should 
have some knowledge of—in the direction in which the kids 
are going.

We feel that some of the best and most effective coun­
seling can be done by a counselor right in the shop, side 
by side with the kid, working. So, what we have attempted 
to do since is to build a strong academic program right 
with the vocational program. In other words, the kids 
don’t go on the third floor to take their math. They take 
their math right there where it’s meaningful, in the class.

Q. In terms of the staffing of your programs, were you 
[4883 able to draw primarily on your existing faculty? 
A. From the standpoint of the vocational teacher, yes, and 
the counselor and the teachers are involved in the academic 
—we had to go outside to get paraprofessionals. We actu­
ally hired carpenters and tradesmen right in the program 
on the faculty.

Q. This represents in reality a new approach to the edu-

James D. Ward—-for Defendants—Direct



1850a

actional process, does it not? A. Well, I think it was a 
new approach to the edncational process at the high school.

Q. Are yon aware of any similar approach taking place 
at any of the other Denver high schools? A. I think some 
are looking at programs like this and have expressed an 
interest, wanting to go into this area.

Q. Because of your experience with the program? A. I 
don’t know whether you could say it was my experience 
with it. But I  think we should—there are many positive 
things about the program, and I think if you can develop 
the program to meet the problems—I’m not concerned about 
programs just because they’re programs. They have to be 
designed for some purpose as far as I ’m concerned.

Q. When did you actually begin to implement your 
vocational skills program? A. I was at Manual one semes­
ter and began the second semester.

[489] Q. And did you start the entire program at that 
time? Or, was that one that was established in stages? 
A. We developed the basic program at that time.

Q. And could you tell us, please, and tell the Court some 
of the specific trades which are concerned in the vocational 
skills program? A. Well, we are concerned with what is 
known as the building trades which includes carpentry, 
plumbing, electrical work, bricklaying; some of the so-called 
gray areas like linoleum laying and things of these kinds. 
Everything that goes into the building* trades. That’s what 
we called the trades program. We have a program that is 
called power and transportation which deals with the begin­
ning program in small motors and advancing to automotive 
motors and the introduction to diesel. We are looking at 
jet engines if we could find ways in the building to hold 
the noise in there. We are looking at cosmetology, which 
is an actual program, state-sanctioned program, for girls;

James D. Ward—■for Defendants—Direct



1851a

a program which is called HERO, which is home economics 
and related occupations, which takes in nurse’s aides, takes 
in food preparation, sewing, different types of sewing, 
power sewing, commercial-type work. Machine metals, 
which is fabrication. Welding. Different types of welding. 
And we have what we call machine shop where they deal 
with the lathe and cutting-type machines.

Q. Do you have any present plans for an expansion or 
[490] adjustment in any of these programs! A. Yes, we 
are trying to build additional dimensions in these programs. 
For example, I just touched lightly on what we want to 
do more than skill training. We want to give kids as much 
knowledge about what goes into the total picture. An ex­
ample was in the trades when we built a house. We actu­
ally built a house.

Q. Would you tell us about that, please! A. Well, my 
advice is, don’t get into the house-building business. But 
we were concerned with—the kids were actually involved. 
All things that go into it. They establish their companies 
and we are strong believers in this, which is the experience 
and the kind of leadership and opportunities the kids have 
in school. It was the experience where the kids went down 
to the Urban Renewal and presented their plan for the 
use of the property. They had to go to the First National 
Bank and borrow $16,000 as construction money, and they 
had to listen to subcontractors and weigh bids with help, 
of course, to see what goes on. What they learned about 
property: How do you buy property? What are the zon­
ing laws? Spending time in the Engineer’s office; spending 
time in architectural offices downtown; finding the kind of 
house, the type of house they could build, and that would 
be attractive in the area. Then, having this experience, 
actually constructing the house. What it did to them in­

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1852a

trinsically to see themselves building [4913 something; and, 
the attitude of people in the areas while they are building 
something rather than tearing something down. These are 
many of the experiences and many of the values that we 
feel are important in these programs. On an extension, 
on one of the programs, the students in the metal shop 
will be making all of the bulletin boards for the Denver 
Public Schools. We have the contract now. This is a mean­
ingful thing. Here the kids have a chance to establish a 
company, here they have a chance to really utilize the math 
and measure means and figuring out the cost of materials, 
and these kinds of experiences. The power and transporta­
tion program—we are now running a filling station in co­
operation with Standard Oil Company. This gives them 
the introduction to small business. How do you buy? What 
is this thing called marketing? How do you figure out 
profits? And these things of experience. This is what we 
try to build into these vocational programs.

Q. Do the children who participate in the construction 
of the home and those who participate in the operation of 
the filling station receive instruction in the general academic 
areas? A. Yes. Here, again, the power and transporta­
tion—we build in a math and English person that worked 
right there in the shops with the kids. This is also done 
in the metals shop, cosmetology. No, there is a specific 
program for that E492] where young ladies have to be in 
the program 1,600 plus hours. They are there for clock 
hours a day and then they go to their regular subjects 
during the day. In the home economics, in the HERO pro­
gram, the academics are not built into that program. The 
kids go to their regular program.

Q. And do you intend to continue these programs at 
Manual? A. If funding is available, yes.

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1853a

Q. What observations have you been able to gather in 
terms of the success of these programs as it relates first 
to the students involved ? A. I think we have seen changes 
in attitudes. To many kids, school is more human. They 
see means for school; how it can function as far as they 
are concerned. Academic achievement, I have not seen 
great gains in this area yet.

Q. Is it an area that you would normally see fantastic 
gains over short periods of time? A. No, it’s something 
you hope for.

Q. What about the community acceptance of these pro­
grams and of the school? A. I think the community’s 
acceptance has been positive. I  think they, the commu­
nity, some parts of the community feel that we are working 
with the kids to the best we can in trying to give them as 
many experiences as we possibly can. I might say what 
we are attempting to do in essence is developing* [4933 
comprehensive high school, where there are many things for 
the kids to make selections to do.

Q. And I assume you are continually reevaluating these 
programs and learning as you experience their operation? 
A. The building committee right now, which is the teach­
ers’ evaluating program—those in the program and some 
of those out of the program—are attempting to evaluate to 
see what we need to put in and what we need to take out. 
Do we need to expand? Do we need to remove the program?

Q. Speaking of teachers, Mr. Ward, what generally is 
the experience level of your teaching staff at Manual? A. 
It’s in that book there, I think. We have quite a few teach­
ers—I’m satisfied with them.

Q. Do you feel that the new teachers are capable teachers 
in terms of being assimilated either into the District’s aca-

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1854a

demie program or into your vocational skills program! A. 
Yes. As a matter of fact, I’m a firm believer that the old 
teachers are the best teachers. I think some with young 
ideas who are coming in now with this changing society— 
I think many of those have a very fine ideâ —have fine ideas 
to put into the program.

Q. Following your experience with your vocational skills 
program, did you establish a new program in the pre­
professional area! [4943 A. Yes. I might point out that 
the vocational program runs in blocks of time. You can’t 
do the laboratory-type program in a 45-minute period, so 
we’ve blocked this at three periods at a time. So we looked 
at the program to see what were the values of it, and there 
were some things that we saw that were interesting. We 
were introducing students to many areas that they were 
not familiar with, because many of our kids come from 
not-affluent backgrounds or homes. We saw also a value 
of our kids getting the experience of going out of the school 
and working with people, not basically school people. In 
other words, working with people from unions; working 
with people from businesses. And I think it’s a reciprocal 
type of thing where people on the outside get a chance 
to take a look at the kids, too, and see—and have a chance 
to better understand how kids think. So we took a look at 
some other areas that are generally considered by society 
as basically professional areas. We were concerned about 
the number of youngsters who went to college and we 
started to examine some of their pursuits and we were 
concerned about large numbers going into areas like into 
the social studies areas; sociology, social work. These kinds 
of things. And also we looked at the results of a ques­
tionnaire that we put out for career day. Now, career day 
is where a lot of people come into the building from all

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1855a

over, businesses and the broad community, and say what 
they think to kids and tell [495] them about opportunities. 
But, when we looked at the choices, we were a little bit 
alarmed that there were very few kids who wanted to 
listen to a doctor; very few wanted to listen to a lawyer; 
engineers. No takers. So we wondered, could we take a 
little piece out of the academic program. And we thought 
we could do it without disturbing the educational studies 
because kids can graduate from Denver Public Schools in 
two and a half years. They can get their requirements in. 
So we said, well, let’s try to work at that semester time 
where we could use these experiences, credit these experi­
ences as electives to the kids. And talked to the kids in—• 
small groups of students about their interests in going to 
college; what they would like to take a look at. How they 
feel about the medical and the allied health fields. What 
do you know about engineering? Are you interested in 
seeing more about these things 1 In other words, attempting 
to expose them to these areas. So we selected the areas 
based on students’ interest. One was the medical and allied 
health fields. One was engineering. One was elementary 
education. One was communications. We were concerned 
about minorities being in front of the camera, what goes 
on behind and how about being a technician or a photog­
rapher or running a camera, or writing, producing. We 
looked at the aviation—the area of aviation. I’m sure there 
was one other but I can’t— So, we started working, meet­
ing with the people concerned and the agencies, [496] 
schools, et cetera, talking to them about the program. How 
could you assist in setting up experience-type programs for 
our kids? But also letting them know that they had to be 
more than just to sit there and listen and watch. The kids 
had to get involved. Data processing was the other one.

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1856a

So, we got a few takers. And in the medical program 
the C.U. Medical Center said, “Well, we would like to work 
with them.” They got doctors to volunteer to lecture kids 
and to help them and set up experiments for them. The 
Denver University picked up the engineering program. The 
telephone company said, “We’ve got millions of dollars’ 
worth of business machines. We would be very happy to 
work with the kids here.”

Our own Channel 6 supplied the television area, the 
support from Channel 4 and Channel 7 were received. So 
rather than attempt to buy the equipment and put it in the 
schools we feel that these people have to have updated 
equipment—have the best, why, then why can’t we go out 
and use theirs. So we bused the kids into these programs 
where all of them spent a period of time. WTe had some 
interesting results in it. I ’m looking anxiously at the re­
ports from the kids who are doing the medical research. 
They are studying tissues—scar tissue after operations. 
We feel this is very interesting kind of exploratory work 
for kids. They watch things like circumcision and heart 
transplants on dogs [497] and animals and these things, 
and from this we have a number of kids who have elected 
to go to college into the medical area. This is the purpose. 
We have one youngster who has received a scholarship 
already to the Denver University, going into the field of 
engineering, and we feel the experience he had there at 
the university in preengineering courses was perhaps one 
of the things.

Q. Did the students actually take courses at the Univer­
sity of Denver? A. Yes. They are right in there with 
engineering students—beginning engineering students.

Q. Your medical program—this is not a program run at 
the school, but at the University of Colorado Medical Cen­
ter? A. Yes.

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1857a

Q. Your preeducational program, Mr. Ward—-what basi­
cally does that provide? A. One of the concerns in col­
leges has been that black male students have not been 
interested in going into the field of specifically—education 
specifically at the elementary level, so we were concerned 
about how could we work into this area. So, we went to 
the Northern Colorado University, at Greeley, and worked 
with them on a program and we received cooperation from 
elementary principals in the area and our kids started what 
we call laboratory experience, [498] working with teachers 
in six elementary schools in the area. We did not want 
them to have experience like running off materials, march­
ing the kids to the lavatory. We wanted to have them to 
have a chance to work with teachers, working with specific 
kinds of youngsters doing what we might call backyard 
counseling with them, helping with their reading problems 
in the classroom, assisting the social worker and working 
with the kids, counseling with youngsters. And we found 
—we had many letters from principals expressing pleasure 
in having this program because it did a lot to establish 
an image for some of the kids. The second semester they 
have been going, still at the elementary schools, but a pro­
fessor comes down from the University of Northern Colo­
rado and the kids were in a lecture course, general psychol­
ogy or something like that, psychology courses, and they 
spent the last three days—the last week they were up on 
the campus at Greeley studying this to finish their work. 
This gave the kids a chance to look at Greeley, to talk to 
some of the professors about going to school there. We 
have a number that are going there and, of course, they 
received both high school credit and college credit towards 
it.

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1858a

Q. In connection with the University of Northern Colo­
rado, I think we’re now, are we not, supposed to call it 
that? Is this a recent understanding in which you have 
finally been able to achieve with them? [499] A. Yes.

Q. Is this a basic program looking forward—as opposed 
to anything you have had going for any period of time? 
A. Yes.

Q. Do you have any advanced placement opportunities 
for your students in the college area again? A. Yes, we 
utilized this—here again, we utilize this time the kids have. 
We were concerned about this because when kids know they 
are graduating, they receive their hours-—the last semester, 
and grades start to go down, and attitudes change and you 
have more kids getting in trouble with teachers because 
they’re sort of fed up with it, you know, and they are 
through. So, to motivate these kids to go on, we developed 
with the Denver University a program where these kids 
could come out to be bused right out to D.U. and take col­
lege courses. Now, we were not talking about orientation 
courses. They were taught actually freshman courses. Some 
of the kids got in a two-year program—no, in the one-year 
program—some of them last year. So, the kids had 20 
quarter hours ready to go before they had actually entered 
college. We were also working with Community College 
on the same basis, where the kids are bused there in the 
morning. These are limited programs. I  think we have 27 
going to D.U. and there’s about 14 going out at Community 
College.

Q. There was some testimony at the February hearing, 
[500] Mr. Ward, regarding the percentage of Manual grad­
uates going on to college, and I think perhaps they’re talk­
ing about students now taking college courses. This would 
be an opportune time to straighten this out. What, gener­

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1859a

ally speaking, last year, was the percentage of your gradu­
ates that actually went on to college ! A. Fifty-one plus in 
the graduating class.

Q. This was not applications to college but was actually 
a matriculation into the college program! A. Yes.

Q. As part of your continuing program for the motiva­
tion of the students, have you developed a plan or have you 
a plan under consideration to continue your connection with 
the students once they leave Manual and enter college cur­
riculum! A. Yes. We are very concerned about when our 
students leave because, with the kinds of support they get 
and which we feel is a very close support, we are concerned 
about when they leave us, the kinds of help that they will 
get. We understand that they have to be weaned sooner 
or later. But we worked out a program with the University 
of Colorado. We just experimented with that last semes­
ter, of sending one of our counselors up on the campus 
two or three days a week just to see how the kids are doing. 
It can be a home base; a reference point; where the kids 
need help, and perhaps, because of the vastness of the school 
don’t know some of the [501] ways in which to go. So we 
are utilizing this approach. We are also calling back many 
of our students to make contributions back to the school 
in terms of ways they have been helped and ways that we 
could help other kids going on, too, so we could hold onto 
these kids as long as possible.

Q. In terms generally of the preprofessional type pro­
grams which we have been discussing, the premed, prelaw, 
preeducation, these programs—when were those instituted 
into the curriculum! A. We began on those programs be­
ginning in the fall.

Q. Of last year! A. This school year. The fall of this 
school year.

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1860a

Q. Now, you mentioned earlier in your testimony that 
having identified some of the problems which you felt ex­
isted in terms of the students at Manual when you arrived, 
one of the foremost problems apparently was in—the ques­
tion of student motivation as far as school was concerned. 
As a result of your experience with these programs, have 
you any observations regarding the motivation of the stu­
dents as a result of the institution of these programs? A. 
They definitley have holding power. We have kids that are 
staying in school. At the present time our enrollment is 
1,380 kids, which is much higher than it has been in the 
past. This is one indication. The attitudes of students in 
terms of wanting to learn something. What kids talk about 
[502] now. I  see in them having a much broader idea of 
what is happening; what is going on in the world. And 
through the opportunities that they have in making a go 
at it. You see these kinds of things.

Q. How about the reaction in the community, in the 
employers you mentioned? A. Well, this has been very— 
a very interesting experience for us, to see some changes 
in some people. Now, I don’t want to be understood that 
we have changed the world out there. We haven’t. But I 
think our employers are seeing minority students, specif­
ically black students, in a little different light. They’re 
seeing abilities that they didn’t—that someone else told 
them the}7- didn’t have in the past. Many of the experiences 
have been very positive and many of the employers want 
to continue to go along with the program.

Q. What about the community support and recognition 
of the high school? A. Well, as I said before, I think 
the feeling of the community is positive. Still, you don’t 
know what really is going on, but the experiences that we 
have had from the standpoint of parents, the community 
support that we have had, I think it’s positive.

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1861a

Q. Is part of your program in reality an educational 
process for the entire community as well as for the students 
themselves? [503] A. We feel it is. And I think it’s 
probably something that we should just briefly allude to 
at this time. The school in the community like Manual High 
School cannot necessarily operate like a school in many 
other kinds of communities. We are located in the commu­
nity—in a community that a few years ago had a number 
of socializing agencies. But, as the community becomes 
older, people become more affluent. People become better 
off financially. They move from the area and the leadership 
is constantly drained from the area. And it’s very difficult 
to get input from these people after they leave. Churches 
move out where the constituents are moving. The recrea­
tion centers, other kinds of socializing agencies move out 
where the people are. Consequently, it leaves the school in 
a difficult position, and the role of the school is different, 
I  believe. I think the school has to do what it can to supple­
ment those forces that move out. Probably Manual High 
School is utilizing more from the standpoint of commu­
nity after school and on weekends than any other school 
in the city, because it has become the center. But the physi­
cal aspect is one, of course, that we can easily look at, 
easily see or identify. But one of the most difficult things 
is to attempt to develop a program, attempt to develop 
knowledge for kids, for people in the community, where 
they will be effective citizens in the community, politically, 
socially, and the school has a very difficult role to play. In 
other [504] words, it has to be more than an agency. We 
felt that one of the important things in this vocational pro­
gram wTas to get the kids out into the community; get 
them away from there. Let them see something. Let them 
experience things. Let the majority of the community see 
kids can do something. This, in a sense is one of the re­

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1862a

sponsibilities we felt we bad to do. We are right now con­
cerned about a program that we call the environmental 
design program. Can kids learn in a school like that to 
redevelop their own community! No one else is going to 
do it. Outsiders can’t come in and rebuild it. It has to be 
redone by the people. Can kids who will be voting for 
something perhaps as the eighteen or nineteen-year-olds— 
and I would sure hate to see them voting for nothing. It 
seems to me they have—they ought to have some roots. 
They ought to have some belief or concern about their own 
community if they’re going to be successful people. So I 
think the role of the school is, you can’t wait for George to 
do it. We have to attempt to put it in. In our prelaw course, 
if kids don’t desire to be lawyers, they at least learn some­
thing about law that affects them, you see. We can at least 
get some of these kinds of things done. And when we talk 
about law and order and things of this kind, maybe if they 
understood the law sometimes or how the law is supposed 
to be interpreted maybe they can see their own relationship 
to it.

Q. You started to mention one of the future programs 
[5051 which you envision for Manual in the environmental 
design program. Would you tell us a little bit more about 
that, please.

The Court: I  think we might break at this point 
for lunch. And we will take up at 2 :00 p.m.

(Whereupon, the trial recessed at 12:28 p.m. and 
resumed at 2 :08 p.m.)

By Mr. Jackson:
Q. Mr. Ward, prior to the break for lunch we were start­

ing to discuss some of your future programs. I believe yon

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1863a

were preparing to discuss your program on environmental 
design. Would you explain that to the Court, please? A. 
Well, as we have looked at the—here again, the role of the 
school, what can the school do in providing educational 
programs, better education for kids? What can it do in 
helping to improve the social climate and also what can be 
done in terms of the political climate ? And we, as I stated 
before, we were vitally concerned with what these seven­
teen, eighteen and nineteen-year-old young people who are 
citizens in our community, how can they look intelligently 
at the political picture in the community when it comes to 
voting? What can they look at as needs for the community, 
if they haven’t any involvement in it? So we worked out a 
program with the architectural school, the University of 
Colorado, and with the Urban Renewal, and we are wonder­
ing if £506] young people who are in schools learn to work 
with many mediums, like clay and wood and metals and 
paper and so forth—are they creative enough to work with 
the guidance of engineers and architects to start working 
with larger areas? Can our kids redevelop blocks in the 
community? Can they build, design miniparks, and can 
they give suggestions for recreation centers and where 
houses should be and these things? We do this on a small 
scale within the school. Can we use the community then as 
a much larger learning laboratory? So, if funding is avail­
able in the fall we want to work in the summer to design 
the curriculum for this program and to work in this. We 
think it has some interesting dimensions for youth in terms 
of having a piece of the action in their own community, 
hoping that, if kids can get action programs like this going 
in the broad community in the Northeast, will families and 
other agencies in the community join in and see what can be 
done in the redevelopment.

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1864a

Q. Do you also have plans for an outdoor education cen­
ter? A. Yes, and I don’t want this to he confused with the 
Ballerette program. We are concerned about the acquisi­
tion of a Job Corps Camp. In some areas these camps are 
declining in use, and we have asked assistance to obtain 
one of these camps that we would like to use for an exten­
sion of all programs. We would like to look at the pos­
sibility of taking [5073 up youngsters, not only from 
Manual but from other parts of the city; kids who may be 
working on joint kinds of programs, to spend a few weeks 
at a time with their instructors, bringing in. tutors from the 
University of Colorado and Greeley that would be with the 
kids on—to continue their educational programs. But we 
feel there is a lot to be gained from this kind of relationship 
and association. Also, our young people come from an 
urban setting. We feel that an exposure to some of the 
activities that we see more out in the open, in the mountains 
and plains and things where our kids don’t have the chance 
to participate, and that we feel this would be a broad ex­
perience. Also, we wanted to use this as a training ground 
for our young people in the elementary education program 
where they can get some counseling and training and we 
could set up camping opportunities for the youngsters in 
the surrounding elementary schools and where kids could 
get the experience of providing a camp experience for the 
young people. We could also use many of the resources of 
our own young people in our home economics area and in 
our trades area to maintain the camp and to provide the 
maintenance-type facilities for the kids. It would be an ex­
tension of our regular program.

