Objections Alternatives, and Recommendations of the MEA to reports of the Desegregation Panel

    ♦

4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 
SOUTHERN DIVISION

RONALD BRADLEY, et al.,
Plaintiffs, 

v.
WILLIAM G. MILLIKEN, et al.,

and
Defendants,

DETROIT FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, 
LOCAL 231, AMERICAN FEDERATION 
OF TEACHERS, AFL-CIO,

Defendant-
Intervenor,

and
DENISE MAGDOWSKI, et al.,

Defendants- 
Intervenor,

CIVIL ACTION NO: 
35257

et al.

OBJECTIONS, ALTERNATIVES AND MODIFICATIONS OF THE 
MICHIGAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION 

TO REPORTS FILED BY DESEGREGATION PANEL AND
SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION______

INTRODUCTION

This set of objections, alternatives and modifications 
to the reports filed by the Desegregation Panel and Superintendent 
of Public Instruction is filed pursuant to the RULING ON DESEGREGA­
TION AREA AND ORDER FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PLAN OF DESEGREGATION issued



f

by this Court on June 14, 1972. Said Ruling and Order provided for
certain reports to be filed by a Desegregation Panel appointed by
the Court and by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Said Ruling and Order further provided:

"Fifteen days after the filing of the reports 
required herein, hearings will begin on any 
proposal to modify any interim plan prepared 
by the panel and all other matters which may 
be incident to the adoption and implementation 
of any interim plan of desegregation submitted.
The parties are placed on notice that they _ are 
to be prepared at that time to present their 
objections, alternatives and modifications.
At such hearing the Court will not consider 
objections to desegregation or proposals 
offered 'instead' of desegregation."
The Desegregation Panel and the State Superintendent 

of Public Instruction have issued reports in conformance with the 
Court's Ruling and Order of June 14, 1972, and the following ob­
jections, alternatives and modifications to said reports are here­
with submitted by the Michigan Education Association.

The Michigan Education Association, on or about August 10, 
1972, filed a Petition for Writ of Prohibition and/or Mandamus, 
together with an alternative Motion for Intervention with the 
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. On August 21, 
1972, the Court concluded that the Petition for the Writ was "not 
well taken", but it further ordered that the Michigan Education 
Association "be and it hereby is permitted to intervene in the 
case of Bradley v. Milliken, Cause No. 72—1809—14 on the docket 
of this Court." The Michigan Education Association interprets 
said Order to mean that it has full authority to respond to the 
proposals of the Desegregation Panel and the Superintendent of 

Public Instruction.
In preparing this response, we shall attempt to 

address ourselves to the basic subjects outlined on pages 
7, 8, 9 and 10 of the June 14, 1972, Ruling and Order of this

-2



Court. The Court, in said Ruling, assigned certain areas of 
inquiry to the State Superintendent of Education with others 
delegated to the Desegregation Panel. Considerable overlapping 
has resulted, and our comments will be aimed at subject matter 
as opposed to specific findings of the several agencies. In 
addition, we will herein offer some proposals not previously 
discussed by any of the agencies delegated to assist the Court.

In addressing ourselves to the subjects hereinafter 
enumerated, we specifically reserve the right to comment on 
all other aspects of the various reports at a later time. The 
logistical burdens of the present endeavor dictate confinement 
of our remarks to certain key areas, but our failure to comment 
on other subjects at this time should not be construed as a 
waiver of interest in those other areas.

3-



•  •

INDEX TO TOPICAL AREAS

I. ADMINISTRATION AND GOVERNANCE

II. FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS

III. PERSONNEL AND CONTRACTS

IV. FACULTY REASSIGNMENT

V. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT - CULTURAL PLURALISM

VI. INSERVICE TRAINING

VII. TESTING

VIII. GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING SERVICES

IX. BI-RACIAL COMMITTEES

X. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION HIRING PROGRAM

XI. TEACHER PREPARATION NEEDS

XII. STUDENT CONDUCT AND DISCIPLINE

XIII. PROPOSED CALENDAR

-4-



I. ADMINISTRATION AND GOVERNANCE

A. In this area, the Desegregation Panel (hereinafter 
the "Panel") seems to delegate the ultimate answer to the State 
Board of Education. Dr. Porter, in his report on Final Desegre­
gation, concludes that an "area-wide authority" is necessary.
He believes this should be an elected body, charged with overall 
financial and contractual power, and further recommends adoption 
of immediate procedures to insure election of the agency.

We believe this recommendation to be ill advised, pre­
mature, and erroneous.

In order to insure the success of any desegregation 
plan, we recognize the need of some form of overriding super­
visory power. This agency or arm of government should assume 
responsibility in areas of pupil reassignment, transportation, and, 
by way of example and not limitation, the establishment and super­
vision of minimal standards for curriculum, in service training, 
and student conduct for the constituent districts.

Such an admission, however, does not concede that a 
whole new form of government or super school board need be 
created as Porter seemingly advocates.

It is the position of the Michigan Education Association 
that the interim report of Dr. Porter is basically sound, and that 
said interim report, with variations and modifications, should be 
implemented and given a fair trial. The local Boards of Education 
should be maintained, and given the opportunity to effectuate the 
Plan.

The overall supervision of the Plan should remain with 
the State Department of Education, an agency already formed, 
staffed and funded. The State Department should remain as the 
supervisory authority responsible for certain tasks assigned by

-5-



this Court. It should also be charged with the duty of examining 
the operation of the constituent boards to determine the effective­
ness of their endeavors under the Plan. In so stating, we believe 
that the role of the "central authority" or the State Department 
should be limited to a supervisory role which assures success of 
the Plan. The test of "substantially like" services does not re­
quire obliteration of existing school districts. Diversity exists 
and should be encouraged to the degree that it does not discriminate 
against children on the basis of race. To assure that children 
have racially integrated teaching faculties and facilities does 
not require a single "super" employer; compliance by the various 
districts with the orders of this Court should be enough.

B. Dr. Porter, on Page 49 of his Final Report (para­
graph 7) recommends transfer of library and recreational func­
tions from local boards to local municipal governments. We do 

not agree.
Public libraries and recreational services are identi­

fiable extensions of the educational process. To deny school 
districts the opportunity of initiating, supporting and con­
tinuing said services is not educationally desirable and appears 
to have been recommended only to facilitate administrative ease 
in accounting. We prefer continuation of present service on the 

local level.

C. Dr. Porter recommends (Page 34, Final Plan, para­
graph 5) the creation of an area-wide complaint council. He 
further recommends that some of the members be elected.

We deem the creation of such an agency to be premature 

and unnecessary.

-6-



A number of citizen concerns will likely arise during 
the first stages of desegregation and they should be directed to 
the local boards of education or to the State Board of Education 
the legal bodies, democratically elected, responsible for imple­
mentation of the desegregation plan.

This suggestion of a new council continues the theme 
which is replete throughout Dr. Porter's Report, to wit, the 
creation of new bureaus, agencies, or bodies to implement and 
police the Plan. The education of Michigan's children is pri­
marily a state responsibility, and it should remain fixed at 
that level. The State Department of Education should assume 
the dominant role in implementing the Plan, with said responsi­
bility shared by the local districts. Little or no new govern­
mental machinery is needed. The creation of new bodies and 
bureaus merely provides more avenues for the diffusion of re­
sponsibility, and for this reason, we oppose the same.

II. FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS

A. We do not feel it necessary for the court to create 
an area wide school district empowered to establish an area wide 
property tax rate. (See Dr. Porter Final Report, Pages 9 and 10.)

The current method of funding education in Michigan rep­
resents a combination of State and local monies with little ref­
erence to the needs of children. Those methods are under attack 
and currently resting before the Michigan Supreme Court. At this 
juncture, we recommend that this Court charge the State Department 
of Education with the task of reporting to the Court those extra 
sums necessary to insure effective implementation of the desegre­
gation plan. All sums necessary beyond present revenues available

-7-



to the districts should be provided by the State of Michigan.
B. Use of current state aid reimbursements is undesirable 

and will not provide substantially like services or equal educational 
opportunity for public school children within the desegregation area. 
(See Final Report of Dr. Porter, Page 11.)

Heavy reliance on current state aid to education as indi­
cated in the Superintendent's Report ignores the reality of dif­
ferences in local supporting efforts or ability and the fact that 
the State's portion is unrelated to educational needs.

C. It is unnecessary and undesirable for the Court to 
order that building fund assets be transferred to an area wide 
authority. (See Final Report of Dr. Porter, Page 15.)

The Court should order that all building fund assets be 
frozen and used for new building purposes only upon approval of 
the State Board of Education in order to assure that no new 
buildings are planned or erected which do not add to the efforts 
to desegregate student populations within the area.

D. It is undesirable, both politically and financially, 
to have the Court order the State to assume the operating deficits 
of fiscally troubled school districts. (Panel Report, Page 26.)

This recommendation is ill advised and has little rela­
tion to desegregation necessities. The Court should order the 
State to deduct from state aid payments sums sufficient to retire 
defecits of financially distressed districts, and this should be 
done over a period of time. The state must, if necessary, devise 
means to raise those monies which are necessary to run a program 
for children in the face of local citizens refusal to fund.
Citizens of one district should not be taxed unfairly to relieve 
citizens of another district, possessing like financial ability , 
from their obligation to provide adequate funding for the educa­

tion of children.

