During the 19^th and 20^th centuries, Pennsylvania was a center of the anti-slavery movement, part of the route of the Underground Railroad, among the principal destinations of the Great Migration of the descendants of enslaved Africans from the Jim Crow former slave states of the south.

But these days, the Keystone State can no longer be considered by Black people as a gateway to freedom. Especially when it comes to their children attaining a high-quality education.

Today, just 17 percent of African-American adults in Pennsylvania have attained a baccalaureate or advanced degree compared to 31 percent of White, non-Hispanic adults. In fact, the level of higher education attainment for Blacks in the Keystone state is lower than the 20 percent national average for all African American adults.

Fifteen percent of Pennsylvania’s Black residents leave school without a high school diploma. That is higher than the nine percent average for White residents and two percentage points greater than the 11 percent national average for all African Americans.

The consequences can be seen in the economy. A much higher percentage of White residents than Black residents are employed in managerial occupations.  A much higher percentage of Black residents than White are employed in service occupations. Black family incomes are both lower than those of White families in the state and lower than the national average for African-Americans.  The poverty rate for the 1.4 million Black residents of Pennsylvania is more than triple that for White Pennsylvanians.

These matters are all connected.  Adults, particularly Black adults, without a high school diploma have little chance for middle class careers, those without college degrees little chance of securing jobs in the professions. Children whose parents have not graduated from college have less of a chance to do well in school than those whose parents are well-educated.

By failing to close the gaps in both the amount and quality of educational opportunities between Black and White residents of Pennsylvania, its state and local officials ensure that Pennsylvania’s racially-based caste system will remain in place.

The educational and racial caste system begins early. Pennsylvania is ranked 30^th for access to pre-kindergarten for 4-year olds by the National Institute for Early Education Research. High quality pre-kindergarten programs have positive effects that continue to be evident through the primary grades.

Perhaps in part because of limited access, Pennsylvania’s early childhood education system does not have the expected positive results in the primary grades for Black children, just 15 percent of whom are in the state’s prekindergarten classrooms.  While 49 percent of White, non-Hispanic, fourth-graders are taught to read at the level expected at that grade, only 17 percent of Pennsylvania’s African-American fourth graders read at grade level.

The Keystone State’s big-city districts especially lag far behind national averages in teaching fourth grade students to read.  While nationally 30 percent of urban children read at grade level in fourth grade, Pennsylvania’s urban schools successfully teach only 19 percent of their students to read proficiently in primary school, while the state’s suburban schools teach more than half of their students to read well—approximately the same proportion left functionally illiterate in fourth grade by the state’s urban schools.

While Pittsburgh’s Black and White kids sometimes end up in the same schools, they don’t get the same quality of education.

Much of the problem is located in Philadelphia, where just 10 percent of fourth grade African-American students are taught to read proficiently, and even fewer, eight percent, of Black children from lower income families are taught to read to grade level.  In Philadelphia, over 90 percent of Black children from lower income families do not reach grade level in reading and nearly two-thirds are functionally illiterate in fourth grade, as are more than half of Black children from middle class families.

Could more access to high quality prekindergarten classes improve this situation?  Most researchers believe it would.  Why, then, is it that 85 percent of Black children in the state are not given that opportunity?

If a Black child remains in a Pennsylvania public school beyond fourth grade, their chances of being ready for college and career will not improve at all.

By grade eight, the same proportion of White children reading at grade level in eighth grade as in fourth grade and a decline to 13 percent of Black students taught by their schools to read as well as expected in middle school. The state’s record for its White, non-Hispanic, students is better than the national average for the group (42 percent), while that for its Black students is worse than the national average of 16 percent, bringing the state’s racial gap to 34 percentage points greater than the national gap, which is in itself unacceptable, of 27 percentage points.

It is generally expected that education is an important aspect of cultural capital that is passed down within families.  But the attitude toward education in the home seems to be overwhelmed by racial disadvantage in Pennsylvania.

