INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again - beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 I i 75-3211 TUCKER, Thomas, 1943- AN HISTORICAL STUDY OF THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE CONGRESS OF RACIAL EQUALITY IN PUBLIC SCHOOL DESEGREGATION ACTIONS FROM 1954 THROUGH 1973. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1974 Education, administration Xerox University MicrofilmsAnn , Arbor, Michigan 48106 (c) Copyright by Thomas Tucker 197*1 THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. AN HISTORICAL STUDY OF THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE CONGRESS OF RACIAL EQUALITY IN PUBLIC SCHOOL DESEGREGATION ACTIONS FROM 195*+ THROUGH 1973 DISSERTATION Presented in Partial F ulfillm ent of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Thomas Tucker, B.S., M.A. ^ W w V V w w w w V The Ohio State University 197*+ Reading Committee: Approved By Professor Frederick Staub Professor Elsie Alberty Professor William B. Toran [jj, Abcij'Lr'' Adviser Department of Educational Administration ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my personal gratitude to Elsie Alberty and William Toran who served on my committee and gave me considerable guidance. I extend a special thanks to my adviser, Frederick Staub, who provided me with a great deal of assistance and encouragement. I am also deeply indebted to the s ta ff of the Congress of Racial Equality for the ir kindness and especially to Edward Brown whose assistance was invaluable. I wish to express my gratitude to my wife, V icki, for her assistance in helping me complete the dissertation. I lovingly dedicate this study to my daughter, Michelle. VITA May I, 19^3................. Born - San Antonio, Texas 1965 ..................................... B.S., Miami University, Oxford, Ohio 1965 - 1971 ................. Teacher, Dayton Public Schools, Dayton, Ohio 1968 - 1970 ................. President of Dayton Classroom Teacher's Association, Dayton, Ohio 1971 ................................. M.A., Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio 1971 " 1972 ................. Research Associate, Department of Educational Administration, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1973 ................................. Elementary P rincipal, Community Consolidated School District 59, Elk Grove Village, Illinois FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Education Studies in Administration. Professor W. Frederick Staub Studies in Curriculum Development. Professor Elsie Alberty Studies in Public Relations - Journalism. Professor William B. Toran - i i i- TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS i i VITA ! I f LIST OF.........................................TABLES AND FIGURES....................................... vi Chapter I. INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY . 1 H istorical Development of CORE as an Organization Introduction to the Problem Statement of the Problem The Design of the Study Definition of Terms Scope and Lim itation Significance of the Investigation Organizat ion II. CORE DURING THE FARMER-MCKISS1C ERA, 195^-1966 .... 2k Emphasis on Desegregating Public Accommodations Emphasis Shifts to Public School Desegregation Through Integration Integrationist Philosophy Comes Under Attack Relationships With the NAACP Become Strained McKissic Replaces Farmer as National Director Financial Problems Plague McKissic CORE'S Thrust for Increased Ghetto Involvement Continues and the Organization's National Outlook Begins Innis Replaces McKissic Attaining Equal Educational Opportunity Becomes the Major Thrust of CORE National CORE Emphasizes the Attainment of an Independent School Board for Harlem CORE Adds Legislative Lobbying as a New Tactic III. CORE DURING THE INNIS ERA, 1968-1973 .................................... *+5 National CORE Assumes a Major Role in the Harlem CORE Project - ? v- Legislative Lobbying Becomes a Major Tactic Court Action Becomes a Major Tactic The CORE Desegregation Proposal is Developed Mobile is Chosen as a Test Site for the CORE Plan CORE is Involved with Its Frist Legal Test Case CORE Seeks Further Test Sites CORE Moves to Gain Popular Black Support For Its Plan CORE'S Plan Becomes Known as "The CORE Unitary School Model" CORE'S Role in the National Black Political Convent ion CORE Seeks to Become Involved in Richmond, V i rg i n i a CORE U tilizes Congressional Lobbying as a Tact ic CORE Files an Amicus B rief in the Richmond Case The Court of Appeals Rules in the Richmond Case CORE Becomes Involved in Atlanta, Georgia IV. AN ANALYSIS OF CORE'S ROLE IN PUBLIC SCHOOL DESEGREGATION ACTIONS FROM 1954-1973 .............................................. 102 Research Questions Analyzed Typology of Civil Rights Activity CORE'S School Desegregation A c tiv itie s Since 1968 Evaluated by McKissic and Farmer The CORE-NAACP Relationship Research Conclusions V. SUMMARY...................................................................................................................124 Suggestions for Further Study Problems Encountered APPENDIX A. List of Interviews ............................................................................................144 B. Interview Questions .................................................................................... 145 C. The CORE Unitary School P la n .....................................................................147 BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................... 148 -v- LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES TABLE 1 CRAIN'S TYPOLOGY OF CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVITY ................................. 16 2 CORE'S SCHOOL DESEGREGATION ACTIONS PLACED IN CRAIN'S TYPOLOGY ................................................................ 113 FIGURE I FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS, 195^-1968 34 -v i- Chapter I INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY ....we conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of separate but equal has no place. Separate educational fa c ilitie s are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated fo r whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained o f, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment....* With these words, on May 17, 1954, Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Brown v. Board of Education to Topeka. Kansas. This decision caused white Southerners to react " ...w ith a combination o f fru stra tio n , resent­ ment, anger, and resignation. Negroes, on the other hand, hailed the decision as a giant step toward a future of legal equality and full accep- tance into American Society." Brown v. Board of Education was one of four cases that had been combined for review by the Supreme Court.3 The other cases were on appeal 1 01iver Brown, e t . a l . , v. Board of Education of Topeka, Shownee County. Kansas, e t. a 1. (347 U.S. 483, 1954). 2 Berman, Daniel M., It Is So Ordered (New York: W.O. Norton and Co., 1966) p. 1. 3 Brown v. Board of Education (347 U.S. 483, 1954); Briggs v. E llio tt (334 U.S. H f4 l, 891); Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County. Va. (103 F. Supp. 337, 341); Gebhart v. Belton (347 U.S. 483; 347 U.W. 497). from Federal D is tric t Courts in South Carolina and V irginia, and from the State Supreme Court of Delaware. The Court's decision in these cases was later extended to include a sim ilar case that was on appeal from L the United States Court of Appeals fo r the D is tric t of Columbia. The Supreme Court's decision in the Brown case became known as the "benchmark" case in school desegregation. The National Association For The