This piece correlates to what the other articles have mentioned, that certain communities that are seen as "better", that have a higher income coming in, are family centered and have more resources aren't easy to get into. It is easier if you have family that live there already or if you have resources to help you, but to come from a regular city, it is harder for you, or Stacey Calvin in this case, to get into a better community. Even though this community would be benificial because it has a better school district, is closer to where she works and has more access to grocery stores, she wasn't accepted due to her income that she was bringing in. Although Stacey Calvin is willing to work hard, and she is obviously a very dedicated person, her communities don't give her the opportunity to moved up that latter.

This paragraph, although it is sad to acknowledge how Stacey Calvin has to travel so far for work, and how much that commute probably drags her down, this paragraph did remind me of a topic that we went over in class. In class we learned about transportation and how that led to a boom of people in cities going to different areas. Due to new freeways, train stations, buses and more, people no longer had to have their whole life built in a single community, they could work in one and live in another. This piece of learning connects to this introduction paragraph because it shows that there are many people, like Stacey Calvin, that is part of those people, however it isn't a good thing because she has to travel far and long, and that causes her to take time out of her day, what was once a new opportunity to have a life in neighboring communities, has led to people traveling to neighboring communities just to survive.

It is important to note that although Irvine was the "national center of subprime mortgage lenders - the ones whose predatory lending practices hurt predominantly black, Latino and female homeowners in spaces like Saint Louis and Ferguson", that it ironically still became a place that is a non-white suburb. Although there are many white people here in Irvine, it does have a huge population of Asian residents and that is worth noting because with Irvine's history, as the author mentioned, of having mortgage practices that affected black, latino and women homeowners, it the end that discrimination wasn't worth it because now Irvine is changing, although still a desired suburb, it isn't what it used to be.

To predict what the author will bring up next, I think the author will go into detail about redlining. As the author explains the history of "racial covenants and racist realtors", they explain that black people have been trying to be placed in specific neighborhoods, starting in the early 1900s, in class we learned that the suburban lifestyle and redlinning occurred a few decades after that, but I think the author is trying to break down the history, to then bring up the actual effect of redlining and explain what it is, and then reel that back into the current state of the O.C or Irvine? Or at least how Irvine and other parts of O.C can serve as an area where white people fled to.

It is important to note that the author, as they continue throughout this conclusion, that integration in communities is possible, the author explains that this is we see this due to our previous integrated school systems. However I'd also like to add that another aspect to add to this hope is that we also gain hope and saw integration from neighborhoods. However, it is similar to schools in which they gradually became segregated again. However, we know that communities can be integrated, and many people of different backgrounds are able to live the same neighborhood. And if we work towards that plan, as was mentioned in the beginning of this article, we can also work that into our school systems.

I found this part of the reading interesting because it can connect to information we previously learned. In class on Tuesday, we went over the White Fleet, where we learned that white people left to suburban areas as a reaction to wanting to get away from the city after the desegregation of schools. However, one aspect I found interesting was that when white people left the city, they took their resources, communities and organizations with them, leaving the cities behind with nothing besides the people, meaning that people of color had less resources and opportunities now. So this piece of learning from class connects to this part of the reading because it proves that segregation didn't lead to any good, but rather that when communities are segregated, their poverty rates increase, yet when they are integrated, even if it isn't necessarily a white community, since there are more races, that means more communities and resources that come with each race or ethnicity, making the overall neighborhood stronger.

This part of the reading changed my perspective because it allowed me to broaden my understanding of segregation. By the author bringing up multiple examples, it allows for me as the reader to use other contexts of where segregation has been present. For me, this is helpful because it allows for me to build on the knowledge I already knew. Upon knowing about segregation in schools and neighborhoods, I wouldn't really be able to think about it in another form because the only form of it I currently knew was in the form of schools or neighborhoods, however now with these new examples, I am able see how segregation has been used to harm different people and communities throughout the world's history, and how every form of it has led to discrimination. I think it is interesting to consider how segregation, what people consider as separate but equal, has happened time and time again across the world and every time it simply proves that it is never equal, and segregation will never lead to equality because one side will always be more powerful.

