No matter how tough politicians and education pundits talk the obstacles remain. Massachusetts is a good example. The Boston Globe reports that among 3rd graders last year, minority and low income students were twice as likely as white students to score lowest in the state’s standardized tests. These are discouraging numbers for everyone, and they are pretty much replicated nationally. They raise the question: Why after all these years of No Child Left Behind are we still struggling to achieve parity between rich and poor students, between white and minority children?
Nobody is satisfied with our schools, and there’s blame all round as experts scramble for solutions: We label schools as failing. We fire whole teachings staffs. We tweak curricula. We script teachers’ every move. We increase the school day and student seat time at the expense of art, music and recreation. Still things don’t improve.
Maybe we’re not listening to the right people. Somebody like Dick Gregory, for example. Yeah, Dick Gregory. You may remember him (if you’re old enough)—African American comedian, civil rights activist, 1968 presidential candidate, author, and nutrition guru? His list of accomplishments doesn’t include education specialist, but he knew quite a lot about why schools fail and about the “achievement gap.” He went to one of those failing schools and was trapped in that gap.
Most of my students—kids serving time in an adult county jail where I taught high school—didn’t know who Dick Gregory was when I announced that we were going to read a short chapter entitled “Shame” from his autobiography. At first they weren’t interested. They assumed (like so many teenagers) that the reading, any reading would be boring. Then when I mentioned that he was black, and had marched with Dr. King there was a spark of curiosity. It was enough to get us into the chapter. After that they were hooked. . . .
In a page and a half, Gregory tells the reader (and America if we would only listen) why poor kids of color fail in school. In heartbreaking detail he writes about being in the third grade filled with shame—the shame of poverty, of being a “welfare kid,” of being abandoned by his father, of living in the projects, of wearing dirty clothes because once again there wasn’t any hot water, of having little food, and of living with rats and bugs.
When my locked-up students read that he was a “troublemaker” in school, the little kid who spent more time in the corner facing the wall than he did at his desk, none of them was surprised. And when Gregory wonders out loud why the teacher didn’t understand that maybe he caused trouble not because he was bad or stupid but because he was poor and hungry and too tired to concentrate you could hear the whispered, “Ya got that right,” followed by, “bitch” when she berates him in front of the class, talking about “you and your kind.”
The reading may seem dated to those of us comfortable with the gifts of life; after all that was back in the late 30s. But my students had no problem with what Gregory described. Most of them lived similar lives, although I would venture to say, much harsher and more embattled ones. They grew up in neighborhoods overrun with drugs, guns and random violence, in households fractured by unemployment, disease and substance abuse. My students went to schools that never had enough books or supplies or staff to go around, in falling down buildings in neighborhoods unsafe to walk. A friend of mine works in a school where it’s not unusual that kids can’t play outside at recess because of drive-by-shootings.
If it wasn’t good in Dick Gregory’s day, it’s far from good for minority students today. The 2010 Census confirms this: Black children are three times as likely to be poor as white children. Forty percent of black children are born into poor families compared with 8% of white children. An even more alarming statistic is that an African American boy born in the past decade has a 1-in-3 chance of being incarcerated in his lifetime.
There’s a poignant moment in Jonathan Kozol’s Savage Inequalities: Children in America’s Schools when he goes into an East St. Louis grade school classroom that is dirty, dilapidated, and overcrowded. At one point Kozol reports that as he came into a classroom a young boy looked up at him with an expression that asked, “What did I do to deserve this?” The “achievement gap”—which is just that young boy’s unspoken question in a different form—will never be closed until our policymakers, educational and otherwise, aggressively address the underlying issues of poverty and racism that cripple every aspect of poor and minority children’s lives. Maybe those policymakers need to stop talking and listen for a change to people who know a lot more than they do about failing schools, and about failing lives.
Originally posted on Beacon Broadside




15 Comments

You put in much to think about. Many of the problems go far beyond the school system and the teacher/student relation. It is already clear that simply putting more money into some schools will not be the answer. There is graft and corruption that is at the highest levels of many school districts and this is not the fault of the teachers. There should be, however, a real review of how to teach the kids who are so far behind their peers. obama-duncan’s race to the bottom will not improve the schools that need improving, it will only move the problems around to mask them.
“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”
“In the first place, God made idiots. That was for practice. Then he made school boards.”
“I’ve never let my school interfere with my education.” —
attributed to Mark Twain (my MAN!!)
My thoughts:
What about low achievement in schools that maybe aren’t top drawer but which don’t have the severe problems described here? Explanation for that?
Money helps, but only if it gets to the classroom level. I wonder about over-grown, bloated centralized school district bureaucracies like LAUSD. (Three non-teaching employees for every teacher.)
How do we solve the “no parents to help with homework” problem? (Parents not willing or not able to help. (“Not able” ranging from not having the education themselves to simply working too many jobs trying to maintain food and shelter.)
