This article appeared on Huffington Post. Abby Norman and her husband chose to send their four-year-old daughter to a neighborhood school that has very few white students. Their friends are puzzled. They can’t understand why Abby and her husband would choose a “black” school.
Abby can’t understand why the other white paare nts make negative judgments about a school they don’t know, have never set foot in.
This summer, when I told the other moms at the pool where my kids went to school. I was repeatedly told to move them. This from women who had never ever set foot in my school. They had not had contact with our deeply passionate, and very responsive principal, had not met the pre-k teachers who my daughter loves more than Santa. They had not toured the various science labs, or listened as their child talked incessantly about robotics. They don’t know that every Tuesday Juliet comes home with a new Spanish song to sing and bothers me until I look up the colors in Spanish if I can’t remember them from High school. Juliet loves her school. Her mother, a teacher at a suburban school, and her father, a PhD candidate at the state university, both find the school completely acceptable, more than acceptable. We love it too.
But my neighbors will not send their kids there and my friends won’t even move into the neighborhood. They will whisper about it. They will tell their friends not to go there. They will even tell a stranger that she should move her kids immediately as they both wait for their children to come down the water slide. But they will not give the neighborhood school a chance. They will even go to great lengths to avoid the neighborhood school.
In July, through the neighborhood list serve I got invited to attend the charter school exploration meeting. A group of parents were attempting to start a charter school to center on diversity. They wanted a Spanish program and a principal that was very invested in the neighborhood. After inquiring I discovered the local elementary school had not even been contacted. The one with a principal who left his high profile high school job and came back to his neighborhood to an elementary school where he immediately implemented a Spanish language program. Before starting their own charter school, not one person had bothered even contacting the school already in existence. The school that has made huge strides, and could do even better with some parents who had this kind of time and know how. No one was interested in the school of the neighborhood….
When I am able to move past the anger, the frustration that people are talking about a school they know nothing about, I listen to what they say. Behind all the test score talk, the opportunity mumbo jumbo that people lead with, I feel like what is actually being said, and what is never being said is this: That school is too black.
The people who are moving into my neighborhood want their children to have a diverse upbringing, but not too diverse. They still want a white school, just with other non-white children also participating…They want diversity, just not too much.

“They still want a white school, just with other non-white children also participating…”
Exactly. Black is fine, as long as it’s white enough.
LikeLike
Excellent account of sterotyping and not only in this community
LikeLike
They choose white schools out of fear of the unknown and perhaps racism. My daughter lives in Texas, and my grandson started kindergarten this year. His school is a PEG school so under Texas law he was able to choose a higher performing school in the district, which my daughter decided to try. It was a bad idea for him. Not to bash the teacher, but from day one, she acted like my grandson was a burden for her class of twenty-two. By day three, my grandson stated that the teacher hated him, and by day four, he refused to get out of the car at drop-off. The next week my daughter sent him back to his more diverse local school where he was welcomed with open arms, is happy, loves the teacher and is doing well. You can’t always judge a school by its test scores or the color of its students.
LikeLike
That is why it is so important to look at attrition rates from Day 1 at any “choice” school. It is incredibly easy to make a 5 year old feel misery, and some “choice” schools specialize in doing so for any child who doesn’t seem to “fit”. Back when neighborhood public schools were celebrated instead of underfunded and bashed, everyone understood that their job was to teach all the kids, and making them feel misery is only going to make it harder to teach them as it will often lead to them acting out even more. But if you know the child’s parents can “choose” another school for him, the incentive is to make him feel terrible instead of make him feel wanted in the school. And if no one is looking over your shoulder, you can do this to any child you want and then crow about how well you educate “every” child.
LikeLike
This is unbelievably appalling! Just when I think things can’t get worse, I read something like this. To what degree do you think this goes on?
LikeLike
I have no idea. But what seemed like a good idea at first — providing “choice” to kids who only had failing public schools — has become warped. The few charter schools that DO keep every child despite their struggles have mediocre results. It is no coincidence that the charter schools with the best test scores either 1. have a primarily middle class student body or 2. have large attrition rates for at-risk children or 3. Have such rigorous standards with no obligation to teach any child who can’t meet them (there is always another school where that child might “fit”). BASIS is famous for this — if you require every high school student to take and pass 5 or 7 AP courses in order to graduate, you are guaranteed to have the kids unable to do so drop out. See, no obligation to teach “those” kids who can’t handle the AP work. That what charter schools have morphed into.
