ONE<br >JAMES COLEMAN AND THE COLEMAN<br > REPORTS*<br >GERALD GRANT and CHRISTINE MURRAY<br >Syracuse University<br > There is perhaps no better introduction to this study of the politics of<br > the Coleman Report (Coleman， Campbell， Hobson， McPartland， Mood，<br >Weinfeld， & York， 1966; henceforth referred to as the Report) than ~ames<br >Cdeman s ~x~x t~{~ma s~mma~，j o~ ~xts {t~xcLt~x%s t，~ testLmor~ be~o~e<br >a Senate committee 4 years after the original publication of the Report.<br >His Report， formally titled Equality of Educational Opportunity， had been<br >based on one of the most extensive surveys of the schools ever under-<br >taken. The results， as he noted， "were not at all what was anticipated":<br >School Quality--Racial Differences<br >First， all the standard measures of school quality were compared， for<br >schools attended by whites， by Negroes， by American Indians， Oriental<br >Americans， by persons of Puerto Rican origin， and by persons of Mexican-<br >American origin. The schools attended by Negroes had slightly lowm<br >levels of these measures of quality than those attended by whites. The<br >same was true of the comparison between whites and other minority<br >groups that I mentioned， as well， but what was striking and surprising<br >was the relativelv small size of these differences.<br >School Quality--Regional Differences<br > For example， there was a much greater difference between regions<br >than between races within a region; and there was a larger difference<br >between rural and urban than between races within urban areas or within<br >rural areas.<br >~arts of this<br > achers Colle~<br >~f inequality of opportunity by ra<br >paper were published earlier in Harvard Educational Review &<br >3<br ><br >