On December 18, the superintendent issued a reply to the Urban League. He stated first that "classrooms" in the 1948 report meant "total classrooms" and in the 1961 report meant "available classrooms," a concept excluding library, home mechanics, and other rooms. Thus the 1948 report was said to exaggerate the number of rooms. This would explain the apparent undercounting in the white areas by the present superintendent. But when one recalls the alleged "overcounting" in the Negro areas in the 1961 report, the explanation is less satisfactory. If the present superintendent's method of counting produced fewer rooms in white schools than the 1948 report, it should have done so in the Negro areas as well, but the opposite was true.

The second major criticism by the superintendent of the Urban League report is clear. As the league had indicated was possible, some of the 382 rooms had been demolished-in fact, the superintendent said, 84 rooms, or 22.4 percent no longer existed.

The superintendent's third objection to the league's report was the listing as "vacant" of rooms in fact being used for high school branches. This accounted for 62 rooms or 16.2 percent of the total.

If the first objection to the league report is disregarded as meaningless, the report erred to the extent of 38.6 percent or 146 rooms. Of course, this would mean that 236 empty rooms (61.4 percent) had in fact been identified.

On January 10, the superintendent issued a more detailed statement of total available classroom space in the schools studied by the Urban League. This report again employs a more "conservative" method of counting rooms than that ascribed to the 1948 report. On this basis it demonstrates that there has been no undercounting in the white schools and that for these schools the 1948 and 1961 reports, when adjusted for the difference in method, agree almost precisely. Unfortunately, it again demonstrates that on the same basis the overcounting for the Negro schools in the 1961 report would be even greater. For the 4 schools reported in district 13, the superintendent's figures show 11 more rooms than the 1948 report, and the pattern is the same throughout the other Negro districts. This curious result invites other possible explanations of the differences in the two reports. The most obvious possibility is that one of the two reports is simply wrong. Further events failed to clarify the situation. On January 16, the Sun-Times reported a statement by the public relations director of the board of education that 200 classrooms were "available." This figure was later confirmed by the then president of the board. If this last statement is coupled with information from the superintendent himself, indicating that 85 additional rooms would be made available by

31

"Chicago Sun-Times, Mar. 8, 1962. "... But the figures don't mean anything because nobody knows what is a proper or an improper use for classrooms."

32

February graduations, the result is startling. This total of 285 rooms at 35 pupils per room, if the necessary transport were available, could have taken nearly 20,000 pupils off double shift in February without purchasing mobile units. The difficulty with this conclusion is that since no one is sure which figures are correct, the estimate may be an egregious overstatement. On the other hand, it may be

conservative.

In January the classroom-counting contest took a new and dramatic turn. A transfer of children involving several South Side schools raised the question of available space in the nearly all-white Perry school, a situation discussed in greater detail below. The Perry matter eventuated in a suit against the superintendent and board. A second and related court action, this time with Negroes as criminal defendants, grew out of the activity of "truth squads," which began to annoy school administrators in the white areas. These groups consisted principally of Negro mothers who were searching for empty classrooms. Their uninvited, and sometimes opposed, visits resulted in their arrest and conviction on ground of criminal trespass. The defendants received $50 suspended fines in June. They have said that they will appeal.

34

It is interesting to note how the discussion tended to shift from the larger question of underused space to the narrow question of totally vacant classrooms. In answering his critics, the superintendent emphasized not the degree of utilization of the facilities but only the rooms that had no students whatsoever. He seemed to assume in the debate that a classroom in use by a small number of students was not to count as vacant. This left the question of the amount of usable space ambiguous. Under this approach, in comparing a school housing 20 students per class with one housing 45, it was possible to say that neither had vacant space if all rooms were in use.35

Whether or not large numbers of vacant rooms existed, it has remained reasonably clear throughout the controversy that, viewed in

Board of education, Press Release, Oct. 11, 1961.

33 See Burroughs v. Board of Education, discussed infra, pp. 212–15.

84 Chicago Sun-Times, June 6, 1962.

35 It is true, of course, that an underused classroom is not as handy as an empty one. The introduction of transported students into the empty desks in an existing class unit creates more and greater administrative problems than installing the transported group in an empty room. Whether this added difficulty would justify a refusal to transfer children to an underused facility is at best questionable. To recognize such a justification might invite the distribution of students in an unfilled school in small groups so as to preempt all classrooms.

Where there exist classrooms which are totally empty, a different question is posed. May the class units of the receiving school, irrespective of size, properly be kept completely separate from the transported pupils? Where children are bused from an allNegro school to an all-white school, may they be kept completely isolated within the receiving school by assigning them separate facilities? Any answer to this question put in general terms would appear doctrinaire, but to suppose there is no problem is equally unrealistic. Such separation indeed might be a clearer case of discrimination under some circumstances than not busing at all.

terms of relative crowding of facilities, the white schools did have space. This appears clearly from the utilization of over 2,000 spaces in white elementary schools for high school branches proposed on November 8. It appears also from the redistricting plan noted, the object of which was to achieve an average of 30 students per class in 80 schools, primarily white. A later section of this report will suggest that the average class size in the Negro schools was significantly greater than the proposed 30 average. This disparity in class size between Negro and white schools has never been denied by the superintendent. Indeed, its alleviation has been one of the avowed objectives of his building program in the impacted areas.

