Pearsall Plan

Last updated

The Pearsall Plan to Save Our Schools, known colloquially as the Pearsall Plan, was North Carolina's 1956 attempt at a delayed approach to integrate their public schools after racial segregation of schools was ruled unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court ruling Brown v. Board of Education (1954). [1] Many southern states were challenged by the Brown ruling as they faced opposition to integration from residents.

Contents

North Carolina decided to highlight moderation, acknowledging that school integration was inevitable, rather than promoting active resistance like Alabama, Virginia, and other southern states. [2] To find a creative solution, the North Carolina Advisory Committee on Education established the Pearsall Committee, named after its chairman, Thomas J. Pearsall, a landholder and notable public figure from Rocky Mount. [3] The Pearsall Committee created the Pearsall Plan, which was intended to gradually integrate the North Carolina public school system. Some observers believe this scheme hindered the fight for equality for students across the state for years. Others believe that the resulting legislation helped the society adapt to the drastic social changes related to school integration.

Terms of the Pearsall Plan

Rather than having the North Carolina State Board of Education direct the pace of integration, the Pearsall Plan decentralized decisionmaking to the individual local school boards, which were dominated by whites, as most blacks were still disenfranchised, dating from a 1900 suffrage amendment, and were prevented from running for office or voting. [4] The Pupil Assignment Act, which preceded the Pearsall Plan, provided for parents to receive a monetary grant if a child was placed into a mixed school against their wishes. [5] [6]

Under the Pearsall Plan, many school districts maintained segregated schools and denied the transfer applications of black students to white schools. [7] It also provided that any child not accepted to a private school, and who was placed into a mixed public school, would not be forced to attend school. [8] The community could evaluate schools and shut down any it considered "intolerable" by a vote. [9] Thus, a predominantly white neighborhood could vote to shut down a mixed school if they felt it unfit for their children to share its classrooms.

According to the Pearsall Committee, their proposition was, "the building of a new school system on a new foundation – a foundation of no racial segregation by law, but assignment according to natural racial preference and the administrative determination of what is best for the child." [10] The Committee believed that segregation of schools was natural and students could continue to prosper without the aid of laws. (The lack of African-American representation in the state legislature and local offices resulted in the continual underfunding of black schools and other facilities, showing that white students "could continue to prosper".) The struggle for unified schools in North Carolina continued for the next two decades, ultimately resulting in the integration of schools.

Defiance of the government

Many critics cite the wording of the Pearsall Plan as evidence of it expressing defiance of the Supreme Court rather than being an effort to accomplish desegregation. They consider the title of "the Pearsall Plan to Save our Schools" as implying the Court was destroying the public school system by its ruling. They suggest that the document is intended to question the ruling of the Supreme Court, rather than implement its direction. Suggesting that integration will lead to situations in which schools become "intolerable" seems to show that the Pearsall Plan was intended to halt rather than moderate integration. The question and answer section of the Plan states that the legislative action was not a defiance of the US Supreme Court's decision; rather, it was "an attempt to stay within that decision, even though a great majority of our citizens disapprove of the Supreme Court's ruling." [11] Persuaded that the ruling was not what the "community" wanted, the Pearsall Committee developed a plan that minimized the ruling's effects. The "answer" section claims that the Supreme Court abused its power by ruling on public education, believed to belong to the states. [9] Some opponents were bitter about states rights arguments.

Necessity of the Plan

The Pearsall Committee recognized that the integration of schools was inevitable and would result in social changes. The Pearsall Committee, especially Thomas Pearsall, believed they needed to prepare a plan to help the state prepare for change. Pearsall's son, Mack, said his father had anticipated, "a very tension filled environment – a major change in lifestyles and folkways and mores." [12] The committee tried to create a plan that would enable only as much action as the people of North Carolina wanted. They believed rushing into wholesale change would result in chaos. That was avoided, but, by allowing communities not to make any changes, in many places, there were multiple years of stagnancy after the release of the Pearsall Plan, during which nothing was accomplished. The Committee had tried to find the right balance between action and chaos. [13]

Political implications

Strategically, the Pearsall Plan decentralized decision making to the school boards, which also enabled elected politicians to get out of the middle of the fight. Handing responsibility to the school boards enabled politicians to escape the spotlight and maintain an ostensibly neutral stance on school desegregation. According to one resident, the state's decision to let the local town boards decide was to "make it clear that the state itself, from Raleigh, is not masterminding or trying to assure a particular result." [14] By doing this, the state school board also escaped having to make a controversial decision, which would likely be criticized from either or both sides.