Q. And you have an airline cadet program that you are 
considering? A. Yes. We have looked—we have gone into 
the trades, building trades area and to other areas and we

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1865a

realize that the [508] airline business is a huge business, 
and our kids ought be involved more into opportunities 
there. And United Air Lines is coming in the area with a 
huge plant in the Denver area where it will be increased. 
We talked to United Air Lines people—we talked them into 
working with us in a program that would be—we use the 
word “cadet”—because it would be a beginning program 
of learning and operating and working with the people in 
there and in the many, many jobs in the airline business. 
And we’re talking about ticket agents; we’re talking about 
hostesses; we’re talking about stewards; we’re talking about 
many of the kinds of jobs. It would also give us an op­
portunity to extend the training of these young people into 
the Community College, in the publication at the Denver 
University. We’re working with Community College where, 
once they finish high school, to extend their training they 
could go into the Community College and their kids could 
either go on performing’ the skills to work in the airlines or 
it would give them a chance to go on to college. It would 
be an entry-type thing into college.

Q. If I could back up for just a minute, Mr. Ward. You 
mentioned the problems which you had experienced or 
which your students had experienced in the industry. At 
the time of the trades program did you have any particular 
problem either in setting up the program or finding union- 
type trades that would accept your students? £5091 A. 
When we began the program, and when we made our first 
inquiry we were told that this would be foolish to attempt; 
to attempt to work with the unions, because they weren’t 
interested in working with schools. And they want to have 
their own people do their own training*. But we found that 
this was not necessarily so; that, if you can get anyone to 
listen to you, you would have a fifty-fifty chance of con­

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1866a

vincing them that they can do something for you. So we 
went ahead and we utilized their people—called their co­
ordinators—to help us develop the curriculum. I put them 
on the advisory committee. They wanted us to build tool 
boxes and sawhorses as training projects, but we ended up 
building a house. They will go along with you, I think, if 
you involve them. And we involved them on a participation 
level.

Q. Now, in addition to these preprofessional programs 
and your vocational skills programs, do you also have plans 
to develop a teacher resource program directed more 
towards the basic academic areas? A. Yes, we are con­
cerned about this, and the direct effort here is in this thing 
called academic achievement. I ’m concerned about using 
teachers who are educators to ride herd on kids in lunch­
rooms, and be on ground duties, and we feel this can be done 
with trained paraprofessionals. And since we are limited 
in the time that we can schedule a teacher in the classes and 
we feel rather than put a teacher [5103 in that kind of 
duty, we could better utilize the teacher’s talents to work in 
individualized construction programs. Briefly, the way we 
intend to do this—if we can get support to put parapro­
fessionals in the building under the supervision of a 
teacher or one of the officers, then students would have the 
opportunity to come from their scheduled study halls and 
the teachers would be on duty, not in the teacher’s lounge, 
but on duty in certain rooms, certain places in the building 
utilizing what we call study materials and visual aid ma­
terials and resource materials that they have there to help 
kids. One of the kinds of things that we are concerned 
about is that juniors and seniors have difficulty many times 
in writing term papers and reports. Teachers would be 
available. We attempted to do this with remedial approach

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1867a

to tutors from the neighboring universities, C.U., Denver 
University. But a tutor lacks something. Sometimes they 
lack philosophy of the school. Sometimes they lack some 
of the techniques that some teachers use, plus the fact we 
realize that just because someone wants to help you does 
not mean necessarily you want to receive their help. There 
has to be a relationship and we feel this kind of approach 
would help us develop a relationship between teachers and 
students.

Q. And this, again, is a program which you now have 
under consideration and are developing? A. For the fall, 
yes, sir.

[511] Q. Has it been possible, up to this moment, Mr. 
Ward, to gauge the impact which your relationship with 
the University of Northern Colorado will have on your 
program and on your school? A. Not just yet. There are 
many problems that have to be worked out. IBs not an 
easy situation for a school—a public school to work with 
an institution of higher learning. There has to be some 
trust and confidence developed on both sides. But I think 
we have taken some significant steps. We have the advisory 
committee. We have interested people in the community 
that are attempting to work with the program. We have 
some teachers that are bending a little, both ways, to work 
it out, but at this point I couldn’t say that we are ready 
to move in that direction.

Q. Does the same basic philosophy apply to all your pro­
grams, that your initial planning appears to be sound? 
Or is there still additional work that needs to be done in 
these areas ? A. I would be the last one to say that every­
thing is running smooth. We have many problems.

Q. But you feel generally that it holds some prospect 
for success in terms of the ideals that you have set for the

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Direct



1868a

program? A. Philosophically, I think it’s sound. Some 
programs have to be changed; a change in attitudes. But 
I think all [512] these things have to be taken into consid­
eration, and with continued work we can develop it into a 
meaningful program.

Q. Do you think you have achieved some success at this 
point? A. I  think so.

Mr. Jackson: You may examine.

Cross-Examination by Mr. Barnes:
Q. Mr. Ward, the vocational training program began 

about three and a half years ago, was that correct? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. And you have about 1,380 students at Manual? A. 
In school now.

Q. About how many are involved in the vocational pro­
gram? A. Oh, roughly 250—300.

Q. Somewhere between 15 and 20 percent? A. About 
that.

Q. Now, the students coming into Manual—the feeder 
school for Manual is Cole, is it not? A. One of them it is. 
It’s the largest feeder school.

Q. What are the others ? A. Morey Junior High School. 
A few from Smiley. Horace Mann.

Q. The majority of them come from Cole, do they not? 
A. The majority come from Cole.

[513] Q. And one of the problems, is it not, is that the 
children who do come from Cole are achieving in the 9th 
grade at the 20th percentile grade, is not that correct? A. 
I believe the figure is correct.

Q. It’s about in that area? A. (Nods affirmatively.)
Q. So then they come in there already substantially be­

hind academically? A. (Nods affirmatively.)

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Cross



1869a

Q. And they may be reading- technically two to three 
grade levels behind the citywide average, is that correct? 
A. Yes, sir. I think it’s correct. I don’t know specifically.

Q. But that’s in the neighborhood, isn’t it? A. Bight.
Q. So they are having trouble with reading and they 

have a low percentile rating on their achievement score 
when they get there and as they go through Manual they 
take what’s called the par test when they get to the end? 
A. Yes, sir.

Q. And do all of them pass that test? A. No, not all 
kids pass it.

Q. Can you give us some idea of what the percentages 
are on that? A. Probably Mr. Cavanaugh, who tested 
them, can probably [5143 give you a better percentage. 
I’m not evading the question, sir. Some of them take it in 
summer school and some of them take it at Metro, but we 
attempt to give it as many times as possible and use our 
clinics—our par clinics to help them.

Q. Those are special training programs to try and get 
them through the par test? A. Yes.

Q. Those who get the par test—do all of those who pass 
the par test also graduate? A. That’s basically true.

Q. Is it the same thing, that you get a certificate of 
graduation for passing the par test? Or do you have some 
further requirement? A. To pass the par examination 
and to secure the minimum number of hours for gradua­
tion, something like 150 hours, plus the required that’s in 
here.

Q. So those who pass the par test, even fewer who actu­
ally get a certificate of graduation or diploma? A. Those 
who do pass the par test?

Q. Yes. We start off with a certain number who pass 
the par test, and then an even smaller number who get a

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Cross



1870a

diploma, isn’t that correct? A. I would say that would be 
true, sir. I feel accurate in saying that generally those who 
pass the par test graduate.

Q. You also have, do you not, at Manual, some special 
[515] education programs? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Can you tell us approximately how many students you 
have in special education? A. In special ed we have 60 
students.

Q. Sixty out of 1,380? A. (Nods affirmatively.)
Q. Has there been a problem in the past of getting—I 

think you said there was—a problem of getting graduates 
from Manual or people with par certificates employed? A. 
Yes, it’s a job we work at.

Q. And your vocational training program is geared pri­
marily at that employment question, is it not? A. Certain 
kinds of employment, yes.

Q. I t’s not a substitute for the early academic failures, 
but rather it is created because of those failures, isn’t it? 
A. Yes, and it’s really a slushing program on the part of 
the student.

Q. When you put it together you took a poll of some of 
the businesses in the community to find out what their im­
pression should be of the more relevant program? A. 
(Nods affirmatively.)

Q. Can you say audibly, so the record will pick it up, 
please? A. Yes. I’m sorry.

[5163 Q. And you took a poll of students themselves? 
A. Yes, talked to students.

Q. So the choice of this vocational training program was 
in part based on the expectations of the community about 
employment of your graduates and expectations of the 
students themselves, was it not? A. But also student in­
terest. I ought to point out that many students do not want

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Cross



1871a

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Cross 

to go to college.
Q. Well, isn’t it true that many students want to see that 

they have a job at the end of where they’re going? Isn’t 
that the problem? A. Yes.

Q. And those that somehow feel they’re not going to be 
frustrated when they end up with all this education? A. 
Yes.

Q. So they’re really trying to avoid the fear and isola­
tion of not getting a job, aren’t they? A. Yes.

Q. And the program is in part based therefore on the 
community expectations of what kind of jobs your gradu­
ates can get? It’s aimed at that, is that correct? A. You’ve 
got me around in there someplace.

Q. Well, is it correct? A. I think it’s right, yes.
Q. And the failure to get these other jobs— Well, E517] 

it’s the acceptance of reality, isn’t it, for these kids?

The Court: I suppose it’s an acceptance of reality 
for everybody. I mean, to do the best you can.

The Witness: I  would say yes.

Q. It’s based on an acceptance of the past failures to get 
better jobs, isn’t it? A. Yes.

# # # # #

[518] * * *
Q. You don’t disagree, do you, Mr. Ward, that the— A. 

No.
Q. —that the peer group has an important influence on 

the classroom? A. Yes.
[5193 Q. You do agree? A. Yes.
Q. And what aspect of the vocational training program 

would be continued if Manual were integrated? A. I 
would answer that question by saying I would continue,



1872a

cut back or increase any program that I felt met the needs 
of the kids in the school.

Q. Would you expect the needs to change if it were 
integrated? A. I don’t know. I think we have some pro­
grams at Manual that many young people would like to 
take a look at.

Q. Turning your attention, Mr. Ward, to the pre-profes­
sional program, can you tell us specifically how many chil­
dren are in the premedical program? A. Twenty-seven.

Q. In the law program? A. The law runs about 35. 
There’s about 35.

Q. And you have an engineering program? A. Yes, 14 
in engineering.

Q. And the education program? A. Fifty-two.
Q. And you have a social work program? Or, do you? 

A. No, sir.
Q. And you have communications ? A. Communications, 

15.
[520] Q. So you have somewhere— I’d better do my 

arithmetic. A. About 150, something like that.
Q. Let’s say a hundred and fifty or so—somewhere 

around ten percent in these preprofessional programs ? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. And somewhere around fifteen to twenty percent in 
the vocational programs? A. I think we should say closer 
to twenty percent, I think.

# # # # #

[531] * * *
Q. Would you agree that a major part of the academic 

problem at segregated schools results from the failure of 
the peer group to present linguistic challenges to the 
minority student? A. I will agree that could be a part of 
it, yes.

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Cross



1873a

Q. And isn’t there a learning factor just in the terminol­
ogy and the language that other students around one stu­
dent might use that challenges that student to expand his 
own vocabulary and his own horizon? A. I ’m sure it 
would affect him.

Q. Would it affect the academic performance of the stu­
dent to be challenged in that way?

The Court: I  don’t think he has ever said that a 
[532J desegregation program might be useful or 
valuable. All he did was describe his program. And 
I don’t think you’re disparaging his efforts, either. 
But I  just don’t think we’re getting anywhere. May­
be we are, but it just doesn’t strike me that we are. 
What do you wish for him to admit to? I mean, do 
you want him to say that he could get more mileage 
out of an integrated setting? Why don’t you ask him 
that if you do?

Q. Can you answer that question, Mr. Ward? A. What 
was the question?

The Court: Did you get that question?
The Witness: I got it.
The Court: I  mean, that’s what you’re driving at, 

isn’t it?
Mr. Barnes: Yes.

Q. Would you expect an integrated setting to produce 
higher academic achievement? A. I think it would have a 
definite effect on academic achievement, yes.

Q. And your classes at Manual are still 96-percent seg­
regated, are they not? A. That’s right.

Q. Are you familiar with the academic achievement—the

James D. Ward—for Defendants—Cross



1874a

progress of academic achievement at Manual over the past 
three or four years? A. Am I familiar with it?

[533] Q. Yes. You’re aware of the fact, are you not, 
that it has declined? A. That’s right.

Q. Since 1965? A. Yes.
Q. And Manual was at the 34th percentile rate in 1965 

and had fallen to 28 by 1968? A. I’m familiar with the 
figures, sir.

Q. Are they correct? A. I  would have to say that they 
are correct, sir. They are based on the tests made of the 
kids.

# #  # # #

[535] * * *
G eorge M orrison-, J r ., a witness called by and on behalf 

of defendants, having first been duly sworn, was examined 
and testified as follows:

[536] Direct Examination by Mr. Jackson:
The Court: Please give us your full name and 

address.
The Witness: George Morrison, Jr., 3055 Cherry 

Street, Denver, Colorado.

By Mr. Jackson:

Q. Mr. Morrison, what is your present occupation? A. 
Principal, Cole Junior High School, Denver, Colorado.

Q. And how long have you held that position? A. A 
year and a half in June.

Q. How long have you been employed by the Denver 
Public Schools? A. Sixteen years.

Q. And prior to your going to Cole a year and a half 
ago, where were you at that time? A. Principal of Wyatt 
Elementary School.

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1875a

Q. Had you been principal of a junior high prior to your 
going to Cole? A. No.

Q. Mr. Morrison, I  wonder if you would explain briefly 
for the Court and for counsel the situation as you found it 
at Cole when you arrived there a year and a half ago?

The Court: I wonder if you would bring your 
chair around a little bit so the reporter can hear you.

[537] A. I have a bad leg and I can’t—-

(Colloquy not transcribed herein.)

A. I would say that the situation at Cole in January of 
1969 was one of turmoil, confusion and conflict. These 
terms as I use them are not necessarily in that sequence, 
but they had many problems that had been publicized in 
the newspapers and also by word of mouth where Cole was 
concerned and that is the type of situation that we run 
into. Students, teachers, the community, this type of thing. 
They just weren’t together in their endeavors at all.

Q. The students looked upon the school more as a jail 
than they did a school? A. They used that term; that they 
were in prison. Of course, here again, this is youngsters’ 
terminology. I think what they meant by that'—they didn’t 
have many opportunities to do some of the things that they 
thought they should be able to do as students.

Q. As a part of your analysis of—in your job, did you 
have occasion to consider then current achievement test 
scores of the students at Cole? A. Not immediately. Be­
fore the end of the school year I did get a chance to go 
over this information in regard to our students’ achieve­
ment levels.

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1876a

Q. Did you find that they were generally low! A. Yes, 
I did.

£538] Q. Mr. Morrison, do you feel that the test scores 
are indicators as such! Or do you figure that they are 
absolute measures of the students’ ability! A. No, they’re 
not absolute measures at all. There are too many intangi­
bles that standardized tests do not measure. And also I ’m 
not sure if standardized tests reflect the abilities of all of 
our youngsters because of the basic fact that they are 
standardized and they assume certain prerequisites, pre­
classifications on the part of the students, and I think many 
times we have found in order for us to determine how much 
progress students are making, that teacher-made tests are 
more effective.

Q. Are you at present utilizing teacher-made tests for 
your students! A. In part. We still use the standardized 
tests but we use teacher-made tests in terms of determin­
ing progress and areas in which we need to improve our 
instructional program.

Q. What specific efforts have you made, Mr. Morrison, 
to attempt to raise the achievement level or to make the 
educational practices at Cole since your arrival there! A. 
Well, the first thing I attempted to do was to sit down with 
our faculty and find out just what many of the problems 
were at Cole. I  was very much concerned about teacher 
attitudes; also pupil attitudes. And the community atti­
tudes. £539] All these things are an integral part of the 
total situation there at Cole. So we sat down with the 
teachers first of all and they had many problems and many 
demands that had been submitted to the central adminis­
tration, and we took these one by one and tried to reconcile 
them. And then I talked with the students very frankly 
about their role there and their function there in the school

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1877a

and in terms of “This is your school. We care about you.” 
And I think this is something that many of the youngsters 
didn’t feel prior to the change, that someone really cared 
about them and what they wanted to do, and their aspira­
tions and this type of thing. And very frankly, I said to 
them that, if we’re going to have a black school here, we’re 
going to have a good black school. And we’re going to have 
a good black school with the help and cooperation of every­
one involved, meaning students, teachers, and everyone 
else. And once they got the feeling that this is the way 
things were going to move, then we began to sit down and 
talk with teachers about educational philosophies, exactly 
what is our purpose in the school where kids are concerned. 
What are we here for? Are we here to serve kids? Or are 
we here to go through the motions and draw a paycheck 
and this type of thing? And I tried to be very frank. I 
don’t pull many punches when I ’m talking to the individu­
als. I  thought that it was a reciprocal responsibility of 
teachers and students, getting together, the role of the 
student in the [54031 building, the role of the teacher. We 
all are a team and we have to work that way in order to 
be successful. And when the team isn’t pulling in the same 
direction, we’re not making any progress.

Q. What is the racial and ethnic composition of Cole 
Junior Hig*h, Mr. Morrison, at the present time? A. Cole 
is 72.1-percent black, 25-percent Hispano, 1.4 Anglo, 1.2 
Asian, and ,3-percent American Indian.

Q. And you came to Cole during the middle of an aca­
demic year, did you not, Mr. Morrison? A. Yes.

Q. And did you not have available to you then any addi­
tional time prior to the commencement of your job within 
which to make plans and programs ? A. I certainly didn’t.

Q. This was kind of—you are here one day and there the 
next, is that right? A. Yes. 1

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1878a

Q. When were yon able to institute new programs or 
new approaches to the educational process! A. Septem­
ber, 1969.

Q. And could you detail some of those for us, please. A. 
Well, before I do that, may I make another statement!

Q. Sure. A. I  have been much concerned, in fact all my 
teaching [5413 experience in Denver has been in the Man­
ual area, and I have observed that what we have been do­
ing with youngsters hasn’t been successful. Our young­
sters are going into high school, going into junior high with 
reading deficiencies, and two or three—even four years be­
low grade levels. So I have had some ideas of what I  would 
like to try. So I sat down with the faculty and the admin­
istrative staff and said, “What we have been doing hasn’t 
been successful. So let’s try something different; a differ­
ent approach.” And I can’t say that these things are new 
because, as more learned educators than I will testify, 
there is not an awful lot new under the education process, 
the approach to it, that you can take.

So we decided that we would try to go to what we call 
a laboratory approach to education over at Cole in an 
attempt to give youngsters more opportunity for indivu- 
alized instruction and also in an attempt to give youngsters 
more actual experiences as opposed to vicarious experi­
ences. So we started out in the area of reading because 
this is one area that we definitely are lacking in. And we 
went to the laboratory approach here. We set up what we 
call a reading laboratory on the third floor of our building 
for the staff of eight periods a day with teachers who have 
backgrounds in reading. Now, the key to this whole thing 
is, as I see it, that kids love to read what they want to read. 
And I’m not saying that black and brown kids are inferior 
in terms of [542 3 their ability to read, but I  don’t see much

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1879a

sense in giving youngsters Dick and Jane to read in school 
when Dick and Jane actually have no relevance to these 
kids in this area. Ton see, these kids don’t see their father 
getting up in the morning, putting on a business suit and 
taking a briefcase and kissing mother good-bye and getting 
into an automobile and going to work. They don’t see 
mother going to bridge parties or having time to chat with 
the neighbors and this type of thing. You have to face 
things realistically with these kids. So let’s get away from 
this approach and find out where these youngsters’ inter­
ests are. And to me this is the key to teaching reading.

In reading, if we find youngsters’ interest—and they are 
all interested in something—it might be auto mechanics; 
it might be cosmetology. They wouldn’t call it cosmetology 
at their age, of course. Hair dressing is probably what 
they would call it. Automobiles. Anything. And then, we 
center these kids—these youngsters’ reading around their 
interests now at Cole. And what we do, we identify these 
interests or interest, even, and then we try to get reading 
materials in these areas where the youngsters have ex­
pressed an interest and we go from there. Because, if a 
youngster wants to learn how to put an airplane together, 
if his interest is model airplanes, you give him model air­
planes with all the parts. He has to do something to figure 
[5433 out where those parts are, rather than trial and 
error. Because, if he breaks a part of that airplane, he 
is lost, and he—if he loses an essential part of the airplane. 
So he’s going to try to figure out some words in those 
directions. All right. This kid is learning to read. He’s 
improving his reading.

Now, when you centralize the youngster’s ability and in­
terest in reading around his own interests—and this has 
proven to be successful, we think, at Cole this year. And

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1880a

we also approach it from another viewpoint. Many young­
sters have a background—an inadequate background in 
reading because of lack of phonics. Now, we have tried the 
phonic system in the Manual area for many years. It was 
supposed to be so effective that every youngster who had 
a good background would know how to read. Well, that 
hasn’t been necessarily true at all. So when we do find a 
deficiency in phonics we go back and we try to correct this 
deficiency and then immediately begin to capitalize on this 
idea of interest in reading. And I think that this has done 
more for our kids. We have kids who voluntarily go to 
the reading laboratories we have set up now. The old 
conception of the study hall is something else that we did 
away with at Cole. When I went to Cole many years ago, 
I did some things at study hall that were pretty wild for 
that day and age. And the same thing prevails today. Study 
hall, as a study hall, just does not [544] make too much 
sense to me. So we give youngsters the option of going 
to all of our laboratories on the voluntary basis to pick up 
additional help in areas in which they are deficient, the 
mathematics laboratory, the reading laboratory, the sci­
ence laboratory, social science laboratory, and things like 
that. And we have found youngsters on their own going 
to these labs and picking up some additional help which 
in turn helps them to become more proficient in their aca­
demics.

