Desegregation Issue Research Articles

Dilated residual grooming kernel model for breast cancer detection

• Solves the overfitting issue in the Convolution Neural Networks . • The proposed fully connected dilation unit enhances small and low-level features. • Accurate cancerous cell Detection using dilated model. • The proposed model solves the issue of desegregation. • Efficiently removal of redundant and similar features through proposed model. Breast cancer is the most significant cause of mortality among women. When detected and treated early, it saves lives. Breast cancer detection is becoming more accessible and accurate thanks to machine learning and deep learning models. This research aims to enhance medical science and technology by employing a deep learning model to detect small cancer cells with pinpoint accuracy. The proposed model uses datasets from the Breast Cancer Histopathological Image Classification (BreakHis) and Breast Cancer Histopathological Annotation and Diagnosis (BreCaHAD). Next, the image processing procedure employs strain normalization to rectify color divergence caused by using different slide scanners, staining processes, and biopsy materials. The data augmentation with nineteen parameters such as scaling, rotation, flip, resize, and gamma value tackles the overfitting problems. The augmented images are then processed using the dilated residual (DR) model; the DR model combines the proposed dilated spatial convolution unit, fully connected dilation unit, and dilated channel convolution. The first unit is the dilated spatial convolution, which handles all channels equally and amplifies the valuable aspects. The second unit is a fully connected dilation unit; it displays low-level properties such as edges, contours, and color. The third unit is dilated channel convolution, which detects tiny objects and thin boundaries without adding complexity. The proposed dilated residual grooming kernel (DRGK) model is a 14-layer deep learning model that stretches the receptive field while retaining feature information, using the proposed DR unit and ghost model, as well as convolution, pooling, downsampling, and dilated convolution. Dilated convolutions are extensively used in the proposed model to extract features. Accuracy, the area under the curve, average precision score, precision, sensitivity, and f1 score all improve with a learning rate of 0.001. With 96.33% and 93.35% marks, the proposed approach surpasses several state-of-the-art methods.

ESEA and the Civil Rights Act: An Interbranch Approach to Furthering Desegregation

To understand the impact of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and the Civil Rights Act in contributing to school desegregation, it is necessary to take an interbranch perspective that accounts for the ways in which interplay among the branches of the federal government occurred to further a policy agenda that would have been improbable had one branch acted alone. This paper examines the passage and implementation of the ESEA and the Civil Rights Act during the Johnson and Nixon years, considering how the legislative, judicial, and executive branches collaborated with each other to strengthen the impact of this legislation beyond what was initially conceived. Despite complex desegregation issues left unresolved, this period marks the only time when all branches of government employed their unique powers to implement and enforce desegregation, offering important insights into the ways in which the federal government can effectively accomplish progress in changing local practice on contentious civil rights issues.

"A Study in Second Class Citizenship": Race, Urban Development, and Little Rock's Gillam Park, 1934-2004