Criticisms of the Plan

The African-American community criticized the amendments because they appeared to help whites and provide few or no benefits to African-American students. Critics criticized the unequal representation of the races on the Pearsall Committee as the primary reason for the unbalanced plan. They believed that a committee with sixteen white and three black citizens could not fairly represent society. [15] Regulations related to the Plan proved a barrier to black students and some whites. A student wishing to challenge their assignment had to contact their school board directly; no independent bodies were keeping track of complaints to evaluate the performance of school boards as a whole. The appeals process required submission of materials related to distinct and detailed clauses that were difficult for uneducated and under-educated parents to fill out. If students' appeals were not correctly submitted, the boards would reject their requests. As a result of these factors, "most school boards denied every request filed by a black student to transfer from an assigned black school to a white school" until the early 1960s. [16] Only one family was granted a monetary voucher for being placed into an integrated school. [15] North Carolina lagged behind Florida, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia in terms of the pace of enrolling black students in integrated schools. [17] Many African Americans in North Carolina were dismayed by the lack of progress, as they had been hopeful about the Brown ruling being a catalyst for school integration.

Reaction toward the Plan

Though many people supported the integration of schools in principle, they were wary about the implications of quick social change. The Pearsall Plan seemed to reject any social change. A poll released in February 1956 stated that forty-seven percent of African Americans in the South did not support the Brown ruling because they feared their children would be spurned and not afforded a truly fair education from white teachers. [18] At the same time, they did not support the Pearsall Plan because it had the potential to halt the trend toward change altogether. Benjamin L. Smith, the white superintendent of Greensboro schools wrote, "After careful deliberation it is my opinion that desegregation is an idea whose hour has arrived." [19] He believed that North Carolina and the US were ready for desegregation to begin. He cautioned against moving too fast, saying, "Three hundred years of social distinctions have established customs and traditions that cannot and ought not be overthrown over night." [20]

Impact on Charlotte

Though in general, the sentiments regarding the Pearsall Plan were similar throughout North Carolina, the results of school integration would have a wider ranging effect on the city of Charlotte. Since the beginning of the 20th century, Charlotte was completely segregated, both in schools and in the entire culture of the city. [21] There was even a divide between the parts of town where the blacks lived and where the whites lived. Thus, when Brown was passed, the effort to desegregate in Charlotte revolved around a complete culture revolution rather than just a change in the education system. The NAACP was integral in helping to advocate for black students in their attempts to attend the predominantly white schools, which had better resources for their students. [22] However, despite this backing, there was harsh criticism of the idea that schools could simply be integrated because there was such a massive difference in the cultures of the students. The vast majority of the applicants that attempted to switch into the better funded schools were rejected and segregation in the city continued. Finally, during the summer of 1957, the Charlotte School Board agreed to enact voluntary desegregation to avoid further national or state-ordered mandates. [23] The effort turned out to be relatively unsuccessful as the protesters at Harry Harding High School received national attention for their protest of the enrollment of Dorothy Counts, embarrassing the city leaders. [23] They crowded around the doors to the school in an attempt to prevent Dorothy from entering, resulting in two arrests. [23] This misconduct, however, would fuel a series of successful and peaceful desegregation efforts as blacks and whites worked together to reform the city's reputation and end segregation throughout the city.

