The Right to an Education: Connecticut’s 1965 Education Amendment

• How did historical documents like Ludlow’s Code influence modern educational policies in Connecticut?
• What role did Simon Bernstein play in shaping Connecticut’s education rights through the 1965 Constitution?
• How general or specific should language be regarding the rights of citizens?

1. Introduce the lesson with the following questions. Have students turn-and-talk to discuss with a partner:
   • How do you think your education in Connecticut compares to the education students receive in other states?
   • What rights do you believe you have as a student regarding your education?
   • How do you think the government ensures that all students receive a quality education?
2. Explain that the right to an education is not guaranteed by the federal government but is established through state constitutions. Share with students that while the right to public education wasn’t written into Connecticut’s constitution until 1965, the Code of Laws for the Colony of Connecticut (also known as Ludlow’s Code) was adopted in 1650 and established laws to maintain the civil and religious order of the community. The code established two fundamental principles regarding education: the first mandated that the state compel parents and guardians to educate children, while the second allowed public funds, collected through taxes, to be used for education; additionally, towns with 50 households were required to appoint a teacher, and once a town reached 100 families, it had to establish a grammar school to prepare students for university.
3. Divide students into two groups to read parts of Ludlow’s Code: assign each group the excerpt “Children” or “Schools.” What stands out to them? What connections do they see to education today? (Transcriptions are provided, but students may still struggle with more archaic language. Feel free to adapt this section based on your students’ needs.)
4. Remind students that by 1965, however, Connecticut still did not guarantee its citizens a constitutional right to an education, unlike most states. The 1965 Constitutional Convention was called in order to align Connecticut’s representation system with Reynolds v. Sims, but delegate Simon Bernstein felt that Connecticut’s lack of a constitutional guarantee to education needed to be remedied. While his peers were focused on their one task of reapportionment, Bernstein repeatedly asked John Bailey, the Democratic Chairman, to consider an education proposal and threatened to discuss his frustration with the media. This threat worked and Bailey granted Bernstein just five minutes to draft a proposal.
5. Display the language of the public education amendment as it exists in Article 8, Section 1 of the constitution: “There shall always be free public elementary and secondary schools in the state. The general assembly shall implement this principle by appropriate legislation.” (In the Toolkit above, you will find the Comparing Constitutional Language Chart. You can have students complete part of the chart for Connecticut here or as part of Communicating Conclusions Assessment 1 below.) As a larger group, discuss the following questions:
   • What specific words stand out to you?
   • What does this language guarantee?
   • What words or ideas might be missing? (For example, the world “equal” is not explicitly written in the amendment.)
   • How might they rewrite this language? What would they include?
   • The U.S. Constitution does not establish a federal right to education, leaving this responsibility to the states. What are the potential advantages and disadvantages of this approach?
6. Exit Ticket: Rather than accept the legislature’s preplanned agenda during the constitutional convention, Simon Bernstein chose to challenge his political superiors. As he shares in this interview, he was compelled to act, asking himself: “Well, what bothers me? Do I just sit here or do I do something?”
   1. Tell students they are now in a similar situation. They have a great idea for a change that they believe is essential for their school, community, or state (e.g., a new school policy, a community improvement, a state law). They have managed to get the attention of a decision-making body, but due to limited time on the agenda, they have been given only five minutes to draft their proposal.
   2. Provide each student with a small piece of paper or have them use a corner of their notebook.
   3. Set a timer for exactly five minutes.
   4. Instruct them to quickly brainstorm and write down the core idea of their proposed change and why it’s important, much like Bernstein’s concise statement about the principle of free public education. They should aim for clarity and focus, knowing they can’t include every detail.
   5. When the timer goes off, have a few students volunteer to share their “five-minute proposals.” Discuss the ideas they came up with. Prompt students to reflect on the experience using questions like:
      • How did the five-minute time limit affect your brainstorming and drafting process? What was challenging about it?
      • Did you focus on the main idea or try to include many details? Why?
      • How important was the core principle of your idea when you only had five minutes?
        
      • What does Bernstein’s story illustrate about the importance of individual advocacy and challenging established agendas in the political and legal systems?

Assessment Option 1: Comparing Constitutional Language Chart

Bernstein’s amendment is general because he believed the language of the Constitution should reflect overall principles and ideas. Have students complete the Comparing Constitutional Language Chart (see Toolkit) for at least one other state using the resources “State Constitution Education Clause Language” or “Constitutional Obligations for Public Education“. How is that state’s language different from Connecticut’s? Which amendment do they think better serves students? Is it important for states, rather than the federal government, to establish the right to education?

Assessment Option 2: Further Research

Connecticut’s constitution explicitly commits to providing public education as a state responsibility. Over the years, this right has been interpreted by the state’s courts to mean that the education provided must be adequate, equitable, and accessible to all students. Students can research and present on the following:

• Horton v. Meskill: At the time of Horton v. Meskill, Connecticut supplied school districts with $250 per child, forcing towns to rely heavily on local property taxes for additional funding. The Horton plaintiffs used Bernstein’s amendment to argue that this system was unconstitutional because it meant educational quality varied considerably from poorer to wealthier towns. 
• Sheff v. O’Neill: Sheff v. O’Neill used Bernstein’s amendment to prove that the extreme racial, ethnic, and economic isolation of the Hartford school district left its schoolchildren, and suburban schoolchildren, with an insufficient education that the state was required to remedy.
• CCJEF v. Rell: The CCJEF v. Rell lawsuit used the 1965 Educational Amendment to argue that Connecticut’s system for funding public schools was not only inadequate but also disproportionately harmed minority schoolchildren by diminishing their ability to participate in the democratic process, thrive in college, and reap the monetary rewards of intellectual success.

Places to GO

Things To DO

Websites to VISIT

Articles to READ