HISTORIANS AND THE WIDER PUBLIC often view the civil rights movement primarily as a struggle for black freedom and equality unfolding between the mid-1950s and mid-1960s and led by Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. This King-centered narrative begins with such seminal events as the U.S. Supreme Court's 1954 Brown v. Board of Education school desegregation ruling and the 1955-56 Montgomery bus boycott, which, along with the subsequent formation of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), propelled King into a national leadership position. It takes in landmark events that include the 1957 Little Rock crisis, the 1960 lunch-counter sit-in movement and the formation of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), the 1961 Freedom Rides launched by the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), the 1963 March on Washington, the 1964 Mississippi Freedom Summer, and various community-based campaigns run by King and the SCLC, most notably in Birmingham (1963) and Selma (1965). The narrative culminates in the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which ended segregation in public facilities and accommodations, and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which removed obstacles to the black franchise in some southern states and provided active federal assistance to many southern black voters.1 While these achievements are important and quite rightly celebrated, this narrative tends to highlight the movement's successes and downplay its limitations and failures. Community studies have deepened our understanding of civil rights activism at local and state levels, exploring the origins of the movement prior to the 1950s and its legacies beyond the 1960s. But such studies often mirror the national civil rights narrative by focusing on the same principal issues of desegregation and voting rights.2 A different approach by urban historians has offered an important challenge to the way that we conceptualize the civil rights movement. Studies by Thomas Sugrue, Arnold Hirsch, and others, have explored the role of race and urban development in cities across the United States.3 In doing so, they have shifted the focus of historians from the short-term battles for desegregation and voting rights to the longer-term structural issues of urban planning and neighborhood development. This shift has in turn forced attention both on areas in which the civil rights movement failed to have a decisive impact and to relatively neglected episodes within the civil rights canon. These include, for example, Martin Luther King, Jr. and the SCLC's 1965-66 Chicago campaign, which failed in its bid to win open for blacks in that northern city, and the failure of a 1966 civil rights bill that contained fair housing proposals.4 Studies by urban historians suggest that to understand the wider implications of the civil rights struggle we need to broaden our focus beyond what have been traditionally perceived as the key issues and to pay more attention to those areas where the movement failed. The history of Gillam Park in Little Rock, Arkansas, is particularly instructive for understanding the link between race and urban development in that city and the nature of the ongoing struggle for black freedom and equality there. Gillam Park is made up of about 375 acres located in the southeast corner of Little Rock's city limits in the Granite Mountain area. Although at first glance it appears to be a marginal tract of land, distant from the main body of urban affairs, it has, in fact, often been at the heart of debates over race and city planning. In the 1930s, the city purchased the property as a site for Little Rock's first separate but equal park. In the 1940s, the site became central to a campaign by black activists for a more comprehensive plan to develop black recreation facilities but also illustrated the growing divide between African Americans pressing for equalization within the Jim Crow system and those urging the abolition of segregation and the integration of white facilities. …

Reconstructing Los Angeles Magnet Schools: Representations in Newspapers

This article is a study of the social construction of school desegregation in Los Angeles, California. Particular emphasis is placed on how magnet schools were presented to area residents in the local press over a period of 3 decades. I use quantitative and qualitative techniques with 355 newspaper articles. I find that magnet schools were originally discussed as part of a larger desegregation program, but that references to desegregation declined steadily. Magnet schools are now discussed as providers of academic excellence, and desegregation issues are largely ignored. This follows the current trend in political and academic circles, in which the rhetoric surrounding education is increasingly focused on standards and accountability rather than equality and access.

A Legal History of Desegregation in Higher Education

The white race deems itself to be the dominant race in this country. And so it is, in prestige, in achievements, in education, in wealth and in power. So, I doubt not, it will continue to be for all time, if it remains true to its great heritage and holds fast to the principles of constitutional liberty. But in view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. (Justice John Marshall Harlan, dissenting opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896, p. 559)For almost a century now, the American judiciary has struggled with issues of segregation and desegregation in higher education. Justice Harlan's simplistic characterization of a color-blind Constitution fails to address adequately our contemporary racially stratified, culturally diverse, and economically divided nation (Gotanda, 1991). The United States Supreme Court's 1992 decision in United States v. Fordice is only the most recent of many unsuccessful attempts to solve this thorny problem. With litigation still under way in several states, the Court's ruling in Fordice does not promise to be the final word on this topic. The issue of desegregation in higher education remains unresolved for many reasons--some of which are examined in this article.Focusing on United States Supreme Court rulings, this article highlights legal, educational, and social issues surrounding the court-ordered desegregation of higher education. It also offers insights about the general effectiveness of the Court's rulings in this vital area. To accomplish this task, the article is divided into three parts. Part one provides a chronological, historical perspective of important court cases as well as relevant federal legislation on this topic.(1) Part two introduces and discusses concepts of academic freedom at the postsecondary level and their influence on higher education desegregation efforts. Part three concludes the article and offers a partial explanation why the judiciary has been unable to desegregate higher education.THE LEGAL HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVEThe legal history of higher education desegregation is appropriately divided into three distinct segments. The first period, starting in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, focuses on early law that emphasized equal protection as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution. Stressing the importance of institutions and facilities, these decisions maintained that a separate education may be an equal education and, in essence, supported laws that mandated separate facilities for the races.During the second period, which began in the late 1930s and reached its apex with such important rulings as Sweatt v. Painter (1950) and McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (1950), the focus shifted from the institution to the individual, as individual plaintiffs, mostly African Americans, sued to attend the institution of their choice. In some of these cases, no separate facility was available while in others, such as Sweatt, a facility was available but the Supreme Court deemed that it was not equal. These cases began to question the separate but equal doctrine as it applied to higher education, and they laid the groundwork for the Court's 1954 Brown v. Board of Education declaration that, when it comes to education, separate is inherently unequal.The third period shifted emphasis back to the institution. Encompassing litigation that occurred after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, this analysis focused on cases that called for dismantling dual systems of education for Whites and Blacks and that reconsidered the role of choice in this process. Desegregation litigation in higher education during this period is best characterized by the most recent applicable Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Fordice (1992). …

