Date:    Tue, 6 Feb 96 10:45 EST
From: "Jetaway Dave" <CGH2@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Undeliverable Mail
To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU

>In-Reply-To:  halebsky AT ssc.wisc.edu -- Tue, 6 Feb 1996 00:48:47 -0600

>>Jetaway Dave and Alan Davidson both noted that Brown vs. The Board
>>of Education (1954), which rejected the notion of separate but
>>equal, was based on quantitative social science research.

>>My response:  (Given the current educational outcomes of black
>>Americans [relative to whites], given the antipathy now of blacks
>>toward bussing, and given the interest expressed by some blacks in
>>voucher or other similar systems that do not have integration as
>>their goal, it could be argued that no major social problem has
>>been solved.)  Assuming that a major social problem has been
>>solved, my question is this: was Brown based on high-level
>>quantitative methods, or was it based essentially on quantitative
>>*data*?  Did it require a lot manipulation to come to the
>>conclusion that separate was not equal, or was it a matter of
>>getting the data (which I agree is critical) and then laying out
>>various descriptive statistics, comparisons of percentages, etc.?

 It's all relative.  Pearson correlation coefficients were 'high-level
 quantitative' methods back in the 1920s.  Our good and sturdy friend, OLS
 regression, though theoretically developed much earlier, did not become a
 work-a-day tool until the 1950s / 60s.  It's been awhile since I looked at the
 original work, but I think that the quantitative methods used would meet your
 critera for 'high-level,' given the state of the art at the time.

>Jetaway Dave