The schools in the state teach nearly a third, 30 percent, of White, non-Hispanic, students whose parents did not progress beyond high school to read at the level expected in eighth grade.  This is more than twice the percentage of the Black children of college graduates reading at grade level in middle school. The positive effects of higher education attainment level in the families of Black students in Pennsylvania appear to be overwhelmed by the lack of educational opportunities for Black students in the schools.

In Pennsylvania, it is the color of your skin, not just the education level of your parents, which counts.

While the opportunities for high-quality education in Philadelphia is almost non-existent.

Student educational attainment in Pennsylvania, as elsewhere, is divided by income as well as by race.  White students from families living in or near poverty, and therefore eligible for the National Lunch Program, read at grade level in eighth grade half as often as students from more prosperous White families in Pennsylvania. Black students from families living in or near poverty, and therefore eligible for the National Lunch Program, read at grade level in eighth grade just under two-thirds as often in Pennsylvania as Black students from middle class families.

The gap between Black students from poorer families and White students from prosperous families is more than forty percentage points. The gap based on income among White students is approximately twenty points, among Black students it is just eight points. Family economic status matters much more for Pennsylvania’s White, non-Hispanic, students than it does for the state’s African-American students.  One explanation for this might be that, as in New York City, higher family income in Pennsylvania does not protect Black students from relegation to inferior, segregated, schools.

Racial disparities in Pennsylvania compound those of economic class.

The racial gap for students from lower income families is 15 points in Pennsylvania, as it is nationally, but that for students from middle class families is 38 points in Pennsylvania, 14 points greater than the national average. A White student from a comparatively prosperous family in Pennsylvania is approximately five times as likely to be brought to grade level in eighth grade reading as a Black student from a low-income family.  A Black student from a comparatively prosperous family in Pennsylvania is not as likely to read at or above grade level in eighth grade as is a White student eligible for the National Lunch Program.

In Pennsylvania, it is the color of your skin, not just the color of your money, which counts.

As with fourth grade, in eighth grade the lack of educational opportunities for African-American students is especially acute in the urban districts.  More than 90 percent of Black students from lower income families in city schools are not taught to read at grade level in middle school and half are left functionally illiterate.  Even middle class Black students are denied a meaningful education in the state’s urban schools: Just 12 percent of them are taught to read at grade level in eighth grade.  It is not that the schools are unable to teach their students to read.

Twenty percent of lower income White students in city schools read proficiently in eighth grade, as do more than half of urban middle class White students.  And in suburban schools nearly a third of lower income and nearly two-thirds of middle class White students are taught to read proficiently.

Pennsylvania Secretary of Education Pedro Rivera is one of the people responsible for the state’s failures to provide high-quality education to Black children. But he’s not the only one.

In Pennsylvania, it is the color of your skin, not just the location of your school, which counts.

The reality of the failure of the state’s education system is partially hidden behind the inflated results reported by the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment. In 2016, the state reported that 58 percent of eighth-graders read at Proficient and Advanced (grade) levels, while 11 read Below Basic. This doesn’t square with the National Assessment of Eduational Progress, which reports that only 40 percent of Keystone State eighth-graders were Proficient and above in reading while 22 percent scored Below Basic.

As we know by now, NAEP is considered “the gold standard” of education assessment.  The PSSA does not meet that standard.  The children of Pennsylvania are not well-served by an assessment system that conceals the deficiencies of their schools.

But Black children in Pennsylvania aren’t just punished with low-quality education. The overuse of out-of-school suspensions and other harsh traditional forms of school discipline also damage their prospects.

A study by the Council of State Governments Justice Center has established that school discipline practices are a good indicator of the racial prejudices of the adults in the schools.  The researchers found that disciplinary actions by teachers and school administrators for subjective issues, “attitude” and such, were much more likely against African-American than White or Hispanic students, while those for actions that can be objectively assessed, such as violence, were more evenly distributed among the racial and ethnic groups.