Q. You discussed the reading laboratory. Will you tell 
us a little bit about the establishment of the mathematics 
laboratory? A. The mathematics laboratory is one that 
we’re working on very hard to improve. We have machines, 
calculators and adding machines and things like that in 
the laboratory and, through the innovative and creative­
ness of our teachers we are able to assign youngsters to

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1881a

the lab or else have them go voluntarily to figure out the 
problems through that manipulative process, of course, 
which they enjoy quite a bit. Basically, what we try to do 
here, we don’t let the machines actually do the thinking 
for the youngsters. I think if it’s one thing we have to get 
across to youngsters in school is the ability to think out 
your problems, whether they are right or wrong in terms 
of the outcome, but give it some thought, so the youngsters 
solve these problems and then they prove they are work­
ing by going to the math lab and £5453 actually verifying 
the—on the machines what they have done. And if there 
is an error in their written work, then the machines show 
them that is—that the answer is incorrect. We go back 
and we think out'—go through the thought processes. 
Where did I do so and so wrong? And then find their 
mistakes and they go back and check them. They are be­
ginning to use slide rules in the mathematics laboratory. 
We’re going to try to get them into IBM to see how other 
machinery works and this type of thing with these young­
sters, and we are finding that many of our kids who were 
given homework assignments—there is no philosophy of 
mine that says homework has to be done at home. If a 
youngster wants to go up in the lab and work at school, 
we have it available for him, and he goes up there, and if 
he wants to go up there during the day, he can get help 
from teachers who are able to give him this opportunity 
to get some of these things done in school where I think 
the opportunity is greater than in many of our homes in 
our area.

Q. Have you also established a social science laboratory? 
A. Yes. This was established before I came to Cole and 
we have tried to improve it in terms of the addition of 
audiovisual equipment, soundproofing the room. We had

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1882a

the room carpeted. We had one whole wall torn out and 
glass windows put in where we can operate between two- 
rooms now without having to go all the way around through 
a door. We [546] can observe youngsters who are work­
ing at their own individual rates and their own individual 
ability levels, although we do emphasize that youngsters 
will try to improve their rate of speed and their efficiency 
in these labs. The social science lab is very popular. A 
youngster can tune in on his own lesson, using earphones 
and get all his directions. He can do the same thing with 
tape. Move right along. And we have teacher supervision 
there, at least two teachers in the lab.

Q. Going back for a moment, Mr. Morrison, to your 
reading laboratory—are there new programs which you 
started this year that were not specifically related to the 
laboratory approaches? For example, the 9th grade read­
ing improvement and the 7th grade programs? A. Yes, 
the 9th grade reading improvement program—one of the 
things we’ve doing this year is that we’re trying to use our 
students on a peer relationship with other students to help 
them in reading. We have some of our students tutoring 
other students. Here I think this gives a youngster a sense 
of pride, a sense of accomplishment. And it helps him to 
stand out and feel that “I have had some success.” So much 
of our trouble in the schools and with youngsters in partic­
ular is that we never experience success, and I think it’s 
a terrible shame that we tell youngsters so many times all 
the things that they cannot do. You’re not good at this. 
You can’t do this. Why don’t you do better here? Instead 
of [547] capitalizing on the positive things that they can 
do. And we are working along this line with some of our 
students there in the building. Our 7th graders coming in 
have had a little bit more of the self-contained classroom

George Morrison—for Defendants-—Direct



1883a

approach and many of them who are behind, we are work­
ing with them through the remedial-type programs in read­
ing, based again here on their interest level and this type 
of thing’.

Q. There is also in operation a science laboratory? A. 
Yes. I don’t see much sense in a youngster reading a book 
about an experiment and saying, well, this is great. I’d 
rather have them get in there and try to do something on 
his own and experiment. This learning-by-doing theory 
that we have heard so much about in education for many 
years, we’re trying to provide more opportunity for stu­
dents at Cole to have actual experiences rather than these 
vicarious experiences that I mentioned before. That’s 
where the pleasures—some of the pleasures of going to 
school come in, as I look at it. Kids like to be involved in 
things, and they should be involved. And if they make a 
mistake, okay, we made a mistake. Let’s try it again. This 
is the type of philosophy we’re trying to give our people 
and the same thing with our teachers. And it is very diffi­
cult for teachers to admit that “I’m wrong” sometimes in 
their classrooms, and I think it’s an important—a more 
physcial thing when they do, and they say to the young­
sters, well, okay. I  didn’t do this just [548] right. But I 
think that, if we try to solve our problems together, we will 
have a better success next time. And I think youngsters 
like to realize that teachers and principals and everybody 
else is human. We’re not tin gods.

Q. Now, do you also have different approaches to cer­
tain of the other fields as well, and without going into de­
tail on them, for example, the home economies, the in­
dustrial arts program? A. I think that in home economics 
programs, we talked about home economics, and it’s nor­
mally something that is associated with girls. So we

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1884a

started a boys’ home economics program; boys’ foods. 
Some of the fellows were very masculine, of course, and 
they didn’t see the value of being around the building with 
an apron on, mixing foodstuffs in bowls and things like 
that. But that was back in September. You could hardly 
get them into an apron. Along about December, January, 
it wasn’t uncommon to see these youngsters walking down 
the halls with their aprons on, saying, “I ’m in the boys’ 
foods class.” We have tried to provide alternatives for 
youngsters in our program which I think is needed. I 
think, really, the alternatives are needed in the junior high 
school program. Many youngsters are adverse to taking- 
physical education as such. Many of our young ladies are 
adverse to this. So we have tried to give some alternatives 
rather than saying, if you don’t take P.E., then you’re 
going [549] to be sent to the dean’s office, or something 
like this, or you possibly will be suspended from school. 
Because it is my philosophy that youngsters belong in 
school and it is our job to provide adequate programs to 
keep them in school. Innovative programs. So we have 
the cadets, which is an auxiliary of the R.O.T.C. program 
at Manual for young ladies. For the young men, we have 
the R.O.T.C. program. We have gymnastics laboratory 
where they begin to become more proficient in the areas 
of tumbling, gymnastics, and this type of thing and we’re 
trying to offer more and more alternatives. There are 
boys’ cooking classes and thing like this so that youngsters 
have experiences that are meaningful.

Now, here’s something else I want to bring out. That 
these just aren’t off the top of my head. They are things 
that will be of a great deal of value to these youngsters, 
not only now but as a concomitant assist later on in life.

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1885a

Q. Are there at present certain programs which you have 
instituted at Cole under what’s been commonly referred to 
as the Senate Bill 174, Educational Achievement Act? A. 
Yes.

Q. Will you describe those programs? A. Well, that is a 
three-phase program and it takes into consideration the 
many different types and personalities of youngsters that 
we have at Cole. The first phase of it C5503 is called the 
Crisis Boom and it is designed for youngsters who are 
having troubles either of their own or of the teachers’ 
making, period by period. Youngsters might come to 
school the first period and he gets along quite well. The 
second period he bugs the teacher or vice versa and gets 
into a little trouble. Now, heretofore, youngsters were be­
ing suspended from Cole and let out and they were out on 
the streets. And I think this is entirely wrong. We need 
to provide things to keep them in school. So this youngster 
will go to the Crisis Room. And he will stay there for one 
period or any part of that one period and he will receive 
academic instruction while he is there. Now, he might and 
he might not come back to that Crisis Boom that day. If 
he can make it through the rest of the classes successfully, 
the more power to him. That’s great. Now, the second 
type of youngster we have is one that might be able to 
tolerate the total program of the school for let’s say three 
or four periods a day only. Well, the alternative is either 
to put him on a half-day schedule or else discourage him 
from coming to school at all. Well, we have another alter­
native and that is put him into the educational laboratory. 
And this program—he is given all of the academic areas 
that he would normally miss with the exception of physical 
education, home economics, and industrial arts. And music, 
of course. But, if it’s an academic situation that he can’t

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1886a

compete with, then he goes to the educational [551] labora­
tory. Now, history has proven to us that the reason that 
most kids are bugged by the schools is because of tradition, 
that is to say, the traditional approach to educational prob­
lems. The structure, the pressures and things like this. 
And many youngsters just cannot endure these types of 
programs. But this is not to say that they cannot make it 
through school if somebody cares about them and wants to 
help them. So this program in the educational lab does 
this. It’s an informal setting. They have chairs in there, 
they have all types of reading machines. They have a tele­
vision set that is not always tuned to Channel 6, either, 
incidentally. It’s tuned to other channels because many 
times what a youngster needs when he is in there is this 
type of—or this frame of mind, or some relaxation. And 
we try to counsel with youngsters. We try to provide them 
with opportunities to express themselves and tell us what’s 
wrong so that we can help them. Now, I agree that a great 
many teachers don’t have time for this, so the educational 
lab is there for that purpose. Then we have another type of 
youngster who has decided that school is just not for him. 
And he has either dropped out or he’s a potential dropout. 
And in an attempt to get him back into school this young­
ster has said to me or someone in the building, “I just 
refuse to come to Cole Junior High School. This building 
just turns me off,” so to speak. So we have an extension 
center. It is located at [552] 2563 Gflenarm, and here we 
have a program that is built around a reading specialty as 
well as teachers who are very proficient in the areas of 
social science and mathematics. And these youngsters have 
—after we do a lot of screening, we do have consultation 
with the parents. We have visitation with the parents and 
with the youngsters and they go to the extension center

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1887a

each day. Now we have around 21 youngsters registered 
to go to the extension center and of these 21, not one of 
these youngsters has had a successful experience in Cole. 
Many of them refuse to go to school at all. But now they 
are going to the extension center. They go there on their 
own. At first we accommodated them to a degree where we 
would even go by and help them to get there, but now we 
figured, “You have some responsibility in this matter your­
self. So, if you’re interested in what we’re doing down 
here, you get down there on your own.” And these young­
sters are attending between 70 and 80 percent of the time. 
Now, here’s another program or here’s another way we’re 
trying to help kids. The kids have something to say about 
some of these things. Not only in our main building but in 
our special programs. It isn’t the type of program where 
we sit there and pour out all of our wisdom to kids and 
expect them to digest it and this type of thing. We try to 
get them involved. And if anything has made a difference 
at Cole—and we're not taking credit for any miracles at 
all because we have problems galore [553] at Cole right 
now—but if anything has made any difference over there I 
think it’s the fact that kids feel that they are part of the 
situation and they can come in and talk to any of the ad­
ministrative staff. They can come in and talk with their 
counselors and with teachers and some of this fear that 
was so rampant at Cole when I first went there on the 
part of teachers in terms of their attitudes with children 
has disappeared. You don’t find teachers leaving in groups 
any more for example because that was the safest way out 
of the building. “Don’t go out there by yourself. Go out 
there with somebody else.” We don’t see this any more. 
Teachers come and go freely and the youngsters seem to 
be even a little bit more relaxed in the building. People

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1888a

are talking to them. And we’re friendly with them. And 
they seem to have an idea that, well, maybe somebody does 
care enough about me to speak to me in the morning, any­
how, and if I’m having a problem, to take time to find out 
what it is. And I think these types of things have helped 
as well as these other programs that I mentioned earlier.

The Court: We will take our afternoon recess now.
(Whereupon, the trial recessed at 3 :30 p.m. and 

resumed at 3 :47 p.m.)

By Mr. Jackson:
Q. Mr. Morrison, we have been discussing programs 

which you instituted at Cole following your assignment 
there. Are there other programs which you are [5543 
presently considering for implementation next fall? A. 
Yes, there are. If funds are available, we would like to go 
into photographic darkroom programs, a darkroom with 
our industrial arts program, and we would like to obtain 
an IBM Varityper that we can use to help prepare our 
youngsters for this line of work. We have presently an 
offset press that we’re using and a Varitype headliner in 
our printing shop, and I can see some real value here, not 
only for our youngsters at Cole but I could see youngsters 
from Manual coming back to Cole getting this experience. 
And if the funds are available we would like to certainly 
move along this line. We were also planning to work co­
operatively with Manual next year in moving more of our 
students to Manual in the 9th grade into some of the pro­
grams that are existing there. We have what we call a 
biomedical program going on at Cole which is not a part 
of the regular curriculum, but is proving to be very in­
teresting and important for youngsters who have designs

George Morrison■—for Defendants—-Direct



1889a

on getting to the area of medicine. This program is spon­
sored by Mrs. Shirley Carter of onr school, who is a com­
munity aide. And we are able to work with hospitals in 
the summertime. We have youngsters going into hospitals 
working with doctors, technicians, this type of thing. And 
we would like to expand this. We would also like to go into 
a prelaw type program at Cole in terms of identifying 
youngsters who have an interest here.

[556] Q. Are you also considering expanding the lan­
guage program? A. You mean the total language arts 
program ?

Q. The foreign language program. A. The foreign 
language program, yes. We are able to work cooperatively 
with Manual here this year in sending some of our young­
sters over there to take French. We didn’t have the staff 
to do it at our own school, so we worked out a program 
with them and we hope to expand this into the area of 
Latin next year for those who are interested in the bio­
medical program, particularly, and in law as well.

Q. How about an expansion or an implementation of the 
work study program ? A. The work study program we have 
found to be very helpful to our youngsters. It teaches them 
responsibility and we would like to expand this program. 
This is part of the ESEA funded program that we have 
now. We would certainly like to continue along that line. 
One thing that we’re trying to do in our business education 
department which I think will prove to be meaningful to 
our youngsters is, instead of them typing letters out of old 
traditional books to fictitious companies and individuals-— 
we are using these youngsters who have shown ability to 
work right within the building to help prepare masters, 
ditto masters, and this type of thing. They are learning 
how to do this work neatly and efficiently [557] for teach­

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1890a

ers. And this type of thing of getting experience of doing 
many of the jobs that will help prepare them we hope for 
successful endeavors in the area of secretarial science.

Q. Mr. Morrison, have you been able at this point in 
view of the fact that these programs were instituted only 
last September to come to any conclusion as to whether or 
not the achievement levels have been materially affected 
by the institution of these programs! A. I have no hard 
data on it. I have what teachers have told me, what I have 
observed and what I have found out from talking with the 
youngsters in the building in terms of what do they think 
of some of the things we’re trying over there. And we have 
found that from these sources we have been able to get 
some positive data verbally from these individuals. I think, 
also, the fact that we notice a decline in our discipline cases 
in the assistant principal’s office and the dean’s office, which 
is indicative of some meaningful things going on in class­
rooms.

Q. What generally is the composition of your teaching 
staff in terms of its experience level? A. We have, I think, 
around 22 to 23 teachers who are tenure teachers. We have 
around 53 who are either in the first, second or third year.

Q. How do you find the activities of these teachers in 
[558] their first, second or third year? A. I’m pleased to 
say that the group of new teachers that we received last 
September has been one of the most outstanding groups 
of new teachers I  have ever had the experience to work 
with. They have seemed to come in and make the adjust­
ment very well at Cole. They were for the most part new 
teachers. And I think their assignment was satisfactory 
to them from the way they are performing at Cole this year.

Q. Mr. Morrison, do you know at the present time, based 
upon the data available to you, what type of teacher turn­

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1891a

over you will experience this next year? A. If every teacher 
gets his or her wish, that will he a total of 18; that is to 
say, either for sabbatical leave, maternity leave—of course, 
there you have no choice—or else transfer.

Q. Are there any who have requested transfer to other 
junior high schools? A. Not to my knowledge. The ones 
who have asked for transfers wish to go to senior high.

Q. None of your present junior personnel are trying to 
get out of Cole into another junior high, to your knowledge ? 
A. Not to my knowledge, no.

Q. Now, Mr. Morrison, you described briefly earlier 
£5593 in the testimony the situation briefly at Cole when 
you first arrived there. Does that same situation prevail 
today? A. Now, you mention—you mean in terms of—

Q. Community attitude and student attitude. A. I think 
that we have seen an improved attitude in the community. 
People that I visit and chat with on different occasions, 
and those who come into the building, the student attitude 
seems to be much more positive than it was when I first 
went to Cole. The teacher attitude seems to be much 
better. And I think that—well, there are just little things 
but perhaps to people outside of Cole these would sound 
very trivial, but this year we had a Christmas tree. Now, 
this doesn’t sound like it would be something to anybody, 
but it was my understanding that they couldn’t have a 
Christmas tree in the hall because the youngsters would 
tear it down and that type of thing. This year we got a 
tree, put it in the hall and the youngsters decorated it and 
almost defied anyone from going in there trying to damage 
the tree. This type of thing. The class of 1969, which was 
a pretty rough class—they had a lot of problems. I think 
that they had three principals in three years over there and 
this type of thing. But this class showed their feeling for

George Morrison—for Defendants—Direct



1892a

the school in that they left us an inlaid linoleum letter C 
that they designed themselves. It has the letter C in gold 
and the eagle on it and this type of thing, and they raised 
the money [5603 for this and left it to the school last year 
before they left. I see other signs of pride in the youngsters 
at Cole. Some of our athletic leaders—fellows on our bas­
ketball team and football team—will actually go down the 
halls occasionally and tell other youngsters who are run­
ning or misbehaving, in their language, to just “cool it.” 
We don’t want this going on at Cole. Well, these are some 
early indications, I think, of some pride that they are de­
veloping in their school. And we like to think that it is 
their school and let them know that this is your school, to 
take care of it.

Q. Do you expect then that pride to carry over into 
their classroom work1? A. Yes, I do. Unfortunately,'—and 
I would like to see more of this pride carried over into the 
classroom work. I don’t think that there is enough of it.

Mr. Jackson: Thank you. You may examine.

Cross-Examination by Mr. Barnes:
Q. Mr. Morrison, how much of the regular curriculum 

is left? Are there any standardized programs or regular 
textbooks and regular tests? How much is left? A. Not an 
awful lot. There are still some phases of the regular school 
program that we use but we’re trying this new approach 
for the entire student body. I think that’s the [561] best 
way to state it, and to actually find out what’s effective and 
what isn’t effective.

Q. I just want to focus on the reading, English aspects 
of your presentation and what is in Defendants’ Exhibit 
V-A, which I think you probably wrote for the special pro­
gram now being implemented at Cole Junior High. A. Yes.

George Morrison—for Defendants—Cross



1893a

Q. In reading laboratory, that is a voluntary program, 
is it? A. It’s voluntary three periods a day and it can be 
used by a regular English class, English-reading classes 
the other periods of the day.

Q. Is it a supplement or a substitute for the regular 
reading classes? A. I would say it would be a supplement.

Q. So they are still required to take the regular reading- 
class as well? A. Yes.

Q. How many students would you estimate participate 
in the reading laboratory in a given day? A. I would say 
one-half to three-quarters of all of our English classes.

Q. In the reading improvement program, that is an ex­
perimental program, is it not, a 9th-graders’ program? A. 
May I refer to this just to make sure that we’re [5621 
talking about the same thing ?

Q. Yes, Page. 116. A. Yes, this program was set up in 
one English class because of the prohibitive cost. This 
activity is concept English or—the kit costs us nine dollars, 
I believe, a kit, and we were experimenting with about 40 
youngsters with this. And this is a new concept in the 
approach to reading in that it differs from the SEA ap­
proach in that youngsters are able to move along at a more 
effective rate at their own level than they can with the SEA 
approach. And the reason we experimented with only 40 of 
these this year is because we didn’t have any more money. 
But we are hoping that we will be able to get additional 
money to work with this because the teacher who is in 
charge of this is very high on it and he has shown me some 
results as far as the reading improvement is concerned 
with these youngsters that have been really outstanding.

Q. What is the total enrollment at Cole? A. 990.
Q. And of—you have 40 participants in this program. 

How many do you have in the special reading classes for

George Morrison—for Defendants—Cross



1894a

the 7th grade? That’s 20 for each of four teachers? Or is 
it 20 altogether? A. Actually, all the youngsters in the 7th 
grade are in a reading program. And we hope to keep 
the numbers down £563] to around 20 so that the teachers 
can give these youngsters more individualized instruction.

Q. And the total of how many students, though, Mr. 
Morrison, in this program? A. I would say about 160.

Q. And is that all of the 7th grade or is that a portion? 
A. All the 7th graders have reading, but these are young­
sters who are three to four grade levels below their normal 
grade level in reading.

Q. Now, as I understand it, all of the other programs in 
mathematics and social science and science would have 
been under way even without this Court’s order and were 
not prepared specifically for this plan, is that correct A. 
Without this Court’s order?

Q. Yes. These other programs are not conceived espe­
cially for this program, are they? A. No.

Q. They have been in effect for some time? A. Well, 
they went into effect last September. Are you speaking of 
the laboratories?

Q. I’m speaking of the social science laboratory and the 
science laboratory and the mathematics laboratory. A. Yes. 
Now, those went into effect with the exception of the social 
science laboratory last year. The social science [564] 
started a few years before that.

Q. And the other things you have listed in this plan: the 
art classes and the home economics and the music class, 
industrial arts, phys. ed., work study and extracurricular 
programs, business education—those are not seriously con­
sidered to be programs which will raise academic achieve­
ment, are they? A. I would certainly hope they would.

Q. Are those subjects tested under the achievement test?

George Morrison—for Defendants—Cross



1895a

There is no test— A. No, but if I may say, sir, I would 
like to state again that, here again, I don’t like to measure 
youngsters only in terms of a standardized test. I don’t 
believe that this is fair. I don’t believe that it is really 
conclusive as to what the youngster is actually able to do. 
The standardized tests measure various areas of academic 
work, of course, but many youngsters who might excel in 
the areas of industrial arts, home economics and other 
programs—other areas, might not score so high on the 
standardized tests. But I wouldn’t say that this isn’t help­
ing his academic progress. I wouldn’t say that at all.

Q. The educational laboratory and the extension center 
are relatively new, aren’t they? A. Yes. As far as the 
funding under Senate Bill 174.

Q. Doesn’t that give you, together with the Ci’isis [565] 
Room and the special education programs, a total of four 
different kinds of programs where troubled students or 
difficult students are isolated by themselves? A. Well, I 
guess you could put it this way. I figured them with stu­
dents with problems, really.