-8



III. PERSONNEL AND CONTRACTS

In the Report submitted by Dr. John Porter, he 
suggests that his original proposals as contained in the 
interim plan be given a fair opportunity to succeed. As 
already indicated, we concur in that recommendation and feel 
that the interim plan submitted by Dr. Porter, with certain 
modifications, be adopted as the pivotal plan to be implemented 

by the court.
Dr. Porter continues, however, with his recurring 

theme of a "super authority" in the event that the "interim 
experience does not recommend extension of interim arrange­

ments ."
Briefly, we renew our objections to the creation of 

a super authority in the area of personnel and contracts, and 
feel that the recommendations set forth at page 36 of Dr. 
Porter's Final Report are ill advised. In short, we do not 
feel that the laudable aim of providing "substantially like" 
educational opportunity to the children of the desegregation 
area requires that each and every individual and master con­
tract be one and the same. We do not feel that the problems 
of teacher retirement or the requirements of the Michigan 
Teacher Tenure Act need stand in the way of an effective de­
segregation plan, or that a central authority need be created 
to iron out the problems posed by the existence of separate 
retirement systems and the Teacher Tenure Act. Finally, we 
do not feel that any compelling reasons exist for present 
elimination of 53 school districts or the creation of a gigantic 
new school authority which will employ some 60,000 employees 
and be responsible for educating 800,000 children.

-9-



In short, we do not feel that it is necessary for the 
court to order the creation of a "central authority" to achieve 
satisfactory employee-employer relationships. Such relationships 
currently exist and can continue to exist within the framework 
of existing laws subject to this court's further orders of re­
assignment of faculty, affirmative hiring practices, pupil re­
location and the continuing and active supervision of the State 
Department of Education. Under our proposed time schedule, the 
problems of retirement, teacher tenure and teacher contracts 
can, and should be resolved, within the present framework of 
existing state laws. It is true that certain modifications may 
have to be made, but these basically administerial problems do 
not require the extraordinary relief contained in the Final 
Report of Dr. Porter.

IV. FACULTY REASSIGNMENT

A. No reason or rationale has been advanced to support 
the recommendation of the Panel that a ratio of 75% white, 25% 
black be maintained for all faculties and staffs. (Panel Report, 
Page 26.)

The purpose of education, as we perceive it, is to pro­
vide experiences which help the youth acquire and analyze previously 
learned knowledge and social values. From this, the student should 
be able to acquire and develop a working philosophy of life.
Whether a teacher is black, white or oriental is of far less im­
portance than his or her ability to accomplish these objectives.
We do not believe that the rigid racial ratio for faculty adopted 
by the Panel is desirable, yet we concede that some goal or base 
must necessarily be established in order to accomplish a socially 
desirable level of faculty integration. We believe that the Court

-10-



should direct reassignment of faculty, at the time of actual 
desegregation, to accomplish an even allocation, and that by 
September of 1976, all schools should be required to have 
achieved a racial balance of minority teachers which is equal 
to the black-white student population ratio then in existence 
within the desegregation area. We could then expect an approxi­
mation of 25% black faculty throughout the area by September 
of 1976. In lieu of this goal, we would prefer the views ex­
pressed in the minority report of the Panel. We would further 
insist, during implementation and progress toward that goal, 
that no teachers be laid off to achieve the racial ratio, and 
that no teachers be hired who are not fully certified.

B. Partial desegregation is undesirable and the re­
quirement that 17 1/2% of faculty and staff be black in non- 
desegregated schools is unnecessary and unduly disruptive.

(Panel - Final, Page 26.)
The original reports by the Superintendent and Panel 

contemplated a limited desegregation effort on September 1, 1972. 
In view of the pending appeals, it is our view that the Court 
should order total and complete desegregation of grades 1-12 as 
of September 1, 1973, and thus avoid the duplication of effort 
and confusion attendant to partial integregation. Total dese­
gregation of faculty is recommended on the same date. The 
recommendation that teaching faculties be integrated ahead of 
students should be rejected as unduly disruptive and counter 
productive to the original goals of desegregation.

C. Any involuntary transfer of teachers should be 
based strictly upon seniority, with those having lowest seniority 
being first available for transfer.

While we recognize that both the majority and minority 
reports of the Panel attempt to wrestle with the complicated

-11-



problem of involuntary teacher transfer (Majority, Page 27, 
Minority, Page 15), we believe the end results of both reports 
are cumbersome, confusing and ill conceived. Teachers are 
conditioned to the seniority system, and will accept the same.
To our knowledge, no problems have been posed which will be 
created by such a method, and we support the imposition of a 
strict seniority system.

We do not believe that the question of balancing of 
staffs and faculty by sex should be addressed or considered at 
this time and suggest that the intrusion of this factor at this 
time is unwarranted and unwise. We prefer to leave any result­
ing sexual imbalance to another day and another case.

D. The term "Contract Teacher at Large" is a local 
term not used nor necessary in the majority of the districts 
and should be dropped. Uncertain assignments should be dis­
couraged; not encouraged. (Panel - Final, Page 27.)

This term is peculiar to the City of Detroit and covers 
those members of the faculty who have no regular assignment and 
who are often used as substitutes on a permanent basis. If 
the Detroit Board and the Detroit Federation of Teachers choose 
to label certain of their teachers in that fashion, they may do 
so; these teachers, however, should not be given preference any­
where in the desegregation area —  only in Detroit where they were 
hired. Each school district should be responsible for providing 
its own substitute replacements and no others have requested area­
wide preferential treatment. The Court should not order such an 

action.
E. It is undesirable and inequitable to reinstate only 

1500 of an estimated 2500 teachers who were laid off for economic 

reasons. (Panel - Final, Page 29.)

-12-



The previous actions of the Court were commendable in 
protecting the children of Detroit by ordering 180 days of edu­
cation and 900 hours of instruction and the retention of the 
necessary teachers for a complete program. The actions were 
initiated by a school district faced with economic disaster 
as are several nearby school districts. The Court should order, 
the immediate reemployment of all teachers laid off for economic 
reasons at the close of school year 1971-72. Such an order would 
restore equity and the necessary pupil-teacher ratio throughout 
the area. The Panel's recommendation that this requirement be 
qualified by minority group employment goals should be ignored.
All teachers laid off for economic reasons should be immediately 

reinstated.
F. It is psychologically, socially, and educationally 

undesirable to require the transportation of children at the 
kindergarten age. (Roth - Findings of Fact #52.)

Desegregation actions in Pontiac, Jackson, Lansing, 
and Kalamazoo recognized the educational, social and psychologi­
cal realities that children aged 4 1/2 to 5 1/2 are close to in­
fants, often have illnesses, encounter adjustment problems in 
structured school environments, only attend school 2 1/2 hours 
per day, and have limited attention spans. In those school dis­
tricts teachers consistently and successfully recommended that 
kindergarten children not be bussed unnecessarily and be educated 
close to their homes and mothers. It is strongly urged that the 
Court recognize these characteristics and apply similar exemptions. 
The desegregation order should be limited to grades 1-12. The 
same recognition should be extended to prekinaergarten and nursery 
programs currently existing in the various schools so that each 
elementary school would contain a kindergarten, e.g., K-l-2-3, 
K-4-5-6. We recognize that the ultimate goal of integration - 
understanding - can best be achieved at an early age, but on

-13-



’ •  •

balance we feel that kindergarteners should be exempted from 
the integration order.

G. As stated, we generally support the recommendation 
of the interim report of Dr. Porter, and as to the mechanics of 
teacher transfers and the preservation of teacher rights, the 
ideas contained in appendix B of that report.

To extend that report, however, we submit the following 
recommendations for implementation under the interim plan. In 
so recommending, the MEA feels that the ruling of June 14, 1972, 
presents a dramatic and corrective remedy to the sickness of 
segregation which has, for so long, plagued Detroit.

We feel that the pattern outlined in the order can be 
followed; we are equally convinced, however, that the adjustments 
required of teachers to implement this plan can be accommodated 
without significant sacrifice of the legitimate aims, goals,

1 benefits and rights of teachers achieved over the past years.
There is no need for abdication of these rights, nor need said 
rights be shunted aside.
Basic Assumptions

1. All teachers shall be guaranteed the retention of 
pay and other economic fringe benefits, including 
pension rights.

2. All teachers, presently employed, shall be guar­
anteed the right to a job for the first year of 
the plan, and all positions existing in the school 
year 1971-1972 in any of the effected districts, 
shall be maintained.

3. All teachers shall be guaranteed the right to 
grieve, including termination of grievance in 
binding arbitration, if said right now exists in 
the district where the teacher is employed.

4. All teachers shall be guaranteed due process in 
the protection of job rights.

I 14-



5. The work load, of all teachers shall be substantially 
the same throughout the geographical cluster to 
which the teacher is assigned.

6. Class size of all grade levels within a geographical 
cluster shall be maintained at the lowest level for 
said grade, prevailing at said level in any school 
district within said geographical cluster during 
the school year 1971-1972.

Initial Transfers; Right to Retransfer; Ultimate Employment
1. Voluntary transfers shall receive the highest 

priority in teacher—transfer assignments, and 
shall be encouraged.

2. No teachers shall be transferred outside of major 
areas of preparation and experience, but certifi­
cation, at least for elementary grades 1-6, shall 
be considered to define the necessary area of 
preparation and experience.

3. In the event of involuntary transfers to achieve 
racial balance, teachers with lowest district wide 
seniority within scope of certification and within 
the grade levels effected by the integration order 
shall be first transferred.
a) The above procedure shall only be varied to 

prevent the transfer of Union or Association 
presidents and chief negotiators.