The Continuing Significance of Desegregation: School Racial Composition and African American Inclusion in American Society

The observance of the 40th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954) decision provides an occasion for examining the impact of school desegregation on individuals and the broader society during the four decades that have passed since the Supreme Court's ruling declared segregated schools unconstitutional. Much of the attention in the early post-Brown period, following the initial massive-resistance response, was centered around the question of whether school desegregation would have positive or negative effects on academic achievement, self-esteem, and interracial attitudes of Blacks and Whites. More recent attention has turned to an examination of desegregated schooling's impact on long-term outcomes, including its effects on career attainment and adult social roles. This focus has been especially important for African Americans and other excluded minorities in gauging the extent to which school desegregation has promoted the broader principle of minority inclusion.Research on the long-term benefits of desegregated schooling such as success in college and the job market has recently entered legal and public policy debates over current desegregation issues (Coughlin, 1991). However, much of what is known has not been widely disseminated to the public or in scholarly circles (Braddock, 1985; Braddock & Dawkins, 1984; Braddock & McPartland, 1988). Consequently, this article summarizes research evidence on the long-term effects of school desegregation on educational and career advancement and adult social roles of African Americans.ASSIMILATION OR INCLUSION?: AN ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTUALIZATIONGordon (1964) delineates seven dimensions of assimilation to identify the mechanisms by which ethnic and racial minority groups are incorporated into society's mainstream. Additionally, he makes an important distinction between cultural and structural assimilation. According to Gordon, cultural assimilation is the process whereby ethnic and racial minority groups absorb the cultural and behavioral patterns of the dominant group. Structural assimilation is the process involving the entry of minority groups into the institutional activities of the larger society at both primary (e.g., religious worship, intermarriage, and recreational activity) and secondary (e.g., employment, politics, and education) levels. Gordon notes that cultural and structural assimilation are separate stages and may occur at different rates. Therefore, while the rate of cultural assimilation has been substantial for many minority groups, the pace of structural assimilation--especially entry into the critical institutions of education, politics, and employment--has been much slower for some groups (e.g., African Americans).Despite its utility, Gordon's assimilation conceptualization is limited in its ability to describe the continued exclusion of African Americans from the mainstream of American society. First of all, it assumes that conformity to the cultural norms of White Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPs) has been the major goal in African Americans' desire for inclusion. Secondly, it assumes that structural assimilation will occur in due course for all minority groups as an outcome of the completion of this stage in the assimilation process. This ignores the possibility that exclusionary barriers such as institutional racism can exist within a society perceived to have achieved full assimilation, despite continued efforts to permanently exclude certain groups from full participation in the institutional activities of that society. Thus, from the assimilation perspective, American society can be characterized as one in which African Americans have adapted to the core WASP culture and made substantial progress toward entry into major areas of institutional life in the broader society.An alternative conceptualization is to view minority groups' desire for inclusion as not necessarily an expression of a desire to embrace the dominant culture's norms and values and thereby reject their own, but rather as a means of realizing the principles of equal opportunity and access. …

Merging Educational Finance Reform and Desegregation Goals

Educational finance reforms and desegregation have both sought to address inequities in educational opportunities for minorities and low income families. The recent methods of addressing desegregation issues have tended to focus on attaining racial balance rather than educational quality, however. This paper explores how desegregation goals can be merged with educational finance reform to more systematically address educational quality in schools serving low income and minority populations. By moving toward centralized control over school financing, the inequity of school outcomes that are based on unequal school resources can be reduced. In addition, state determined expenditures when combined with desegregation monies, would meet the original intention of desegregation funds by clearly providing add-on monies for additional services for minority children, while at the same time, creating a better monitoring mechanism.