Q. And there are four different kinds of ways in which 
students with problems are put with other students with 
problems? A. Yes.

Q. So, as far as the peer group effect for those is con­
cerned—for those students is concerned, with the Crisis 
Room, they are all students with discipline problems or 
something of that kind, isn’t that right? A. Well, I  wouldn’t 
classify special education in that category at all. That’s a 
program for the mentally retarded youngsters and I cer­
tainty wouldn’t say they are all discipline problems. But 
the other three programs are designed specifically to help 
the alienated youth.

Q. Do you think that being in an integrated program

George Morrison—for Defendants—Cross



1896a

would help these students in any way? A. Well, yes, I think 
an integrated situation would help.

Q. And do you think that it would alleviate some of your 
problems if they were integrated programs at elementary 
level, for example?

[566] Mr. Jackson: I’m going to object to that, 
Your Honor. We’re talking about programs specif­
ically at Cole.

The Court: Well, he may not be able to answer, but 
maybe he can. You can try him out.

A. Well, I would think, yes. I think, if this thing is going 
to be effective it would have to start at an early age and 
not wait until junior high school to get going.

The Court: This wouldn’t eliminate these other 
programs that you speak of, would it?

The Witness: No, I would certainly try to adapt 
these programs to any students that attend Cole 
Junior High School, because I think that they have 
some merit. And I think the approaches that we are 
trying to make here would benefit the students from 
any part of the City of Denver, yes, sir.

Mr. Barnes: I have nothing further.

Redirect Examination by Mr. Jachson:
Q. Mr. Morrison, the Crisis Room and the extension 

center—these are programs designed to keep children in 
school who would otherwise not be in school, is that true? 
A. That is very true, yes.

Q. And has the program demonstrated that it can func­
tion in that fashion? A. Yes, definitely.

George Morrison—for Defendants—Redirect



1897a

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Direct 

[567] * * *
Albert C. Reamer, a witness called by and on behalf of 

defendants, having first been duly sworn, was examined and 
testified as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Jackson:
The Court: Give us your name and address, please.
The Witness: Albert C. Reamer, 1710 South 

Kearney.

By Mr. Jackson:
Q. Mr. Reamer, what is your present position? A. I ’m 

Principal of Bryant-Webster Elementary School.
Q. How long have you held that position? A. I have 

had that position four years. I’m completing my fourth year 
now.

Q. How long have you been employed by the Denver 
Public Schools? A. Twenty-one years.

Q. Prior to your assignment at Bryant-Webster, what 
was your position? A. Assistant Principal, University 
Park, out by the [568] University of Denver, for three and 
a half years. Teacher assistant at Knapp for one-half year. 
Prior to that time, eight years as teacher at Asbury School, 
and prior to that time, five years as a teacher at Ashland 
School in North Denver.

Q. Mr. Reamer, what is the general racial composition 
of Bryant-Webster? A. The makeup is this: Hispano, 
75% percent; Anglo, 23.4 percent, as I  recall, and a very 
small percent—-less than one percent Negro and Asiatic.

Q. At the present time, are there any Negro students at 
Bryant-Webster? A. This is very difficult to say. There 
is one child who is half Hispano and half Negro this year.

Q. As principal of an elementary school, do you have oc­



1898a

casion to examine the achievement results of your students ? 
A. Yes, I  do.

Q. And could you characterize present achievement levels 
for the Court, please? Is it generally low? A. The per­
formance level is below that of what we would expect by 
grade level reference. I think maybe this would be an 
indication. I  would say at the 3rd grade, based on 1968 
statistics, about half a year below where they belong, and 
at the 5th grade, somewhat near a year below from where 
we would expect the child to be by grade level.

Q. Mr. Reamer, during the period of time that you have 
[569] been principal of Bryant-Webster, what has been 
your experience with regard to the mobility rate of pupils ? 
By that, I  mean, does a child entering Bryant-Webster in 
the kindergarten or first grade generally continue through 
the 6th grade in Bryant-Webster? A. Well, we have prob­
lems—we have some children who continue right on through. 
Generally, as an overall statement, as I recall the facts, the 
turnover is about 34 percent a year. As a matter of in­
formation, I  can recall one cumulative record that came 
across my desk recently where the child had been in 16 dif­
ferent schools. A 5th-grade child. So, we do have signifi­
cant problems.

Q. Is this mobility factor—does it create any specific 
problems as far as the school is concerned? A. Yes, tre­
mendous problems in terms of the school’s ability to rally 
its forces and to bring effective education into focus for 
that youngster. Yes.

Q. After your assignment at Bryant-Webster, did you 
and your staff or the staff undertake any comprehensive 
type of study to determine what was available to you in 
terms of either altering the educational approach or by 
other new, innovative approaches, raising your achieve-

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Direct



1899a

inent level? A. Yes, sir. This did happen. In the fall of 
1968 and throughout the entire year, the entire staff under­
took a very extensive study involving the cost of several 
thousand [5701 dollars in terms of releasing teacher time, 
of having experts in the field come in and discuss the matter 
with us and this type of thing. As a result of this study, 
we did come up with a document in terms of what we felt 
we could do to help the youngsters in a better way.

Q, This was a study which took a little over a year to 
perform? A. Yes, it did.

Q. And again you started this in the fall of 1968? A. 
Correct.

Q. As a result of that study, Mr. Reamer, have you in­
troduced any new programs or new approaches to the edu­
cational process at Bryant-Webster? A. Yes, sir, we have. 
I have taken the liberty this year to give continuous atten­
tion to the things that we called for in here. It is true, at 
the same time, inherent in this study were demands for 
financial needs and this type of thing and some limitations. 
However, just to give you some ideas of the things that we 
achieved, we did ask for a counselor. We did get a guidance 
counselor this year. We asked for and in our early educa­
tion program we got one of these—one of the three pro­
grams.

Q. Would you explain that briefly to us, please? What 
this early education program is? A. Well, I  think as a 
result of this study teachers, [571] principals and the com­
munity sensed the need to get at the problem of education 
and orientation as a start at a far earlier age with regard to 
the youngster. We sensed in the Head Start programs and 
other research available and in publications and whatnot 
that really this was a hopeful thing in the future. Actually, 
our program involves some 30 youngsters. They are not

Albert G. Reamer—for Defendants■—Direct



1900a

housed in our school. They are housed at Eemington Ele­
mentary School, due to the fact that we do not have suffi­
cient space. But it is a problem that—I mean, it is a pro­
gram that focuses on considerable involvement on the part 
of parents and the bringing in of highly-skilled teachers and 
aides to work with these youngsters.

Q. As a result of a child’s participation either in the 
Head Start program or in the early education—early child­
hood education program, has experience shown you and 
your teachers that these children become identifiable in the 
kindergarten? A. Well, I was thinking just the other day 
the reference that the two kindergarten teachers in my 
building have made to this very subject area, and they said 
they could tell the children who had been in the Head Start 
programs. So I think, in terms of assessing it in terms of 
what they have said, there has been success in it and there 
can be success in it.

The Court: Is this a grant that you are working 
£572] under from Congress!

The Witness: No, this was a program financed by 
the Denver Public Schools; one of three programs.

Q. What other programs did you institute! A. One of 
the concerns, of course, had to do with pupil-teacher ratio 
and we were effective this year in reducing the pupil-teacher 
ratio by two pupils per classroom. Another significant one 
as far as I ’m concerned had to do with the involvement of 
parents in the school. I personally believe this has been a 
great and critical loss in terms of large cities in America, 
having come from a small rural area in Colorado myself, I 
knew what the school meant to my family personally. Our 
involvement in it. I  think in the city the size of Denver

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Direct



1901a

here, this close attachment was not available. So therefore 
we were bent on programs of trying to confer with people 
in our school—a special means of parent-teacher confer­
ences ; the creation of a truly significant advisory commit­
tee that is run literally by the people in our community 
where they say anything they want to. I merely sit as a 
spectator in this. These kinds of things. I  think involve­
ment was one of the big areas we worked on. I think may­
be another thing that we have accomplished, too, had to do 
with acting as the coordinating agency between other pro­
grams available to early childhood education, such as the 
Day Care Center under the Model City. We have been very 
close to that program [5733 and we do meet in our building 
to coordinate that.

The Head Start people have come into our building and 
it’s a three-pronged effort, and in these early education 
programs currently we are initiating* the forward thrust, 
trying to bring all these elements together in the interest of 
children to be served.

Q. Are there any other new approaches which you have 
taken directly and specifically toward this question of your 
school’s achievement that you have already instituted? A. 
Well, of course, the question of overcrowdedness. It prob­
ably is important to say that the school was built for 660 
youngsters and we have been serving this year 750, and at 
one time well over 800. I did raise some basic questions of 
double sessions and these types of things. Our advisory 
committee did go down to the Board of Education and seek 
relief, and we are lucky in that at least we helped in some 
small measure the bringing in of a mobile unit in this area 
•—in school this year. So that has lessened the pressures 
there. We felt that through our advisory council, through 
their efforts and the school’s efforts, something happened 
in that field.

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Direct



1902a

Q. Prior to the installation of mobile units, was the com­
munity given an opportunity to express its opinion on the 
question of double sessions or busing at Brvant-Webster? 
A. Yes, sir. This was a part of the plan. The problem 
E574] was faced up to in the fall of 1968 when we came 
back and found that we had a hundred more youngsters 
than we expected. I think, in part, this was due to the re­
arranging and the closing of some of the parochial schools. 
These youngsters were thrown off into public education.

Two alternatives on our—occurred to us in terms of how 
the school could meet the educational needs of these young­
sters. We had talked with our advisory committee. Our 
PTA, we discussed this with them and other groups and the 
two alternatives were arrived at. One was busing and the 
other was double sessions. And we didn’t know which one at 
the time. But they did go for the double-session program 
twelve to one. I think it involved about a hundred and 
twenty children and our returns were based on how the— 
probably 98 or 99, as I  remember—eight of which said they 
did not want to bus.

Q. Now, in addition to the programs which you have pres­
ently instituted and—

The Court: What was the total vote?
The Witness: Pm just trying to recollect, Your 

Honor, but I think it was 98 who participated of the 
120 people. Some didn’t send them back.

The Court: In other words, you gave one vote to 
each family?

The Witness: Yes, each child who would—
The Court: And you have 120 in the school?
[575] The Witness: 120 who were affected by the—
The Court: Oh, this is your overflow?

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Direct



1903a

The Witness: Yes, sir.
The Court: And you say they voted twelve to—
The Witness: Twelve to one, as I recall.
The Court: These were predominantly Hispano?
The Witness: Yes, sir. There are indications—I 

have lived among the Hispano people all my life in 
Northern Colorado. As a child, I have thinned beets 
with these kids. Have been poor with them. They 
are very—a very tight-knit family really and they 
feel very keenly about their children and I have heard 
expressions to our PTA against busing any number 
of times. I  think maybe this whole question—

[5763 * # *
The Court: Do you have any Spanish language 

program?
The Witness: Yes, sir, we do. In 5th and 6th 

grades.
The Court: And that’s been very successful? I 

mean, is this—is there a great deal of interest in it?
[5773 The Witness: We did an intensive study, 

sir, I guess maybe two years ago, and we were very 
interested to find out how many of our families and 
youngsters spoke Spanish. On a determination of a 
survey made with every third Hispano family made 
by another Hispano person, a community aide, we 
discovered that about eleven percent, as I recall, of 
our youngsters spoke Spanish yet and 66 per cent 
of our adults spoke it. And, oddly enough, one of 
our—one of the outcomes was that the adults were 
using it to keep secrets from kids. This would be a 
clear indication that the language—

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Direct



1904a

The Court: Well, that figures, I would say.
The Witness: This is probably a clear indication 

that in another generation the language will be lost, 
unfortunately.

The Court: But has it been successful in the 5th 
and 6th grade programs that you have followed 
out? I mean, it’s pretty young, I’m sure, but are 
they interested?

The Witness: I would say there is an interest, 
yes, sir.

The Court: More interest generated in a subject 
like this than other subjects?

The Witness: No, I wouldn’t say that. Two years 
ago we had the option of letting the children and 
the parents choose whether youngsters would be 
involved in these programs, [578] and that year, 
two years ago, quite a number of the families de­
cided not to do it. But this year we had an extremely 
competent person in the field who really wanted to 
do it and all children are involved this year. I would 
say it’s successful.

#  *  # #  #

[5793 * * *
Q. How do these relate to the overall problem which you 

[5803 indicated that you identified and that being the rela­
tively low achievement? A. I think they have meaning. I 
think they have meaning in terms of self-identity that these 
youngsters have to acquire for themselves; how they feel 
about themselves. I  think, for example, a new reading pro­
gram, a newly-designed one that is designed just for us 
by our teachers can have a real impact. I think outgoing 
experiences in terms of many more field trips—one of the

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Direct



1905a

things I neglected to say in here has had a greater impact 
for our children. This year we have practically doubled 
the number of excursions into the community and—as an 
outgoing, outreaching experience for the children.

Q. How do these programs relate to any increase in the 
achievement level? A. Well, we have said in here that we 
would sincerely hope that within two years we would hope 
to eliminate one-half of the deficiencies.

Q. Through these programs that you have been mention­
ing and the staff study which you have? A. It’s a goal to 
shoot for.

Mr. Jackson: I have nothing further.

Cross-Examination by Mr. Greiner:
Q. Mr. Reamer, who authored that report that you keep 

[5811 referring to? A. Is this the one that I spoke of with 
regard to the 34 pages on our study?

Q. Yes. A. This was put together by the teachers in our 
school.

Q. Did this advisory council that you had reference to 
play a part in the preparation of that report? A. Yes, the 
parents were involved in the process.

Q. Now, we have been told, Mr. Reamer, that the educa­
tion of minority children is a very complex area. Would 
you agree ? A. No question in my mind.

Q. And it’s one that requires a great deal of specializa­
tion or special background and so on ? A. I think that would 
be a fair statement, yes.

Q. Are the people on this advisory council—are they 
possessed of this kind of technical training? A. Well, this 
is the citizens and the patrons of the school—I don’t know 
quite what you’re driving at.

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Cross



1906a

The Court: Well, the answer would be no, that 
they are not. They’re not professional educators nor 
do they have any specialized training.

The Witness: Yes.

Q. Now, with regard to the faculty at Bryant-Webster, 
I understand you indicated it’s a very stable faculty, is 
[582] that correct! A. Yes.

Q. What is your annual rate of turnover for all causes? 
A. Well, let’s see. Let’s go back three years. Three years 
ago it was 23 percent. At that time—I don’t have the exact 
facts in front of me, but I think—23 percent involved five 
teachers; two for maternity leaves; two or one on retire­
ment ; and one or two resignations—

Q. What about two years ago? A. Two years ago, one 
or two teachers; I’m trying to think back and I think 
maternity may have been one of the reasons for one of 
them.

Q. Are you familiar with the educational background, 
experience and training that the teachers of your faculty 
have as members at Bryant-Webster? A. I have a fair 
understanding, yes, sir.

Q. How many of these teachers have ever engaged in 
special education programs directed toward the problem of 
educating minority children? A. A part of this study had 
to do with in-service programs, of bringing Daniel Valdez, 
a noted sociologist, from Metro State. Father Torres and 
some of the other people in the field who were helping us 
understand and comprehend the problems that we were 
dealing with. It was an in-service involvement.

[5833 Q. Well, have you had that in-service program? 
A. Yes, sir, as we developed this.

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Cross



1907a

Q. And it’s finished now? A. It’s finished now.
Q. And all the staff in fact have participated in it at 

Bryant-Webster? A. There were fonr teachers who did 
not choose to give study to it.

Q. What was the subject of that in-service program? 
What did the teachers learn in it? A. It had to do with the 
understanding of the cultural heritage of these youngsters. 
The history where these people come from, what their 
problem,s were, what their aspirations in life are. These 
kinds of things.

Q. What their aspirations in life are? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What does that mean? A. Well, what they aspire to; 

what they want to be; what they want to make out of their 
lives.

Q. Is it different than for other people? A. No, I don’t 
think it is.

Q. So the program was—to say that its bounds were 
basically the same as far as the aspirations were concerned, 
is that right? A. I would say so.

[584] Q. Now, how many Hispano teachers do you have 
at Bryant-Webster? A. We have one surnamed Hispano 
teacher. She’s an Anglo. Her husband is a teacher in 
Denver and he is Hispano.

Q. Now, Bryant-Webster in the past, Mr. Reamer, has 
added, has it not, a certain compensatory education pro­
gram, one entitled Cultural Education? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you have tried team teaching? A. On a very 
limited basis.

Q. And it was discontinued, is that correct? A. That’s 
right.

Q. And you have tried study activities, is that correct? 
A. We’re still doing those extensively.

Q. And cultural arts? A. Yes, sir.

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Cross



1908a

Q. And lots of field trips ? A. More so now.
Q. Trips into the community? A. ITh-huh.
Q. Individualized instruction? A. Uh-huh.
Q. Differentiated staffing? A. No, I think that is a never- 

never land. I ’m not quite certain.
[585] Q. Is it? A. Yes, it’s new and emerging and it’s 

difficult for me to assess exactly what the—
Q. You use paraprofessionals? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You’ve got community aides? A. We have one com­

munity aide four hours a day. Teachers’ aide, is what we 
call them.

Q. And you have tried counseling? A. This is our first 
year.

Q. This year? A. This year.
Q. Do you have a phychologist? A. We do have a school 

psychologist one-half day a week.
Q. You have lowered the parent-teacher ratio—or pupil- 

teacher ratio ? A. Yes, sir.

The Court: That would be quite an undertaking.
Mr. Greiner: I’m sorry.
I didn’t get the witness’s response.
The Witness: Yes, sir, we did.

Q. You lowered the pupil-teacher ratio? A. Yes, and—
Q. From what to what? Over what time period? [5863 

A. It was lowered two pupils per classroom.
Q. What is it today? A. The pupil-teacher ratio? It 

fluctuates; give or take twenty children a building, due to 
the mobility, standing at about 24.5. You could have, of 
course, in the process—you may well understand that a 
certain—that certain teachers are counted who do not keep 
records until—it’s strictly an accounting system. This

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Cross



1909a

means that if you went in a schoolroom at Bryant-Webster 
you could well see 28, 27, 29 children.

Q. You’re giving* me an average and you’re going over 
the range there, is that correct? A. Yes, sir, that’s right.

Q. Well, did the parents at Bryant-Webster vote against 
busing? A. The parents at Bryant-Webster were involved 
in the decision, children coming out of kindergarten and into 
first grade voted on this issue in the fall of 1968.

Q. These were very young children, is that right? A. 
Yes, sir.

Q. Kids just entering first grade? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And that was the fall of 1968? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Before school started? [587] A. At the time, we didn’t 

discover that.
Q. Until they all arrived at school? A. Until they got 

there and it was about two weeks after school started that 
the decision was made.

Q. Now, that vote then was taken, wasn’t it, before the 
School District released the achievement data on the schools 
of this District? A. In the fall of 1968? I don’t know when 
that—

Q. That was in October, November 1968. A. Uh-huh.
Q. So that the people voting about that question really 

didn’t realize how comparatively bad Bryant-Webster was 
at that point, did they? A. They wouldn’t have known 
these facts, no, sir.

Q. And the program that you have described, Mr. Keamer 
—these programs are—these are programs that are de­
signed to—designed especially for a predominantly minor­
ity school? A. I would say by and large they are, yes, sir.

Q. If Bryant-Webster were integrated, could certain of 
those programs be continued for the benefit of the minority 
children ? A. They could.

Albert C. Reamer—for Defendants—Cross



1910a

Q. In other words, the integration of Bryant-Webster 
wouldn’t necessarily destroy the presence of those pro­
grams? A. No, sir.

[588] Q. Or their efficacy if they have any? A. Yes.
Q. Do you have any opinion as to whether it would help 

the scholastic achievements of Bryant-Webster children 
to integrate them with Anglo children of a higher socio­
economic class? A. This is a very difficult question to as­
sess. I think there could be some benefits.

Q. What kind of benefits do you foresee? A. Human 
understanding.

Q. Cultural? A. Cultural.
Q. How about language skills? A. Very possibly.
Q. How about vocabulary? A. Very possibly.
Q. Perhaps a more competitive atmosphere? A. That 

could be a by-product.
Q. So all the benefits just aren’t in terms of cultural 

understanding, isn’t that correct? A. Bight.
Q. But there might be very significant benefits in that 

area, too? A. There could be.
Q. And that is an important area, isn’t it? [589] A. Yes, 

it is.
#  #  #  *  #

[593] * * *
Robert O’Reilly, a witness called by and on behalf of 

plaintiffs as rebuttal testimony, having first been duly 
sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Direct Examination by Mr. Greiner:
The Court: Give us your name and address, please, 

and occupation.
The Witness: My name is Robert O’Reilly. I am 

a psychologist and I live at 10 Alona Lane, Lock- 
ville, New York.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1911a

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct 

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. By whom are yon currently employed? A. The New 

York State of Education Department.
Q. And what is your current position?

The Court: What’s the organization.
The Witness: The New York State Education 

Department.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. What is your current position? A. I am Chief of the 

Bureau of School and Cultural Research.
Q. How long have you held that position? A. I have 

had that position for a year and a half and a related position 
for an additional year and a half.

Q. And that was also with the same bureau? [594] A. 
The same bureau.

Q. Would you tell the Court just briefly what your edu­
cational background is? A. I have a Ph.D. in educational 
psychology and a Master’s degree.

Q. From what school? A. From Cornell University. 
And I have a Master’s degree in educational psychology 
and I have four years of teaching experience, including ex­
perience in teaching in a black school.

Q. Where was that? A. In Buffalo, New York.
Q. Now, what are your primary duties and responsi­

bilities with the New York State Department of Education? 
A. Well, I direct and formulate research for other depart­
ment units which serve all schools in the state at the ele­
mentary and secondary levels. I direct the programs de­
signed to yield new educational programs in accord with 
the educational needs of the schools in the state, and I 
consult and design research programs relating to compen­



1912a

satory education in New York State, where we have ex­
penditures of approximately $200 million in this area.