4. Appeal of transfer may be made by_a teacher to a 
special Michigan Employment Relations Commission 
Hearing Examiner who shall have exclusive and 
final authority. A decision shall be rendered 
within five days of written appeal. This sole 
remedy supersedes all collective bargaining 
agreements and statutory appeals. Hearing pro­
cedures shall be as developed by MERC. Appeals 
shall be limited to claims of misapplication of 
the above criteria.

5. Any teacher refusing reassignment for any reason 
shall be allowed to resign, without prejudice 
under any state law, but said teacher may not
be rehired, for a period of one year, within 
the desegregated area.

6. All transferees will be assigned for a period of 
’ three (3) years. At the end of each semester,

the transferee, in the event of an available  ̂
opening in the sending district for which he is 
certified, may reapply and he shall be entitled 
to transfer back to the sending district; pro­
vided, however, that the required racial balance 
in the sending district is not disturbed by said 
transfer. In the event of multi-applications 
from the transferees, seniority shall prevail._
In the event of equal seniority and certification, 
the re-transferees shall be selected by lot.

-15-



Transferees who desire to change employment at 
any time during the three year period may, with 
the consent of the receiving board, apply for 
employment with the receiving district, pro­
vided however, that the corresponding transferees 
from the sending districts have waived all rights 
to return.
At the end of the three year period, all remaining 
transferees shall be hired by the receiving board, 
and tenure status immediately bestowed by the 
hiring board. The position on the salary schedule 
assigned to the teacher at the time of change of 
employment shall be equal to the step on the re­
ceiving board's salary schedule which is no less 
than the combination of the experience of the 
teacher achieved in the sending district as of 
September of 1973, plus years served in the re­
ceiving district.
No teacher, at the time of actual change of em­
ployment, shall receive less salary than he re­
ceived in the previous year of employment from 
the sending district, plus the amount of the 
next year's increment on the salary schedule^ 
as computed on the schedule of the sending district

Employer-Employee Relationships
1. Teachers will work for the sending district in 

regard to salary, fringe benefits and leaves 
and will be assigned into a receiving district 
subject to that receiving district's direct 
supervision and currently existing employment 
conditions.

2. Grievances shall be lodged against, and pursuant 
to the procedures of, the sending district, if 
they concern economic conditions. Grievances 
shall be lodged against, and pursuant to the 
procedures of, the receiving district regarding 
employment conditions. A permanent umpire shall 
be appointed by the Michigan Employment Relations 
Commission to arbitrate the question of the proper 
procedure or contract to be followed, and the de­
cision of the umpire on the controlling contract 
shall be final.

3. Transferred teachers filing grievances shall be 
entitled to select either a representative of 
the Union of the sending district, or a repre­
sentative of the Union of the receiving district, 
to process grievances. The choice, once made, 
shall be final. The Union responsible for the 
contract under which the grievance is processed 
shall have ultimate control of final resolution 
of the grievance.

-16-



4. The employee organization representing the teachers 
of the receiving district shall owe the transferees 
assigned to said district the same duty of repre­
sentation as it owes its own members.

5. There shall be a moratorium on intra-union repre- 
sentatiion elections for certificated teaching 
employees for three (3) years ending August 15,
1976, provided, however, that decertification 
elections may be held during said period. Local 
collective bargaining union security clauses, in­
cluding agency shop provisions, shall prevail 
during this period to insure teacher collective 
rights and representation.

6. Teachers who have acquired tenure prior to or 
during the desegregation period shall have the 
full protection of the Michigan Teacher Tenure 
Act. Charges under the Tenure Act shall be made 
by the immediate supervisor of the receiving dis­
trict and the hearing shall be conducted by the 
board of the sending district. (Immediate ef­
forts should be made to amend the Tenure Act to 
provide for impartial hearing examiners empowered 
to make the initial finding in tenure cases).

7. Probationary teachers transferred to new districts 
shall be evaluated, in writing, at least two times 
per year by the principal or his designee in the 
receiving district. The sending district may also 
make its own independent evaluations. Decisions 
to grant or refuse tenure shall be made by the 
Board of Education of the sending district.

8. No collective bargaining contract shall be entered 
into by teacher organizations or boards of educa­
tion beyond the period of August 15, 1976.

9. A common school year and common school calendar 
shall be instituted of 180 days of instruction 
and five (5) days of teacher-orientation, among 
all school districts within the desegregation area.

10. For the school years 1973-74 and 1974-75, there 
shall be no work stoppages or employer lockouts.
All collective bargaining agreements for said 
school years, unresolved as of sixty (60) days 
from the opening of said school years, shall be 
submitted to final and binding arbitration. In 
following years, all employee work stoppages and 
employer lockouts shall be resolved by the re­
sponsible state agencies and courts.

11. Each district teacher assigned out of his employing 
district shall be observed and evaluated in writing 
at least two times each school year, in accordance 
with the supervising district's practice.

-17-



12. All teachers in the school districts within the 
desegregated area who were employed in the 1971-72 
school year and who have not resigned, retired or 
been separated, shall be offered immediate employ­
ment. All positions existing within school 
districts within the desegregated area during the 
school year 1971-72 shall be maintained during 
the present school year.

13. If no collective bargaining contract exists between 
the district and its employees during the implemen­
tation period of 1973-1974 and 1974-1975, the 
economic and grievance conditions of the previously 
existing master contract, including the next incre­
ment on the salary scale, shall prevail until a new 
mutually agreeable contract has been negotiated or 
resolved by arbitration.

14. Substitute teachers shall be compensated at the 
rate of the district wherever services are per­
formed and each receiving district shall keep an 
absence record for transmittal, handling and pay­
ment by the sending district.

Necessity of Certain Standardized Policies
1. All school districts, and/or the State of Michigan, 

shall be required to pay a standardized travel ex­
pense to all transferees for additional miles 
traveled as the result of transfers.

2. Transferred teachers, as well as remaining teachers, 
shall be consulted and allowed to participate in all 
decisions concerning changes of curriculum in the 
schools or districts where they are assigned to 
teach.

V. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT - CULTURAL PLURALISM

The MEA objects to the recommendations made by Dr. 
Porter in response to Part II, Section K. of the court's 
ruling of June 14, 1972.

Dr. Porter's recommendations failed to give the court 
specific direction, and thus, we feel the need to comment.

The Panel also recommended that at all levels, but 
particularly at the cluster level, curriculum content be ex­
amined to guarantee full and equal minority representation in 
instructional materials so as to insure that each school would 
offer a multi-racial and multi-ethnic learning environment.

-18



While the MEA does not object to the various recom­
mendations, we do not believe that they provide viable alterna­
tives in improving the quality of curricula and resources used 
in the school environment. It is not enough to ask the State 
Department and local school districts to review curricula and 
resource materials from a culturally diverse perspective. Mini­
mal guidelines must be established for all districts. The MEA 
recommends the following to assure that the quality of the school 
program provided in every district affords an opportunity to 
each child to consider himself in a favorable light in relation­
ship to the dignity and worth of the individual. In so stating, 
we do not advocate the adoption of an area wide standardized 
curriculum, but instead propose certain criteria which must be 
satisfied by each district.

Each district should be ordered to establish a multi­
ethnic approach to curriculum development within two years of 
this date. Each district should be required to report periodically 
to the State Department of Education relative to its affirmative 
action plan developed to meet the above stated objective.

School desegregation cannot be used synonymously with 
quality education or equality of educational opportunity. The 
bringing together of students and school personnel whose ethnic 
backgrounds are different does not in and of itself automatically 
cause positive modifications in the school curriculum, teaching 
techniques, how some school personnel perceive their colleagues 
who are culturally different, how some school personnel perceive 
culturally different youngsters, nor how students of different 
cultural backgrounds perceive each other as well as self.



The Michigan Civil Rights Commission Community Services 
Division, in its report, "Defining Equal Educational Opportunity 
In Michigan," November 1971, states that the real issue remains 
what happens in the school and in the classroom and how each 
child is affected. This report further states that it is in the 
desegregated setting that the institution, through its officials, 
staff, and curriculum, can interact with all children in a manner 
which:

1. Demonstrates respect for the student and his 
cultural heritage.

2. Recognizes and serves the educational needs of 
every student.

3. Facilitates the acquisition of survival and 
participating skills in our complex society, and

4. Encourages individual and group problem solving 
to improve conditions of life for all persons 
with respect and appreciation for the rights of 
others.

It is imperative for all school districts, particularly 
those embarking on school desegregation, to address the educational 
challenge —  instituting cultural pluralism or multi-ethnicity —  
into the school environment.

Rationale for Cultural Pluralism in the School Curriculum
William Toll documents very concisely the noncom­

pliance of school districts with the provisions of the Michigan 
Social Studies Act of 1966 (Act No. 127) (MSA 15.3365 (1)) 
and points out some limitations of the Michigan Department of 
Education in implementing this act.  ̂ The Social Studies Act 
stipulates two major requirements:

1 William Toll, "Beyond Desegregation", a Memo on A Report on the 
Treatment of Minorities in American History Textbooks', (July,1968) , 
and "A Second Report on the Treatment of Minorities Tn American
History Textbooks", mss. (February, 1971)', said memo appearing.in
Cultural Democracy, Report of 1970-1971 Michigan Project, Improving 
State Leadership in Education (March, 1971)

-20



1. That when new textbooks are selected they 
should include a "recognition of the 
achievements and accomplishments of ethnic 
and racial groups" and

2. That the Superintendent of Public Instruc­
tion should annually report on the textbooks 
in use to determine whether they did treat 
minority "achievements and accomplishments" 
fairly.