Reforming the Racial Curriculum: curriculum change in desegregated schools in South Africa

This article analyses curriculum changes that have accompanied the reform movement to desegregate private and religious schools in South Africa. In a context of racially segregated State schooling, the 'open' schools have admitted students of all races to what were previously white schools. An examination of the curriculum practices of these schools reveals different patterns in terms of the extent to which schools have modified their practices to acknowledge their black enrolments, and their different approaches to the political crisis in South Africa. The article suggests that the assimilationist practices of most of the open schools illustrate their limits as a reform movement; but it suggests also that they are the only schooling venture during this period that has engaged with issues of desegregation in South Africa in a sustained way. The relationship between school knowledge and social power was placed firmly on the agenda of British sociology of education by the work of Young & Bernstein in the early 1970s. Writing in the context of more than a decade of debates about education, social mobility and equality of opportunity, Young & Bernstein ques- tioned the potential of education for social reform. They suggested that schooling practices, in particular curriculum, pedagogy and evaluation, were themselves related to the unequal patterns of social power. Subsequently, Marxist, neo- Marxist and feminist theorists have elaborated more fully on structural patterns of power and their relationship to schooling. Making a similar point within in a different intellectual tradition, Foucault has noted: Any system of education is a political way of maintaining or modifying the appropriation of discourses, along with the knowledges and powers which they carry (1984, p. 123). This article sets out to explore the power/knowledge nexus in relation to a particular movement for reform within the private and religious schools in South Africa in the last decade.

The influence of catholic schools on the desegregation of public school systems: A case study of white flight in Boston

White flight from public school desegregation can result in educational and residential resegregation which defeat the purpose of desegregation programs. One form of white flight is pupil transfer to private schools, which in major metropolitan areas are predominantly Catholic schools. Unlike residential relocation, transfers to Catholic schools do not effect an increase in residential segregation and they constitute a potentially less permanent loss to the public system than that caused by relocation. Nevertheless, empty seats in area Catholic schools pose a threat to the success of any desegregation program. For the Catholic diocese, the white flight issue creates a complex conflict of interests, involving institutional self-interest and competing claims to moral principles and Church teachings. A case study of Boston indicates that approximately 2,000 students transferred to Catholic schools from the public system, accounting for over 20 percent of white pupil loss to the public system. This occurred despite diocesan policies designed to prevent white flight to Catholic schools. An analysis of political and institutional constraints on policy development and implementation provides a basis for predicting Church response to future desegregation programs in other locations. Suggestions for diocesan programs designed to address desegregation issues are included.

Black school board members and desegregation

James J. Doughty College of Education Central State University Wilberforce, Ohio D uring the past thirteen years since the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, we have seen the election of hundreds of black officials throughout the country. These officials cover the spectrum from ward leaders to United States Senator. However, the vast majority are board of education members. The Ohio State Board of Education, for example, has two black members. Furthermore, there are thirty-eight black members on local boards of education in Ohio. A logical question would be to ask how black board members view the challenge of school desegregation. The article represents an attempt to provide an answer. The processes used to gather data were personal, on-site visits with black board members, conference calls, and the solicitation and review of relevant documents. At the state level an interview was arranged with Mr. Walter A. Burks, Jr., member of the Ohio State Board of Education. A conference call was held with Attorney James H. Roland, Sr., Acting ChairpersonPennsylvania State Board of Education, Chairperson of its Council of Basic Education and President of the Harrisburg City Schools Board of Education. Documents were obtained from Dr. Robert W. Evans, Director, Kent State University KEDS General Assistance Center and Dr. Joseph M. Cronin, Illinois State Superintendent of Education. At the local level interviews were held with Mrs. Bernice Lott, President, Cleveland Heights, University Heights Board of Education; Attorney Robert Braddock, Member, Cincinnati Board of Education; Mrs. Marie Castleman, Dr. David Hamlar, and Dr. Watson Walker, all members of the Columbus Board of Education; and Mr. Leo Lucas, Member, Dayton Board of Education. Additional insight relative to Black board members was obtained from Dr. James Hagerty of KEDS and Dr. Benjamin Turner, Superintendent, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania City Schools. The personal interview technique was used because it was hoped that it would facilitate an open and thoughtful treatment of the desegregation issue. In order to insure reporting accuracy, most of the sessions were tape recorded. Most of the interviewees were asked a common set of fifteen questions, as follows:

