Each month, in the Equity Exchange newsletter, I reflect on the historical context, my experiences as an educator and large urban district superintendent, and their relationship to educational practice, reforms, opportunities, and equity. May, of course, was a time for our MSU graduates to move forward, building on the great opportunities and successes they have achieved as undergraduate or graduate students. At this year’s commencement, the Vice Chairman of the MSU Board of Regents, General Larry R. Ellis, U.S. Army (Ret.), reminded the graduates to “Never forget where you’ve been. Never lose sight of where you’re going. And never take for granted the people who travel the journey with you” (attributed to Susan Gale). At that moment, I was reminded of the Ghanaian proverb, “It is not wrong to go back for that which you have forgotten.” I have always thought that proverb is relevant in keeping history alive as we push forward for progress. It is particularly meaningful when thinking about June Pride Month and a holiday like Juneteenth and all of the slow-coming, hard-won freedoms in civil rights and education.

Educational research is fraught with conflicting theories and research findings, and these conflicting theories have, in part, led to a plethora of contradictory practices, initiatives, and programs – what teachers often call “the flavor of the month.” To better understand the current state of K-12 and post-secondary education, it is important to appreciate the historical context. This edition of the NCEED newsletter examines the parallel between the long struggle in achieving civil rights, exemplified by the Juneteenth holiday, and the slow progress toward educational equity and freedoms in America. This month’s “Numbers That Matter” article looks back to celebrate the progress toward civil rights for the LGBTQ+ community through the history of Pride Month and what research says about the growth and fragility of those rights. In our NCEED Pillar “spotlight” article, in celebration of Father’s Day, NCEED’s Walter Fields offers a personal perspective and a glimpse into his research on misconceptions about Black fathers.

Juneteenth National Independence Day, on June 19th, has only been recognized as a federal holiday in the United States since 2021. Juneteenth marks the day in 1865 when Union soldiers arrived in Galveston, Texas, to announce the end of slavery, bringing the news to the last remaining Confederate state, nearly three years after President Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation.

So as we commemorate Juneteenth, we must remember that progress in the United States has often come not all at once but in slow, delayed waves of recognition and action. The work of justice requires not only moving forward but also looking back—retrieving the truths, histories, and commitments too often neglected or ignored, and reflecting on our precarious march toward educational civil rights for all children, particularly Black, Brown, and economically disadvantaged children.

A Long Road

People often call the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in the civil rights case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, a landmark decision, and, certainly, it was an important turning point. It marked the end of the “separate but equal” precedent set by the Supreme Court nearly 60 years earlier. However, because there was considerable resistance to the ruling, a year later, Chief Justice Warren instructed the states to begin desegregation plans “with all deliberate speed.”

Still, while it was a world-changing event, the ruling was as much a starting point as a landmark.

ESEA/Title I 1965

As a former school superintendent in three large urban districts, I know that segregation, resulting from inequalities in income and housing, continues to be a constant challenge. For example, while some families take advantage of open enrollment and flexible transfer and transportation policies, many parents and students have insufficient options, and their children are forced to attend schools where low academic achievement is the norm.

Aside from the ongoing struggle to address segregation and the many attempts to circumvent the intention of the Brown v. Board ruling, the most pressing issue was, and remains, how to create level playing fields to meet the needs of kids who are economically disadvantaged, have special needs, whose first language is not English, and/or who are struggling and falling further and further behind—regardless of where the children live or the demographics of the community.

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) was first signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965. The Title I program of ESEA was created to “aid high-poverty schools in providing supplementary services to low-achieving students” (NCES, n.d.). ESEA has been reauthorized several times since 1965, including the controversial 2002 version–promoted by President George W. Bush–known as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), which focused on trying to close the achievement gap by increasing “accountability, flexibility, and choice.”

Today, Title I supports the education of over 26 million children, which is about 36% of the student population in the United States (All4Ed, 2023). These funds primarily benefit children from low-income families, with schools having a higher percentage of low-income students receiving more Title I funds. In 2021-22, about 63% of traditional public schools and 62% of public charter schools were identified as Title I-eligible (NCES, n.d.).

In 2024, to try to create more equitable opportunities for struggling readers, the Maryland legislature approved a new policy emphasizing the implementation of “Science of Reading” programs, intensive interventions for students with identified reading difficulties, and possible retention in grade 3 if students do not meet the specified reading standards. While the retention component does not take effect until the 2027-2028 school year, districts will be required to implement Student Reading Improvement Plans (SRIP) in SY 2026-2027 for any student identified as demonstrating “difficulties in reading.” Here at NCEED, we are currently developing plans to assess and support effective strategies related to the state’s new literacy policy.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

In looking back, many special educators today remember the spotlight the 2002 NCLB revision of ESEA placed on meeting the academic needs of children with disabilities. However, the slow march for equity for all children began long before 2002. In 1975, Congress enacted the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA) to support states and localities in protecting the rights of and meeting the individual needs of children with disabilities and their families. This “landmark” law’s name changed to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in the 1990 reauthorization.

Before EHA, many children were denied access to education and opportunities to learn. In 1970, U.S. schools educated only one in five children with disabilities, and many states had laws allowing the exclusion of certain students, including “children who were deaf, blind, emotionally disturbed, or had an intellectual disability” (ed.gov, n.d.).

