Environmental Concerns: Habitat Fragmentation

What is it?

Discontinuities in an organism's preferred environment causing population fragmentation (a form of population segregation). Habitat fragmentation includes 5 discrete phenomena:

• Reduction in the total are of the habitat
• Increase in the interior-edge ratio
• Isolation of one habitat fragment from other areas of habitat
• Breaking up of one patch of habitat into smaller patches
• Decrease in the average size of each patch of habitat

What causes it?

Natural causes

• Volcanism
• Fire
• Climate Change

Human Causes

Habitat fragmentation is frequently caused by humans when native vegetation is cleared for human activities such as agriculture, rural development, urbanization, and the creation of hydroelectric reservoirs. As a result of these activities, habitats that were once continuous become divided into separate fragments. These separate fragments tend to be isolated from each other separated by cropland, pasture, pavement or barren land. 

Implications

Habitat fragmentation reduces the amount of available habitat (such as rain forest, oceans, marshlands, etc.) for all organisms in an ecological niche. It also involves some degree of habitat destruction. Plants in these areas are usually directly destroyed while mobile animals like birds and mammals retreat into patches of habitat. This often results in crowding and increased competition which may be due in part to the fact that the remaining habitat fragments are smaller than the original habitat. Another issue with fragmentation is that species that cannot move between fragments must make due with what is available in the smaller, isolated patch of habitat; unfortunately, habitat fragments are rarely representative samples of the initial landscape making it difficult for less mobile species to survive. Thus, of significant importance is the area of the fragment.  The size of the new habitat influences the number of species which are present when the fragment was initially created and also influences the ability of these species to survive in the fragment. Small fragments can only support small populations of plants and animals; small populations, however, are more vulnerable to extinction. Therefore, habitat fragmentation is an important cause of species extinction.

Source:
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Habitat_fragmentation?topic=58074

Historical Figures: Orzell Billingsley, Jr.

Orzell Billingsley, Jr

 

(October 24, 1924 - December 14, 2001)

Orzell Billingsley, born in Birmingham, Alabama in 1924, was one of the first African Americans admitted to the Alabama Bar after graduating from Talladega College and Howard University. During his law career, he was deeply involved in civil rights litigation representing both Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks during the 1955 Montgomery Bus Boycott. He also helped to incorporate more than 20 small towns in Alabama that consisted of majority black populations and founded the Alabama Lawyers Association.. Billingsley is perhaps most well-known for his 15 year defense of Caliph Washington who was falsely accused and later convicted of killing a white police officer by an all-white jury. A significant legal ramification of this case was the end of all-white juries. Active in political causes, he was often called upon by Presidents John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson regarding racial tensions in Alabama during the 1960s. Billingsley also fought for a re-write of Alabama's 1901 Constitution and assisted in the establishment of the Alabama Democratic Conference while striving to to offset the segregationist policies of the Alabama Democratic Party.  

Orzell Billingsley, Jr., a widely respected legal authority and representative for the interests of African Americans known as the "black Patrick Henry of Alabama", died of natural causes in Birmingham, Alabama in 2001.

Source: 

http://www.bplonline.org/resources/BlackBirmingham.aspx

Rising Student Loan Debts: Current U.S. Facts & Figures

While everyone from high school teachers and guidance counselors to President Obama have long been encouraging young people to attend college, there is one aspect of post-secondary life that many conveniently forget to seriously discuss: student loan debt. College can be integral in obtaining certain kinds of employment and helping to expand one's intellect, but the costs with it often deter many from attending and some from even applying for admission. This is especially true in low-income communities which see a lower percentage of high school graduates attending 2- or 4-year colleges or universities (here). Those who do attend college, despite rising costs, tend to graduate with a substantial amount of debt.  Currently, a large percentage of young people are taking on federal and/or private loans with little discussion of interest rates and, most importantly, what the final debt will actually be leaving many shocked at the final figure.

The National Post-Secondary Aid Study (NPSAS), conducted by the Department of Education, is a nationwide survey designed to determine how undergraduate students and their parents pay for college. In 2008, NPSAS found that 67% of students graduating from 4-year colleges or universities had student loan debt; this is a 27% increase from 2004. NPSAS also found that:

• 62% of graduates from public universities had student loans
• 72% of graduates from private, non-profit universities had student loans
• 96% of graduates from private, for-profit universities had student loans

Acquiring loans in itself is not necessarily a bad thing as many families do not have huge sums of money saved in order to pay for college outright. The amount of debt that students are taking on, however, has steadily increased over the years. 