Thomas Pearsall's regret

Thomas J. Pearsall, who is most credited for the Pearsall Plan, would later regret leading such an important and controversial decision in the integration of schools. After falling ill with lymphoma, Pearsall reflected on how the actions of the committee had affected everyone. His wife noted that in his waning days, Pearsall's interactions with black people became more strained as he felt that he had done wrong to them. He was quoted saying, "I don't want to go to my grave feeling that I haven't done the best I could for the blacks." [24] Though others reassured him that he did in fact, do everything possible to appease everyone, evidence shows he, himself, did not believe this to be completely true. This is perhaps due to the fact that at the time of his death, in 1981, the majority of the schools in North Carolina had been forced to integrate, often ending in clashes between the races. However, despite the tremendous guilt he experienced, Pearsall's reputation remained relatively clean. He is highly regarded for his work with the Pearsall Plan despite setting back the integration of North Carolina schools a number of years. This is an indication that people did not blame Pearsall but rather the local prejudices that ultimately would hinder the ability for everyone to access equal opportunities. His son, Mack Pearsall, noted that his father dedicated a portion of his life working towards equality for all people and struggled when producing the Pearsall Plan because he feared he would go down in history as an enemy of the black community. [25] Though Pearsall stalled the ability of blacks to gain equal educational opportunities, many people still claim that his actions were necessary in preventing the chaos from erupting from the Brown v. Board of Education result.[ citation needed ]

See also

Related Research Articles

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that ruled that U.S. state laws establishing racial segregation in public schools are unconstitutional, even if the segregated schools are otherwise equal in quality. The decision partially overruled the Court's 1896 decision Plessy v. Ferguson, which had held that racial segregation laws did not violate the U.S. Constitution as long as the facilities for each race were equal in quality, a doctrine that had come to be known as "separate but equal". The Court's unanimous decision in Brown, and its related cases, paved the way for integration and was a major victory of the civil rights movement, and a model for many future impact litigation cases.

Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717 (1974), was a significant United States Supreme Court case dealing with the planned desegregation busing of public school students across district lines among 53 school districts in metropolitan Detroit. It concerned the plans to integrate public schools in the United States following the Brown v. Board of Education (1954) decision.

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1971), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case dealing with the busing of students to promote integration in public schools. The Court held that busing was an appropriate remedy for the problem of racial imbalance in schools, even when the imbalance resulted from the selection of students based on geographic proximity to the school rather than from deliberate assignment based on race. This was done to ensure the schools would be "properly" integrated and that all students would receive equal educational opportunities regardless of their race.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Louise Day Hicks</span> American politician and lawyer (1916–2003)

Anna Louise Day Hicks was an American politician and lawyer from Boston, Massachusetts, best known for her staunch opposition to desegregation in Boston public schools, and especially to court-ordered busing, in the 1960s and 1970s. A longtime member of Boston's school board and city council, she served one term in the United States House of Representatives, succeeding Speaker of the House John W. McCormack.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Desegregation busing</span> Failed attempt to racially diversify American public schools

Desegregation busing was an attempt to diversify the racial make-up of schools in the United States by sending students to school districts other than their own. While the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional, many American schools continued to remain largely racially homogeneous. In an effort to address the ongoing de facto segregation in schools, the 1971 Supreme Court decision, Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, ruled that the federal courts could use busing as a further integration tool to achieve racial balance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Massive resistance</span> Strategy declared by U.S. Senator Harry F. Byrd to resist public school desegregation in Virginia

Massive resistance was a political strategy created by American politicians Harry F. Byrd and James M. Thomson aimed at getting Virginia officials to pass laws and policies preventing public school desegregation, particularly after Brown v. Board of Education. Many schools and an entire school system were shut down in 1958 and 1959 in attempts to block integration.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Segregation academy</span> Segregationist private schools in the US

Segregation academies are private schools in the Southern United States that were founded in the mid-20th century by white parents to avoid having their children attend desegregated public schools. They were founded between 1954, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that segregated public schools were unconstitutional, and 1976, when the court ruled similarly about private schools.

Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education, 396 U.S. 19 (1969), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ordered immediate desegregation of public schools in the American South. It followed 15 years of delays to integrate by most Southern school boards after the Court's ruling in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) that segregated public schools were unconstitutional.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charles Sherrod</span> American civil rights activist (1937–2022)

Charles Melvin Sherrod was an American minister and civil rights activist. During the civil rights movement, Sherrod helped found the Albany Movement while serving as field secretary for southwest Georgia for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. He also participated in the Selma Voting Rights Movement and in many other campaigns of the civil rights movement of that era.

Morgan v. Hennigan was the case that defined the school busing controversy in Boston, Massachusetts during the 1970s. On March 14, 1972, the Boston chapter of the NAACP filed a class action lawsuit against the Boston School Committee on behalf of 14 black parents and 44 children. Tallulah Morgan headed the list of plaintiffs, and James Hennigan, then chair of the School Committee, was listed as the main defendant.