As with crime statistics, which measure police and prosecutor activity, not simply the activities of those arrested, so school discipline data is a measure of the activities and attitudes of teachers and administrators, not just those of students.  This can be seen in Pennsylvania, where more than five times the percentage of Black students (17 percent) as White students (three percent) were given at least one out-of-school suspension.

It has been found that out-of-school suspensions, like expulsions, are an efficient way to discourage students from completing their educations.

What about graduation rates? The four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate reported by Pennsylvania for the 2014-15 school year was 72 percent for Black students and 89 percent for White students. Given that only 13 percent of Black students and 47 percent of White students were reading at grade level in 2011, when they were in eighth grade, it appears that just nine percent of Black students in Pennsylvania who began their high school education four years earlier and less than half (42 percent) of White students received their diplomas while reading at eighth-grade proficiency or better.

The value of the state’s high school diplomas for college and career readiness has been measured by the College Board.  According to the College Board, in 2015 just 12 percent of Pennsylvania’s African-American SAT takers met the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark.  Of course, only those students considering college take the SAT.

This is clear: Pennsylvania educates its White students, and does not educate its Black students, so that three times the former as the latter read at grade level in middle school. On average, just 9 percent of the Black students who begin high school in Pennsylvania, and less than half of the White students, graduate reading proficiently.

That is not a good record for White students.  It is a catastrophe for Black students.

Two-thirds of African-Americans in the state of Pennsylvania live in just three counties: Philadelphia, neighboring Delaware and Allegheny County (Pittsburgh). The responsibility for the catastrophic educational failure of the schools in the state can be attributed to the administrations of the districts in those counties, particularly Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

The professed mission of the School District of Philadelphia is to provide to “every child in Philadelphia an excellent public school education and ensure all children graduate from high school ready to succeed, fully engaged as a citizen of our world.” The Board of the Pittsburgh Public Schools states in its mission statement that “We will hold ourselves accountable for preparing all children to achieve academic excellence and strength of character, so that they have the opportunity to succeed in all aspects of life.”

The four-year graduation rate for Philadelphia’s Black students is just 61 percent; that for Pittsburgh’s can be estimated at 64 percent. Very few of these graduates are “career- and college-ready.”  Fewer than ten percent were able to read proficiently when in eighth grade; fewer met the College Board’s standard for college and career readiness. They are, instead, prepared to reproduce the trajectory of their parents’ generation, with little chance of upward socio-economic mobility and a good chance of a life of poverty.

Who is responsible?  These people are responsible: The School Reform Commission of Philadelphia, controlled by the governor of the state, is responsible for the failure of the Philadelphia schools to educate most of its African-America students; the Superintendent and Board of Directors of the Pittsburgh Schools, for its failure to educate most of its African-American students. The state’s Secretary of Education and the state Board of Education; the state legislature and the governor are responsible for the race-based allocation of educational opportunities throughout Pennsylvania.

Most directly the governor and the two big-city district superintendents should be held accountable for failing to preparing all children so that they have the opportunity to succeed in life.

Mississippi and Michigan are the states in the country with the lowest percentage of African-American students reading at or above grade level in eighth grade.  Mississippi teaches just 8 percent of its Black students to read to national standards in middle school; Michigan teaches just 9 percent.  [The national average is for Black students is 15 percent.]

In both states, about half are functionally illiterate, tested at the “Below Basic” level by the National Assessment of Educational Progress. As the percentage of students reading at grade level changes little between 8^th and 12th grades, it means that more than 90 percent of Black students in these states are unlikely to graduate from high school college- and career-ready.

It would, of course, be unjust to say that in the 21^st century the goal of educators in Michigan and Mississippi is to so limit educational opportunities for Black students that 90 percent cannot read at grade level in middle school, that half are functionally illiterate, that nearly a fifth of Black adults in Michigan and a quarter of those in Mississippi have not finished high school. But what can we say about institutions, and those in responsible positions in those institutions, that year after year fail to meet their responsibilities 90 percent of the time?