• Average debt at public universities: $20,200; a 20% increase from the average of $16,850 in 2004
• Average debt at private, non-profit universities: $27,650; a 29% increase from the average of $21,500 in 2004
• Average debt at private, for-profit universities: 33,050; a 23% increase from the average of $26,850 in 2004

If these debt averages were not high enough, more students than ever are graduating with $40,000 or more in student loans. In 2008, 10% of the graduates from 4-year colleges or universities owed at least $40,000, up from just 3% in 1996. To put it in actual figures, the number of students graduating with substantial debt has increased from about 23,000 students in 1996 to 206,000 students in 2010. There does seem to be racial differences in the percentage of students with high debt as African Americans are the most likely among all racial/ethnic groups to graduate with high debt (again $40,000+). Unfortunately, 4 out of 5 borrowers with high debt have private, non-federal loans which lack important repayment options and consumer protections  afforded to those with federal loans.

Low income students, who are generally thought to reap most of the benefits of financial aid, are also not escaping huge student loan debts. The NPSAS revealed that Pell Grant recipients, whose families earn less than $50,000 per year, are not only much more likely to borrow money for college but also  more likely to borrow more than a non-Pell Grant recipient. Specifically, among graduating seniors who had received a Pell Grant, 87% had student loans with an average debt of $24,800;  fourteen percent of Pell Grant recipients graduated with $40,000 or more in loan debt. Pell Grant recipients who graduate from 4-year for-profit colleges or universities are also more likely to carry at least $40,000 in debt.

In covering the increase in student loan debt, The Huffington Post recently published a story entitled "Majoring in Debt" about college or graduate students with astronomical amounts of debt (see here). The stories presented clearly indicate the ways in which debt can stop one from making decisions such as going to graduate school and starting a business. They also illustrate how debt can change one's perspective on the years they spent in college or graduate school. Jason Watson is a an example of this; Watson, law student at the University of South Carolina, will be $150,000 in debt by the time he graduates. In the article, he states "The debt feels crushing to say the least and it leaves me wondering whether the benefit of a legal education will be worth its cost (here)" Another featured student, Scott Adams, agrees with this sentiment saying "I was just trying to get ahead and it put me more behind. College is a scam unless you can pay for it or get it for free (here)." The ability to enjoy the supposed financial benefits of advanced education is also questioned as Watson says "I'm not sure how I will be able to provide for my wife and son while coping with debt I've amassed in six short years (here)." Other students grapple with their decision to attend college and wonder if attending is a Catch-22; Bliss Davis, an undergraduate at Bowling Green State University who is $40,000 in debt, says "The hardest part about owing so much is knowing that I am being judged for my decision to go to school. If I had not gone to college, I would be considered another statistical waste of space (here)."

Due to the increasing amount of debt that undergraduate students are at times forced to take on, it is imperative that teachers, guidance counselors, and parents speak with their students/children about the potential long term effects of substantial debt. This will result in an informed decision regarding where and whether to attend school at the time. At a higher level, politicians and education 'reformers' should come to understand that one's socioeconomic status and ability to access loans do matter. Therefore, schools and communities, especially those with a high percentage of low income students, should not penalized or looked down upon if students are choosing to forgo college in high numbers. For many, the debt associated with higher education does not outweigh the benefits of an undergraduate degree even if such debt is considered "good."  This may especially be true if the high unemployment and underemployment rates, particularly in low income communities and among people of color, are considered. While student loan debt is ultimately in the hands of the student who incurred it, the state and federal government should look for ways to mitigate crushing debts related to college education in order to make higher learning accessible to anyone who desires to obtain it.

Sources:
http://projectonstudentdebt.org/files/File/Debt_Facts_and_Sources.pdf
http://ticas.org/files/pub/High_Hopes_Big_Debts_2008.pdf

Political Alternatives: The Green Rainbow & Libertarian Parties

The current political deadlock over the debt ceiling has many frustrated with both the Republican and Democratic parties and disillusioned with the American political system. While U. S. politics is  essentially dominated by a two-party system, there other political parties that often produce candidates for a variety of local and state elections. 

