Plaintiff Witnesses Decry Conditions in South Carolina Schools, Seeking Equal Opportunity 50 Years after Brown v. Board of Education

For seven weeks ending October 10, 2003, eight rural school districts (chosen to represent all 36 plaintiff districts), in the Abbeville v. State school funding "adequacy" case presented evidence in support of their allegations that the state's school funding system is inadequate and unfair and continues to deny their mostly minority and low-income students an equal educational opportunity.

Parallel to Briggs v. Elliot and Brown v. Board of Education

State circuit court judge Thomas W. Cooper is hearing Abbeville in Clarendon County, South Carolina, the same county where Briggs v. Elliot originated. Briggs was one of three cases from South Carolina, Virginia, and Delaware, that the U.S. Supreme Court decided along with Brown v. Board of Education case (from Kansas) in its landmark 1954 desegregation decision. Like Abbeville, Briggs sought equal educational opportunity.

Many organizations are planning events commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Brown decision in 2004, and federal courts are ending many long-standing desegregation orders.

The Trial

Since the trial began in late July, witnesses from the school districts themselves and high-level officials from the state Department of Education (DOE), as well as a South Carolina business leader, a state senator, and state and national education experts have testified for plaintiffs. As reported frequently in the Columbia, South Carolina The State newspaper, plaintiff witnesses have reiterated the widely known low test scores and extremely low graduation rates of students in these districts and have spoken to the consequences for these youngsters, "who are not going to have the skills to enter the work force and be productive citizens."

Plaintiffs, represented by Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, have also presented witnesses who have testified about educational programs, such as high-quality preschool, quality teaching, and early literacy interventions, which have proven track records of success and would, plaintiffs contend, greatly improve student outcomes – if the districts had adequate funding to pay for them.

The deputy superintendent in charge of curriculum and testing at the state DOE explained the state's increasingly challenging student learning standards – in English, math, social studies and science – and testified that the state has not given local educators enough guidance on how to teach to the standards, especially in what she described as understaffed rural districts.

"Fact witnesses," such as school district superintendents, curriculum directors, and principals have described difficulties their districts and schools face, including:

devastating teacher turnover due to low salaries and meager benefits

uncertified teachers

buildings in shoddy condition

lack of equipment

overcrowding

growing numbers of ELL students, and

graduation rates that vary between 33% and 57% in the eight districts.

The trial judge has commitments to hear other cases until January 5, 2004, when the Abbeville trial will resume.

Prepared by Molly A. Hunter, October 13, 2003