Step 0: Original Text: “Since the first Sheff trial ended in 1993, scholars across the nation have quietly produced evidence rather decisively documenting the harms of segregation and the benefits of policies and programs that connect racially and economically isolated families to the mainstream. Were John Brittain and Wes Horton only now starting to argue Sheff v. O’Neill in trial court, they might very well be able to make a surer, simpler case.
Before considering this research, it’s useful to acknowledge that “desegregation” represents not merely a “policy” or set of political choices but an aspiration, a moral vision of an inclusive, cohesive society. School desegregation, in particular, is not and never was sold but its advocates merely as the most effective “treatment” for increasing test scores. Evidence, however, does strongly suggest that reducing concentrated poverty—segregation’s ever-present attendant—might in fact contribute to higher achievement.”
Step 1: Plagiarize: It’s useful to acknowledge that “desegregation” represents not merely a “policy” or set of political choices but an aspiration, a moral vision of an inclusive, cohesive society.
Step 2: Plagiarize: Prior to contemplating this research, it is important to recognize that “desegregation” does not simply just signify a “policy” or political decisions but an aspiration, a moral apparition of an all-encompassing, unified society.
Step 3: Plagiarize: Instead of decisively recording the dangers of segregation, scholars throughout the nation have given evidence to the advantages of policies and plans that unite racially and economically segregate families to the mainstream (Eaton, 343).
Step 4: Properly Paraphrase: Susan Eaton speaks about how segregation is not something we should simply look at as a set of political decisions but as a future goal in which our society is completely unified across all racial and economic differences (Eaton, 343).
Step 5: Properly Paraphrase: Although some people would argue that advocates for school desegregation assert that integration would be the most important element for increasing test scores, Eaton says that this is not the claim being made here. Instead Eaton argues that there is evidence that “strongly suggest that reducing concentrated poverty—segregation’s ever-present attendant—might in fact contribute to higher achievement” (Eaton, 343).
Work Cited:
Eaton, Susan E. The Children in Room E4: American Education on Trial. Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin of Chapel Hill, 2007. Print.