The Stanley Plan was a package of 13 statutes adopted in September 1956 by the U.S. state of Virginia. The statutes were designed to ensure racial segregation would continue in that state's public schools despite the unanimous ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) that school segregation was unconstitutional. The legislative program was named for Governor Thomas B. Stanley, a Democrat, who proposed the program and successfully pushed for its enactment. The Stanley plan was a critical element in the policy of "massive resistance" to the Brown ruling advocated by U.S. Senator Harry F. Byrd Sr. The plan also included measures designed to curb the Virginia state chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), which many Virginia segregationists believed was responsible for "stirring up" litigation to integrate the public schools.

The desegregation of Boston public schools (1974–1988) was a period in which the Boston Public Schools were under court control to desegregate through a system of busing students. The call for desegregation and the first years of its implementation led to a series of racial protests and riots that brought national attention, particularly from 1974 to 1976. In response to the Massachusetts legislature's enactment of the 1965 Racial Imbalance Act, which ordered the state's public schools to desegregate, W. Arthur Garrity Jr. of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts laid out a plan for compulsory busing of students between predominantly white and black areas of the city. The hard control of the desegregation plan lasted for over a decade. It influenced Boston politics and contributed to demographic shifts of Boston's school-age population, leading to a decline of public-school enrollment and white flight to the suburbs. Full control of the desegregation plan was transferred to the Boston School Committee in 1988; in 2013 the busing system was replaced by one with dramatically reduced busing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Caswell County Schools</span> School district in North Carolina, US

Caswell County Schools is a PK–12 graded school district serving Caswell County, North Carolina. Its six schools serve 3,012 students as of the 2010–2011 school year.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">School segregation in the United States</span> Racial separation in schools

School segregation in the United States was the segregation of students in educational facilities based on their race and ethnicity. While not prohibited from having or attending schools, various minorities were barred from most schools that admitted white students. Segregation was enforced legally in the U.S. states, primarily in the Southern United States, although segregation could occur in informal settings or through social expectations and norms. Segregation laws were met with resistance by Civil Rights activists and began to be challenged in 1954 by cases brought before the U.S. Supreme Court. Segregation continued longstanding exclusionary policies in much of the Southern United States after the Civil War. Jim Crow laws codified segregation. These laws were influenced by the history of slavery and discrimination in the US. Secondary schools for African Americans in the South were called training schools instead of high schools in order to appease racist whites and focused on vocational education. School integration in the United States took place at different times in different areas and often met resistance. After the ruling of Brown v. Board of Education, which banned segregated school laws, school segregation took de facto form. School segregation declined rapidly during the late 1960s and early 1970s as the government became strict on schools' plans to combat segregation more effectively as a result of Green v. County School Board of New Kent County. Voluntary segregation by income appears to have increased since 1990. Racial segregation has either increased or stayed constant since 1990, depending on which definition of segregation is used. In general, definitions based on the amount of interaction between black and white students show increased racial segregation, while definitions based on the proportion of black and white students in different schools show racial segregation remaining approximately constant.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">New Orleans school desegregation crisis</span> 1960 unrest following racial desegregation

The New Orleans school desegregation crisis was a period of intense public resistance in New Orleans that followed the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Board of Education that racial segregation of public schools was unconstitutional. The conflict peaked when U.S. Circuit Judge J. Skelly Wright ordered desegregation in New Orleans to begin on November 14, 1960.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">School integration in the United States</span> Racial desegregation process

In the United States, school integration is the process of ending race-based segregation within American public and private schools. Racial segregation in schools existed throughout most of American history and remains an issue in contemporary education. During the Civil Rights Movement school integration became a priority, but since then de facto segregation has again become prevalent.

This is a timeline of the civil rights movement in the United States, a nonviolent mid-20th century freedom movement to gain legal equality and the enforcement of constitutional rights for people of color. The goals of the movement included securing equal protection under the law, ending legally institutionalized racial discrimination, and gaining equal access to public facilities, education reform, fair housing, and the ability to vote.

Frederick Douglas Alexander was an American businessman, civil rights activist, and politician from Charlotte, North Carolina. Elected to the Charlotte City Council in 1965, he was the first African American to serve on it since the 1890s. He was repeatedly re-elected, serving until 1974. That year he was elected to the State Senate, serving into 1980. He was also active in local business, community and civil rights organizations, establishing a reputation as a moderate.