Toll, looking at the Michigan State Department of 
Education's (MSDE) own findings, shows that the secondary social 
studies textbooks (adopted and used by Michigan school districts) 
as assessed both in 1968 and 1970 by MSDE did not, in their dis­
cussion of minorities, make explicit the dignity and worth of the 
individual. Said texts also failed to discuss the minority popula­
tion as an integral part of the whole. In addition, Toll notes that 
the social studies textbooks, as assessed both in 1968 and 1970 
by MSDE, avoided discussing "controversial issues", i.e., race, 
class structure, economic and educational discrimination, etc. 
and failed to make connections between minority groups and other 
historical movements or events.

In brief, the structure of school curricula generally 
perpetuates the myth that minority groups really had little to 
do with the development of America and are hardly visible today 
except for the tan colored kids and the usual heroes. It must 
be noted that when a school curriculum only reflects the anglo 
aspect of a pluralistic culture, it does not merely damage the 
self-confidence and self-knowledge of students drawn from the 
various cultural and racial minority groups, but is, in fact, an 
embezzlement perpetrated on the majority group student that only 
allows him to sanction one language, to learn about one side of 
American History, to be exposed to only one musical tradition, 
to learn about one literature, one kind of art, to see and 
sanction one kind of world, one that is white, monocultural, 
unreal and dishonest.

-21-



The previous discussion indicates, and we advocate, 
that the recognition of the need for cultural pluralism in the 
school curriculum is a rapidly growing reality at many levels 
of our educational society by many people. A small number have 
proceeded to do something about developing means by which to 
address this need, including the Ann Arbor Public Schools and 
the Maryland State Board of Education. This Court should order 
the implementation of similar programs in the instant case.

Recommendations For Effectuating a Culturally Plural Curriculum
The following recommendations for developing a culturally 

plural curriculum are a conglomerate of suggestions offered by 
authorities who have completed in-depth research in the areas of 
desegregation of schools and its implications for curriculum modi­
fication. It is felt that these recommendations must become a 
part of the school curriculum if, in fact, the school is to 
seriously pursue its charge of equal educational opportunity for 
all pupils. The school curriculum of all the school districts 
affected by this litigation must, within two years from this date, 
reflect the cultural pluralism of our society, historically as 
well as contemporarily. In order to assist in the realization 
of the aforementioned, all instructional material in the school 
environment should:

1. Be evaluated relative to its treatment of 
ethnic minorities in terms of: their 
stuggles, contributions and accomplish­
ments in the development of this country.

2. Reflect the cultural pluralistic make-up 
of our country and the world.

3. Provide evidence that the writers, authors, 
and editors are sensitive to prejudice, 
sterotypes and to the use of offensive material.

-22-



4. Provide abundant but fair and well-balanced 
recognition of male and female children and 
adults of ethnic minorities.

5. Present a significant number of instances of 
fully integrated human groupings and settings 
to indicate equal status and non-segregated 
social relationships.

6. Make clearly apparent in illustrations the 
group representation of individuals —  Whites, 
Blacks, Chicanos, Native Americans, Chinese, 
and not avoid identification by such means as 
smudging some color over white facial features.

7. Reflect the multi-ethnic make-up of our country 
and the world. Specifically, materials showing 
the contributions of black Americans to United 
States history and culture.

8. Include minority groups for the various subject 
areas, thus eliminating much of the need for 
special and separate materials.

9. Analyze intergroup tension and conflict fairly, 
frankly, objectively and with emphasis upon re­
solving our social problems in a spirit of 
fully implementing democratic values and goals 
in order to achieve the American dream.

10. Clarify or present factually the historical and 
contemporary forces and conditions which have 
operated in the past, and which continue to 
operate to the disadvantage of minority groups.

11. Supply an accurate and sound balance in the 
matter of historical perspective, making it 
perfectly clear that all racial, religious and 
ethnic groups have mixed heritages, which
can well serve as sources of both group 
pride and group humility.

12. Help students appreciate the many important 
contributions to our civilization made by 
members of the various human groups, empha­
sizing that every human group has its list 
of achievers, thinkers, writers, artists, 
scientists, builders and statesmen.

13. Emphasize the multi-cultural character of 
our nation as having unique and special value 
which we must esteem and treasure.

14. Portray racial, religious and ethnic groups, 
with their similarities and differences, in 
such a way as to build positive images.

-23-



15. Delineate life in contemporary urban environ­
ments, as well as in rural or suburban en­
vironments, so that today's city child can 
also find significant identification for 
himself, his problems and his potential for 
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

16. Seek to motivate students to examine their 
own attitudes and behaviors, and to compre­
hend their own duties and responsibilities as 
citizens in a pluralistic democracy —  to de­
mand freedom and justice and equal opportunity 
for every individual and for every group.

In addition to modifying the instructional material, 
there are other crucial facets of the school environment that 
must be present if cultural pluralism in the school curriculum 
is to be realized. They are as follows:

1. If a second language or dialect of English 
is widely spoken in the area, an "English 
as a second language" technique should be 
introduced.

2. Every effort should be made to acquaint 
pupils and visiting parents with the rich 
literature now available pertaining to non­
white America.

3. Minority adults and youth should be involved 
in the life of the school as resource people, 
supplementary teachers, teacher's aides and 
special occasion speakers.

4. Teachers and administrators should be familiar 
with the dialect spoken in the pupil's home 
and should be encouraged to utilize this 
language wherever appropriate in order to en­
hance communication both with pupils and with 
parents and, more especially, to help develop 
a positive self-image on the part of minority 
people.

5. Courses in literature should include readings 
in the literature of non-white Americans (in 
translation, if necessary).

6. Curricula in music and "music appreciation" 
should give attention to all classes of non­
European music, including pre-European contact 
styles and music of recent origin whether from 
the United States, elsewhere in the Americas 
or Africa and Asia.

7. Arts and crafts courses should acquaint all 
pupils with the non-white arts of the Americas 
and should provide a close tie-in with the 
various folk movements in existence.

-24-



9
0

8. American Indian, Black, Mexican and Asian 
cooking should be available as a part of the 
school's programs in home economics wherever 
sufficient interest exists, and non-European 
foods should be served in the cafeteria.

9. Supplementary materials utilized in the 
classroom, as well as library resources, 
should include numerous brown and black- 
oriented items (magazines, newspapers, 
books, phonograph records, films, etc.)
in order to provide cross-cultural experi­
ences for all pupils and to provide an 
atmosphere relevant to the non-white pupil's 
heritage.

10. School personnel should receive special 
training in minority culture and history 
and should have some background in anthro­
pology and/or sociology.

11. Maximum use should be made of techniques 
which are designed to enhance self-concept 
and involve the community in the life of the 
school, including the use of parent teaching 
aides, older pupils as tutors for younger 
pupils and college students of minority 
background as para-professional counselors.

Implementation of Possibilities for Recommendations
Each of the above recommendations should be charged 

to the Michigan State Board of Education (MSDE) and the respective 
local boards of education for implementation. Semi-annual re­
ports of progress should be submitted by both in respect to their 
affirmative action plan to carry out their charge.

The Court, or its appointee (individual, board, or . 
committee) must, of course, monitor this activity.

VI. INSERVICE TRAINING

The reports of the Panel and Dr. Porter both 
address themselves, in passing, to the need for in-service 
programs across the desegregation area. We concur. Further, 
we believe such programs are absolutely vital to the success 
of any plan, and that planning for said training must be 
commenced immediately.

-25-



# 4

In view of our proposals as to a modified time 
schedule, we believe that such programs can be meaningfully 
employed at present.

Neither of the reports represent, to our mind, 
quality affirmative action plans. Minimal guidelines must 
be presented by the court to all affected districts and 
clusters relative to what must happen if each district is 
to play its role in insuring that the Plan will succeed.

The two reports somehow exclude the State Depart­
ment of Education as a major party in the development and 
implementation of a quality in-service program. We feel that 
in-service education must be considered equally with the basic 
curriculum provided for students. We cannot assume that all 
personnel within the school setting have the skills necessary 
to create an environment that is conducive to learning in a 
culturally diverse setting. The MEA participated with the 
State Department in developing a comprehensive in-service 
recommendation which we feel should have been made a part 
of the interim and final recommendations presented by the 
State Department. For some reason, this was not done. We 
believe that this model represents the minimal guidelines 
which must be established by the Department if the desegrega­
tion program is to succeed. We attach the same hereto and 
submit it as Appendix "A" with our endorsement.

VII. TESTING

In the Court's Ruling of June 14, 1972, the testing 
of students was identified as a potential device for the further 
segregation of students.

-26-



)

The Panel, in its report, spoke briefly to the 
problem, and recommended that the participant schools keep 
grouping, tracking, and other processes to a minimum.

The MEA believes this subject to be one of highest 
priority, and although it agrees with the generalities of the 
Panel recommendation, it wishes to expand upon the same.