The answer is making education of kids from low income backgrounds a national priority and pouring the sorts of resources- and I don’t mean just money, but that should never be an impediment either- that are usually reserved for wars and bailing out crooked bankers. The middle class kids need help too, but not nearly as much and the rich kids will obviously do just fine regardless what the government does or doesn’t do. I can’t think of anything more important the government could do to ensure a strong, prosperous and free country going ahead.
There’s no good reason the children from the poorest neighborhoods shouldn’t be guaranteed schools every bit as good- and probably better- than our rich. They after all need it far more.
I agree on the priority thing, and I’m with you on the cutting back on the wars and stupid unnecessary defense dept overspending shit. And of course, the cancerous banksters.
However, I don’t think you’ll get public support for those types of things as long as voters see their tax money going down a rathole of bureaucratic ineptitude. This is where unions and Dems run up against the problem. Public employees should have good salaries and bennies and pensions, but they also have to be accountable to the voters for performance and workloads. The government has to have enough employees to do any job, but not featherbedding. There is no way anyone I know can justify the incompetence, bureaucratic inertia, and waste of the LAUSD. And I’m sure there are similar instances in other big school districts.
You want education? Stop talking about bureaucracies. People learn, it’s something we do well. Every one of ‘those’ kids has learned and if you want to participate start listening. It’s not about ‘rote’ and learning the ‘right thing’. This is not turning out parts in a machine shop. Every kid in that classroom has a different answer for “How did you get here?”, from “I took the bus” to “My dad left when I was six”. Until we stop thinking that schools are for creating cloned industrial beings in service to money instead of maximized unique citizens with freedom and ability to choose we are dead-ended.
How much blame are you placing on school systems which belongs on parents? A kid should not arrive at middle school achieving poorly without a parent having gone to the mats for their kid. They’ve already been in the school system 6-7 years at that point and should be cruising along comfortably before puberty sets in. I see too many kids whose parents are disengaged — regardless of income level — and don’t realize their kids need more from them in the way of guidance and advocacy.*
Secondly, LAUSD should be the exception, not a good example at all. As Wikipedia notes,
We’re talking about a bureaucracy which is bigger than a number of states, bigger than some third world countries, and you want better? We’re talking about one of the most diverse school systems in the U.S., one in which poverty is clearly a major factor in educational outcomes. I’m surprised that the dropout rate isn’t higher than the stated 26%; by comparison, Detroit City School District in the Detroit Public School system is nearly 40%. In this district’s case, the problems are overwhelmingly related to poverty and unemployment.
Find some middle class, mid-sized suburban schools which are doing poorly and then talk about the role of bureaucracy in relation to outcomes. And I’ll bet the performance will still be related to parental involvement or the lack thereof in each child’s education, in intramural augmentation of education, and in participation with the school board.
* I actually had this very discussion tonight with my 13-year-old; a friend of his had tested into the accelerated classes that my son is in, but the same kid has done poorly all year and will now be dropped back to the standard classes next year. Even my son can see that this kid is bright enough for the accelerated program but needed additional help at home to settle into the demands of that level of performance. He didn’t get it, and now it’s too late. The poor kid will go into 8th grade thinking he’s not smart enough for accelerated work, probably shaping his attitude for the rest of his school career. School system bureaucracy had nothing to do with this sad story.
I agree with everything you said but it still does not explain why middleclass kids born into “good homes” can’t locate Rome on a map, tell you what the American Revolution was about or when it was fought and where, describe the cause’s of the Civil War and or balance a checkbook. Too many come home to empty homes where no one has the time, energy or motivation to help with homework and create an appreciation for reading, writing and arithmetic.
We need a systemic change in our culture relative to how we introduce our children to the excitement of learning, the values of education and the improved quality of life that they provide. Parents need to be involved in their children’s education from beginning to end as motivators, mentors, coaches and advocates. If children learn to value learning at home they will value it everywhere and for all of their lives. It is a complicated conundrum to be sure but maybe we could take some lessons from some of the East Asian, European, Scandinavian or developing countries that our kicking our derrieres in terms of the quality of education and results obtained by them.
“I agree with everything you said but it still does not explain why middleclass kids born into “good homes” can’t locate Rome on a map, tell you what the American Revolution was about or when it was fought and where, describe the cause’s of the Civil War and or balance a checkbook. Too many come home to empty homes where no one has the time, energy or motivation to help with homework and create an appreciation for reading, writing and arithmetic.”
That’s because there are very few “good homes” in America.
When I was growing up, one parent worked, the other stayed at home, we were financially secure, and we wanted for nothing (even though my dad was a blue collar worker). There were a few poor kids around– mostly, the children of alcoholics. In their homes, the nondrinking parent had two jobs to try to keep the family’s head above water, and the kids worked after school and on weekends, too. Even with everyone working, they didn’t always have what they needed. Those kids didn’t usually turn out so well.
Today, there are four or even more jobs split between mom, dad, and the kid (with one of those jobs belonging to the kid). Even though everyone is working, a lot, sometimes they come up short.