Green Rainbow Party (MA; known as Green Party nationally)

Taxes & the Economy

• Supports an ecological approach to economic security in which economic enterprises are a compatible, integrated part of local communities with increases emphasis on local cycles of production, consumption, and recycling
• Calls for tax fairness measures to be implemented to address the unfair tax burden in which lower income people pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes and fees than do wealthier citizens and corporations
• Supports the repeal of the constitutional constraint that forbids providing tax relief by taxing lower income residents at a lower rate than higher income residents
• Supports legislation that would return any state-owned land deemed surplus to local communities to be used for affordable housing, local agriculture, public open space or enhanced community sustainability
• Supports programs to create community-based green jobs such as renewable energy, energy efficiency, sustainable agriculture, public transportation and recycling
• Supports the pursuit of food security by increasing the fraction of food that is locally grown
• Opposes increased reliance on regressive forms of revenue production such as the sales tax, gambling casinos, the state lottery and fees

Health care

• Support moving to a single-payer health care
• Calls for the elimination of any penalties upon people who do not purchase private health care coverage 
• Demands that steps be taken to ensure that people do not lose their health coverage when their employment situation changes

Education

• Calls for a value-oriented public school system that emphasizes the importance of literacy, good citizenship, civic participation and healthy self-realization
• Opposes the privatization of public education 
• Supports access to quality, free public education at all levels and support significant rollbacks of tuition and fees at public colleges and universities
• Supports real commitments to eliminate disparities in education and prohibit using standardized tests to punish students

Source: www.massgreens.org

Libertarian Party

Taxes & the Budget

• Supports cutting taxes 
• Supports reducing a defense budget it believes a large percentage of is spent defending "wealthy countries like Germany and Japan"
• Also supports ending or reducing foreign aid which it calls "welfare for nations"
• Opposes bailing out private industries

Health care

• Supports establishing Medical Savings Accounts
• Supports deregulating the health care industry
• Supports removing barriers to safe, affordable medicines

Poverty & Welfare

• Supports ending welfare; believes that the government should "get out of the charity business" and allow private charities and groups, who it believes to be more efficient, to help the truly needy
• Supports establishing a dollar for dollar tax credit for contributions to a private charity; believes this will help to facilitate a transfer from government welfare to private charity
• Supports eliminating barriers to economic growth such as the minimum wage and mandates benefits
• Believes that poverty cannot be solved without addressing public education system; supports school choice and a free marketplace in education

Source: www.lp.org

Education and the U. S. Supreme Court

Here's a look at some important education-related Supreme Court cases:

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896): upheld the constitutionality of state laws requiring racial segregation in private businesses under the doctrine of "separate but equal" contending that laws separating the races were not in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and were a matter of public policy. Plessy v. Ferguson not only cemented the legal foundation for the 'separate but equal' doctrine, but paved the way for the Jim Crow system.  While the court found no difference in quality in things such as whites-only and blacks-only railway cars (the issue that started the initial case), the same could not be said for public education where facilities designed for blacks were wholly inferior. Southern states, however, refused to provide African Americans with equal facilities or funding after the Plessy decision. Racial differences in educational funding would persist well into the 20th century.



Lum v. Rice (1927):  held that the exclusion on account of race of a child of Chinese ancestry did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. This decision approved the exclusion of minority students from schools reserved for whites.

The case was filed after 9-year old Martha Lum was prohibited from attending the Rosedale Consolidated High School in Bolivar, Mississippi because she was of Chinese descent. There was no school in the district reserved for Chinese students and she was forced by compulsory attendance laws to attend school. A lower court granted a request to force members of the Board of Trustees to admit Martha Lum; her father Gong Lum's case argued not that discrimination was illegal but that his daughter, being Chinese (not black) was incorrectly labeled 'colored' by authorities. After losing the case, the Board of Trustees brought it before the state Supreme Court which reversed the lower court's decision and allowed for the exclusion of Martha from schools reserved for whites. Gong Lum then brought the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court, however, affirmed the state Supreme Court's ruling. In an unanimous opinion written by Chief Justice William Howard Taft, the Court found that "a child of Chinese blood, born in and a citizen of the United States is not denied the equal protection of the law by being classed by the state among the colored races who assigned to public schools separate from those provided for the whites when equal facilities for education are afforded to both classes."



Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954): initially filed in 1951 by 13 Topeka, KS parents on behalf of their 20 children, Brown called for the Topeka school district to end its policy of racial segregation.  The plaintiffs in Brown asserted that the system of racial separation allowed under Plessy perpetuated inferior accommodations, services and treatment for black Americans. The District Court disagreed and ruled on behalf of the Board of Education citing the precedent set by Plessy and stating that  while segregation had a negative effect on African American children, it denied integration would resolve this issue. The reason: that black and white schools in Topeka were equal with regard to facilities, transportation, curricular and education qualifications of teachers.

Later taken to the Supreme Court, the case as it was heard combined five other cases: Brown itself, Briggs v. Elliot (South Carolina), Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County (Virgina), Gebhart v. Belton  (Delaware), and Bolling v. Sharpe (Washington, D.C.). Decided on May 17, 1954, the Warren Court's unanimous decision held that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal," thereby declaring segregation unconstitutional. Specifically, racial segregation was ruled in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, paving the way for integration. As a result of the Brown decision, all Topeka elementary schools were changed to neighborhood attendance centers in January 1956. This case also overturned the decision in Lum v. Rice. While the fight for desegregation continued long after Brown, this was a landmark decision in the civil rights movement.

Engel v. Vitale (1962): challenged public school prayer calling it an unconstitutional state establishment of religion in violation of the First Amendment. Plaintiffs in this case were families of public school students in New Hyde, NY that the voluntary prayer to "Almighty God" contradicted their religious beliefs. They argued that opening the school day with a prayer violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment  which says in part "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."  The governments of 22 states signed a brief urging affirmation of the New York Court of Appeals decision that upheld school prayer as constitutional. The American Ethical Union, the American Jewish Committee, and the Synagogue Council of America also submitted briefs, but called for a reversal of the decision and asked that school prayer be deemed unconstitutional. The Supreme Court sided with the plaintiffs in a 6-1 decision, finding that government directed prayer in schools violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment even if the prayer is denominationally neutral and students may remain silent or be excused from the classroom during its recitation.

San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973): held that "reliance on property taxes to fund public schools does not violate the Equal Protection Clause even if it causes inter-district expenditure disparities. Absolute equality of education funding is not required and a state system that encourages local control over schools bears a rational relationship to a legitimate state interest."  The majority opinion in this case found that education was not a fundamental right that existed within the U. S. Constitution and was not subject to strict scrutiny. 

In 1968, the Edgewood Concerned Parents Association sued San Antonio ISD, Alamo Heights ISD and five other district schools, the Bexar County School Trustees and the State of Texas contending that the Texas  method of school financing violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The lawsuit claimed that education was a fundamental right and that wealth-based discrimination in education, created in the poor a constitutionally suspect class that was protected from discrimination. Particularly,  the schools in San Antonio has a long history of financial inequity such that the primarily white areas of town were able to contribute more per child than Edgewood, a low income, minority area. The case advanced through the court system with the Edgewood parents as the victors until 1972. In a 5-4 decision, the court found that education "neither implicitly or explicitly protected in the Constitution" and that Texas had not created a suspect class related to poverty. 

Plyler v. Doe (1982): held that a Texas statute denying free public education to illegal aliens violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, because discrimination on the basis of immigration status did not further a substantial state interest. In Texas, revisions to states laws in 1975 withheld state funds for educating children who had not been legally admitted to the United States and authorized local school boards to deny enrollment to undocumented children. A 5-4 majority decision found that this policy was in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment as illegal immigrant children are people "in any ordinary sense of the term" and therefore had protection from discrimination a substantial state interest could be shown to justify it. It also found that the Texas law was "directed against children and imposed its discriminatory burden on the basis of a legal characterization over which children can have little control" and that denying the children in question an education would likely contribute to "the creation and perpetuation of a subclass of illiterates within our boundaries, surely adding to the costs of unemployment, welfare and crime." This case was decided together with Texas v. Certain Named and Unnamed Alien Children 