Mississippi, the quintessential post-Confederate state, has the nation’s highest percentage of descendants of enslaved Africans: 37 percent.  In Michigan, far to the north, only 14 percent of the population is Black, although there are many more African-Americans in Michigan, 1.4 million, than in Mississippi—1.1 million. Mississippi did not repeal its constitutionally mandated restrictions on voting by means of poll taxes and literacy tests until 1975 nor the requirement for segregated schools until 1978 (a quarter century after Brown).  Michigan has never had a poll tax or a literacy test for the franchise, nor de jure segregated schools.

While the Black population of Mississippi is fairly evenly distributed about the state, although especially dense in the plantation counties along the Mississippi river, that of Michigan is highly concentrated in its southeastern corner, primarily the formerly industrial cities of Detroit, Flint and Saginaw, with a Brown University segregation index for the Detroit metropolitan area of 80, on a scale where 60 is considered very high.

Despite their similarities, there are major differences in the ways that the two states distribute, or, rather, restrict, educational opportunities. In Michigan, over half of Black families and one-third of White families have incomes low enough to qualify their children for free- or reduced-price school lunches; in Mississippi, over one-third of White families and over two-thirds of Black families have qualifying incomes (or qualifying lack of incomes). Both states educate very few of their children, of either race, from low-income families. Each brings just seven percent of their African-American children from low-income families to reading proficiency in eighth grade.  Mississippi manages this marginally better than Michigan for its White students from comparatively poor families: 25 percent to 23 percent.

The picture is quite different among students from more prosperous families.  Mississippi does much better than Michigan for those among them who are descendants of enslaved African, educating just over a quarter to reading proficiency in eighth grade, which we should note is more than either state does for its impoverished White students. Michigan only manages to bring 12 percent of its students from the upper half of the Black family income distribution to grade level in reading in middle school.  Nearly four times that percentage of middle class White children in Michigan learn to read proficiently in eighth grade.

One interpretation of these results would be that while educational opportunity in Mississippi’s public schools is chiefly distributed by income for both Black and White students, while in Michigan, educational opportunities are chiefly distributed by race, with less regard to income. The gap between lower income Black and White students in each state is approximately the same, but the gap between higher income Black and White students is much larger in Michigan. More than twice the percentage of Black students from higher income families in Mississippi read at grade level are brought to grade level in reading than in Michigan.

Few of the Wolverine State’s black children graduate with the knowledge they need for lifelong success.

However, it should be noted that while among White residents of Mississippi, almost two-thirds have incomes high enough to make students from those families ineligible for the National Lunch Program. Just one-third of Black families have incomes sufficient to make their students ineligible for the National Lunch Program. In other words, dividing educational resources by economic class in Mississippi results in increased opportunities for two-thirds of those from White families and decreased opportunities for two-thirds of those from Black families.

At the classroom level, out-of-school suspensions in both states are inflicted on a racial basis.  Schools in Mississippi give Black students more than one-out-of-school suspension three times as often as they do to White students; Michigan does this four times as often to Black as White students, resulting in nearly a fifth of Michigan’s Black students being kept out of the classroom at some point in their school careers. Research has shown that out-of-school suspensions have an efficient negative effect on student learning and frequently lead to the need to repeat grades and, eventually, to leaving school without a diploma.

Mississippi reports a graduation rate for its Black students of 77 percent, for its White students, 83 percent, a six-percentage point racial difference, considerably less than the 13 percent national difference.  Michigan reports a graduation rate for its Black students of 68 percent, for its White students, 83 percent, close to a 15 percent racial difference.  This is bad enough.  But if we look at the basic skill of reading mastered by these students when they were in eighth grade, we can conclude that just nine percent of Black students in Michigan and eight percent of Black students in Mississippi graduate able to read at least at the level desired for middle school students. This means that 59 percent of Black students in Michigan are graduating without the necessary skills for college and a career.

