1. Please post substantive replies to each post. at least 100 words per reply.

2.substantive means that your replies have substance, that it helps further the discussion of course content and move the discussion forward. Substantive posts will often include contributions of additional ideas and sources, insights or questions about classmates comments, connections to the course readings, ways of applying the lessons from the course, etc. Short comments, such as “Good idea” or “I agree,” do not constitute substantive posts on their own. Neither do comments that are unrelated to the topics at hand (for example, I saw that movie too!) If you say you agree about something, please explain why you agree, and add an additional insight or question.

Who is John Brittain? Why was he respected in Hartford? (p. 33-35)
Explain one of the main arguments of the Sheff v. O’Neill case. (p. 35-36)
By 2000, Eaton explained that segregation in the neighborhood surrounding Simpson-Waverly “had evolved
into a largely accepted reality.” Why? (p. 36-38)
Explain what happened to the demographics of the Blue Hills neighborhood by the 1990s? (p. 39-40)
What were the hopes and dreams of Jeremy and his classmates? (p. 41-43)
What is the history lesson about immigration and race relations? (p. 44-47)
What do we discover about real estate associations/brokers and their role in segregated neighborhoods? (p.
47)
What was the connection between Hartford and Puerto Rico during the 1950s-1960s? (p. 47-48)
How did the federal government contribute to segregation (or race and class isolation)? (p. 53-54)
Children in Room E4: Part 3 Questions for Journal 7
What was the significance of Milliken v. Bradley in relationship to Hartford’s desegregation efforts?
Explain the significance of Eaton’s (the author) discussion of President Ronald Reagan and Justice William
Rehnquist.
Choose a court case mentioned in this section of the book (other than Milliken v. Bradley) and explain how it
helped or hurt the development of the Sheff v. O’Neill case.
Explain the impact of “the Tirozzi report.”
Explain how the Sheff v. O’Neill case gained support, and what were the main arguments of the case? (p. 102-
112)
Children in Room E4: Part 4 Questions for Journal 7
What did testimony reveal about the condition of Hartford’s separate and segregated schools? (p. 121-127)
What did the testimony of Jomill Braddock (sociologist) and William Trent (professor) reveal about the
detrimental effects of separate and segregated schools? (p. 128-133)
Re-read p. 144. What is the difference between minority and white employees who worked for Aetna, as
described by Badi Foster?
Re-read the last full paragraph on p. 145. At this point in the trial proceedings several witnesses suggested
ways to integrate Hartford’s urban schools. List the ways that were suggested.
Re-read, reflect, and respond to the last full paragraph on p. 157. Connect your comments to what occurred
during the closing remarks on p. 154-157.
What was your reaction to the “champagne controversy” on p. 161-163? Why did it become motivation for the
Sheff v. O’Neill case to continue?
List the highlights of the chapter entitled “Appeal” on p. 164-175.
Chief Justice Ellen Peters wrote the majority decision and explained the court’s reasoning for reversing the
decision of Judge Hammer in the first trial. What were the reasons for reversing the decision? (p. 177-181).

Sample Solution

The post Children in Room E4: Part 2 appeared first on homework handlers.