Q. These are programs—- A. There is one more.
Q. I’m sorry. [5953 A. I  also provide the research basis 

for the formulation of state policy.

The Court: What?
The Witness: Relating to public school education.
The Court: Let’s have it all again.
The Witness: That was the fourth. You want me 

to repeat that?
The Court: Yes.
The Witness: The last one is to provide—we are 

the research arm for the State Education Depart­
ment, the regents of the State of New York; in ques­
tions of policy we provide the research basis in the 
form of reports and so on which relate to making 
major educational decisions at the state level.

Q. Did you also then make recommendations in the nor­
mal course of your duties to the regents of the State of 
New York? A. Yes.

Q. And this is educational policy for the entire state, is 
that correct? A. Yes.

The Court: Over the entire school system, at every 
level ?

The Witness: Elementary and secondary and pre­
school.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. That includes such urban areas as [596] New York 

City? A. Yes, more than half of our efforts are directed 
at New York City.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1913a

Q. Now, in the course of your work have you had occa­
sion to direct a study of the efficacy of compensatory edu­
cation programs at racially or other segregated schools 
within the State of New York? A. Yes, I have.

Q. Now, did you then study and evaluate compensatory 
education programs carried on both in New York State and 
throughout the United States? A. Yes.

Q. Approximately what time period was covered by the 
compensatory education programs which were studied? In 
other words, how long has compensatory education been 
going on? A. Well, the major effort of compensatory ed­
ucation began in 1965 with Title I, ESEA, but it goes back 
before that, to the late ’50s when schools started to develop 
some of their own compensatory education programs, such 
as New York City developed a number of them at that par­
ticular time. It is at least ten years old. But actually, it 
can be traced back considerably further than that.

Q. Now, in the course of this study and evaluation, Dr. 
O’Reilly, how many compensatory education programs did 
you have cause to study? [597] A. We have effectively re­
viewed more than 1,200 programs.

Q. And these are programs both in New York State and 
nationally? A. Yes.

Q. And did these include compensatory education efforts 
in large urban areas such as Denver? A. Yes.

Q. And did it include the study of compensatory educa­
tion programs carried on in segregated schools? A. That 
is typically where they are carried on. So, the answer would 
be yes.

Q. Now, what was the purpose of this study which you 
drafted? A. Well, the major purpose was to advise the 
regents of the State of New York who are responsible for 
formulating policy—educational policy for the whole state.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1914a

It was to advise them as to what was the best thing to do 
in relationship to the problems of the disadvantaged stu­
dent in New York State, primarily Negroes and Puerto 
Ricans, and with respect to integration versus compensatory 
education.

Q. Now, at the conclusion of your study, Dr. O’Reilly, did 
you in fact make a recommendation to the regents of the 
State of New York? A. Yes, we did.

Q. And what was that recommendation?

[5983 Mr. Ris: If the Court please, what was made 
to the regents of the State of New York I don’t think 
is relevant here. I object for two reasons: one, in­
sufficient foundation. He said he made some studies 
in the abstract. No evidence to show what he studied 
and how he studied it and what evidence he developed 
and analyzed, and secondly, what his recommenda­
tions were to the State of New York is not of any 
help to the School Board of the City and County of 
Denver.

The Court: Well, I  suppose that, if he does de­
scribe the scope and extent and character of the 
work that he did, that he can express an opinion as 
an expert as to the value of this.

Mr. Ris: With a proper foundation, I  think he 
can.

The Court: But I  don’t think that what he said in 
New York has any great evidentiary value in and of 
itself.

Mr. Greiner: Well, it simply points out—
The Court: I suppose he could be cross-examined 

on that.
Mr. Greiner: Certainly, because it does point out

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1915a

what the nature and conclusion of this rather com­
prehensive study was, Your Honor.

The Court: Well, he can give us his opinion once 
the foundation is laid. It’s like any other expert’s.

Q. Now, you said that you have studied some 1,200 com­
pensatory education programs. Would you give us some 
idea [5993 of the procedure which was employed? A. Yes, 
we gathered studies from every major source. These are 
empirical research reports.

The Court: If you could just keep your voice up, 
you know—

A. We gathered studies from every major source. In the 
State Education Department we have an excellent setup for 
reviewing research all over the country and our interests 
in compensatory education programs were to see whether 
or not we might be able to find anything that might be use­
ful in New York State, so our review was national. This is 
not a review in the state. This is a review that covers the 
whole country. One of the programs that we reviewed in 
some detail is Title I, ESEA, which is the major source of 
funds for compensatory education in the United States. 
One of the studies reviewed was based on an examination 
of 20,000 programs all over the nation, and from that 20,000 
programs random selection of 1,000 programs was taken 
and these were then studied in detail. We have also re­
viewed programs like the Baniker Project in St. Louis, 
which I believe was referred to here the other day. We have 
studied major compensatory education programs in New 
York City.

Q. Does that include, for example, the Higher Horizons 
project? A. It was one of them.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1916a

£6003 Q. And More Effective Schools projects! A. The 
More Effective Schools project—we have reviewed that 
hut it’s not in this report.

Q. And the All Day Neighborhood Schools project? A. 
Yes.

Q. Dr. O’Reilly, to your knowledge, is there any major 
compensatory education effort which has been carried on 
up to the point of your study which was not considered or 
reviewed? A. I don’t believe that we have missed anything 
that is important.

Q. Now, at the conclusion of this study, then, you did 
make a recommendation to the regents of New York, is that 
correct? A. Yes.

Q. Was that based upon your opinion of the relative 
efficacy of the choice as to what is effective for teaching 
minority students ? A. Yes, it was.

Q. And what was your opinion? A. Well, our opinion—

Mr. Ris : Just a moment, please, Doctor. The same 
objection, lack of foundation.

The Court: I  don’t know what he did. He says he 
reviewed them all. What did he study? That’s the 
thing. I  mean, how can we derive any value from his 
opinion unless we £6013 know what type of thing 
he considered. Was he just reading narrative re­
ports from these various sources? Or was he actu­
ally examining raw material—raw data? I mean, 
this is the type of thing I think we need in order to 
know whether his opinion has probative value.

Mr. Greiner: Thank you, Your Honor. We will 
proceed along that line.

Q. Dr. O’Reilly, what was the nature of the evaluation 
which you carried on? A. We reviewed in most cases orig­

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1917a

inal sources, the actual research reports turned out by the 
people who manned the programs. These were educational 
researchers; psychologists; school districts; their bureaus 
of research who tendered reports. Some of them were done 
by national agencies like the American Institute for Re­
search in California. In general, these are scientific reports, 
not narrative reports, not opinions, not ideas. This is what 
is considered empirical evidence in the field.

Q. Now, with regard to this empirical evidence, for ex­
ample, did it include studies of achievement data related 
to these compensatory education programs? A. This is 
the major factor in studies in compensatory education pro­
grams.

Q. Can you describe for the Court what we are talking 
about in terms of achieving data? How was it evaluated? 
[602] A. Well, we are typically talking about standardized 
achievement tests which are generally accepted as measures 
of a student’s achievement all over the United States.

Q. And what did this achievement data—was there some 
comparison made of the achievement of students before 
and after these programs? A. Yes, there are a lot of dif­
ferent ways in which comparisons are made. Some of the 
studies employed experimental groups who received com­
pensatory education treatment and compared them with 
groups—well, in some instances with students who were 
in an integrated school without compensatory education. 
In other cases we have compensatory education compared 
to no compensatory education, comparable groups of stu­
dents. And the usual indexes of achievement used in these 
studies are reading, mathematics, sometimes the studies go 
beyond that and give a more detailed account of the factors 
of the achievements that are being subjected to considera­
tion.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1918a

Q. Now, Dr. Coleman in court the other day identified 
the nature of his study, which also included achievement 
data. In the course of your study did you also have cause 
to review Dr. Coleman’s study? A. Yes, we reviewed Dr. 
Coleman’s study and all major studies of racialization in 
the schools and formed these studies into a—well, we did a 
comprehensive review on these studies and came out with 
what are regarded as justifiable [603] generalizations rela­
tive to the efficacy of school integration in improving stu­
dents’ achievement.

Q. And this evaluation of achievement data—is this a 
typical component of each and every one of these evalua­
tions ? A. Yes. It is a major component.

Q. And a major objective of each of these compensatory 
education programs was what? A. The major objective is 
to generally improve educational development as measured 
by the standardized achievement tests.

Q. Now, did you also have any occasion to check the 
actual raw data upon which these reports which you evalu­
ated were based? A. Yes. There are different levels of 
checking raw data. In evaluating reports like Coleman 
reports and reports like this one here—

Q. Eacial isolation?* A. Eacial isolation in the Public 
Schools. We did not focus to any great extent on the au­
thor’s interpretation of the data but went directly to the 
appendices of the reports where the results of the analysis 
are given in tables and examined this and based our con­
clusions on these. We have also had occasion to examine 
the data—actual test data summarized, coming back from 
the schools in New York State, in which these are Title I 
schools where we expended—well, this year, we have been

* The parties have agreed to correct the tran sc rip t to read “Eacial 
Isolation” instead of “racialization” .

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1919a

spending $180 million on Title I £604J programs. The data 
are grouped in accordance with where the schools are. 
They are all disadvantaged students. And from these we 
can tell whether they are segregated schools or whether 
they are not segregated schools in general. We have three 
years of data of this type in which we are able to look at 
what proportion of the students are below the 23rd percen­
tile in these schools from year to year. I have examined 
these data for the New York State Education Department 
this year and a report on this and my conclusion was that 
the changes above and below—

Mr. Ris: If the Court please, now we’re getting 
into the conclusion. I think we’re still on foundation. 
So I will object to that.

The Court: Sustained.
Q. That’s all right, Doctor. We will get to your conclu­

sion in a moment.
Then I take it the nature of your evaluation of these 

compensatory education programs and the result contained 
in the study—I take it the study has been marked for 
identification as Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 508, is that correct? A. 
That’s correct.

Q. And the evaluation is contained in Exhibit 508. Are 
they just mere parodies then of the evaluations set forth in 
the evaluations which you studied of these plans? A. Would 
you ask that cjuestion again, please.

[6051 Q. Well, in the course of your evaluation did you 
make an independent examination? A. Of these studies?

Q. Yes. A. Yes.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct

Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, at this time we would 
offer Exhibit 508.

Mr. Ris: May I voir dire the witness?



1920a

Voir Dire Examination by Mr. Ris.-
Q. Dr. O’Reilly, is this the Bureau of School and Cul­

tural Research? A. Yes.
Q. That you are director of ? A. Yes.
Q. How many people do you have in that bureau! A. 

Well, we have, now, eight. We will be adding three, and we 
effectively have about 40 other people working for us.

Q. For a total of how many? A. Well, that would give 
us 62.

The Court: These are all psychologists ?
The Witness : Primarily we work with people who 

—whom you would consider technicians. People who 
have certain kinds of specialized training. They may 
be [606] psychologists. They may be psycholin­
guists. Many different fields which can be considered 
under the rubric of psychology or related fields.

By Mr. Ris:

Q. What is the relationship of the New York State De­
partment of Education to a local school district? A. Well, 
Pm not sure. You would have to be quite specific in asking 
me that question. The relationship is—the relationships 
are extremely complex.

Q. Well, does the New York Department of Education 
set policy for the New York City Public Schools System, 
for example? A. Yes.

Q. How do they do that? Do they hire the personnel? 
A. No, they don’t hire their personnel, but—

Q. Do they establish the curriculum for the elementary 
schools? A. They do have an effect on the establishment of 
curricula.

Q. I didn’t ask you that. I said, do they set— A. These 
questions really can’t be answered in black and white terms.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Voir Dire



1921a

Q. Well, you have been sitting through this trial, have 
you? A. Yes.

[6073 Q. You know the general setup, I presume, from 
what—

The Court: They probably lay down general prin­
ciples of policy, is that right?

The Witness: Yes, they do lay down general prin­
ciples of policy.

The Court: But they don’t seek to implement the 
details of the curriculum at every school, do they?

The Witness: No, but there is a general curricu­
lum outline for the schools in New York State.

Q. This is recommended or is it required of the districts 
to follow? A. Some parts of it are required.

Q. And some parts are not required? A. They would be 
sort of in between being required.

The Court: What are your goals? Do you want to 
make everybody the same? You want the Spanish 
to all fit into this pattern? Do you want everybody 
to become part of the Great American Dream? Is 
this your object?

The Witness: No, sir.
The Court: Then how can you apply these things 

across the board willy-nilly?
The Witness: These are general. And there is 

considerable flexibility and latitude within the kind 
of control that the state exerts over the schools.

The Court: Well, you wouldn’t recommend, though, 
[608] a similar standardizing of every single school 
in New York, would you?

The Witness: Not at all.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Voir Dire



1922a

The Court: Doesn’t it have to have its own char­
acter ?

The Witness: I think perhaps maybe my re­
sponse is being somewhat misunderstood at this 
point. The kinds of policy that have any direct effect 
on the schools are only relatively as gross as that 
you have so many years of English.

Mr. Ris: I’m sorry, Doctor. I can hardly hear you.
The Court: The kind of policy, he said, would be 

to require that you have so many years of English, 
for example. Is that correct?

The Witness: Yes, this is very broad and very 
general, and the way in which a particular program 
is conducted—the particular approach to education 
in school, is pretty much up to the school because— 
well, community control is also a very significant 
thing in New York State.

By Mr. Ris:
Q. Well, all of the public educational facilities then in 

New York State are not administered by the New York 
State Department of Education? A. Well, the New York 
State Department of Education is there to serve the schools.

Q. Provide them with research and advice? [609] A. Yes.
Q. And set minimum standards in certain areas? A. Yes.
Q. But the day-by-day, year-in-and-year-out implementa­

tion of the educational process is done by local boards and 
local administrations? A. Yes.

Q. Now, with regard to your particular work that you 
have been describing, do your people in your bureau ac­
tually go out into the various local districts and give tests 
to pupils ? A. Yes, that includes me.

Q. Pardon? A. That includes me.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Voir Dire



1923a

Q. That’s in New York State? A. Yes.
Q. And do you also prepare the tests or do you use stan­

dardized tests prepared by other agencies or both? A. Well, 
both. We have a statewide testing program in which we 
administer tests of reading and mathematics to Grades 1, 
3, 6 and 9. And I, myself, am now involved in the develop­
ment of a testing program for Title I schools in which we 
are developing our own testing instruments.

Q. And then does your department actually take these 
test results back and correlate them and run them through
[610] your computers, I presume? A. Yes.

Q. And is it down on a computerized basis now? A. Yes, 
it is.

Q. Now, with regard to studies that you make that are 
not in New York State, take St. Louis as an example, that 
you mentioned, and I personally know what the St. Louis 
study is. A. The Baniker program.

Q. All right. You say that you studied this report? A. 
Yes.

Q. And you have not been in St. Louis to examine the 
programs yourself, T don’t suppose? A. No.

Q. Or to test the students? A. No.
Q. Or to review the test results in their raw form that 

have come back ? A. No.
Q. That haven’t been executed by the students ? A. That’s 

right. I haven’t been there to do those.
Q. And this is a—this is typical of what you’re talking 

about outside New York State? A. Yes.
Q. You don’t go outside of New York State yourself

[611] ordinarily? A. It’s not typical.
Q. Nor members of your staff? A. That wouldn’t be 

typical, either, but it does happen.
Q. I’m sure you go to meetings and conventions and 

things of that nature? A. No, some of our staff in the State

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Voir Dire



1924a

Education Department do go to other states around the 
country and other programs and actually look at the pro­
grams.

Q. But basically what your studies, insofar as these other 
programs outside of New York State—you’re studying the 
reports made locally in the school district, for example, 
w'ho haven’t made their own studies'? A. They may be made 
by local districts. They also may be prepared by consul­
tants or they may be prepared by educational research or 
psychologists.

Q. And you’re studying somebody else’s studies then, is 
that right? A. Yes.

Q. And when you’re talking about the Coleman report, 
you are studying the Coleman study? A. That’s correct.

Q. And the various other studies—these 1,200 you men­
tioned—are they all outside of Newr York State? A. The 
1,200?

[6123 Q. Yes. A. Are they all outside New York State?
Q. Yes. A. No.
Q. How many are outside New York State? A. The 

largest proportion of the studies would be outside of New 
York State.

Q. And with respect to those studies, if you wanted to 
find out what they’re doing in Missoula, Montana, you 
would ask them for their report of such studies as they had 
made ? A. I might do that.

Q. You wouldn’t ask them to send you all the raw data 
or analyses? A. Not usually.

Q. So that you then studied all the various studies and 
then made and submitted a report of your studies, is that 
correct? A. That’s correct.

Q. And is the volume that he just offered on Exhibit 508 
based on such a premise then as a study of studies? A. 
Not entirely.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Voir Dire



1925a

Q. A substantial portion of it? A. Yes.

Mr. Ris: If the Court please, we again object, 
number one, that this is a study of studies and not a 
study [6133 of raw data to arrive at his own con­
clusions, and, secondly, there is no showing that this 
has any relevancy to the Denver situation.

May I ask one more question?

By Mr. R is:
Q. Have you been to Denver before to study the Denver 

system? A. No, but I  do have a little bit of exposure to 
Denver before.

Q. What has been your exposure? A. I  looked at a good 
deal of material before I came here for about a week.

Q. Submitted by plaintiffs’ counsel? A. Yes.

Mr. Ris: That’s all.

Direct Examination by Mr. Greiner (Cont’d) :
Q. Dr. O’Reilly, this so-called study of studies, I believe 

you did say that you looked at the data that was compiled 
in each of those studies, is that correct? A. Yes.

Q. And you made an independent evaluation of that data? 
A. Yes, I did.

Mr. Greiner: We offer 508, Your Honor.
Mr. Ris: Same objection.
The Court: I think you ought to tell me what the 

[614] purpose of this offering is besides proving 
your thesis, of course. But what particular use do 
you want to make of it?

The Witness: In New York State—

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1926a

The Court: I want him to tell me.
Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, it’s really not offered 

in a testimonial manner but it does give a full indi­
cation of this man’s in-depth consideration of com­
pensatory education programs.

The Court: You’re just offering it as a basis for 
his opinion?

Mr. Greiner: That’s correct.
The Court: To qualify him?
Mr. Greiner: If you will recall, Dr. Coleman from 

the stand the other day called Exhibit 508 the most 
comprehensive study in existence of compensatory 
education.

The Court: Well, I’m going to reserve a ruling 
on this for a while. He can express his opinion. Go 
ahead.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Now, these study programs—

The Court: We may get confused if we have too 
many of these, too much of this.

Mr. Greiner: I guess we’re always giving some­
thing to the Court to read.

The Court: This is a real hazard.

Q. Dr. O’Reilly, these compensatory education programs 
which you have studied and evaluated, I’d like for you to 
[615] describe some of the elements which they typically 
contain. For example, do they contain programs directed 
toward adding additional teaching staff to the segregated 
schools? A. That is a typical characteristic.

Q. And a low range of pupil-teacher ratios? A. Yes.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1927a

Q. The use of paraprofessionals ? A. Yes.
Q. The use of teacher aides? A. Yes.
Q. Diagnostic laboratories to try to determine quickly 

what the deficiencies of the minority child were ? A. There 
are some studies that have included that.

Q. Did it also include, typically, some sort of increased 
group counseling?

Mr. Ris: If the Court please, I don’t think any of 
these have any evidentiary help and—he ought to just 
say some of these studies contained some of these 
things. Unless we know what studies contain what 
and what he is relying on—

The Court: Well, let’s get to his conclusions. Then 
I think we can evaluate it thereafter. Go ahead.

Mr. Greiner: Well, Your Honor, the point of these 
questions, of course—

The Court: Go ahead. You do whatever your pro­
gram is. We will check it out as you go along. You 
go ahead and [6163 carry out your list as to what 
he considered and we will see what they look like.

Q. Did these programs also typically call for the addition 
of psychologists to the local school staff? A. Yes.

Q. Did they have programs directed toward cultural un­
derstanding? A. Yes.

Q. At below the teacher and student level? A. Yes.
Q. Were there programs directed towards improving the 

child’s self-image? A. Yes.
Q. What about directed toward improving parental in­

volvement in the educational process? A. This has been 
tried many times.

Q. And I assume that these programs also contained 
remedial efforts? A. Typically.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1928a

Q. And in such skilled areas as language and mathe­
matics? A. Yes.

Q. And social science? A. Not social science.
Q. Were these programs directed towards objectives of 

trying to motivate the minority child? [617] A. Yes.
Q. Did they involve efforts to make the curriculum more 

relevant to the minority child? A. That is an implied as­
sumption in most studies, that relevance is being increased.

Q, And were efforts also directed toward teaching teach­
ers how to teach minority children? A. Yes.

Q. Did the evaluation include evaluation of the early 
childhood programs such as Head Start? A. Yes.

Q. Was tutoring also one of the methods adopted in these 
compensatory programs? A. Yes, it was.

Q. The use of multimedia teaching aids? A. You would 
find that in compensatory education programs, but it’s a 
peripheral kind of surface component.

Q. Did it include such things as field trips designed to 
remove at least temporarily the minority child from his 
local environment? A. Yes, this has been tried both gen­
erally and in components of preschool programs and has 
also been a component of elementary programs and secon­
dary programs.

Q. Now, after considering these compensatory programs, 
Dr. O’Reilly, did you come to a conclusion and view and 
[618] opinion as to the efficacy of these compensatory 
programs in these segregated schools? A. Yes.

Q. Does the efficacy insignificantly raise the minority 
child’s achievement? A. Yes.

Q. What is that opinion?

Mr. Ris: Objection, lack of foundation again.
The Court: Overruled.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1929a

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct 

Our opinion is, after—

The Court: Whose opinion? Yours?
The Witness: My opinion, sir. Sorry.
My opinion is, after reviewing the studies and 

their results that there are no general practical ef­
fects accruing to students’ educational development 
as a function of compensatory education programs 
which typically include these kinds of components.