The failure of Michigan to adequately educate its Black residents can be traced to the inequitable support of schools they attend.  Support for public education in Michigan is directly related to the racial make-up of the schools in each district. In the schools of Ann Arbor—where the University of Michigan is located—the schools are more than 90 percent White. The median family income is considerably higher than the state average, as are teacher salaries. The pupil-to-teacher ratio is lower (better) than the state average.

In Detroit, with a student enrollment that is 80 percent Black and a median family income just above half of the state average, teachers are paid less than the state average and the pupil-to-teacher ratio is considerably higher. Nearly 200,000 of Michigan’s 280,000 Black public school students are in the districts of the Detroit metropolitan area and nearby Flint.  The Detroit public schools are under state control and therefore the state government—the legislature and the governor—are directly responsible for how they educate, or fail to educate, their students. The decisions leading to these disparities are not “institutional” or “structural.”  They are the decisions of the governor and the legislature of the state of Michigan to give few educational opportunities to the descendants of enslaved Africans, children for whose education they are individually and collectively responsible.

[Some will mention Michigan’s charter schools and the successes the high-quality operators have had in improving student achievement. But the state allows too many low-quality charters to remain open despite lagging performance. Fourteen percent of Michigan’s charters are both low-performing and do little to improve student achievement, according to Stanford University’s Center for Research on Educational Outcomes; while just one of the 11 charters shut down in 2015-2016 were closed because of academic failure, according to data from the Wolverine State’s Department of Education.]

The only districts in Mississippi with large numbers of Black students are the public schools in the state capitol, Jackson, enrolling 28,000 Black students and those in Desoto County, in the far northwest corner of the state, near Memphis, which enroll 11,000.  According to NAEP, none of the eighth-graders attending Mississippi’s big-city schools read at grade level or above.

Private schools have little effect on the educational opportunities of Black students from low-income families in either Mississippi or Michigan. Private school tuition in Mississippi for a family with two children, one in elementary school and one in high school, would amount to nearly a third of the family income of the average Black family in the state. Similarly, an average Black family in Michigan, with two children, one in elementary school and one in high school, would have to find nearly 40 percent of its income to pay for their private school tuition.

Michigan and Mississippi have separate paths to limiting educational opportunities for the descendants of enslaved Africans.  That followed by Michigan is the racially targeted unequal distribution of educational resources.  That followed by Mississippi is economically focused disparities in education quality in the context of centuries of Black poverty. They both work equally well to perpetuate the status of descendants of enslaved Africans as three-fifths of an American.

College graduation is increasingly important for employment and other economic and social factors.

In Michigan, college graduation rates for both Black and White adults are lower than national averages: 29 percent of White residents have a Bachelor’s degree or higher and 17 percent of Black residents, compared to the national averages of 32 percent and 20 percent, respectively.  The college graduation rate for Black residents of Michigan is almost exactly three-fifths of the White college graduation rate in the state. In large part because of the state’s failure to educate its African-American students, while the median family income of White residents is $68,300, that of Black residents is just over half of that: $37,100. The poverty rate for Black families in Michigan is three and a half times that for White families.

In Mississippi, the state’s percentage of Black adults with Bachelor’s degrees (14 percent) is also three-fifths of the percentage of White adults with Bachelor’s degrees or higher (24 percent). The unemployment rate for African-Americans in the state is more than twice that for White residents.  The median family incomes of both White and Black Mississippi residents are also considerably below national averages.  That of White residents is $62,200, that of Black residents is, again, just over half that: $32,500, hardly different from the ratio in Michigan. The poverty rate for Mississippi’s Black families is three times that for White families.

Recently, the director of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services was charged with misconduct in office, a felony, for his role in the Flint water crisis.  It is an interesting precedent. The officials – governors, legislators, members of state and local boards of education and others—who have been responsible for restricting educational opportunities for Black residents of these states could act differently. They could provide the resources needed to close the gaps between the education now provided to their Black students and that provided to their White students.

Michigan’s political leaders could improve educational opportunities for all students.  They have not.  They do not.  It is not because they cannot. It is because they will not.