Dudley E. Flood is a former educator and administrator in the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction and was instrumental in desegregating North Carolina schools.

Prior to the civil rights movement in South Carolina, African Americans in the state had very few political rights. South Carolina briefly had a majority-black government during the Reconstruction era after the Civil War, but with the 1876 inauguration of Governor Wade Hampton III, a Democrat who supported the disenfranchisement of blacks, African Americans in South Carolina struggled to exercise their rights. Poll taxes, literacy tests, and intimidation kept African Americans from voting, and it was virtually impossible for someone to challenge the Democratic Party, which ran unopposed in most state elections for decades. By 1940, the voter registration provisions written into the 1895 constitution effectively limited African-American voters to 3,000—only 0.8 percent of those of voting age in the state.

References

  1. ↑ "Pearsall plan to save our schools | Gateway Digital History Collections". gateway.uncg.edu. Retrieved December 12, 2024.
  2. ↑ Douglas, Davison. Reading, Writing, and Race: The Desegregation of Charlotte Schools. (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1995.), 32
  3. ↑ Pearsall, Elizabeth. Interview by Walter E. Campbell. Oral Histories of the American South, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. May 25, 1988.
  4. ↑ North Carolina Advisory Committee on Education. The Pearsall Plan to save our schools. (Raleigh, 1956.) http://libcdm1.uncg.edu/cdm/ref/collection/CivilRights/id/533
  5. ↑ Carlson, Arthur Larentz. "With All Deliberate Speed: The Pearsall Plan and School Desegregation in North Carolina, 1954-1966" (Master's Thesis, East Carolina University, 2011.)
  6. ↑ http://thescholarship.ecu.edu/bitstream/handle/10342/3554/Carlson_ecu_0600M_10429.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [ bare URL PDF ]
  7. ↑ Carlson
  8. ↑ North Carolina Advisory Committee on Education. "The Pearsall Plan to save our schools." (Raleigh, 1956.) http://libcdm1.uncg.edu/cdm/ref/collection/CivilRights/id/533
  9. 1 2 North Carolina Advisory Committee on Education
  10. ↑ Douglas, Davison. Reading, Writing, and Race: The Desegregation of Charlotte Schools. (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1995), 32
  11. ↑ North Carolina Advisory Committee on Education. The Pearsall Plan to Save our Schools. (Raleigh, 1956.) http://libcdm1.uncg.edu/cdm/ref/collection/CivilRights/id/533
  12. ↑ Pearsall, Mack. Interview by Walter E. Campbell. Oral Histories of the American South, (Chapel Hill, North Carolina. May 25, 1988.), 31
  13. ↑ Douglas (1995). Reading, Writing, and Race, p. 50
  14. ↑ Giles, Robert. Interview by Jay Jenkins. Chapel Hill, North Carolina. September 10, 1987
  15. 1 2 Korstad, Robert Rodgers. To Write These Wrongs: The North Carolina Fund and the Battle to End Poverty. (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1995), p. 35
  16. ↑ Douglas (1995). Reading, Writing, and Race, p. 51
  17. ↑ Peebles-Wilkins, Wilma. Reactions of Segments of the Black Community to the North Carolina Pearsall Plan, 1954 – 1966. (Clark Atlanta University, 2002.) https://www.jstor.org/stable/274775?seq=4, 119
  18. ↑ Douglas (1995), Reading, Writing, and Race, 51
  19. ↑ Smith, Benjamin Lee. "Report of the Superintendent to the Greensboro City Board of Education regarding Brown v. Board of Education." Greensboro, 1956. http://libcdm1.uncg.edu/cdm/ref/collection/CivilRights/id/547
  20. ↑ Smith
  21. ↑ Douglas, Davison. Reading, Writing, and Race: The Desegregation of Charlotte Schools. (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1995.), 50
  22. ↑ Douglas, 63
  23. 1 2 3 Douglas, 64
  24. ↑ Pearsall, Elizabeth. Interview by Walter E. Campbell. Oral Histories of the American South, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. May 25, 1988.
  25. ↑ Pearsall, Mack. Interview by Walter E. Campbell. Oral Histories of the American South, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. May 25, 1988.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.