We believe that conventional ability tests improperly 
label and classify Black children. Thus, if a child scores 
low on a test that is biased and if he is placed (or misplaced) 
in an "educational tracking" program because he scored low, then 
that child is trapped in a vicious circle known as the "Rosenthal 
Effect" or the self-fulfilling prophecy (Rosenthal, 1968) . This 
self-fulfilling prophecy refers to the extent to which a teacher's 
expectancy influences her responses as well as the direction of 
the behavior she expects to occur. That is, if she predicts 
certain behaviors, e.g., poor performance in the classroom based 
upon I.Q. and achievement test results, then the mere prediction 
and expectation of that behavior will influence her actions in 
such a way as to increase the likelihood of her predictions 

actually occurring.
We believe that ability tests not only label Black 

children unfairly, they may create unfair teacher expectancies 
as well. According to the self-fulfilling prophecy, placing a 
Black child in one of the lower levels based upon an unfair test 
appraisal may significantly reduce that child's chances for a 

higher education.
Conventional intelligence and ability test scores are 

unfair to Black children and can endanger their futures. They 
have supported the phenomenon of the self-fulfilling prophecy. 
Black children are tracted by the schools on the basis of these

27-



inappropriate tests. Teachers develop expectancies based on 
essentially meaningless test scores which, in turn, influence 
their behavior toward Black children. A vicious circle is 
created in which the Black child is the victim. Ability tests 
may do a service to school children, or a disservice. The raw 
fact is that until these tests are more equitable for children 
in American schools, they should be considered not only as merely 
unfair but invalid in predicting academic success for Black 
children. The use of test scores derived from conventional 
intelligence and achievement tests should be discontinued im­
mediately with Black children.

We would like the Court to mandate that all districts 
affected by the Court's ruling include in their policy statements 
the guidelines utilized by the district relative to the use, inter 
pretation and distribution of test data resulting from the use of 
intelligence, aptitude, performance and achievement tests within 

the district.
In addition, the Michigan Education Association recom­

mends that:
1. The Michigan State Department of Education declare 

and enforce a moratorium on the use of individual 
tests of intelligence and group tests of scholastic 
ability in the psychological evaluation and assess­
ment of all children in the desegregation area.

2. The MSDE enforce this moratorium by charging local 
school districts to utilize other psychological 
assessment techniques and criteria in the evalua­
tion of all children in the area.

3. When a school district or a parent initiates a 
request for psychological assessment, the school 
shall inform the parent of their right to have 
the psychological assessment conducted and/or 
interpreted by a person of their own ethnic back­
ground who is competent in psychological assessment.

4. The MSDE shall make intensive efforts to secure, 
authorize and require the use of culturally 
relevant group tests of intelligence and ability 
for the testing of minority group children.

-28-



5. Such culturally relevant individual and group 
tests of intelligence and ability (referred to in 
Item 4) shall be normed and standardized on a 
culturally representative sample.

6. Such culturally relevant individual and group 
tests of intelligence and ability (referred to
in Item 4) used to evaluate minority group children 
shall be submitted to the Association of Black 
Psychologists for their evaluation and recommenda­
tion. The MSDE shall also make available to the 
Association of Black Psychologists reports of the 
success and progress of these efforts.

7. Pursuant to statutory powers already granted 
under Michigan law, all school districts within 
the area shall provide for assessment and remedial 
assistance programs of students in reading, arith­
metic and vocational education.

8. The Department of Education shall select and employ 
persons who have expertise in test development and 
in minority ethnic background and experience. In 
selecting and authorizing tests to be administered 
to school children of the area, the state shall 
consider the extent to which the testing company 
has utilized personnel with minority ethnic back­
ground and experience in the development of the 
culturally relevant test.

9. The State Department of Education shall develop 
guidelines for ongoing, in-service training for per­
sonnel in the local education agencies involved in 
the evaluation and placement of students of diverse 
ethnic backgrounds in the special education programs. 
School Districts shall be required to provide an in­
service preparation program pursuant to said guide­
lines by September 1, 1973, so that those inter-^ 
preting tests and evaluating psychological functioning 
of such pupils shall have complied with said guide­
lines by February 1, 1974.

10. Pupils making the transition from classes for the
Educable Mentally Retarded and Educationally Handi­
capped to grades in the regular public school should 
be placed in an educational program, with children 
of comparable age, based on developmental, social, 
physical and educational needs of the individual 
pupil, utilizing the persons who are most familiar 
with the needs of such pupils.
For pupils making the transition from classes for 
the Educable Mentally Retarded and the Educationally 
Handicapped to the regular grades of the public 
school, the regular program supplementation should 
include as much individual, small group or other 
special attention as possible.

-29-



11. As part of the annual review and recommendation by 
an admission committee, continuance of minors now 
enrolled in programs for the mentally_retarded 
should be recommended only on the basis of an 
evaluation in accordance with the culturally rele­
vant criteria developed pursuant to paragraph 4 
hereof, including any necessary retesting. A re­
port of such evaluations, including any testing and 
the results thereof, and the program recommended 
for the children identified for return to the 
regular classes should be made.

12. The State Department of Education shall_require_ 
constituent districts to obtain statistics suffi­
cient to enable a determination to be made of 
the numbers and percentages of minority^children^ 
(Black, Spanish Surname, Oriental, American, Indian, 
other non-white) in classes for the educable men­
tally retarded in the district. In the event there 
is a significant variance in the percentage of such 
minority children in a school district's EMR classes 
from the total enrollment of such minority students 
in the district, the district shall submit a written 
explanation of the variance to the State Department 
of Education which shall investigate such reports 
and submit its own report to the State Board of 
Education in each instance. The State Department
of Education shall make every effort to require 
local districts to take the necessary corrective 
action. The reports of the school districts and^ 
of the Department of Education shall be made avail­
able to the Association of Black Psychologists and 
to the public upon request. .

VIII. GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING SERVICES

The Court, in Paragraph L on page 9 of the June 14, 
1972, Order, directs the defendants to "insure the effective 
desegregation of the schools in the . . . area", and to take 
immediate action including the employment of black counselors.
It is clear that the Court recognizes the key role to be played 
in the Plan by counselors, and the guidance function, and we 
concur. We offer these recommendations in regard to this subject

Employment of Black Counselors
A. Elementary Schools
It is recommended that a minimum of two counselors, 

at least one of whom is black, be placed in every elementary

-30-



school in the desegregation area. A number of qualified per­
sonnel are currently engaged in teaching, another group is pres­
ently counseling at the secondary level and a large number are 
currently undergoing training. Because of the limited number 
of counseling jobs available at the elementary level, counseling 
personnel are presently employed in non-counseling roles.

Therefore, a recruitment campaign beyond the metro­
politan districts ought to result in the attraction of prospec­
tive black counselors to the area.

Beyond this, counselor certification laws in Michigan 
provide for experimental training programs relating to certifica­
tion, and it is believed that the supply of persons eligible to 
enter such programs, both black and white, is large.

B, Secondary Schools
To achieve the goal of placing bi-racial counselor 

staffs in every secondary (junior and senior high) school in the 
desegregation area is an easier matter than in the elementary schools 
since the overwhelming majority, if not all, of the secondary schools 
currently employ counselors. Whether or not enough black 
counselors exist to assure the assignment of at least one black 
counselor to every school in the district is extremely doubtful, 
and a recruitment effort similar to the one outlined for 
elementary counselors becomes immediately necessary.

Counselor In-Service Training
It is recommended that the bi-racial counselor staffs 

participate in the in-service training provided to other profes­
sional personnel in the desegregation area. In addition, 
specialized training will be necessary.

-31-



Certification Problems Related to the Employment of Bi-Racial 
Counselor Teams and Special Training Programs ........

It is recommended that each local school district de­
termine as soon as possible the number of certifiable counselors, 
either under the provisions of institutional approval or the 
grandfather clause, presently existing on the staffs of schools 
in the desegregation area. Further, each district should ascer­
tain the identity of those staff members who possess a minimum 
of twelve semester hours of graduate credit in counseling and 
guidance.

Should the pool of available counseling personnel be 
insufficient to meet the demands of bi-racial counselor teams 
at the building levels, then the following modifications of 
counselor certification rules and regulations are recommended 
to the degree which is necessary to insure an adequate number 
of qualified counselors:

A. If certified elementary teachers exist who have 
earned a minimum of twelve semester hours of graduate 
credit in guidance and counseling but who do not 
possess at least one full year of counseling experience 
in a public school prior to 1971-72, then the require­
ment of one year's counseling experience should be 
waived providing that the individuals involved qualify 
for institutional approval for counselor endorsement
by July 1, 1974.

B. If qualified counselors exist who hold secondary 
counselor endorsement but lack elementary teacher 
certification, then the level requirement should be 
waived until an adequate number of counselors are 
identified who are qualified to counsel at the elementary 
level, providing these counselors qualify for K-12 coun­
selor endorsement under existing counselor education 
programs by September 1, 1973.

-32-



C. If an adequate number of bi-racial counselors cannot 
be identified by the two modifications suggested above,
then it is recommended that approved institutions of 
higher education design special programs for experimental 
counselor training. Such a program should result in 
institutional approval for counselor endorsement in the 
shortest time possible and provide for maximum credit for 
on-the-job experience.

D. Because of the short time available to identify 
qualified bi-racial counselor teams, it may be necessary 
to supplement certified counseling staff with counselor 
aides on an interim basis. However, such aides should 
be provided a special on-the-job training program which 
is designed to lead to permanent job skills and ultimate 
counselor certification.

Delivery of Guidance and Counseling Services
It is recommended that during the pre-school in-service 

training program the bi-racial counselor staffs, in conjunction 
with the central training staff and such advisory and consulta­
tive personnel as are needed, draw up guidelines for counselors 
which define: (1) the delivery of guidance services to pupils
and (2) professional role relationships with teachers, administra­
tors, students, parents and agency personnel. It is recommended 
that all guidance services to be delivered in the school need to 
be delineated and the responsibility for their delivery needs to 
be established.