Should we be surprised that the kids from the “good homes” perform like those from the “bad homes” once did? After all, they grow up like the alcoholic’s kids once did, while the poor of today live in third world conditions that would have been unimaginable to us back then.
The European model of excellence vis a vis the US is somewhat of a myth, and frequently is a comparison of apples to oranges.
Overall, the US does fairly well in international comparisons.
I would check out any articles by the late Gerald Bracey. For example,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gerald-bracey/on-education-the-obama-ad_b_201858.html
I’ve taught school long enough to realize that the “golden age” in education is usually whenever the person making the claim was in school.
I’ve taught high school kids in the 70′s who would come back years later and lament the present day students’ lack of discipline, study habits, etc.
My perception was that those students were basically the same as in the past. In fact, I usually tell them that in the 70′s, the adults said the exact same things about them.
Agreed. My son had a Korean classmate who moved back to Korea this past year and with whom he’s stayed in contact by email; apparently the boy was ahead of his new Korean classmates in math by nearly a year on arrival.
Yes, you’re right, although the golden ages past had much less content in them, too, primarily because of technology.
I remember being the only kid in my class in the late 1970s with a calculator — and one with a factorial button, too. At the time I had more computing power in my hand than was on the 1969 Apollo mission to the moon. In contrast, my kids now must be computer literate and remain at a level of proficiency throughout their K-12 school career. Only last weekend my oldest spent nearly half her Saturday graphing a math problem on her handheld computer, which she then had to port over to her laptop for further analysis and more detailed graphing. And she’s a junior in high school; this stuff her dad did on a mainframe when he was pursuing his masters in engineering in the 1980s.
While pineywoodsfats is right that there’s always a “golden age”, there has been a dumbing-down of our entire society and in part because political factions in this country have ridiculed the educated as part of the “liberal elite” over the last 30+ years.
Some of it is our own fault, allowing the bread-and-circuses offerings of daily life to interfere with setting expectations as parents. It shows up in some of the most mundane ways, too; imagine the surprise on teenage guests’ faces when I tell them that we have a vegetable or fruit with every meal, insisting that their pizza meal at my house isn’t complete without carrot sticks or salad or apple slices. They literally haven’t been told they should eat vegetables and fruits by their parents. Imagine what it’s like in highly urban, economically disadvantaged areas which have become “food deserts” — no grocery stores, only convenience markets. These kids wouldn’t recognize a cabbage or an onion if you threw it at them. Whether vegetables or reading material, there’s no difference; their parents are leaving them shapeless clay.
Our expectations have shaped our electeds as well; we have a pitiful caliber of people running our nation, our states and cities. They can barely choke out a sound bite now, make fun of speeches by those who can write and deliver lucid ones at length, like Bill Clinton and even Obama. Yet there was a time only a generation or two ago when we expected and demanded this of our electeds, like Roosevelt whose speeches are now models of writing and oration.
I remember with shock and surprise reading that Joe Kennedy Sr. expected each of his children to be well-read and versed on a selected topic each evening before dinner, where they would be expected to debate the topic over the course of the meal. We’re talking about a family whose members read ancient Greek literature and often recited it from memory. These are the “liberal elites” that the know-nothings in this country have ridiculed. Now that this generation of “liberal elites” is gone, we have few intelligent role models to which we can point to for our kids in order to shape expectations.
You want bloat in a smaller school district? Try this: neighboriing city’s school district has just announced that it will go broke in two years, or less. Series of big meetings underway to explore merging with adjoining school districts and other options. District pays its superintendent $185K a year. The punch line?
The “district” has two schools. TWO. Neither of which is a high school. One K-5, one 6-8 middle school.
Another example: my city’s school district. Last four years voters have approved $200 mil in bond measures to completely upgrade and renovate all the campus. Much of the work is completed, the rest will be by the end of summer. We’re talking everything from new computer science labs, library upgrades, administration facilities, and regular classroom improvements to new synthetic football field and track plus a new gym at the high school.
School district is crying over budget cuts, having to reduce staff, etc. The punch line?
The district shares NO support services with the city.
City pays one guy to paint the crosswalk out front.
District pays another guy to paint the hopskotch grid on the playground.
City maintains its own motor pool of trucks, forklifts, rideable lawn mowers, etc.
District maintains its own motor pool of trucks, forklifts, rideable mowers, etc.
City has a Human Resources dept to run ads, administer civil service tests, conduct interviews, handle hiring/termination paperwork, etc.
District has its own Human Resources dept to run ads, administer civil service tests, conduct interviews, handle hiriing/termination paperwork. (Granted, interviews for teaching personnel probably take different expertise but that doesn’t apply to clerical and maintenance personnel and so forth.)
Now, you want the real kicker? City has 65,000 residents in roughly 6 square miles. Before the recession the city had 600 employees (give or take at any one moment in time). That’s all-in for the city, but does NOT count the school district. So what is that, proportionally? Well, it’s about 100 workers per square mile, or one worker for about every 110 residents.
Tell me there’s no waste, no featherbedding.