Source: www.justia.com

This Day in History: July 24

-Antoine de la Monthe Cadillac  founds the trading post at Fort Pontchatrain, which later becomes the city of Detroit, MI, 1701

-Slavery is abolished in Chile, 1823

-Brigham Young leads 148 Mormon pioneers into Salt Lake Valley, resulting in the establishment of Salt Lake City, 1847

-Zelda Fitzgerald, American artist, is born, 1900

-The Treaty of Lausanne is signed in Switzerland by Greece, Bulgaria and other countries that fought in World War I settling the boundaries of modern Turkey, 1923

-The Kellogg-Briand Pact, renouncing war as an instrument of foreign policy goes into effect after being signed in Paris in a year earlier, 1929

-Alabama drops rape charges against 4 of the 9 Scottsboro boys (Willie Roberson, Olen Montgomery, Eugene Williams & Roy Wright) after they had spent 6 years in prison, 1937

-End of the four day long Libyan-Egyptian War, 1977

-Holiday: Simon Bolivar Day (Ecuador, Venezuela, Colombia & Bolivia)

Dropout Rates by Selected Population II: Lynn

In my last post, I discussed the 4 year cohort dropout rates for selected populations in low-income communities (see here). Cohort drop out rates indicate the percentage of students in the same graduating class that dropped out over a 4 year period before receiving a diploma. As a native of Lynn, MA, the particularly high dropout rates for Limited English Proficiency, special education, Hispanic and African American students bothered me. This information also led to me questions. How significant is it really that 31.9% of special education students in Lynn will drop out at some point during high school? If the special education population is for example, 100 students then the number of special ed students dropping out would be about 30; if this population is much larger (say 1,000), the number of drop outs from this group would be substantial.

Here is a comparison between the demographics of the 3 Lynn high schools as a whole (not just graduating students) (top) with the cohort dropout rates of the same populations (bottom) for 2010; all numbers are percentages except 'total student population':

	Lynn Classical	Lynn English	Lynn Tech
Total Student Population	1,401	1,739	809
Limited English Proficiency	13.3	10.2	19.9
Special Education	11.9	11.2	23.6
Low Income	76.9	73.5	87.1
African American/Black	14.6	13.7	11.6
Asian	13.3	9.9	8.8
Hispanic	40.1	46.7	57.4
White	29.6	26.1	19.5
Male	51.4	52	59.2
Female	48.6	48	40.8

	Lynn Classical	Lynn English	Lynn Tech
All Students	10.8	9.8	27.1
Limited English Proficiency	30.6	14.9	32.6
Special Education	27.3	22	32.2
Low Income	11.1	10.3	25.2
African American/Black	12.8	14.7	33.3
Asian	2.3	10	36.8
Hispanic	16.5	10	29.8
White	8.3	8.5	19.1
Male	11.7	12.8	24.7
Female	9.8	7.1	30.7

EDIT: There seems to have been some confusion about what the percentages mean. The top table indicates the percentage of in each of the selected populations. The nature of these categories is such that one student could be counted in more than one population (i.e. African American AND low-income; Caucasian AND special education). The only percentages that should/do add up to 100% are male/female; the minority labels do not add up to 100% exactly because there are other, small categories (bi-racial, multi-racial, Native American/Pacific Islander).


The bottom table represents the percentage of each population that drops out. For example, 32.6% of Limited English proficiency students at Lynn Tech dropped out of school during 2009-10. The percentages here will not add up to 100% because these are dropout rates for individual categories that are not mutually exclusive. In other words, just because someone is counted as African American does not mean that he or she will not show up in any other categories. Thus putting numbers here as opposed to percentages would not make much sense and also would not add up to the number indicated in the 'total student population' box.


Sadly, from this we see that Lynn has over 200 students dropping out of school each year. More importantly the answer to the initial question becomes more clear. A substantial number of students in Lynn are Limited English Proficiency, special education and/or low income students; there the significant dropout rates for these communities are a problem that needs to be actively addressed. While the Lynn Public School system has a number of issues to work on including overcrowding and poor MCAS scores, the dropout rate is an important aspect of the educational system that requires attention.

*Part III (Coming July 25): Dropout Rates by Selected Population: SES: See how Lynn compares to its North Shore neighbors

All data taken from: www.doe.mass.edu