Counseling Support Services
In order for the bi-racial counseling staffs to carry 

out their duties and responsibilities, it is recommended that

-33-



every counselor be provided with the help of a half-time clerk 
and special office space to engage privately in family consulta­
tion and group counseling, and an adequate budget for equipment, 
supplies and other expenses. In buildings where student popula­
tion exceeds 700, counselors should be hired for each 350 addi­
tional students. Bi-racial composition should be maintained.

IX. BI-RACIAL COMMITTEES

Although this Court directed, as of June 14, 1972, the 
creation of bi-racial committees, little has been reported by the 
Panel or Dr. Porter on the make-up and duties of said committees. 
The MEA makes the following recommendations as to the important 
role of these committees.
I. Purposes of School Bi-Racial Committee

A. Responsibility to identify problems in all areas of a 
child's experience during the school day and to suggest 
solutions to these problems.
B. Dissemination of information about desegregation plan 
and how school is handling problems and changes.

1. Serve as a buffer between school and community,
2. Serve as a communication vehicle,
3. Conduct in-service seminars for parents.

C. Organize sub-committees to address themselves minimally 
to the following; however, additional sub-committees may be 
organized as needed:

1. Curriculum,
2. Student safety,
3. Student suspension and expulsion,
4. Student grievance concerns.

II. Structure of School Bi-Racial Committee
A. Team should rely on previously established groups (PTA, 
Advisory Council, etc.).
B. Multi-racial committee membership must be structured.
C. Each multi-racial committee should consist of 50% 
minority and 50% white representation.

-34-



D. It is imperative that the existence of multi-racial 
committees within buildings include student members where 
age permits.
E. School multi-racial committee should be funded for 
operating expenses.
F. For the first 2,000 students the committee should consist of

1. 4 parents
4 students 
4 teachers
The principal of each school should serve as an ad hoc 
member.

2. For each additional 1,000 students, 1 parent, 1 teacher, 
and 1 student should be added to the committee.

3. It should be mandatory that the multi-racial committee 
attend a series of workshops on desegregation techniques 
conducted by the Local In-Service Team (LIT) in their 
school.

III. Purposes of Cluster Multi-Racial Committees
A. Share information regarding effective programs in individual 
schools,
B. Provide a sounding board for racial grievances beyond the 
local school level.

IV. Structure of Cluster Multi-Racial Committees
The cluster bi-racial committee shall include representation 
from each district multi-racial committee.

XI. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION HIRING PROGRAM

Again, both the Panel and Dr. Porter responded to the 
charge of the Court concerning affirmative action hiring programs. 
Generally, we support the Panel recommendations, but we would add 
that we do not believe that the Detroit Public School System 
should be the main feeder and provider of minority group faculty 
for the entire area. We believe that each constitutent district 
should be encouraged to undertake its own action program.

As articulated earlier, however, we disagree with the 
goals and timing of the Panel plan. To repeat, we recommend that 
the percentage of minority group faculty to be employed within

-35-



the desegregation area should be geared to the ratio of minority 
group students to white students existing within said area. Each 
school district within the area should be given three years to 

arrive at that ratio.
It is our belief that compliance by local districts 

and normal attrition will allow the goal to be reached within 

the time limits defined.
We must also insist that present certification standards 

be maintained, and that no teacher presently employed in the area 
be fired or laid off in order that the goal may be achieved.

XI. TEACHER PREPARATION NEEDS
In addition to the foregoing, the MEA feels compelled 

to speak to one additional subject not heretofore mentioned by 
the Court or either reporting agency.

The MEA recommends that the court mandate a change in 
the hiring practices for the districts in the area. The Court 
should order the local boards to require, as a condition of em­
ployment for teachers to be hired, the completion of at least 
six academic credit hours in multi-ethnic studies. For newly 
hired teachers, and present staff who lack such credits, the 
local boards or districts should be compelled to develop, imple­
ment and finance a program which makes such course work in multi­
ethnic studies, or its equivalent, available to those teachers 
heretofore deprived of such training. Such training should be 
completed within a two-year period beginning with the date of imple­

mentation of the desegregation order.
The curriculum components to be completed by professional

personnel will be approved and honored if:
A. The human relations components of the course 
have been developed with participation of members 
of various racial, cultural, and economic groups.

-36-



B. The human relations components are designed 
to develop the ability of applicants to:

1. Understand the contributions and life styles 
of the various racial, cultural, and economic 
groups in our society.

2. Recognize and deal with dehumanizing biases, 
discrimination, and prejudices.

3. Create learning environments which contribute 
to the self-esteem of all persons and to posi­
tive interpersonal relations.

4. Respect human diversity and personal rights. 
Article VIII, Section 3, of the Michigan Constitution

vests in the State Board of Education, responsibility for leader­
ship and general supervision over all public education. We be­
lieve it incumbent on that body, and the court should so order, 
to set forth specific means for attaining goals relative to 
staff training and expertise.

We believe it is thereafter incumbent upon each 
school district to allocate resources sufficiently adequate 
to enable teachers currently employed to obtain desired knowledge 

and skills.
To insure that personnel which the district must employ 

in succeeding years are likewise skilled and knowledgeable, we 
believe the court should order the State Board of Education to 
promulgate amendments to the teacher certification code which 
would require receipt of a certificate to teach to be dependent 
upon acquisition of said knowledge and skills.

Unfortunately, our experience as professional educa­
tors leads us to the conclusion that most universities and colleges 
which prepare teachers do not have staff whose backgrounds enable 
them to make available appropriate learning experiences in this 
critical area. As a means of improving the ability of the li­
censing system to protect the public against persons not properly

-37-



trained, we believe it incumbent upon the court to require that 
the State Board of Education modify its certification code fur­
ther to enable agencies, organizations, and/or corporations —  
other than colleges and universities —  to prepare teachers in 
the areas of instant concern and to recommend them for licensing.

XII. STUDENT CONDUCT AND DISCIPLINE

The MEA believes that prior to implementation of any . 
desegregation plan, serious consideration must be given to the 
adoption of a uniform disciplinary code for the handling of student 
disciplinary offenders. For the sake of teachers and administra­
tors, and particularly students, it would seem that basic pro­
cedural methods for handling offenses should be proscribed in 
advance of actual desegregation. Again, this basic power lies 
presently with the Michigan State Department of Education, but 
after several abortive efforts along this line, no such guide­
lines have been forthcoming. We believe that such a code can 
be developed, and must be developed, as has already been done in 
various school districts and has been recommended by the Harvard 

Center for Law and Education.
VJe also believe some attempts should be made, prior to 

desegregation, to proscribe, in substantive terms, that conduct 
which will be, and will not be, permissible. The merger of some 
53 districts into one area will represent a blend of various 
degrees of permissiveness vis-a-vis student conduct. To insure 
even administration of justice to the students who will be re­
assigned, we believe that substantial effort should be made to 
define, as much as can be done, those behavioral patterns and 
practices that will, or will not be, tolerated.

We consider the present silence of the Panel and Dr. 
Porter on the subject to be a major oversight.

-38



XIII. PROPOSED CALENDAR

It seems obvious that much remains to be done to insure 
the proper implementation— and reception— of any desegregation plan 
to be ultimately adopted. We are of the opinion that the remedy, 
although too long delayed, should not be jeopardized by too 
hasty action. In light of present legal impediments, it is 
clear that the original target date of the fall of 1972 cannot 
be achieved. We are opposed, as a matter of educational con­
viction, to any mid-year plan.

Instead, we propose the following revised calendar 
with the belief that the many things remaining to be done can 
be achieved within the time programmed herein.

PROPOSED ALTERNATE CALENDAR 
FOR TOTAL AREA DESEGREGATION

1972 - December
—  Establishment of a common school calendar for all districts 

for upcoming year
—  Establishment of a moratorium on all building construction 

for a period of one year, pending review and approval

1973 - January
—  Transmittal to the Legislature of estimated costs attendant 

to implementation of desegregation plan
—  Consultation between State Board and interested parties on 

terms of agreement for staff exchange
1973 - February
—  Transfer to local districts of guidelines for staff exchange 

and memoranda of agreement between districts
—  Inservice programs to begin on cultural differences
—  State Board reports to Court progress to date and plans for 

next 3 months
1973 - March
—  Buses ordered for delivery on July 1
—  Dissemination to staff of plans for desegregation action

39-



1973 - April
—  Notice to local boards of staff racial balances
—  Local boards to identify volunteers
—  Local district staff agreements finalized on transfer and 

assignment procedures
1973 - May
—  Teachers notified of transfers and assignments
1973 - June
—  Notification to parents of tentative buildings assignments of 

children
—  Notice to Court of plans to date by State Board of Education 

and time schedule for total and complete integration in 
September

1973 - August
—  Orientation and Inservice Education programs for newly 

integrated faculties
1973 - September
—  Implementation of desegregation area plan including total 

integration of students and initial integration of faculty

1973 - November
—  Court conducts hearings with parties to hear progress, problems 

and suggested plans to improve total integregation. Court to 
receive report from monitoring arm or agency of Court.

