Sheff vs O’Neil 2003

Posted on

Sheff vs. O’Neill Stipulation and Order (Phase I, 2003) is a document dealing with the opening and production of Magnet Schools in the Hartford area.  In an attempt to create racial, ethnic, and economic equality, this document provides an abundant plan.  The purpose of a magnet school is to integrate the suburban and city students.  However, there must be guidelines for this to take place.  The percentage of minority students in any school cannot exceed the Sheff region minority percentage enrollment plus thirty percent.  They must reach this number by their third year of operation.  The schools will be run by the public school system and they must follow the Open Choice policy.  The Open Choice policy allows children from Avon, Bloomfield, Canton, East Granby, East Hartford, East Windsor, Ellington, Farmington, Glastonbury, Granby, Hartford, Manchester, Newington, Rocky Hill, Simsbury, South Windsor, Suffield, Vernon, Wethersfield, Windsor, and Windsor Locks to have access to enter a lottery in order to attend these Magnet Schools.  It is important to note that none of these schools are guarantees for residents of these areas.  Seats are guaranteed for a certain number of minority students and the remaining seats are based on lottery.  The State will be an extreme catalyst in the building of these schools.  They will aid in everything from regulating the amount of students per complex to funding the actual construction projects.  The Commissioner also plays a large role in the process of these magnet schools as well.  Through the Commissioner, student’s time spent on the bus was supposed to be cut down, parents were to become more informed, and suburban students were to be persuaded to participate in the Open Choice Policy.   To avoid stagnant educational patterns, parties are to meet no less than twice a year to make sure everything stays fresh and up to date.

Paul von Zielbauer mentions in his article “Change in Hartford” a quote from Susan Eaton. This was prior to the book The Children in Room E4, however Eaton makes a comment stating ”If you compare what they got with what the original vision was, it’s a huge disappointment,” This Sheff case runs parallel and is mentioned in Eaton’s chapter called The Plantiff and is indirectly referred to in the chapter named Separate but Equal? On page 266.  It outlines the inequality within urban and suburban school districts through telling a story of a field trip to Simpson-Waverly Marlborough.