This sentence stood out to me and I find it to be important because although schools were legally desegregated, the result of not creating a national project to integrate neighborhoods, led to schools still being segregated in a way. In class on Tuesday as well as the Tuesday readings, we read about how although schools are more diverse in certain areas now, they're honestly still segregated, and although it's not lawfully, it is because most neighborhoods don't have diverse communities, but rather each community seems to be built up of only one race or ethnicity. For example, although L.A is a very diverse city, you can go to one school and find the demographic of the school is mostly black students whereas another school close by is made of only latino students, despite the fact that both of these schools are under the same district and could even be in the same "outer community" of that part of L.A. So by the nation never creating a plan to try and integrate neighborhoods, that led to segregation still occurring in a way, not because of laws but because of how they had already been separated by the neighborhoods, forcing families to send their kids to schools in the same area, which is usually built up of their very own race or ethnicity.

When it comes to the funding of schools, I think that information is informative because there are many conversations surrounding how schools are funded. With recent discussion of schools being defunded in order to place that money in other government funded programs, it is important to note that private contributions are still strong and they help fund many schools to this day. However, I think it is also worth noting that most schools that receive private contributions happen to be private schools or at least public schools in wealthier areas. My point being that, although it is good that some schools aren't being affected, education in general continues to be defunded more and more. That won't affect private / wealthier schools but public / poorer schools that don't receive donations, yet continue to lose money, will continue to lose more and more resources and their funding will only be able to stretch so far.

I found this part interesting because although I agree that many families who left, weren't necessarily trying to cause harm but wanted to do what they believed was best for their children, that action itself led to what they were "afraid of". Because of this reading, I learned that many families uprooted and left their lives in L.A as a result of desegregation and the realization that students of color would "take over schools", yet that wouldn't necessarily be a threat if we consider how schools would've looked like if those white families stayed. Yes, no school would no longer be primarily white (with the exception of expensive private schools with a difficult acceptance rate), but that didn't mean there wouldn't be any space for white students, but rather every school would now just have to be shared amongst all races and backgrounds, but with white families being scared that that meant they'd eventually be overlooked, and voluntarily leaving, they, ironically, created that atmosphere themselves and let L.A. become a county who's public schools had mostly students of color.

This part of the reading reminds me of another class, EDUC 124, which goes into depth about multicultural education. For this class, I had to read a couple different papers, and in one of the articles, the author explains her experience growing up in the public school system as a young, black girl. She explains that when she was growing up, her grandmother and mother taught her to always be respectful to elders, to treat them with kindness and always follow their instructions. Because of this, she applied it to her teachers as school, which made them see her as "one of the only good ones", causing a distinct separation between her and other black students. So to read about this statistic where white teachers found black students "to be 'lazy' and 'talkative' and over 30 percent found them 'rebellious' and 'moody'" allows me to understand in terms of statistics how white teachers viewed black students during the 60's, however although these statistics have decreased, it is still very prominent and affects many students, as I learned through Buffy Smiths "Class, Race and the Hidden Curriculum of Schools". By comparing this piece of the article to what I have previously learned in other classes allows for me to understand this topic more in depth and build on my knowledge of students of color in public schools.

Reading the few previous pages and this section of the reading, I found this part to be very informative. As someone who was born and raised in Los Angeles, I've always described the city as one that is incredibly diverse and open-minded, no matter who you are or the type of life you live, there is a spot for you in L.A. And although that is true by today's standards, it is difficult to learn that it wasn't always such an open place, and that throughout the 60's and 70's, segregation was still very prominent despite segregation not being legal anymore. As someone from L.A, I find this to be very noteworthy because it is not common knowledge for everybody to know this, especially with the lifestyle that L.A currently has, which is that everyone is welcome. People focus on the current state of L.A, but it's past, especially with segregation isn't as commonly talked about.