1974 - June 1
—  Deadline for applications of faculty for retransfer
1974 - July 1
—  Pupil assignments given to local boards
—  Existing faculty racial proportions received from local boards, 

with entry of additional faculty transfers deemed necessary

1975 - July 1
—  Deadline for implementation of curriculum insuring satisfactory 

compliance with desegregation objectives

40-



1976 - July 1
—  All faculty and staff temporarily assigned outside of their 

original employing districts to become employees of the 
district where located

—  Bargaining elections allowed to determine whether new repre­
sentation is desired by affected employees

ficiencies in the proposals submitted by the Court-appointed 
and Court-created agencies and boards. It does so with 
genuine concern, and with the hope that the goals and concerns 
of the Court may be accomplished. The teachers of the area 
remain the key to the success of any desegregation plan - and 
the concerns of teachers and educators have largely been over­
looked in the formulation of the reports. Such cavalier dis­
regard of the views of those who are asked to bear the heaviest 
burden cannot be allowed to stand - however noble the intentions 
of the drafters. We ask the Court to adopt the recommendations 

herein set forth.

CONCLUSION

The MEA has attempted to set forth the major de-

Respectfully submitted,
FOSTER, LINDEMER, SWIFT & COLLINS 
Counsel for the Michigan Education

Theodore W. Swift
BUSINESS ADDRESS:

900 American Bank & Trust Bldg. 
Lansing, Michigan 48933 
Telephone (517) 372-8050

September 11, 1972

-41-



APPENDIX A

GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO IN SERVICE 
TRAINING OF SCHOOL PERSONNEL IN THE DESEGREGATION AREA

Background, Rationale, and Objectives.

The intent of desegregation is to equalize educational opportunities for all 
children School desegregation, therefore, implies much more than merely _ 
placing children from different racial, cultural, and geographic backgrounds in 
sLme^uUding It means that the content and process of the educational experience 
within the school environment must be designed and implemented in such a way 
as to actually equalize opportunity.

The desegregation order issued by Judge Roth states ih Part II Section L that 
the defendants shall, to insure the effective desegregation of the schools in ne 
desegregation area, take immediate action Including, but not limited 1to h 
establishment or expansion of in-service training of faculty' * n* J * “ ^  
bi-racial committees, employ black counselors md requtre / l nin_servlce

n t d “ L r ^

relations be required.

I t i L s the need dor conscious participation by all concerned in a total re-exam­
ination of the internal workings of the public schools.

We cannot assume that individual and professional growth in the areas of human 
and cultural diversity in curricula and resources within the schoo 

environment can be acquired through osmosis. The knowledge, information and 
experience gained by educators, social scientists, human relations specialists 
a^d others with experience in desegregated settings have recognized the need to 
provide for continued individual and professional growth to the recipient and all 
school personnel within the desegregated environment.

A comprehensive pre- and in-service training program, designed to enable all .

other^community^pecgde i S T S l  —



2

This program must provide mechanisms whereby all participants in the experience 
can voice their concerns, define their objectives, and participate in developing 
their own strategies for meeting those objectives. An in-service program of this 
nature should involve, but not be limited to, the following objectives:

1. To aid school personnel* in dealing effectively with issues incident to 
desegregation by:

a. aiding teachers in examining their classroom practices as 
those are related to issues incident to desegregation.

b. aiding parents, community persons, students, and staff in developing 
their awareness of school concerns and their role in implementing 
solutions to such concerns.

c . providing on-going staff training consistent with the particular
* concerns identified by student, parent, and staff groups in local

d. Isse  ssik? w^yV and means to deal with problems of communication 
among people different in race, color, creed, sex and/or cultura

e acquainting professional personnel with the theoretical background 
of working with culturally different and low-income pupils.

f. acquainting professional personnel with the dynamics of social process, 
acculturation, and cross-cultural contacts.

g. making the teacher aware of the cultural and class assumptions
and/or prejudices which he or she possesses. _ _

h. providing an opportunity for teachers to acquire skills in detecting
racial bias in instructional materials. _

i. introducing teachers to materials and techniques which are use u
in providing multi-cultural, multi-racial curriculum. _ _

j. creating an awareness of individual and institutional racism in the 
educational environment and society in general.

2. To aid schools in examining and modifying their institutional practices and 
policies which impact on issues incident to desegregation by:

a. disseminating to the metropolitan desegregated area effective
strategies developed at local school levels. ,

b. providing effective channels through which all members of the schoo
community can collectively solve problems. _

c . providing technical assistance to decision-making bodies throughout 
the metropolitan area with regard to in-service education for sc oo 
staffs and the programs of local school action groups.

d strengthening the effectiveness of personnel, curricula, and ot er
* institutional structures and resources to create the climate necessary 

to develop the potentials of all children. _
e. structuring and developing practical operational programs designe 

to foster a positive liaison between school and community.

.  The term "school personnel" Is defined as all persons having a vested and/or 
Immediate interest in the affairs of any school in the desegregated area. T 
includes both professional and non-professional personnel, parents, students, 
and community people.



3

Assumptions

! Judge Roth will order the establishment of “

mandated by the court.

2 . The State Department of Education
for providing the resources necessary for conducting in se
all local districts.

3 ' b i n  " i T i y i o T i i V o T d i i i c t i o t f t h e dep ast°roer 1  
i  mee? regirements of a changing educational environment.

Within the desegregation area, substantial n ^ o r s ^ s t a f f  members have had 
limited or no experience in a multi racial sc

Within the desegregation area, h n o w l e d ^ o ^ r s  - -  

i " r b ^ i i ~ o n g  io feT s^ n al educators and among ancillary school 

personnel.

6. Within the desegregation area school ^ " ^ n s

r f = r » - — *
desegregation which is occasioned by court action.

4.

5.

Program Plan

A. T.ocal School Activity-

The primary responsibility for in-service to
racial in-service education team at each local scho^ ^  ^  ^

as the Local In-service Team (L ) - school and two other professional
members: the c h ie f  administrator teachers and one of whom must
staff people, both of whom should be cl^ 0^ Tte l l c lud ing  the chief 
be a classroom teacher. TWO r :Ctheir L m a l  duties and 
administrator, are to be release made to replace released
responsibilities in the s c h o o ^ r ^ c o V u a t i o n  of 
personnel on an equal time bas . to release of said staff,
services to students at the same level existing P ^  ^  ^  g .ve leader_
Their major reponsibility, during t a re e ' lrir) ln- Service education

— — -r e s p o n s ib i l i t i e s  inc lud e ,  but are not limited to.

1. Planning and implementing the long- and ^ort-rangejn-servioe
programs on matters incident to desegrega , d in the
relations, and cultural diversity in curricula and resources u
school environment.



4

. force composed of students, parents,
2. Developing a school actio ltself to the issues, concerns,

and staff members which will add re. attached recommendations
and needs incident to desegregation. 1 bee a a 
relating to bi-racial committees.)

3. Facilitating the implementation of the strategies and programs 
developed by the action group.

,  Making use of the

■“*  ~ s ;an be o£ use'
s Participating in on-going training provided for the LIT s .

6 . Participating in a one week workshop for initial training of local 
leadership personnel.

7 . collecting and disseminating materials pertaining to:

a. contributions of minority groups toward the development

and history of American sociel y. teaching
b. Elimination of racial bias in textbooks an

c " i o n  of improved school-community relationships.

8 . Engaging in liaison activities with other appropriate educational or 

community agencies. - ' _

9 ' administrator \ n̂-^e^ice^workshops foTfacuUy and staff in areas 
incident to desegregation.

i • 1 on for the staff with the people conducting common 10. Acting as liaison for me swi
training programs. _

Additional duties and responsibilities are to £ £ $ £ £ £
based on the experience of ‘^ " u T  are to be cleared through the
S r ^ « S SE “ u saesignatedagency(s ,.

A written description of the Proie° ‘®j ^  to the transfer
members will be mailed to all eligibl ^  encouraged to apply they
of students. Existing sta i and/or sensitivity consistent with e
feel they have the necessary available consistent with the
iob description. If existing staff are no the job description, an
racial criteria for the ‘ " ' ^ " ‘“ Jtb ^ in stitu te d  immediately. The selection 

"o fT e 1‘ u T T h o u " arom both the sending and receiving schools.

Any eligible staff member may nominate him/herself, up to six candidates in



5.

each building. AH th f  tra in in £sJsio n

The selection of the Lit snau

U Z s s Z T t ^  there are not s u f f ic ie n tJ -b e ^ o f  " h i p  to T e i f  
personnel throughout the metrogoUtan a r e J  the LIT's require training,

s ; s : : ; : = s ‘ - “ r “ -  -  —(that is . throughout the school year).

B. T ra im n s -O til^  -h -ntv of Professional Desegregation

sassssKgaSifcss^gK-K .. jn r  or whatever agency me „Tnrvt:hoDS for the LIT s from
t^6 4- ThP PDS's will conduct initial w during the interimeducation to. The PDb s ff ted by pupil transfer during tne

programs that respond effectively

1.
2 .
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. 
9.

10.
11.
1 2 .

Conflict identification 
Conflict intervention
Conflict " i o n  rilMd tests
Misuse and abus ( m
institutional and indmdual rac 3 
Cultural pluralism in the school c 
Student rights
Culture! shoch ^  and communlty
Topography of n_ d es it really  mean
Desegregation wha
New school policies desegregating environment
Human relationships in the deseg y

a.
,b. 
c.

Student-teacher
Parent-teacher
T each er-teach er

13.
14.
15.
16. 
17.

New school system organization 
New school organization 
Evaluation
“ w h y T n d h o w it isd o n e fo n

a . Students
b . Teachers

c> Administrators



6 .

