Search

The article presents reply to James P. Pitts in response to his comments on group disorders in the public school by Sociologists Pual Ritterband and Richard Silberstein. The authors say that in "Group Disorders in the Public Schools," they set out to understand and explain the distribution of two related sets of events in the high schools of New York City. The article was not set out to explain inequality in the schools nor did it attempt to describe the ways in which schools sort people into the general social structure. The authors did not and do not feel that every sociologist who deals with questions of race has to recapitulate the history of inequality. On the most primitive empiricist level, the authors were able to show that the distribution of non-political disorder was relatively random in the New York City High School context during their study. They deny inequality in school resources and achievement. They demonstrated that more money is spent on black pupils in New York City than Puerto Ricans or Whites, though the way the money is spent makes no dent in the educational problem.