The disparity appears again indirectly from a comparison with the school population in Chicago in the year 1932-33. At that time, the elementary and high school pupil population (472,789) was only 4.3 percent less than the 1960-61 population (494,270). In the early thirties the problem of the double shift was greatest in areas of the city which were then and still are white. Since those days, the white population of Chicago has declined and its average age has increased with a consequent depopulation of the schools. It is the vast increase in the Negro population-a young and prolific populationthat has filled the pupil ranks. The pressure has come in the main, not on the schools that were overcrowded in the early thirties, but on the schools in the Negro neighborhoods. It is instructive to compare the 1961-62 pupil population of a few of the schools that lie near but outside the West Side Negro districts with the population of those schools in 1930-31:

The 1930-31 figures are taken from a' study prepared by the Greater Lawndale Community Council, Schools Committee. June 28, 1960.

'From the Directory, Illinois Schools, 1961-1962.

The decline in enrollment is marked. Of course, classes were probably overcrowded in 1930-31 and it is possible that demolition has removed space in some of these buildings (although it is also possible that additions have been built). Conceding these unknowns, it remains probable that some of these schools could have accommodated students from Negro schools that were on double shift in 1961-62 if this had been thought desirable.

The school year ended in June with a proposal by the superintendent to create a number of additional high school branches in elementary schools most of which are in white areas. These additional changes will mean that more than a dozen new high school branches will be in operation in white elementary schools in September.s

It is reasonably clear from this mass of indirect evidence that substantial space existed in a number of areas of the city in 1961–62. The new president of the board readily conceded this in an interview, although he stated that he though the Urban League count was exaggerated." Even if the use of this space for high school students in 1962-63 were regarded as imperative because of anticipated high school overcrowding, the failure to use that space during 1961-62 to relieve the overcrowding in impacted areas presents a troublesome appearance.

During 1961-62, the administration, consciously or not, was faced with a choice. It was clear that the overcrowded schools had to be relieved. The issue was whether this should be accomplished by transfers to uncrowded schools or by the purchase of mobile units. When the superintendent took the position that there was no room in other schools for this purpose and the board did not dissent from this conclusion, the issue was foreclosed. Why the superintendent so concluded and why the board accepted his conclusion without inquiry in the face of the evidence is difficult to understand.

In response to a later board directive the superintendent produced a list of total "available classrooms" in each elementary school at the August 22 meeting. This list will be discussed again below, but it should be noted that the report did not satisfy all members of the board. It was objected that a more complete inventory would be necessary to assess the degree of overcrowding properly. The later discussion in this report of class size will indicate that, even on the basis of the superintendent's figures of August 1962, it is clear that substantial disparities existed between schools with respect to the degree of utilization of facilities in 1961-62.

Report to the school board, June 13, 1962. Some of the designated elementary schools which are clearly in predominantly white areas are Boone (2), Dawes (15), Hubbard (15). Jamieson (12), Orr (4), and Taylor (17).

87 Interview, Aug. 1, 1962.

TEACHER CERTIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT

Two matters will be dealt with under this heading: (1) the methods of teacher certification, and (2) the methods of teacher assignment to individual schools."9

Teacher certification is relevant to the question of discriminatory State action only in an indirect way. It is useful, however, in gaining a general picture of the internal character of the Chicago school system. All teachers in the Chicago public schools must be certified. The normal procedure for permanent certification involves the taking of an examination which is in part written and in part oral. The written examination is prepared and administered under contract by one of the national testing services. There are examinations of various kinds given for the different categories of certificates-kindergartenprimary, grades 3-8, trade school, high school, etc. The examination for each category has a slightly different scoring system, usually with a passing mark of about 80.

The oral examinations ordinarily are conducted for individual applicants by an examining board consisting of principals and district. superintendents of the Chicago school system. A minimum grade of 80 is required in all oral examinations. They are ordinarily conducted within the space of a half or three-quarters of an hour-a fraction of the time of the written examinations. The oral examinations are not subject to review. It would be extremely difficult to obtain direct evidence indicating either that the oral examination is or is not employed to exclude teachers because of race. That discrimination is effected in this way appears unlikely, however, since there are a large number of Negro teachers in Chicago.

The principal issue of discrimination in the area of teacher selection involves the assignment of the certified teacher. It is often suggested that Negro teachers are never or rarely assigned to white schools. This is in fact probably true, but it does not of itself, or even in context, demonstrate discrimination. The truth seems to be that ordinarily neither are white teachers assigned originally to white schools. Before this becomes too mysterious it should be observed, first of all, that openings occur with much greater frequency in Negro schools. Since on initial assignment a teacher may choose only among schools with vacancies, he is apt to be assigned to a Negro school whether he is white or Negro. The "popular" schools with fewer openings are generally in the white areas. To transfer to such a school

The information with respect to certification comes principally from the 1961 Circular of Information of the board of education containing "Rules and Information Regarding Examinations of Candidates for Certificates to Teach."

"Information on teacher assignment procedures was gathered in interviews of administrators, principals, and teachers.