Explore the vast range of titles available.

In 1954 the Supreme Court decidedBrown v. Board of Education; ten years later, Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act. These monumental changes in American law dramatically expanded educational opportunities for racial and ethnic minority children across the country. They also changed the experiences of white children, who have learned in increasingly diverse classrooms. The authors of this commemorative volume include leading scholars in law, education, and public policy, as well as important historical figures. Taken together, the chapters trace the narrative arc of school desegregation in the United States, beginning in California in the 1940s, continuing throughBrown v. Board, the Civil Rights Act, and three important Supreme Court decisions about school desegregation and voluntary integration in 1974, 1995, and 2007. The authors also assess the status of racial and ethnic equality in education today and consider the viability of future legal and policy reform in pursuit of the goals ofBrown. This remarkable collection of voices in conversation with one another lays the groundwork for future discussions about the relationship between law and educational equality, and ultimately for the creation of new public policy. A valuable reference for scholars and students alike, this dynamic text is an important contribution to the literature by an outstanding group of authors.

[...]states may have parallel provisions to municipal bank- ruptcy, generally known as municipal receivership statutes.

How frequently and in what manner are evolution, creationism, and intelligent design taught in public high schools? Here, I analyze the answer to this question, as given by nearly 600 students from major public universities nationwide in a survey conducted during the spring of 2006. Although almost all recent public high-school graduate respondents reported receiving evolution instruction, only about three-quarters perceived that evolution was taught as a \"credible scientific theory\". Creationism and intelligent design were reportedly presented almost one-third and one-fifth of the time, respectively, though respondents recalled that both concepts were presented as lacking scientific credibility much more often than not. The survey results are presented in composite form and also disaggregated with respect to the strength of evolution-related state standards, red state-blue state divisions, and the regional location of states within the country.

In 1998, the balance tipped: for the first time, Latinos and Latinas comprised a greater percentage of the national school-age population than did African Americans. Within forty years, Whites will become a statistical minority in the United States' school-age population -and in an increasing number of public school districts. In Hawaii, New Mexico, and California, this population shift has occurred already. Texas will have a Non-White majority around 2015, and Arizona, New York, Nevada, New Jersey, and Maryland will quickly follow. The rapidly changing racial and ethnic demographics of our country might seem surprising not only because a Non-White majority is anticipated within the next sixty years, but also because so much of the growth will occur in the Latino population. The 2000 United States Census shows that the percentage of respondents identifying themselves as Latino increased 60% since 1990 and that Latinos will be the United States' largest minority group even sooner than expected.

Debates about teaching intelligent design in public school science classes are inflaming communities across the nation. These controversies present thorny Establishment Clause questions at a time when that doctrine is less clear than ever. The ambiguity is not due to a lack of case law: Just last year, the Supreme Court issued two seemingly contradictory Establishment Clause decisions, driven by what then-Chief Justice Rehnquist characterized as \"Januslike\" interests. McCreary County v. ACLU, with its focus on government purpose, is more applicable to curricular disputes such as intelligent design than Van Orden v. Perry, with its examination of passive, apparently uncontroversial expression. This Article thus examines McCreary County within the intelligent design context, focusing on McCreary County's decision to import the \"objective observer\" from the effects-endorsement analysis into the government purpose inquiry. Such analysis makes clear the ways in which a strict reading of McCreary County leads to undesirable results, and the reasons why the Court should retain McCreary County's focus on government purpose, but reject the expanded role of the objective observer. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

School desegregation cases have long been dominated by a Black-White conception of race, yet Latinos, as an ethnic group, do not fit squarely within this binary. This disconnect has led to the popular misconception that Latinos have been largely absent from the history of school desegregation. Bowman elaborates further on the matter.

How frequently and in what manner are evolution, creationism, and intelligent design taught in public high schools? Here, I analyze the answer to this question, as given by nearly 600 students from major public universities nationwide in a survey conducted during the spring of 2006. Although almost all recent public high‐school graduate respondents reported receiving evolution instruction, only about three‐quarters perceived that evolution was taught as a “credible scientific theory”. Creationism and intelligent design were reportedly presented almost one‐third and one‐fifth of the time, respectively, though respondents recalled that both concepts were presented as lacking scientific credibility much more often than not. The survey results are presented in composite form and also disaggregated with respect to the strength of evolution‐related state standards, red state–blue state divisions, and the regional location of states within the country.

In 1946, a federal district court held that Latino and Latina (Latino/a) students could not be segregated from “other” white students in public schools. This holding, the outcome ofMendez v. Westminster,¹ is one of the earliest victories in school desegregation, and a crucial part of the story of Latinos/as’ struggles for equality in the United States. Unfortunately, the story ofMendez, and in fact the story of Latinos/as’ pursuit of educational equity in general, is not one we often tell. In part this can be explained by demographics: until relatively recently, the Latino/a population was small in number throughout

The Supreme Court’s 1995 decision inMissouri v. Jenkinsis one of the many middle children of school desegregation jurisprudence. Born long after the celebrated civil rights victories inBrown v. Board of Education¹ andGreen v. County School Board of New Kent County,² and a generation beforeParents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1³ and the higher education affirmative action cases brought by white plaintiffs,Jenkinshas merited comparatively little sustained scholarly attention in its own right.Jenkinshas not been forgotten, but most often it is mentioned in the literature merely as part of