The Court: Are you saying that the system based 
upon these components is valueless?

The Witness: Yes.
The Court: And the individual elements in it—in 

its totality has no value whatsoever?
The Witness: I don’t think so. They constitute 

basically giving the minority, the disadvantaged—•
The Court: Don’t even the psychologists help at 

[619] the local level?
The Witness: No, not typically.
The Court: Amazing.
The Witness: I was going to say—you see, these 

things have already been done by the schools. They 
have been done for years. And what this really con­
stitutes is giving the minority child more of what the 
schools already have. I t’s nothing particularly new 
about any of these things.

The Court: But none of it has any value?
The Witness: No, sir. Not only do I have this 

opinion but—
The Court: Are you saying it’s not any value in 

combination with integration?
The Witness: There is no indication that these 

particular kinds of approaches would necessarily



1930a

work in an integrated setting. The evidence is just 
not generally available on that area on that question.

The Court: And it’s valueless at every level?
The Witness: Equally valueless from a practical 

point of view, yes.
The Court: The lack of value is the same at every 

level?
The Witness: Basically, it has turned out that way. 

And perhaps I should define what I mean by practi­
cal value. We mean that—rather, I mean that the 
studies result in [620] differences as a function of 
compensatory education programs which would in­
dicate that they have some potential in improving 
the—some real potential in improving educational 
development among minority students relative to 
those who don’t get this kind of compensatory edu­
cation. The gap between blacks and whites or Puerto 
Bicans and whites is just hardly affected or is not 
affected at all.

Q. Well, these programs then do not succeed in teaching 
a child to read?

The Witness: Generally not.
The Court: Or to express himself?
The Witness: I would have to qualify that, now. 

It’s not minority students don’t learn to read—it’s 
the level of reading capability that they show. Typ­
ically the minority child is one to two years behind 
his age mates.

The Court: We’ve heard that before.
The Witness: Now, these programs just generally 

do not have much of an affect or a sense of affect on

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1931a

the gap between whites and blacks or whites and 
Puerto Ricans or Mexican-Americans and whites.

The Court: Well, what about whites who are in the 
same condition?

The Witness: Under the same conditions? Most 
of the studies that we are talking about here that I 
reviewed have been done on minority students. Most 
typically whites £621] are not included. Although 
there are studies with whites in them. And—or they 
are included as parts of the group of disadvantaged 
children. That is more typical than anything else. 
We really couldn’t say too much about the effects on 
whites.

The Court: Well, you recommend that, if they 
are integrated in these white schools, that they get 
any special attention?

Yes, sir, but I  wouldn’t go about it this way.

The Court: Pardon?
The Witness: I wouldn’t go about it in this par­

ticular way. I  would recommend special attention, 
yes.

The Court: In other words, you have some rem­
edial plans, then?

The Witness: We have identified some tentatively 
that we feel have potential for—•

The Court: But they have never proven them­
selves ?

The Witness: They are experimental programs. 
They have not been tried with large numbers of stu­
dents. We don’t really know their potential nor how 
well they would operate in a broad-scale school sys-

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1932a

tem. And the field really is—of compensatory edu­
cation is really quite unsettled. For example, in the 
area of language development, we did a very intensive 
review—excuse me now. We did not do this review, 
but I have—a friend of mine in Syracuse University 
£6223 who is an expert in the field of language de­
velopment, and we commissioned him to carry out a 
detailed comprehensive review of compensatory ed­
ucation programs in the area of language develop­
ment. As a result of this study which covers most 
of what is available in the field, we were not able 
to make any really strong recommendations about 
what ought to be tried in the schools. We were only 
able to say that—well, here’s two or three programs 
which look like they might have some potential. But 
then a few weeks later we received a study on one of 
those programs and it had been validated and stud­
ied and tested out in a very small test setting with 
about 15 kids. Then another fellow tried the pro­
gram out after a two-year period in the schools and 
we received that report after this report was written 
up and it turned out that when it was tried out in 
the schools it had no effect whatsoever.

So, what I ’m trying to communicate to you, I 
guess, is that this is a very unsettled field. There are 
no hard and fast rules to go on. It’s very unlikely 
that anybody is ever going to come up with a treat­
ment that is going to be generally effective with 
minority students at all. What has to be done is 
basically many, many years of experimentation in 
which we slowly and carefully identify and develop 
specific programs designed for specific groups, spe­
cific minority groups. Because they differ so greatly.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1933a

The Court: Well, then, you’re not recommending 
any [623] doctrinaire approach to this problem at 
all!

The Witness: No, sir. The work that has been 
done in the field doesn’t allow it.

The Court: But you are convinced that there is 
no validity to anything that has been tried so far?

The Witness: Basically, what the schools have 
tried—

The Court: I just can’t understand how you can 
be so sure that it can’t be refined or developed.

The Witness: May I explain a little further? The 
studies in compensatory education can be divided 
into two groups. One group of studies in develop­
ment of compensatory education have been those ap­
proaches that have been developed basically by school 
personnel. To some extent they may have been helped 
by consultants. But, as I mentioned before, what 
these studies boil down to generally is to give the 
kids, the minority kids, what the school already has; 
what it already knows how to do. This is not based 
on a detailed study of the psychological—

The Court: I don’t agree with you at all.
The Witness: Pardon?
The Court: I don’t agree with you at all. I would 

say a person-to-person approach to a child does 
proceed on a psychological thesis; that the kid has 
no promise, home. He has no figure to look to and 
he has got to find some substitutes. Where is he 
going to find them if he’s in a completely impersonal 
[6241 atmosphere of the survival of the fittest?

The Witness: Some of them will. There is no 
doubt about it.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1934a

The Court: What happens to others who are 
strangers, who are in an atmosphere in which they 
are inferior and they feel inferior? Where are they 
going to find some kind of consolation? Have you 
been through this? I have.

The Witness: I grew up in that situation.
The Court: Now, what does he do? He may fight 

his way through. It will take a few years. But he 
may not. The probabilities are that he will drop 
out and get a job, or worse. You don’t think this is 
true ?

The Witness: Well, sir—■
The Court: I mean, psychologically, the school is 

taking over for the family in many instances. It has 
to. I know this is abhorrent to all of you. You just 
disregard it all at paternalism. But you can’t. I 
mean, this is the fact of life. The church has fallen 
down somewhat. The family has collapsed, and there 
is not much left. And a kid has to relate to something, 
to an institution, and to people, doesn’t he? Where is 
this substitute? So, you say there is no psychological 
foundation for this? There is no foundation in ex­
perience? That you can just substitute this competi­
tive atmosphere? And this impersonal competitive 
atmosphere of the integrated school and let him sink 
or swim?

£625] The Witness: I  think the idea of competi­
tion in the integrated school has been overempha­
sized. That element is there. What I think may be 
emphasized more than anything else is the fact that 
the integrated school by itself represents an accep­
tance of other cultural groups because they are mixed 
together, because they are living together, working

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1935a

together towards essentially the same goals. When 
students are separated in different schools, as they 
are in Denver Public Schools—

The Court: Well, that’s a different matter. We’re 
not talking about this.

The Witness: Well, I though you were—
The Court: Well, I ’m talking about— We’re not 

debating whether it’s valuable to have them in an 
atmosphere that is integrated. What I ’m questioning 
is your statement that the integrated setting can be 
just a substitute for everything else that we have 
ever learned.

The Witness: I wouldn’t say that, sir.
The Court: Well, that is what’s implied here. That 

this is a cure-all.
The Witness: It can help.
The Court: I t can help ?
The Witness: Yes.
The Court: That’s all you’re saying?
The Witness: That’s all.
[6263 Mr. Greiner: May I proceed, Your Honor? 

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. O’Reilly, you stated that you studied some 1,200 

different compensatory education programs in segregated 
schools. In the course of your study represented by Exhibit 
508, did you also have occasion to analyze the results of 
integration programs? A. Yes.

Q. Now, did you have 1,200 integration programs to look 
at, Dr. Reilly? A. They are not that easy to find. We had 
the studies that I reviewed on integration cover about 40 
individual studies and desegregation was initiated on a 
local district level. And then the major studies of existing

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1936a

degrees of racialization in the schools, like the Coleman 
study, which includes this report, which includes a major 
re-analysis of the Coleman data.

Q. And that was Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 27? A. Yes. And 
also includes a new study on integration done by Wilson 
and in Oakland, California.

Q. What was the basis of Wilson’s study? A. Oakland, 
California, is a segregated school district which is some­
what similar to this particular district here, from what I 
know of both of them. And there are different degrees of 
racial and social isolation in the schools in Oakland, Cal­
ifornia.

[627] Q- Is there also integration in Oakland schools? 
A. When I say different degrees of it, this would mean 
that schools vary from being virtually segregated schools 
to schools that are partially integrated.

Q. What did Wilson study? A. Wilson studied the effect 
of segregation in the schools on achievement, on psycholog­
ical development, and on delinquency.

Q. Now, with regard to these studies of programs of 
integration, for example, did you study the Berkeley pro­
gram? A. Yes.

Q. That Dr. Sullivan has described to us? A. Yes.
Q. What other integration programs did you study? A. 

We had a program—several programs in Rochester, New 
York. T vto or three programs in Syracuse, New York. The 
MEDCO project in New Haven, Connecticut. Several other 
small individual studies of desegregation in the schools.

Q. Now, did these studies also present you with, for 
example, comparative achievement data, comparing what 
were—comparing achievement data for minority students 
before and after, for example, integration? A. Yes.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1937a

Q. What did those data show? A. The individual studies 
generally tend to show that—

[628] Mr. Ris: I  object. I ’m sorry, Doctor. I 
object on the grounds of lack of foundation again.

The Court: Overruled.

A. The desegregation studies—these are the small indi­
vidual studies where a school district has either been 
ordered to desegregate or at least primarily a school dis­
trict where they desegregated by themselves, and the re­
sults generally show that the educational development of 
the desegregated minority students tends to be facilitated 
or tends to improve within a year or two after the de­
segregation experience is initiated.

Q. Now, is this improvement—can you compare or con­
trast the degree of improvement under the integration 
programs with that which you found under the compensa­
tory education program! A. There are fewer studies 
available on this but there are five or six in which com­
pensatory education has been compared with integration. 
And the results here tend to show that the integrated stu­
dents perform at higher levels on achievement tests as 
compared to students in segregated schools receiving com­
pensatory education.

The Court: This helps, I’m sure, the ideas, at 
least, of the better students.

The Witness: This is—there is quite a bit of 
variation, sir. Not everybody experiences or—

[629] The Court: I mean those who have better 
abilities.

The Witness: I don’t believe the question has

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1938a

been studied of students with different ability levels 
and who is most affected on it.

The Court: How about the dropout rate? Does it 
increase?

The Witness: The question of the dropout rate— 
there is really not that I ’m aware of enough evidence 
on the dropout rate in desegregation studies at this 
particular point. A great many of them occurred at 
the elementary school level.

The Court: .But there is no evidence as to whether 
it increases or not?

The Witness: But you could make an inference 
like this. The dropout rate is related to how well 
you do in school. If you fail miserably then you 
tend to drop out of school. Now, if, as the evidence 
indicates, integration has a facilitating effect on 
education achievement, this would tend to make—- 
would tend to lower the rate of failure of minority 
group students. You would then predict from that 
that the dropout rate would be generally decreased.

The Court: Because they are competing with 
students who are one to two years ahead of them?

The Witness: More successfully, though.
The Court: Well, that is, the upper level of them,

[630] but not necessarily the lower level? They 
get frustrated and start wearing black leather jack­
ets? I  mean, they can’t do anything. Then they 
start acting out?

The Witness: Sir, that may happen to some stu­
dents but the evidence from the studies, the big 
studies of integration like Coleman would indicate 
that the students have developed a more positive 
attitude towards school; that they begin to develop

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—-Direct



1939a

a sense that what they are doing has some effect on 
their future, and I think in general that you could 
predict more positive effects on psychological de­
velopment rather than educational development it­
self. They go hand in hand. If an individual begins 
to experience success in school then he begins to 
feel more positive about something.

The Court: Let me ask you this. Do you think the 
impersonal approach would be preferred, even at 
the elementary level?

The Witness: No, sir. I think it should be—
The Court: Sink or swim?
The Witness: No, I think it should be as personal 

as you can make it.
The Court: Well, then, you do have to baby them 

along to keep them in school and to keep them alive, 
don’t you?

The Witness: I think you have to show basically 
that [6313 you regard them as worthwhile human 
beings and that, if that kind of baby attitude of 
respect for a member of another minority group is 
there, then—

The Court: This means you have to really be 
geared for it because, if you get teachers who are 
petty, objectionable personal habits or appearances 
or things of that sort, or for the individual involved, 
it can have a traumatic effect?

The Witness: Well, the studies that I reviewed 
on desegregation didn’t take any great pains to do 
anything really extensive in the school situation 
to prepare—

The Court: I get letters from these teachers. 
They say this is an impossible thing. I mean, I

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1940a

probably shouldn’t read them but I have. They say, 
“He runs down the hall. He can’t understand why he 
should walk. He squirms in his seat.” Pretty soon 
he drops out. But what I’m saying is they en­
counter oftentimes, I’m afraid, completely unsym­
pathetic receptions.

The Witness: I’m sure there are people who 
are—

The Court: How are you going to combat this 
kind of thing? If it isn’t on a personal approach, 
I mean?

The Witness: I agree with you that these repre­
sent problems.

The Court: They are formidable problems.
The Witness: Yes, but I think they can be handled.
[6323 The Court: Well, then you are not say­

ing that ipso facto that we can cure everything by 
simply—

The Witness: No, I ’m not.
The Court:—by simply integrating the schools?
The Witness: No, I think you’ve got to take time 

to plan it. If you initiate the process, work at it as 
you go along, try to develop a school in which you 
have a multi-cultural atmosphere in which mutual 
respect is possible among the students, I think, you 
know, these things are required. There are things 
that have to be done with teachers; things that have 
to be done with students. There is a great deal that 
can be done with students and they are—particu­
larly at the elementary school level. The easy things 
to do are the least expensive.

The Court: Well, what I’m really leading up

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1941a

to—I suppose that there may be some value in these 
remedial efforts after all?

The Witness: In a certain context, sir.
The Court: Eight.
Proceed.
Excuse me, Mr. Greiner.

By Mr. Greiner:
Q. Dr. O’Reilly, you have also reviewed the plaintiffs’ 

plans for relief in this case, have you not? A. Yes, I 
have.

[633] Q. Dr. O’Reilly, do the plaintiff s’ plans contem­
plate simply throwing the blacks and whites together and 
letting the blacks sink or swim? A. No, they do not.

Q. And have there really been, for example,—the Berke­
ley program which Dr. Sullivan described to the Court the 
other day—now, in Berkeley they attempted to change 
teacher attitudes, did they not? A. Yes.

Q. And had programs of cultural understanding, minor­
ity history? A. Yes.

Q. And they had programs directed towards helping the 
teacher to cope with some of the peculiar problems of the 
minority child, is that right? A. Yes.

Q. Now, these programs were continued in Berkeley, 
were they not, in an integrated setting? A. Yes, they 
were.

Q. And is Berkeley one of the success stories of integra­
tion in the United States? A. I t’s probably the most 
well known at this point.

Mr. Greiner: We have no further question, Your 
Honor.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Direct



1942a

[634] Cross-Examination by Mr. Ris:

Q. Are compensatory education programs in progress 
in New York City at the present time, this school year? 
A. Yes, they are.

Q. And throughout New York State? A. Yes, they are.
Q. And in—are there such programs evaluated yearly 

in New York State? A. Yes.
Q. Insofar as federal government participation and 

funding is concerned, are evaluations submitted to federal 
agencies annually? A. Yes, they are.

Q. Bequests for funding for the following years are 
based upon those studies? A. Funding in Title I, ESEA, 
is virtually automatic. It depends on how many disadvan­
taged students are in the school of your state.

Q. Is it contemplated in New York State that these pro­
grams will continue next year? A. Yes, but it’s not con­
templated about how much longer it’s going to last.

Q. But they are going to be continued next year? A. 
So far.

Q. And that has been determined by those who make the
[635] policies? A. Yes, it has.

Q. How much was spent during or contemplated to be 
spent during the school year 1969 and ’70 in New York 
State compensatory programs? A. This year, Title I, 
ESEA, was about $170 million and the state’s assistance 
from local state tax money was about $52 million for urban 
educational programs which are directed toward the dis­
advantaged children.

Q. And how much was spent during—or will be spent 
before the end of this current school year on programs 
other than Title I? A. Well, we have $7million for in­
tegration programs. The state provides money for de­
segregation, for busing and so on.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1943a

Q. I ’m asking about compensatory purposes. A. That’s 
considered compensatory.

Q. That has been considered compensatory, also? A. 
Yes.

Q. All right. A. We have some more, if you would like 
to know them.

Q. Some more dollar expenditures? A. Yes.
Q. What are they? A. We have $3 million, prekinder­

garten program.
[636] Q. Do yon know what has been budgeted for next 

year throughout the state? A. Roughly.
Q. What is it? A. I think the Title I, ESEA, program 

is $183 minion. Urban education will be exactly the same 
as before; it is 52 million— Excuse me. I said seven mil­
lion for integration. It’s three million. The prekindergar­
ten program has been reduced from seven million requested 
to three million. And that would constitute the major ef­
forts for the state.

Q. Now, with respect to the studies you made of the 
studies on desegregation in the various school districts, 
could you give us any statistics either numerically or per­
centagewise as to which of those desegregation plans were 
voluntary as contrasted to mandatory? A. The desegre­
gation programs?

Q. Yes, sir. A. What do you mean by voluntary versus 
mandatory?

Q. Well, whether the desegregation plans were on a vol­
untary basis of the students or the parents requested trans­
fer, or whether—such as under the Denver VOE which you 
have heard while you have been in court, or whether they 
are mandatory comparable to Plan 1 or Plan 2 submitted by 
the plaintiffs here. A. The decisions to desegregate the

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Gross



1944a

schools are really [6373 not typically made at the commu­
nity level. They are made as a function of the arrange­
ments between school boards or is directly a decision be­
tween school boards or, in the case in New York State, 
we have some instances where in one case where a school 
superintendent led the battle in a very peculiar way and 
desegregated the whole school system in White Plains, New 
York.

The Court: Where was that located?
The Witness: White Plains.
The Court: We have heard about White Plains 

quite a bit.

A. We have other instances where the Commissioner of 
Education in New York State has ordered schools to deseg­
regate and they have consequently desegregated. Some of 
these being actions brought by the N.A.A.C.P.

Q. Have you correlated whether these were mandatory 
or voluntary? A. No, we haven’t, because the mandatory 
versus voluntary concept is just not—it isn’t—this isn’t a 
mandatory or voluntary— It’s a very—an extremely corn- 
lex thing.

Q. But you made no study of that? That’s my question. 
A. No.

Q. To what extent, Doctor, are you segregated in New 
York City? [638] A. New York City is very highly segre­
gated. There have been some few programs in New York 
City, school pairing, for example, where some sort of pilot 
program of integration has occurred. But New York City 
is—the problem there is extraordinarily complex in terms 
of size; 1.2 million kids in New York City, and 55 percent 
of them are Negro and Puerto Ricans and they live in areas 
in the city where there just aren’t any white kids.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs-—Cross



1945a

Q. And so I take it that you’re using remedial approaches 
there? A. That’s exactly what is being tried and where 
the complexity of the problem is as bad as it is in that 
particular place and where there hasn’t been any legal ac­
tion at this point—

The Court: In Harlem, for example, do all the 
students have to go to school in Harlem who live 
there?

The Witness: They have to go to school.
The Court: In Harlem?
The Witness: Yes.
The Court: Do you move any of them out?
The Witness: No. Typically, in New York City, 

students aren’t really—the neighborhood school con­
cept is still viable there.

The Court: Would this be true in other boroughs? 
All of the boroughs of New York City?

[639] The Witness: Basically.
The Court: Well, then, when you get out, do you 

have any other place where you have integrated?
The Witness: Yes.
The Court: Where?
The Witness: Rochester had some pilot integra­

tion programs which have encouraged a lot of peo­
ple. Syracuse has had some pilot integration pro­
grams that have encouraged people. The White Plains 
—the one I already mentioned. And this moves on 
in different places in the state to desegregate local 
cities. A good example of that is Rochester, in which 
they are still, you know, this movement has been go­
ing on in Rochester for a considerable period of 
time. They haven’t achieved success yet but I’m sure 
they will continue to work.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1946a

The Court: Well, is there any city in the United 
States or in the Northwest, the Middle West, East, 
where they have a complete program of integration?

The Witness: Integration program?
The Court: From your studies have you found 

any?
The Witness: No cities that I am aware of at this 

particular time have an extensive integration pro­
gram in which they have integrated the whole city. 
But I can’t recall the details now of other places, 
but I do recall that there are some movements on 
at some places in the country for a [640] program 
that may affect large numbers of students.

The Court: We have read about some of them 
recently.

The Witness: Yes.
The Court: But, so far, it has not been accom­

plished or really tried out on any broad scale any­
place.

The Witness: Well, the broadest-scaled one, in 
which the program has been studied reasonably well 
—in fact, quite well in terms of most of the studies, 
is Sullivan’s program, in Berkeley, which is—well, a 
city of 100,000.

The Court: But, Boston apparently hasn’t done it, 
really.

The Witness: No.
The Court: They’ve got a voluntary program up 

there. That’s what I  assumed from what he said.
The Witness: Yes.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1947a

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross 

By Mr. R is :
Q. Dr. O’Reilly, in White Plains, wasn’t the technique 

there used to close one black school and transport the 
children then to other schools? A. As I recall, that was 
a technique.

Q. Now, with regard to school desegregation, I believe 
the title of your work is Racial and Class Isolation. And 
throughout your work you lay great stress upon the social 
class of minorities, do you not? A. Yes.

[641] Q. So it is not merely the color that you’re pri­
marily concerned with in your conclusions—it’s a matter 
of social class? A. Doesn’t make any difference.