,• i u fr\r t tt1 <? iq to bo hold at a site removed
The pre-student transfer workshop J  ^  of tlme avaiiQble for
from the the local school build nf  * . , ln be conducted In ways that insure
training LIT's demands that thf h tnltif . f  g^ ere more than one PDS is
that they will not be distracted by any . coordinate their training
operating within any one cluster the PDS s are to
activities with one another.

m addition to training n e c e s s a r y

with Knowled^and "

ongoing in-service educationalL activ itiess  o  ^  institutionai racism, myths, and
" . “have skill in dealing with and deve.oping

programs around the following: •

A. Communication

1. awareness training

a) Self-evaluation (facing own attitudes and increased
knowledge). _

b) Awareness of cultural diversity,
c) Empathy,
d) Support and accept positive differences.

2. sta ff  cooperation at personal level

a) Team teaching,
b) Peer pressure,
c) Trust concept,
d) Values,
e) Empathy
f) Sexuality,
g) Non-verbal communication.

3. Group process

a)
b)
c)
d)
e)

Decision-making (student-parents-teachers),
Confrontation (student-parents-teachers!,
Conflict resolution (student-parent-teach relationships)

" i n ^ o f ^ ^ ^ c ^ r o o e s s e s .

B. Community Involvement

1. Crisis (intervention, prevention, and anticipation).

a . rumor control /ro d e n t and business),

e .  - —

local agencies!
a bus safety, .



2. P r o v i s io n s  for co m m u n ity  input

a) identification of community helper teams,
b) Public relations/media
c) Personal, institutional, and community awareness of issues,

. d) Identification of communication networks (formal and informal),
e). Design and implementation of surveys (staff and community) 

of dissemination techniques.

C. Curriculum (student-parent-teacher)

1. Goal setting and analysis of needs,
2. Theories and philosophies of learning,
3. Textbook evaluation * (minority representation),
4. Multi-ethnic curriculum development,
5. Awareness of process v s . content,
6. History of race relations,
7. Affective education,
8. Use of technical equipment,

D. Evaluation

1. Test interpretation and utilization (encoding and decoding).
2. Collection of demographic data,
3. Accountability model development,
4. Consideration of confidentiality

E. Consider existing school policies relative to:

1. Student

a) Expulsion and suspension,
b) Participation in curricular and extra curricular activities,
c) Grading policy and practices,
d) Tracking patterns,
e) Standardized testing
f) Career development and vocational-educational placement 

services,
g) Health services.

2. Staff Involvement

a) Curriculum development and selection,
b) Teacher and administrators evaluations,
c) Absence and tardiness procedures,
d) Retention of existing staff (policies concerning)
e) Affirmative action programs
f) Utilization of student records,
g) Promotion policies.

(See attached ^commendations for Cultural Pluralism in the School Curriculum 
in Desegregated Schools) '



8 .

G. Supportive__Staff_

LIT's are to participate in a regular and ongoing manner in the train g 
activities of the PDS's. PDS's will have program responslblli 7 
more^than ten schools, that is thirty professional staff People The duties 
and responsibilities of the PDS's include, but are not limited to.

1.

2 .

3.

4.

5.
6 .

7.

Provide training for LIT candidates in the pre-student transfer

T v "  inln, for the LIT members in the continuing leadership

Conduct^ommon^concerns workshops for the: school P ™ i  in the area^^  
they have responsibility for. Additionally, PDS s are to prov p

training for supportive personnel. - ..-
Assume in-service responsibility for the LIT's of not more than ten

Provide advice to decision-making bodies in the areas they serve,
Provide logistical support for the activities of LIT's within their local
buildings. ■ ..
Meet with their LIT’s at least once a week to provide onsite 
support to the efforts of the LIT’s and provide the LIT s with onsite
leadership training and experiences.

The PDS's are to be selected and employed by the SDE The SDE is to employ 
I  'core staff" whose duties and responsibilities include:

1.
2,
3,

4.
5.
6 .
7.
8,

Making a national search for people to = " , f SlU° nS ° £PDS' S' 
Developing the criteria for the se ec ion^  ̂ tlse ln the area

“ " r e g i o n  a'nd a T a T a 'ia iso n  between those agencies and the 

Provide continuing3a d m in is tr a t iv e * f in in g  support to the PDS's.

L W K the PDS' s -

Assign the PDS's to s p e c i f i c of w“  :n_servloe education 
Communicate to local school districts tne m

Sv9r p Sa°schheemeSfof housing the PDS's in:

a a branch office of the SDE in the Detroit metropolitan area, or

bc ; r s i e " n f u o n s Sif°they are created by court order, or 
d. intermediate school districts.



J

Thp "core"staff of the SDE is to be a racially and sexually balanced team 
The core s a t u  tQ be lmmedlate so that they can begin the

l ? i i u Sre°o“
and employing professional desegregation specialists.

D. Finances

In-service education must tie cl^^te^aff^cted^y^the cou^ru^ng^^Financial 
program in every js jic  provided whether through state, federal,
" o c a T * *  — to assure That the duality of the in-service program 
is consistent with the court order.

LIT', in local schools are to be provided withprogram budgetsi that they can

X UsedUmee?or school staff to participate in in-service education 
activities,

" " n t  s tire S s  tor in-service education activities which go beyond 

food a^nd°iodging expenses for retreat-type workshops.

1.
2 .

3.
4.

5.
Other budget categories may be created «  b ‘agefcaTegorie s
experiences of the LIT's throughou e me activities. The core staff
may be dropped as a result. of su.^ “ per*® ^eschooi districts,'and PDS's

with the intent and durectton of the cour ord than a formula that

“» sch°o1 u“ es $3'00
per pupil.

PDS's are to have budgets administered by the’

T ts fb u d g 'e lfs tu ld  in o T u d e^ t not be limited to, the following categories:

1.
2 .
3.
4.
5.
6.

consultant fees, 
travel, _
materials and supplies, ,
workshop stipends for after school activities,

Umf ?oresXcPheonoiesStaff to participate in common activities workshops

• +Uc, PD^’c; hudaet should be adequate to cover 
The total amount of money in the PD develop a budget
the expenditure categories listed above. The core stall
for PDS support.



10

E. Evaluation

The SDE or whatever^agency i t  of a

^  = " r  be
That evaluation design must spe Droaram. The evaluation will take
made of the goals stated earlier in p program. That is; the LIT's
place at all levels of the in-service education progr
PDS's, and core staff levels.

recom m endations

1.

2 .

3.

The SDE must Immediately Id e n tif y ^  e“ P } ° ^  S i a ^ t h a t  staff with the

"  ~ sndauons-
, G(3arrh for "professional

The core staff mus‘  who'wiU assume the program responsibilities
desegregation specialists iEUb s; w.
described below.

The PDS's are to be full-time staff — ^ r s e w ^ ^ — .996" 07 '3’ “  
whom the SDE delegates its responsibility for m serv

4 . The PDS’s
should exist in a ratio of one PDS for every ten LIT's.

5.

7.

8.

The following recommendations are to be of stadents
all schools identified as partic: p the total desegregation area

^  t0 "
implemented no later than November 1, 1972.

A multi- or bi-racial team bTci^sroom ^eachers, one of whom
three staff people, two o w being the chief administrator of
must be a classroom teacher and one be 9 a£fected by the desegrega-
the"building, must be identified in every butidi g
tion order.

The LIT members, excluding ^  “
least half time from their normal duties and respo

The LIT must be responsible for providing leadership to the in-service 
fd eucaUon program in their school (see program plan).

The SDE is charged with the resp° nS* ^
mendations of a financial delivery rmal school dutles and
members being released half t bullding who will assume the duties
hire an additional state person in each Duuamy 
and responsibilities of released staff personnel.



All staff members (two of whom should be and one of whom must be classroom 
teachers) in every school affected by desegregation must be provided the 
opportunity of becoming a member of the LIT. They are to be informed of the 
duties and responsibilities of the LIT and if interested in assuming sue a 
position, up to a limit of 6 for each building, they are to participate in  ̂ r e 
initial training program for LIT's. After participation in the initial training 
program candidates will be selected based upon evaluations by the PDb s 
and reactions of the other staff persons involved in the training program.

The LIT candidates must participate in an intensive leadership training 
conference before they begin to work with their respective staffs.

The leadership training conference shall be conducted by the PDS's.

The LIT's must conduct initial training with their entire staffs prior to the 
transfer of students.

The PDS's are to have continuing responsibility for providing LIT’s with 
training on a weekly basis.

The LIT's must participate in continuing training programs throughout 
the school year.

Training of school personnel in content areas that are common to all 
desegregated schools is the responsibility of the PDS's in coordination with
the LIT.

The LIT in each school must be responsible for the training and coordination 
of the bi-racial committees.

The SDE is charged with the responsibility of developing an evaluation model.

The recommendations for the employment of black counselors are contained in 
the attached Recommendations for the Employment of Black Counselors and 
the Upgrading of Guidance Practices of Schools in the Desegregation Area.

The SDE shall develop evaluation instruments and procedures whereby local 
Iohoo?s may determine and report whether they have ^ d e  P * ^ » »
toward achieving a curriculum which reflects in all subject areas the ethnic 
and cultural diversity of the student population.

The SDE shall take whatever steps are necessary, including the provision 
of additional personnel resources to assist schools which have been identified 
as making unsatisfactory progress toward developing a culturally diverse
curriculum.