What Have We Been Doing? (Black School Psychologists and the Desegregation Issue)

They also serve who only stand and wait' appears to be the maxim of school psychologists in regards to their involvement in the racial desegregation movement. School psychology has been waiting for the governing agencies of education to act, and action in both areas has been minimal. Although some school systems have attempted to comply with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and desegregate their schools, many more school systems have been practicing deception. The strategies of evasion at the local levels are innumerable. A search of psychological, sociological, and educational abstracts revealed that not only have the school psychologists been standing around waiting for the Black child to come to their school, they have failed to investigate the effects of desegregation on students and school personnel when the black child is present. While this writer feels justified in castigating school psychologists (myself included) for their lack of involvement in desegregation, the castigation cannot be generalized to all psychologists. Social, clinical, and child psychologists, as well as educational psychologists from university settings, have been involved in desegregation and all that it entails. The worth of some of their work is questioned and much of it is interpreted loosely because, as too often happens, the beliefs of psychologists are expounded upon before they have been subjected to scientific proof. Black psychologists such as Clark2 and Johnson3 feel that some of the theories that the white psychologists have intro

Florida and the School Desegregation Issue, 1954-1959: A Summary View

During the late 1940s and the early 1950s many southern states, Florida included, launched strong efforts to equalize their educational facilities for blacks and whites. This development was not, however, a matter of altruism, nor did it flow from any new or more enlightened racial attitude in the South. The drive to equalize was part of an attempt to preserve segregated education. The South believed that if it, after so many years of observing only the portion of the separate but doctrine, now tried to live up to the equal segment as well then it might succeed in keeping the races separated in its schools. And the South clung to this belief, even though, in retrospect, the tide had turned against racially segregated education. But whatever the motivation, the change was remarkable.1 In 1940, Florida had expended, yearly, $62.78 per white student and $27.63 per black student for educational purposes. In 1952 the figures were $195.01 for each white student and $153.24 for each black student. In 1940 the capital outlay for schools amounted to $6.39 per white student and $.80 for each black. But

The Warren Court and the Administration of Criminal Justice

Three important changes in American society were given impetus by decisions of the Supreme Court under Earl Warren. These were in the issues of desegregation; one-man, one-vote; and the administration of criminal justice. The accusation against the Warren Court that it was coddling criminals and handcuffing police, belied by statistics, may have been incited by hostility that the Court had aroused because of its decisions on integration and electoral apportionment. Analysis of impor tant decisions in the years before Warren reveals a hesitant and ambiguous Court, taking both forward and backward steps in defense of the constitutional rights of the accused. Some of the Warren decisions on issues of criminal justice were unani mous, and others were made by a split court. A study of the voting records of Warren's colleagues leads to the belief that the major thrust of that court will not be reversed by its successor, unless under the pressure of a precipitate change in America's social atmosphere.

School Desegregation and New Industry: The Southern Community Leaders' Viewpoint

School Desegregation and New Industry: The Southern Community Leaders' Viewpoint

Constituency Versus Constitutionalism: The Desegregation Issue and Tensions and Aspirations of Southern Attorneys General

Constituency Versus Constitutionalism: The Desegregation Issue and Tensions and Aspirations of Southern Attorneys General