Q. It doesn’t? You don’t have social class even in the 
minorities? A. In places—let’s see, from the data I have 
examined in Denver on the economical levels, there is a 
little bit—this is a little bit old data—•

Q. 1960 data? A. Yes, but from what I have heard from 
talking to other people, you know, it’s not, you know, the 
greatest kind of basis for this kind of thing. Denver is 
probably very much like Oakland. In fact, it may even 
be more so in terms of the correlation between race and 
social class, in which case, if you desegregate the schools, 
you automatically bring out the condition that Dr. Cole­
man talked about.

Q. So are you acquainted with the Northeast section of 
Denver? A. I  think that’s what I—I guess that’s the area 
I saw, over by Manual High School. I’m not sure of the 
directions.

The Court: This has been called the core city area 
in this trial.

The Witness: Over by Manual High School?



1948a

[642] The Court: Yes. It’s part of it.
The Witness: That’s what I saw.

Q. How long have you been in Denver? A. Since Sun­
day night.

Q. Have you ever been here before? A. No.
Q. Well, in your work you do agree that you stated that 

school desegregation is no panacea leading to disappear­
ance of the existing education gap existing between mem­
bers of the advanced majority student population and dis­
advantaged minority students? A. Yes, I  said that because 
I basically agree with what Judge Doyle has said, and that 
is that integration should be accompanied by additional 
efforts.

Q. You say under certain conditions school desegrega­
tion may result and work—

The Court: Where are you reading from?
Mr. Bis: I’m reading from Page 3.
The Court: We haven’t progressed that far.
I think we’ll take a short recess.
(Whereupon, the trial recessed at 10:50 a.m. and 

resumed at 11:06 a.m.)

By Mr. R is:
Q. Dr. O’Reilly, I  have had a request from some specta­

tors here that, if you would please raise your voice a bit, 
they would appreciate it. They can’t hear [643] you back 
there.

The Witness: I’ll do my best.

Q. Referring to Page 39 of your work, Dr. O’Reilly, it 
says, “Examination of current guidelines for school deseg­

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1949a

regation indicates a failure to give adequate emphasis to 
the importance of social class consideration in planning 
integrated schools.” And you have said, “Guidelines have 
focused on the concept of racial balance with result in 
ambiguous . . . ”

Must the social class of the students both being trans­
ported into a school and the social class of the students 
that are already there be coordinated, then, in some man­
ner? A. Yes, they should.

The Court: Are you still on Page 3 ?
Mr. Bis: Beg your pardon, Your Honor. This is 

Page 39.
The Court: Are you finished with Page 3 ? Did you 

ask him about this statement, “There is no panacea 
. . . ” ?

Mr. Bis: I ’ll come back to that, if I  may. This 
again goes to the social class matter that I asked him 
about before.

The Witness: Yes. I’ll explain that. As you will 
remember, as I  remember, anyway, from Dr. Cole­
man’s testimony, he talked about social class being 
a primary consideration. Now, what I have done in 
my report is to translate that into £6443 arranging 
a condition for the poor integration. This is one of 
the initial conditions. The basic idea there is to 
make sure that the school ends up as a predomi- 
antly middle-class school which, from what I know 
about Denver, seems to be generally possible. The 
other conditions are—the other basic condition is 
that the school also reflects somewhat the ethnic com­
position of the community, but there can be certain 
variations there. In other words, the particular pro­

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1950a

portions, they should never be low. But there is a 
range of variation in which you can work and the 
criteria there in a plan for a well-integrated school 
is to insure that there is enough representation so 
that the different ethnic groups in the community 
are well represented in the school and can interact 
with each other. A school in which you have like 
four or five blacks, you know—it is not an integrated 
school under a criterion like that; or, if an area like 
Denver—it would mean that you would do your best 
to represent not the blacks and the whites, but the 
Hispanos.

Q. So when you’re talking about social class, are you 
using the same criteria, as Dr. Coleman did when he talked 
about socioeconomic class? A. Yes, but I have added an 
additional condition which relates social class and race. Be­
cause there is not just one objective for integration, not 
just entirely the objective of improving educational achieve­
ments. An additional [6453 objective—and this is related 
to—

The Court: What you’re saying is that the middle 
class and the upper middle class in the integrated 
school ought to be predominant? I mean, if they’re 
going to exert any influence?

The Witness: Yes.

By Mr. R is:
Q. So social class must be considered and not merely 

numbers of blacks, numbers of whites, numbers of His­
panos. Bight? A. Yes, in most cases the consideration of 
the racial or the ethnic factor is automatically a considera­
tion of the social class factor.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1951a

The Court: I don’t see what you are—I’m still not 
certain as to what your goal is. It’s to make the 
minority group more articulate and more knowledge­
able as to what’s going on in society? What the val­
ues are of the kinds of society we have?

The Witness: Well, that’s certainly part of it, sir. 
But I think to be articulate as I  can about it there 
are two basic goals. One of them if ignored repre­
sents, I think, a tremendous danger to this society 
in which we live. And that is the isolation of groups 
of students in schools.

The Court: Well, then, you’re trying to develop 
a single culture, is that right?

The Witness: No, sir. I think that’s what we 
have; [646]is a predominant kind of subrogating 
culture which feels pretty indifferent about other 
cultures. The plans that we have discussed with re­
spect to integration take into account the represen­
tation of each culture in the school so that the school 
becomes multicultural and not homogeneous culture. 
In fact, I think this is one of the conditions for the 
success for integration programs, which isn’t really 
all that hard to get at; is to recognize the contribu­
tions of the groups that are existing in school, and 
this apparently is recognized in the Board’s plan. 
However, that plan does not bring together people, 
and it assumes by reading a book or something, that 
that will develop. But I think that’s quite doubtful.

The Court: Well, what influence, then, does the 
so-called middle class or upper middle class—what 
great contribution do they make, do you think, to 
integrated settings?

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1952a

The Witness: I  think part of the contribution is 
the exposure of the minority group student to a 
more different level of language, a more complex 
level of language, a more abstract use of language 
which is more typical of middle-class Anglos. But it 
is not necessarily untypical of middle-class blacks. 
It is a function of social class. Another contribu­
tion, I think, that is made by the integrated program 
is that when you do mix students together, particu­
larly if you start when they are young at the ele­
mentary school, you create an opportunity for mutual 
respect between cultures and [647] this kind of 
thing is really the direct reverse of the segregated 
school where these segregated students must obvi­
ously conclude from the fact that they are alone 
that, since he is segregated, he must be regarded as 
inferior. So this certainly removes that source of 
feeling of inferiority, low self-esteem.

The Court: Brings about insight and perhaps un­
derstanding between the groups, you’re saying?

The Witness: Yes, I think mutual respect.
The Court: Anything else?
The Witness: Yes. Irrespective of social class, 

not—I’m not necessarily speaking of Denver now, 
that is, the correlation between what I’m about to 
say in Denver is up to some other people to judge.

Mr. Bis: I ’m sorry, Dr. O’Beilly. I can hardly 
hear you.

The Witness: The question was, are there any 
other things that occur as a function of the social 
class composition of the school in the integrated 
school. When you group lower-class students to­
gether, predominantly lower-class students together,

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1953a

you tend to get generally a higher level of disorder, 
a generally lower level of academic motivation, and 
the approaches to instruction to typically include 
even small groups are very, very susceptible to the 
influence of the group, and if the predominant aspect 
of the group is in [648] disorder, not caring about 
the school, not caring about achievement and so on, 
this has a highly interfering affect on the effective­
ness of instruction. It cuts down on the efficiency 
of a teacher; cuts down on information transmitted. 
There are additional effects, too, that have been 
stated which I have stated in my report and other 
reports have, too, on the teacher. Teachers come to 
regard the students as being incapable, and there are 
indications that they actually regard them as infe­
rior. Possibly culturally inferior. That is even an 
assumption in some compensatory education pro­
grams. These attitudes of teachers are highly nega­
tive and from my point of view as a psychologist 
can exert damaging effects on an individual’s psy­
chological development. All of this is much more 
likely in a school which consists primarily of poor 
students from a single culture or from an instance 
like this where you have two cultures or like in New 
York City where we have Puerto Bican students and 
Negro students who are primarily segregated from 
the whites. So there are psychological effects.

Wilson’s report is one of the ones, I think, that 
gives us one of the indications of the danger to social 
development represented by the segregated school. 
For example, after accounting for family back­
ground, father absences, individual social class, he 
found that it was the extent to which the school was

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1954a

segregated which appeared to [649] cause the fre­
quency of juvenile delinquency among Negro ad­
olescents. And that, if those students went to upper- 
middle-class schools where the education environ­
ment was different, that they were less likely to 
become delinquents and their effect wTas twice as 
great for blacks as it was for whites. And that is 
understandable because there are a lot more blacks 
in segregated schools than in integrated schools.

The Court: Tou heard Mr. Ward testify yester­
day? He said that he has great concern for the black 
student who has not fared well on the achievement 
tests but who, nevertheless, has great ability, prob­
ably, if he can be discovered and it is brought out.

The Witness: Yes. I remember him saying that.
The Court: This is a person who is apt to be lost 

if somebody doesn’t take an interest in him and 
develop him. What is he going to do in an inte­
grated atmosphere?

The Witness: Sir, a person’s educational develop­
ment particularly at the junior high school and high 
school level is less determined by his parents than 
by his peers.

The Court: At junior high school?
The Witness: Yes, among the ethnic minority, the 

effect of the peer group is twice as great as it is for 
whites. This has been brought out in Coleman’s 
study. Also been brought out in Wilson’s study.

The Court: That’s because the parental influences 
[650] are declining as you get to that age?

The Witness: Possibly. It’s also because of rela­
tive deprivation in terms of the qualities of one’s 
family background that these students are more re­
sponsive to qualitative differences in school.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1955a

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross 

The Court: As to what?
The Witness: They are more responsive. You take 

the disadvantaged Negro student and put him in an 
atmosphere in which the environmental quality of 
that atmosphere has been increased, the extent to 
which he will improve is more rapid and greater 
than the general effect on white students put in that 
same environment. Now, this is a definite finding 
of integration studies and Coleman study and the 
Wilson study in Oakland, California. Now, put in 
the context of what I  said about the peer group, if 
you segregate students in schools like this, the peer 
group’s influence is primarily negative, and this is 
a time of their lives when they are most susceptible 
to that influence. So long as you continue racially- 
isolated schools and the pattern I  see in this par­
ticular case is isolation from elementary through 
secondary, you have virtually programmed the stu­
dent into something that, through his adulthood and 
possibly into juvenile delinquency certainly an in­
crease in the level of social acts displayed by these 
minority students. And it’s predictable. My opinion 
on this is that we know enough about this so that, 
if we do [651] this, that these are the likely effects, 
and we therefore have to take responsibility for it.

By Mr. R is:
Q. But if we have a school with highly-motivated teach­

ers, with greater empathy with these minority students, 
you would say they wouldn’t progress? A. Would you re­
peat the question?

Q. If you had a school in which there are highly-moti­



1956a

vated teachers, with greater emphathy for these disadvan­
taged students—Let’s take Manual High School. A. I can’t 
generalize on the basis of Manual High School.

Q. So you think Manual is not providing anything for 
them that hasn’t been provided for these children before, 
from what you have heard from Principal Ward yesterday! 
A. Prom my reading of the Board’s plan, I don’t think 
there is any hard evidence which would indicate from my 
point of view, as a person in this field, as an educational 
researcher, when I read this plan on Manual High School, 
when I read the language of the Board—

Q. I ’m asking about Mr. Ward’s testimony yesterday. Do 
you think what he is doing is being done without any sub­
stantial benefit to those children? A. I  don’t think you can 
judge from what a person has to say about his opinions. 
Teachers typically and school administrators typically 
think what they’re doing is great.

£6523 The Court: I wish you would keep your 
voice up, please. The reporter is having difficulty 
hearing you. Speak as if you’re making a speech, 
you know, to a large group.

The Witness: Yes, sir.
Teachers and school administrators—
The Court: You want the people in the back 

benches to hear every single word you say.
The Witness: Teachers and school administra­

tors where their opinions of the effects of programs 
have been evaluated, are typically positive, but when 
we look at the programs they are typically negative.

Q. I  see. So, in the case of Manual, you just look at the 
program and not with the results then? A. We look at 
the—-

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1957a

Q. Unless they were on standardized achievement test 
scores? A. That’s not the only thing I would look at.

Q. What else would you look at in Manual? A. I would 
look at, for example, students’ opinions. I would look at 
how many of these students go to college as compared to 
how many went to college before the program was started. 
There are many, many indicators of the effectiveness of 
the school that are not necessarily achievement test data. 
I  wouldn’t rely on a single indicator. That would be an 
[653] evaluation of the program.

Q. Then all these 1,200 programs in compensatory edu­
cation which you relied on, you were relying there on 
standard achievement test scores, were you not? A. No, 
sir. Most of these programs include several indicators of 
effectiveness.

Q. What other tests? A. Sometimes they include psy­
chological tests.

Q. How many of the 1,200? A. Well, that would be 
extremely difficult to say at this point.

Q. Go ahead. What other tests? A. Let’s take Head 
Start, for example. Head Start included a measure of 
self-concept. How the individual felt about himself, and 
also included a measure of the student’s attitude towards 
education, towards school.

Q. These were subjective things from the three and 
four-year-olds? A. Sometimes they are subjective. Some­
times they are relatively objective, in which the student is 
given a questionnaire.

Q. Let me ask you this. In going back to Page 3 of your 
report, you say—and you can state if this is correct— 
“However, knowledge of the process of integration is not 
yet so complete nor is what is known of the process so 
systematically [654] applied that any startling changes

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1958a

in educational development should generally become evi­
dent in desegregate minority group students.” It that your 
opinion today? A. It certainly is, but I would like to 
qualify that opinion, if I  may. That is a preliminary 
statement preceding my analysis of the conditions that are 
likely to make desegregation—the integration program ef­
fective. For example, if it were started at the elementary 
level it is much more likely to be successful than at the 
secondary level. And there are other conditions that I 
indicate in there and basically the proposition that I am 
making there is that people have to plan and work this 
thing out in accordance with what is known about the 
process in order to make it effective. That statement also 
communicates that we can do a much better job with in­
tegration than we have done before because of •what we 
do now with it and, if we continue to work on it and con­
tinue to integrate the schools, that we will know more about 
it and be able to do a better job yet.

Q. Pag’e 20, did you make this statement: “It is evident 
from the results of all studies reviewed that the achieve­
ment levels of disadvantaged minority group students still 
remain substantially below that of the advantaged whites 
. . .  in schools.”

The question is, what that your statement? A. Yes. 
May I qualify that?

£655] Q. Well, may I ask you if that is your statement? 
A. Yes.

Q. Now, basically, what you’re talking about again here 
is achievement levels of the minority who were transferred 
to another school? Eight? A. Yes.

Q. And right down the line, all of your reports indicate 
that the minority students and disadvantaged students, 
when they are moved into the integrated setting, generally

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1959a

remain behind? They never do catch np, isn’t that correct? 
A. Oh, I don’t think the latter part of that statement is 
correct.

Q. Well, Page 27. You said, “Even though the studies 
often indicate superior achievement on the part of the 
integrated Negro student, it must still be noted that the 
integrated Negro students generally remain behind achieve­
ments . . . displayed by white majority.” A. Yes, but you 
said they always remain behind, and—

Q. Well, generally?

Mr. Greiner: If the witness would be allowed to 
finish his response, Your Honor—

The Court: Yes.
Go ahead, Doctor.

A. There aren’t enough studies at this particular time 
on desegregation in which the process has been initated 
on [656] a district level that have gone over a long enough 
period of time, and that have been, you know, effectively 
planned from my point of view, that would indicate whether 
we can wipe out that difference. We just don’t know yet. 
We do know that—

Q. With respect to the—to Page 36, did you make this 
statement: “Despite the appearance of superiority of
the integration approach . . .  it is evident that in the 
Berkeley study that the disadvantaged Negroes, even when 
they are in an integrated setting, achieved at considerably 
lower levels than more advantaged whites.” A. Eeally, 
the same statement. We did—I did make that statement.

Q. So, merely by integration in and of itself, you’re not 
going to cure all evils? A. No, but it’s relative to com­
pensatory education.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1960a

Q. But generally, as to the ultimate fact of the evidence 
—the evidence is just not sufficiently conclusive or there 
haven’t been enough analyses to know what its effect is? 
A. That’s not true.

Mr. Bis : That’s all.
Mr. Greiner: We have no further questions of 

Dr. O’Reilly, Your Honor.
The Court: Where do you think the Spanish- 

origin or [657] Spanish-speaking people fit into 
this desegregation program? Have you made any 
particular studies along this line?

The Witness: The only really big study available 
on the effects of integration on the Mexican-Ameri­
cans is the Coleman report and that report shows 
the effect of integration is as large or larger—-maybe 
slightly larger on their achievement levels in school 
as it is for Negroes, which would indicate that 
there are expectations in relationship to how well 
the Negro is going to do in an integrated setting 
and how well the Mexican-American is going to 
do in that setting, should be roughly the same.

The Court: Well, I take it that, in view of what 
you say, that you feel that there is value in having 
an ideal integrated setting, in having a mixture of 
Negroes and Mexicans, as well as Anglos, is that 
correct?

The Witness: Yes, sir. And I feel that is really— 
surely dictated by a multicultural region like Denver 
or other regions where there are more than two 
ethnic groups.

The Court: Have you conducted any studies as 
to whether this integration affects the so-called su-

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1961a

perior group? Does it lower their standards, their 
levels of achievement?

The Witness: Now, I have rather reviewed stud­
ies of principals and I think, if this is what you’re 
asking, principals’ attitudes, school administrators’ 
and teachers’ attitudes in relationship to the ques­
tion of, did integration [658] lower the standards of 
the school? With very few exceptions, the opinions 
of these people are in the districts where desegre­
gation had occurred, have been positive, and in some 
instances—it’s not infrequent—that they felt the 
program had enriched them and had a better pro­
gram than they had before with a greater variety.

The Court: These are general approaches, I take 
it? The individual problems you are not concerned 
with?

The Witness: With individuals?
The Court: Individual desegregation problems. 

I noted in going over the plans of the plaintiffs’ 
program that they will pair the best facility in town 
with the worst. Would this be desirable? They will 
take the newest facility in town and they will bus 
them to the oldest facility in town because of geo­
graphic proximity.

The Witness: It could be, but I would have no 
problem about the two schools.

The Court: Well, the latter is the lowest in 
achievement, probably, that you could imagine; 20th 
percentile.

The Witness: Well, if the two schools end up— 
if they are both predominantly middle-class, as a 
function of this transfer, you would predict that 
they would both work out pretty well. In no cases 
do we have any—

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1962a

The Court: Is there any adjustment period?
The Witness: Well, sir, the studies that we have

[659] got don’t indicate that the general approach 
to school integration has involved any extensive 
planning. They have taken a relatively short period 
of time. They haven’t done any tremendous amount 
of work at their school to prepare for it. Most of 
what they did, they did as they went along.

The Court: You mean in the South?
The Witness: No, I ’m talking about the studies 

that I have reported in here in Chapters 5 and 6.
The Court: These are pilot programs, though, 

that you’re talking about?
The Witness: Yes, and most of them were initi­

ated—well, some were in preparation, but it’s not 
extensive. They did not make extensive changes in 
the school program. They didn’t send the teachers 
to school for any lengthy period of time nor were 
their in-service training programs particularly 
lengthy. In some cases they did almost nothing 
and in some cases the results almost tend to be 
positive.

The Court: Would you at least recommend that 
these exchanges be worked out on a carefully- 
planned basis and not be the result of computer 
print-outs ?

The Witness: W ell, I think the computer-print­
out-type orientation that we have seen here is fine 
for planning, you know, how are you going to mix 
the students in the schools. But then the human 
element must come in there. I think that you can 
do this in a matter of a few months in terms of
[660] preparation that the rest of the effort should

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross

/



1963a

be devoted toward working with it as you go. Be­
cause some schools just—they typically don’t have 
the kinds of funds; the kinds of additions to the 
program that they can make, to go all-out on this. 
But they can make efforts from studies I have re­
viewed that can work and, you know, it isn’t all 
that extensive, what has been done. Particularly, 
if you do it at the elementary level. It’s a lot less 
of a problem there than, potentially—with the op­
portunity once these kids have learned to interact, 
it’s much easier to do when you’re younger and when 
you are less rigid. Desegregation can then con­
tinue as the students move up.

The Court: What about this specialty school1? 
What about the value of that? That has been rec­
ommended by both sides, really, by the plaintiffs 
as an alternative and the defendants as a proposal, 
in regard to Manual High? Have you studied this 
type of thing?

The Witness: I ’m not sure I ’m familiar with the 
concept involved here, specialty school.

The Court: Well, it would be geared to training- 
people from the intercity in particular trades and— 
or in particular occupations.

The Witness: A job-oriented program?
The Court: In part. But also it would have, as 

I understand it—it would be devoted to prepro­
fessional [661] training, premedic, prelaw, and pre­
engineering, for example, and programs for college 
preparatory training as well. In addition, special­
ized courses in such things as cosmetology and build­
ing construction; all this kind of thing. And per­
haps plumbing. I don’t know. Plumbing isn’t a bad 
job nowadays.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1964a

The Witness: No, it pays pretty well. Well, I 
think if the school expands its organization and 
allows people to go into other kinds of things that 
may be more suited to their particular needs, that 
is basically a good idea and a good approach.

The Court: Well, they’re doing this at both 
Manual and Cole. They’re making more or less 
specialized schools out of them and programs they 
have never done before. This is in self-defense.

The Witness: Well, this kind of thing really goes 
back over a hundred years. In a situation like this, 
why, where mostly black and Hispano students are 
getting that kind of program and whites are getting 
another kind of program—and you have a system 
where grouping occurs into special programs from 
the elementary on up through the secondary level, 
it finally ends up in vocational training. And 
amounts to, in my opinion, programming students 
into basically lower occupations than the whites are 
programmed into. The whites are programmed into 
another environment. And, you know, I  [662] 
don’t know whether this is planned this way, that 
is my feeling.