Today, the U.S. is providing more than 8 million children with developmental differences with special education and related services designed to meet their individual needs. In SY 2022-23, more than 66% of children with disabilities were in general education classrooms for 80% or more of their school day, 63% graduated with a regular diploma or certificate of completion, and early intervention services were provided to more than 441,000 infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families (data.ed.gov, 2024).

NCEED’s Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) and Psychological Well-being Pillar focuses on the social and emotional needs of students and their families. Through research and interventions, NCEED is addressing the social, emotional, mental health, and academic needs of students, particularly those disproportionately impacted by structural barriers and marginalization.

Title IX

Looking back, it is often hard to believe how slowly and, sometimes, how rapidly things can change. For example, “It’s hard to imagine that just 40 years ago, young women were not admitted into many colleges and universities, athletic scholarships were rare, and math and science were a realm reserved for boys. Girls could become teachers and nurses, but not doctors or principals; Graduate professional schools openly discriminated against women. Women were rarely awarded tenure and even more rarely appointed college presidents. There was no such thing as sexual harassment because “boys will be boys” (Winslow, 2010).

Western High School Girls’ Basketball, Washington, DC, 1899.
(Courtesy Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division)

In 1971, fewer than 295,000 girls participated in high school varsity athletics, accounting for just 7 percent of all varsity athletes (Winslow, 2010). In SY 2023-2024, 3,423,517 girls participated in high school sports, out of 8,062,302 total (NFHS Survey, 2024). In that same school year, a record 235,735 women participated in intercollegiate sports, encompassing all NCAA divisions (NCAA.org, 2025).

Why has so much changed since 1970? Title IX was written into law in 1972. “For students attending schools and other educational institutions that receive Federal financial assistance… Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681) prohibits discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance” (USCODE Title IX, 2024).

Learning from the Past

As Juneteenth was a critical turning point, so was the passage of landmark educational legislation, including ESEA, Title I, IDEA, and Title IX. But, as with civil rights, the educational freedoms achieved by women and those won for students with disabilities, students of color, and economically disadvantaged children did not come easily or without strident prejudice and opposition. As lawyer David Ferleger noted, “Litigation cannot be the primary tool for social reform. Social reform should (must) grow from social movements and transformations of consciousness” (Borum & Slayter, 2023).

Today, more than at any time in recent memory, it is difficult not to worry that the gains achieved over the past many years are now in jeopardy. In addition, economic-based school segregation is still common, and factors such as intergenerational poverty continue to hinder equal educational opportunities. Despite good intentions, sound programs and initiatives, and hard work, our schools have not closed the achievement gaps, and Black, Brown, economically disadvantaged, and students with disabilities are still being left behind. In 2022, on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading assessment, “The Nation’s Report Card,” 42% of the White 4th graders scored at or above the proficient level in reading compared to 17% of Black 4th graders and 23% of Hispanic 4th graders (NAEP, 2022).

However, here in Maryland, efforts are underway to strengthen social, emotional, and academic outcomes for children, although history tells us that change is difficult and will undoubtedly be resisted by some. At NCEED, we know that the lessons of the past must not be forgotten, and we are working to provide research and programs to support these efforts.

——————————————————-

References:

All4Ed, 2023. Title I At-A-Glance. https://all4ed.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Title-I-At-A-Glance.pdf

All4Ed, 2023. Title I of ESEA: Targeting Funds to High-Poverty Schools and Districts. https://all4ed.org/publication/title-i-of-esea-targeting-funds-to-high-poverty-schools-and-districts/

Borum, V. & Slayter, 2023. An Intersectional Analysis of Disability Resistance Movements: Looking Back to Look Forward. Pressbooks. https://rotel.pressbooks.pub/disabilitysocialwork/

Data. ed.gov, 2024. IDEA Section 618 Part B Child Count and Educational Environments. https://data.ed.gov/dataset/idea-section-618-state-part-b-child-count-and-educational-environments/resources.

Data. ed.gov, 2024. IDEA Section 618 Part C Child Count and Educational Environments. https://data.ed.gov/dataset/idea-section-618-state-part-c-child-count-and-settings/resources.

Ed.gov, n.d. A History of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/IDEA-History#1980s-90s

Ed.gov, n.d. Title IX and Sex Discrimination. https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/civil-rights-laws/title-ix-and-sex-discrimination#.

NAEP, 2022. National Assessment of Educational Progress. https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading/nation/achievement/?grade=4

NCAA.org, 2024. A look at trends for women in college sports. https://www.ncaa.org/news/2023/3/1/media-center-a-look-at-trends-for-women-in-college-sports.aspx#.

NCAA, 2025 (McGuire, C.). Celebrating progress: women’s representation in NCAA sports, leadership roles. https://www.ncaa.org/news/2025/3/1/media-center-celebrating-progress-womens-representation-in-ncaa-sports-leadership-roles.aspx

NCES, n.d. National Center for Educational Statistics. Title I. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=158#:~:text=1,4%20percent).

NFHS High School Athletics Participation Survey, 2024. https://www.si.com/high-school/news/a-record-8-million-athletes-competed-in-high-school-sports-in-2023-24.

Slayter, E., & Johnson, L. M. (Eds.). (2023). Social work practice and disability communities: An intersectional anti-oppressive approach. Pressbooks. https://rotel.pressbooks.pub/disabilitysocialwork/

USCODE Title IX, 2024. Title IX: Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. 1681. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2023-title20/pdf/USCODE-2023-title20-chap38-sec1681.pdf

Winslow, 2010. The Impact of Title IX. The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-now/journals/turning-points-american-sports.