MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1522709373

Actuating equity?: Historical and contemporary analyses of African American access to selective higher education from Sweatt to the Top 10% law

2011· article· en· W1522709373 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julian Vasquez Heilig, Richard J. Reddick, Choquette Hamilton, Laurel Dietz, Cristóbal Rodríguez

Notice bibliographique

RevueHarvard journal of African American public policy · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueHigher Education Research Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDesegregationLawPolitical scienceContext (archaeology)ConstitutionState (computer science)SociologyEquity (law)History
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

HISTORICAL AND CONTEMPORARY RESEARCHAccess, Opportunity, and Adjudication: 1952-1969The literature review begins in the 1950s and details the role of legal enactments in the context of the desegregation era and the impact of those enactments on Texas's K- 12 public schools and the UT-Austin. Specifically, we consider how pervasive and hostile attitudes toward desegregation influenced the with which students of color had access to levels of education in Texas. We then transition to the impact of the civil rights movement on access and opportunity.In 1946, Heman Marion Sweatt, a Black veteran, applied for, and was denied admission to, the UT-Austin School of Law. Sweatt filed suit against UT-Austin in Texas's 126th District Court alleging that this denial was an infringement of his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. At the time, there were no Black law schools in Texas (Lavergne 2010). After six months, Iudge Roy C. Archer of the 126th District Court decided that if the UT-Austin Board of Regents created a first-class university law school then the UT-Austin School of Law would not be required to accept Blacks (Duren and Iscoe 1979, 3). Sweatt appealed to the U.S. 3rd Court of Appeals, which sent the case back to retrial.The Sweatt case is dissimilar from the Missouri ex rei. Gaines v. Canada (1938), University v. Murray (1936), Sipuel v. Board of Regents ( 1948), and McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (1950) Southern higher education desegregation cases as the state of Texas sought to create a separate but law school to head off integration at UT-Austin. During the appeal, the Texas Legislature approved the establishment of the Texas State University for Negroes (TSUN, later called Texas Southern University or TSU) in Houston. This new university was created to offer general and professional programs equivalent to those offered at UT-Austin for Blacks. On March 10, 1947, the school opened, but Sweatt did not attend due to TSUN's inferior quality and the NAACP's desire to integrate White institutions (Lavergne 2010). After the Texas Supreme Court refused Sweatt's motion for a rehearing of his case, the NAACP filed the case at the U.S. Supreme Court. The nation's highest court ruled on lune 5, 1950, that the educational opportunity for Black and White law students was not substantially equal to meet the equal protection clause under the Fourteenth Amendment, thus, the UT-Austin School of Law was required to admit Sweatt.Despite Sweatt, the official end of the Iim Crow era arrived after the U.S. Supreme Court decision of Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which held that the Plessyv. Ferguson doctrine of separate but was unconstitutional. Following Brown v. Board of Education (1955), the second Brown decision, the U.S. Supreme Court gave the responsibility for integrating public schools to local officials under the scrutiny of the federal courts; in addition, these courts needed to ensure that local officials were making a prompt and reasonable start with all deliberate speed (Ogletree 2004).However, this notion of all deliberate speed became all deliberate in its implementation in Texas. Then Governor Allan Shivers saw the Brown decision as a federal invasion into states' rights on the doctrine of separate but and, as such, did not believe that the schools in Texas needed to change to reflect the Brown decision (Lavergne 2010).Then Attorney General lohn Ben Shepperd, reacting to a Texas high court decision to permit the use of state funds for integrated schools, stated that though the case settled the law for the state, the time frame for integration would be a community-by-community decision (Wilson and Segali 2001). This slowness permeated into postsecondary institutions in Texas as well; although there was to be eventual integration at levels of the schooling system in Texas, the of integration was to be determined by educational institutions and not the federal government (i. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,570
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,899

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,005
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,179
Tête enseignante GPT0,461
Écart entre enseignants0,282 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHarvard journal of African American public policyMême sujetHigher Education Research StudiesTravaux en français237 207