The Court: This is a danger, you say?
The Witness: I think it’s a very clear danger.
The Court: But the program they have prepared 

would be for this school to be a citywide school so 
as to eliminate its segregated character. And turn 
it into a specialty school that would accommodate 
people from every—

The Witness: It could work out that way.
The Court: Anybody else want to ask anything?
Mr. Greiner: Nothing further from us, Your 

Honor.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1965a

Cross-Examination by Mr. Ris (Cont’d ) :
Q. Dr. O’Reilly, you previously testified that you recog­

nize the significance of community support in any operation 
of the school system, did you not? A. Yes.

Q. Dr. Sullivan discussed that the other day. You heard 
his testimony? A. No, I did not hear Dr. Sullivan’s testi­
mony but I have read his book and that is his opinion.

Q. Weren’t you here when he testified? A. No.
Q. I ’m sorry. I thought you were.

The Witness: No, I had some homework to do.

£6633 Q. Well, he testified that it took him two years 
to get things lined up in Berkeley to go into a desegrega­
tion plan other than their original pilot plan. A. He is a 
pioneer.

Q. Pardon? A. He’s a pioneer.
Q. Well, he was working with the community. He had 

the feel of the community and he said it would take a 
minimum of that time, and that community is a lot smaller 
than Denver, isn’t it? A. Did he say that it would take 
a minimum of that amount of time in Denver?

Q. That was the testimony as I  remember.

The Court: Well, he said this : that you can’t com­
pletely disregard community acceptance as a factor; 
that you’ve got to educate the people who are mak­
ing the sacrifice, not only them, but all making sacri­
fices in a way. The people who are allegedly getting 
the benefit. They all want to be educated so that 
they have some motivation for this and some spirit 
for it if it’s going to succeed. I gleaned this from 
remarks; that you can’t just leave it up to the forces

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1966a

of nature or you might run into trouble. I thought 
he conducted a community education program.

Ry Mr. Ris:
Q. With regard to an expression of your opinion that 

this could be done in a couple of months or a £664] few 
months, I believe your phrase was, you don’t know of any 
experience of any community the size of Denver, with the 
problems of Denver, that has done this, have you? A. No, 
but I don’t think you can lay down and—

Q. Then you are just—

Mr. Greiner: Could the witness be allowed to 
finish his response, Your Honor?

The Court: Sure. Go ahead, if you’ve got some­
thing else to say.

A. Yes. First of all, Dr. Sullivan is a pioneer in the field 
and he worked out many of the techniques for gaining 
community support in the school. They exist now. It 
takes a lot of time to work those out. Just to work out the 
procedures, not to get them, going. Now, those procedures, 
those plans, that experience now exists. The people can 
take advantage of that. I  don’t see why it has to take 
two years.

Q. You think you could take the Berkeley experience 
and come to Denver and do the Denver job in a couple of 
months? A. I really couldn’t tell that, but I do think 
that the timetable certainly has been shortened as a result 
of the things that are now available.

Q, And what other community the size of Denver has 
used the Berkeley plan to cut down the time? [665] A. 
I  don’t know of any other community.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1967a

Mr. Eis: That’s all.
Mr. Greiner: Nothing’ further, Your Honor.
The Court: Do you have anything else that you 

wish to add? We have been picking your brain here. 
Maybe you’ve got something we haven’t probed.

The Witness: No, sir. I think I have talked 
enough, and I’m kind of run down a little bit.

The Court: Well, we will be glad to hear you if 
you think there is.

The Witness: There is one thing I might add 
that would be—

The Court: Keep your voice up, though.
The Witness: In this particular book that has 

been offered into evidence with the Court—
The Court: We will take that in evidence. That’s 

508. I doin’t guarantee we will get through all of 
it.

(Whereupon, Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 508 was re­
ceived in evidence.)

The Witness: There is a chapter in there which 
I wrote on planning the desegregated schools. Some 
of the considerations that have to be made and so 
on. This might be a —of particular interest if this 
is the kind of thing that happens in Denver, which 
I don’t know what it is. But there are other sources, 
too, that can be very helpful [6661 in planning de­
segregate programs in the schools. This is one offer­
ing here. There are lots of other things available. 
We do have a lot of information from research, 
from what people have done in integrating schools 
that enhance the chances of achieving a successful 
integration program in other places. They don’t

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Cross



1968a

apply necessarily directly and can’t be transferred, 
you know, just like that. But certainly they can be 
helpful. I think that’s all I would have to add.

The Court: Anything else?

By Mr. R is:
Q. Have you prepared such a plan for any city! A. No, 

I  haven’t prepared such a plan.

Mr. Bis: Thank you.

Redirect Examination by Mr. Greiner:
Q. Would you like to? A. I’d love to.

The Court: Well, good luck to you.
(Witness excused.)
Mr. Greiner: Your Honor, the plaintiffs rest at 

this point.

Robert O’Reilly—for Plaintiffs—Redirect

*  *  *  *



1969a

D ecision Re Plan or Remedy by District Court

(Dated May 21, 1970)

Reprinted in Appendix to Petition 
for Certiorari, pp. 99a-121a

See 313 F. Snpp. 90



1970a

Final Decree and Judgment

(Entered June 11, 1970)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
F or the District of Colorado 

Civil Action No. C-1499

Wilfred Keyes, individually and on behalf of Christi 
Keyes, a minor; Christine A. Colley, individually and 
on behalf of Kris M. Colley and Mark A. Williams, 
minors; Irma J. J ennings, individually and on behalf 
of Rhonda 0. J ennings, a minor; Roberta R. Wade, 
individually and on behalf of Gregory L. Wade, a minor; 
Edward J. Starks, J r., individually and on behalf of 
Denise Michelle Starks, a minor; J osephine Perez, 
individually and on behalf of Carlos A. Perez, Sheila 
R. Perez and Terry J. Perez, minors; Maxine N. 
Becker, individually and on behalf of Dinah L. Becker, 
a minor; Eugene R. Weiner, individually and on be­
half of Sarah S. Weiner, a minor,

Plaintiffs,
vs.

School District No. 1, Denver, Colorado; The Board of 
Education, School District No. 1, Denver, Colorado ; 
William C. Berge, individually and as President, Board 
of Education, School District No. 1, Denver, Colorado; 
Stephen J. Knight, Jr., individually and as Vice Presi­
dent, Board of Education, School District No. 1, Den­
ver, Colorado; J ames C. Perrill, Frank K. South- 
worth, J ohn H. Amesse, J ames D. Voorhees, J r., and 
Rachel B. Noel, individually and as members, Board 
of Education, School District No. 1, Denver, Colorado;



1971a

R obert D. G ilb er ts , individually and as Superintendent 
of Schools, School District No. 1, Denver, Colorado,

Defendants,
Mr. and Mrs. Douglas Barnett, individually and on behalf 

of J ade Barnett, a minor; Mr. and Mrs. J ack P ierce, 
individually and on behalf of Rebecca P ierce and Cyn­
thia P ierce, minors; Mrs. J ane Walden, individually 
and on behalf of J ames Craig Walden, a minor; Mr. 
and Mrs. William B. Brice, individually and on behalf 
of Kristie Brice, a minor; Mr. and Mrs. Carl Ander­
son, individually and on behalf of Gregory Anderson, 
Cindy Anderson, J eeeery Anderson, and Tammy And­
erson, minors; Mr. and Mrs. Charles Simpson, indi­
vidually and on behalf of Douglas Simpson, a minor; 
Mr. and Mrs. Patrick McCarthy, individually and on 
behalf of Cassandra McCarthy, a minor; Mr. Bichard 
Klein, individually and on behalf of J anet Klein, a 
minor; Mr. and Mrs. Frank Bupert, individually and 
on behalf of Michael Bupert and Scott Bupert,

Intervening Defendants.

Final Decree and Judgment

This Cause, having been tried on its merits before the 
Court, and the Court having made and filed its Memoran­
dum Opinion and Order dated March 21, 1970, and its 
Decision re Plan or Bemedy dated May 21, 1970, and hav­
ing therein made its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of 
Law:

It I s Hereby Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed as follows:
A. The Preliminary Injunction of this Court entered 

August 14, 1969, shall continue in full force and effect 
until September 1, 1970.



1972a

B. Effective September 1, 1970, the Preliminary Injunc­
tion shall be and is hereby amended as follows:

1. Resolution 1520 of the Board of Education of School 
District No. 1 in the City and County of Denver and State 
of Colorado, insofar as it applies to East High School, 
and Resolution 1524 insofar as it applies to Cole Junior 
High School, are hereby included in said Injunction;

2. The Board may permit pupils entering their senior 
year of high school in September of 1970, and who reside 
in the senior high school attendance areas changed by 
Resolution 1520 to have the option of attending the senior 
high schools of the attendance area in which they continue 
to reside or the senior high school which they attended at 
the close of the 1969-70 school year;

3. Pupils who reside in the attendance areas detached 
from Cole Junior High School and made a part of the 
attendance areas of Byers, Kunsmiller, Rishel, and Kep- 
ner Junior High Schools by Resolution 1524, and who are 
currently enrolled in other junior high schools under the 
District’s voluntary transfer plan may continue attending 
the junior high school which they attended at the close of 
the 1969-70 school year;

4. All that portion of the area described in paragraph 1 
of Resolution 1524 as detached from Smiley Junior High 
School attendance area and made a part of the Merrill 
Junior High School attendance area which lies east of 
Colorado Boulevard shall be made a part of the Byers 
Junior High School attendance area instead of Merrill 
Junior High School attendance area;

5. The area described in Resolution 1531 as detached 
from Park Hill Elementary School and made a part of

Final Decree and Judgment



1973a

the Steck Elementary School attendance area, beginning 
September 1, 1970, shall be made a part of the Ellsworth 
Elementary School attendance area instead of the Steck 
Elementary School attendance area; and

6. All pupils residing in the attendance areas changed 
by the implementation of Resolutions 1520, 1524 and 1531 
hereunder shall not be eligible for the District’s voluntary 
open enrollment program.

C. As so amended, said Injunction shall become perma­
nent on September 1, 1970, and continue in full force and 
effect until and unless otherwise modified by this Court.

I t I s Further Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed that De­
fendant School District shall:

A. Continue its program of voluntary open enrollment 
as an interim measure between now and the fall of 1971; 
except that it shall be modified in accordance with the 
Defendants’ proposed plan, Exhibit “V-A”, and shall guar­
antee space in predominantly Anglo schools for all Negro 
and Hispano pupils in the 17 Court-designated schools 
commencing January 1, 1971, with transportation provided 
for by the District to all participants.

B. Commencing in September, 1970, implement the com­
pensatory education programs described in its Exhibit “V- 
A” which, as a minimum, shall include the following:

1. Integration of teachers and administrative stall;
2. Encouragement and incentive to place skilled and 

experienced teachers and administrators in the 
core city schools;

3. Use of teacher aides and paraprofessionals;

Final Decree and Judgment



1974a

4. Human relations training for all School District 
employees;

5. Inservice training on both, district-wide and indi­
vidual school bases;

6. Extended work years for certain teachers on a 
voluntary basis;

7. Programs under Senate Bill 174;
8. Early childhood programs such as Head Start 

and Follow Through;
9. Classes in Negro and Hispano culture and history; 

and
10. Spanish language training.

Those programs which are already in effect should be con­
tinued in the 1970-71 school year, with any modifications 
which the Board deems necessary in order to carry out this 
Order.

C. Desegregate grades one though six of the 14 Court- 
designated elementary schools, as follows:

1. Seven of such elementary schools shall be desegre­
gated by September, 1971;

2. The remaining seven of such elementary schools shall 
be desegregated by September of 1972.

Desegregation shall mean that each of said schools shall 
have an Anglo pupil composition in excess of 50 percent.

D. Desegregate Baker Junior High School as follows:
1. Substantial progress shall be made in desegregating 

Baker Junior High School by the fall of 1971, along the 
lines set forth above for elementary schools.

Final Decree and Judgment



1975a

2. Desegregation of Baker Junior High School shall be 
completed by the beginning of the school year in the fall 
of 1972.

E. Desegregate Cole Junior High School along the lines 
set forth above for Baker Junior High School or, in the 
alternative, establish Cole Junior High School as an open 
school for special education and other special programs now 
in effect or which the Board may wish to put into effect in 
the future by the school year beginning in the fall of 1971, 
at the option of the Board of Education.

In the event the Board chooses the second alternative, 
the Cole Junior High School subdistrict boundaries estab­
lished for the year 1969-70, shall remain in effect but pupils 
living therein may transfer to other junior high schools 
within the school district on a space-guaranteed basis with­
out regard to the effect on the racial composition of Cole 
Junior High School.

F. Establish Manual High School as an open school for 
the continuance and expansion of the vocational and pre­
professional training programs which have been instituted 
by the principal, the faculty and staff. The Board shall 
retain the present subdistrict boundaries of Manual High 
School but pupils living therein may transfer to other 
senior high schools within the school district on a space- 
guaranteed basis without regard to the effect on the racial 
composition of Manual High School.

G. Between now and the beginning of school in the fall 
of 1971 and continuing through the fall of 1972, the Board 
shall institute an intensive program of education -within 
the community, teaching staff and administration orienting 
teachers in the field of minority cultures and how effectively

Final Decree and Judgment



1976a

to deal with minority children in an integrated environ­
ment and educating the community as to the educational 
benefits and values to be derived from desegregation and 
integration.

I t I s F urther Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed that this 
shall constitute a Final Judgment in the case and shall be 
entered as such provided, however, the Court shall retain 
jurisdiction for the purpose of supervising its implementa­
tion and modifying its provisions as may be necessary from 
time to time. In any event, there being no further substan­
tive matter to decide there is no just cause for delay and 
the entire matter can now be appealed.

Dated at Denver, Colorado this 8th day of June, 1970.

B y the Court:
/s /  William E. Doyle

United States District Judge
Approved as to F orm :
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Barnes & J ensen

By .......... ...................................
1409 Larimer Square 
Denver, Colorado 80202

Holland & Hart 
Gr. 6. Greiner

By ..............................................
500 Equitable Building 
Denver, Colorado 80202

Final Decree and Judgment



1977a

Attorney for Defendants

Wood, R is  & Hames

By ..............................................
1140 Denver Clnb Building 
Denver, Colorado 80202

Henry, Cockrell, Quinn & Creighton

By ..............................................
1415 Security Life Building 
Denver, Colorado 80202

Final Decree and Judgment



1978a

Defendants’, etc. Notice of Appeal
(Filed June 16, 1970)

Notice is hereby given that all Defendants herein except 
Janies D. Voorhees, Jr., John H. Amesse, and Rachel B. 
Noel, as individuals, hereby appeal to the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit from the Final De­
cree and Judgment entered in this action on June 11, 1970.

Benjamin L. Craig 
Benjamin L. Craig 
1415 Security Life Building 
Denver, Colorado 80202 
Telephone: 244-6075
Attorney for Defendants, 
except James D. Voorhees, 
Jr., John H. Amesse and 
Rachel B. Noel, as individ­
uals.



1979a

Plaintiffs’ Notice o f Appeal 
( Cross-Appeal)

(Filed June 24, 1970)

Notice is hereby given that all plaintiffs herein hereby 
appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth 
Circuit from that portion of the final judgment entered in 
this action on the 11th day of June, 1970, relating to:

1. The Court’s failure to grant relief to those schools 
whose combined Negro and Hispano enrollment was 
in excess of 70% ;

2. The Court’s failure to find that the attendance area 
boundaries of certain schools were intentionally 
gerrymandered to isolate and confine Negro and 
Hispano children and that such acts constitute de- 
jure segregation;

3. The Court’s failure to find that the neighborhood 
school system is unconstitutional where it in fact 
produces segregated schools, regardless of the in­
tent of the Board;

4. The Court’s failure to require that all desegregation 
and integration be accomplished by September, 
1971.



1980a

Plaintiffs’ Notice of Appeal 

Dated this 24th day of June, 1970.

/ s /  G ordon- G. G r e in e r  
Gordon G. Greiner 
500 Equitable Building, 
Denver, Colorado 80202 
292-9200

/s /  Craig S. Barnes 
Craig S. Barnes 
1409 Larimer Square, 
Denver, Colorado 80202 
892-9900

Attorneys for Plaintiffs



1981a

D ecision by Court o f Appeals: lOtli Circuit on  
Motion for Stay, etc.

Nos. 336-70  and 337-70

(Filed March 26, 1971)

MARCH TERM—March 26, 1971
Before Honorable John C. Pickett, Honorable Delmas C. 
Hill and Honorable Oliver Seth, Circuit Judges

Wilfred Keyes, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Appellees in No. 336-70 
Appellants in No. 337-70

School District N o. 1,
Denver, Colorado, et al.,

Defendants,
Appellants in No. 336-70 
Appellees in No. 337-70

Heretofore, and on March 2, 1971 the Defendants, 
Appellants-Appellees, School District No. 1, Denver, Colo­
rado, et al., filed a motion for a stay of the final decree and 
judgment of the United States District Court for the Dis­
trict of Colorado entered in the captioned cases. A response 
on behalf of Plaintiffs, Appellees-Appellants, Wilfred 
Keyes, et ah, was requested by the Court and such response 
has now been filed.

The Court, after considering the motion and response, 
determines that because of events which have occurred



1982a

Decision by Court of Appeals on Stay, etc.
Nos. 336-70 and 337-70

since July 28, 1970, when this Court denied a similar mo­
tion for stay, the motion should now be granted.

As urged in the motion, at the time the cases were sub­
mitted upon their merits the Court indicated a desire to 
reach an early decision in the cases on the merits and it 
was felt by the members of the Court that, because of the 
anticipated early decision, a stay was not necessary. There­
after, the United States Supreme Court announced that it 
would hear oral arguments on October 12, 1970 in Swann v. 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, No. 281, and 
several other school desegregation cases. Such arguments 
were heard and this Court then determined that a decision 
in the captioned cases should be withheld until this Court 
had the benefit of the anticipated Supreme Court decisions 
in the Swann and combined cases. Decision in these have 
not been announced.

By reason of the fact that the original decree provided 
three steps in the Plan for desegregation of Denver Public 
Schools, step one has been carried out; the School District 
is about to finalize the implementation of step two; and we 
are convinced that it would be unfair to the School District 
to compel it to take further steps in the implementation of 
the total plan until this Court and the party litigants have 
the benefit of the United States Supreme Court decisions 
in the Swann and combined desegregation cases, above men­
tioned, which are expected to be announced in the near 
future.

Therefore, the requested stay is granted until further 
order of this Court, and all further proceedings pertaining 
to such portions of the plan as have not heretofore been 
implemented, shall be, and the same hereby are, stayed.



1983a

Decision by Court of Appeals on- Stay, etc.
Nos. 336-70 and 337-70

This stay is prospective only in its application and it 
shall not require the undoing of any steps of implementa­
tion which have heretofore been taken to carry out the 
orders of the United States District Court for the District 
of Colorado herein.

/s /  Howabd K. Phillips 
Howard K. Phillips 
Clerk

A true copy 
Teste

Howard K. Phillips 
Clerk, U. S. Court of 
Appeals, Tenth Circuit

/ s /  (Illegible)
Deputy Clerk



1984ia

Decision by U. S. Supreme Court on Stay, etc.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 
Washington, D.C.

(April 26, 1971)

No.........Wilfred Keyes v. School District Number One,
Denver, Colorado

Per Curiam

The sole basis for the Tenth Circuit’s action in granting 
the stay of the District Court’s order in this case was the 
view “that it would be unfair to the School District to 
compel it to take further steps in the implementation of 
the total plan until (the Tenth Circuit) and the party liti­
gants have the benefit of the United States Supreme Court 
decisions in the Swann and combined desegregation cases.

>5

The decisions in those cases having now been announced, 
it is proper to vacate the stay and remit the matter to the 
Court of Appeals freed of its earlier speculation as to the 
bearing of our decision in the Swann cases.

We, of course, intimate no views upon the merits of the 
underlying issues.

Mr. Justice White took no part in the consideration or 
decision of this matter.



1985a

Opinion o f Court o f Appeals

(Dated June 11, 1971)

Reprinted in Appendix to Petition 
for Certiorari, pp. 122a-158a

See 445 F.2d 990

Judgment o f Court o f Appeals

(Dated June 11, 1971)

Reprinted in Appendix to Petition 
for Certiorari, pp. 159a-160a



1986a

D ecision by Court o f Appeals for “ Clarification of
Opinion”

(Filed August 30, 1971)

JULY TEEM—A ug u st  17, 1971

Before Honorable John C. Pickett, Honorable Delmas C. 
Hill and Honorable Oliver Seth, Circuit Judges

Nos. 336-70 and 337-70

Wilfred Keyes, etc., et al.,
Plaintiffs-A ppellees, 

v.

School District Number One,
Denver, Colorado, et al,,

Defendants, Appellants,
and

M r . and Mrs. Douglas Barnett, 
etc., et al.,

Intervening Defendants.

Appellees-plaintiffs in the captioned appeal have filed 
what they denominate as a “Motion For Clarification Of 
Opinion.” As pointed out in that motion, both the Trial 
Court and this Court have determined the Hallett and Sted- 
man schools to be de jure segregated schools. Under au­
thority of our opinion, immediate steps should be taken 
to formulate and carry out a plan of desegregation for such 
schools. We do not deem this action to be a proper func­
tion of an Appellate Court.



1987a

Decision by Court of Appeals for “Clarification of Opinion

The authority of the Trial Court to hear these matters
and to determine the proper relief to he granted is clearly 
set out in the last sentence of our opinion.

/s /  Howard K. Phillips 
Howard K. Phillips 
Clerk



1988a

Order Granting Certiorari
January 17, 1972

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. Mr. 
Justice White took no part in the consideration or decision 
of this petition.



MEILEN PRESS INC. —  N. Y. C. 21?