Once you get rid of public schools and their obligation to teach all children you have lessened our obligation to one another. I agree that some reform of the worst public schools was needed, but that’s not what we got. REAL reform would have looked at what was being paid for building maintenance, for custodial services, for administrative bureaucracy and figured out a way to streamline it if indeed it was wasteful. REAL reform would not pretend that poor children — the most at-risk ones with no support at home — were failed only because the lazy teacher at their school didn’t care about them and just wanted a paycheck. REAL reform would not have looked the other way when schools that weeded out the most needy children pretended they were teaching the exact same at-risk kids found in failing public schools but with less money. Our debate on how to fix failing schools has been mired in dishonesty as to what works and what doesn’t. And the privatizers pretend there are easy answers in charter schools that claim to be able to educate every child, with less money, and have every child at grade level.
LikeLike
This is so true. Kids are not aware of all the ratings and artifical barriers we adults put up towards each other or schools in the neighborhood. Sometimes it comes down to simple things like their friends go there or the different programs they have and the teachers they like. We, the adults, put up the barriers. A diverse student body is so much better for a child’s all around development.
LikeLike
I taught for six years in a local private school that was inexpensive and close to an almost all black city. The great majority of students were from that city and were there because of parents that wanted the best for their kids and away from the dangers their neighborhood
presented. These students were, almost without exception, excellent students and excellent people to boot. They were a very positive influence on the white students and offered a perspective the white students could not have gotten elsewhere. I cn think of many reasons why it can be beneficial for white parents to send their kids to a predominately black school. Not enough room here to go into it in depth.
LikeLike
I taught minority ELLs in a school district that was about thirds white. Most of the ELLs were a huge asset to the school. They were kind, respectful, resourceful, caring people that enhanced the school environment in so many ways.
LikeLike
The sentiment may be broadly true but it oversimplifies the issue. Particularly that race is often tied to socio-economic inequality and that racially segregated schools are often (although not always) also economically segregated. As a result, the amount of resources (not just budget allocation) but parental involvement, PTA fundraising, etc. leads to very different pedagogical strategies. To give you some concrete example – in my neighborhood there is a predominantly white-upper-middle class school where many of families have at least one parent either free-lancing, having a flexible work schedule, or being a stay-at-home parent. this means that when teachers schedule field trips, there is usually a wait-list for parents who want to volunteer to come along on the trip. The resulting adult-to-child ratio on the trips tends to be sometimes as high as 1:3. this means that children can go on a lot of trips, including to museums, etc. The availability of parents also means that there are often additional adults in the classroom volunteering to help out with different activities. This too, gives a lot of flexibility to the teacher in planning the lessons. Moreover, parents volunteer to help out afterschool kids who need extra help in academic subjects. In addition, the PTA raises a ridiculous amount of money that allows it to pay for extra teachers as well as for enrichment classes.
Compare this to another school in the neighborhood that serves predominantly african-american community from a lower socio-economic class. The majority of families there have both parents working full time, there are a number of single-parent families. As a result, parents aren’t as available to volunteer their time so teachers don’t take their students on as many field trips or take them to parks and other outdoor facilities where they don’t have to control their behavior as much. Discipline is emphasized to a much more significant extent and the teachers tend to gravitate towards activities that are more centralized rather than, e.g., following the independent learning/workshop mode. And because of the way zoning works, families from the second school don’t have the choice to send their kids to the first school and cannot afford to move to the other zone because the real estate prices there have skyrocketed (in large part due to the school!). On the other hand, more affluent families who live in the second zone find ways to get their kids to the first school, including by moving (even if only temporarily) into the other zone.
And as economic factors enhance reinforce segregation, cultural factors from both sides step in as well. For example, there is a proposal currently to redistrict a part of Brooklyn Heights so as to integrate two very segregated schools – one that serves predominantly affluent community and another that serves predominantly families from public housing. There is apprehension and opposition from both constituencies. The latter constituency have voiced concerns that the wealthy parents will want to impose their own agenda, demands on parents, etc. Ultimately, in the longer run, it will reap benefits but convincing people that it is also a good idea in the short run becomes more difficult.
The fundamental problem that the US education system refuses to recognize is the link between economic and racial inequality and quality of education. One only has to look at Canada which, despite having large immigrant population, has been a lot more successful in integrating, in large part due to a robust social welfare program and commitment to public education. As a result, although not perfect, their public schools are significantly better and more diverse than in the US.
LikeLike
But in the example given in this post, the school is very well resourced. The problem is that the white parents haven’t even set foot in it to see if it’s good or not.
LikeLike
No – the second school (ie that serves a different socio-economic community) is not well resourced.
LikeLike
I was referring to Abby’s Norman’s post. Her point is that the neighborhood public school has all the things that these parents say they’re looking for. But those parents won’t even look at the neighborhood school. Why?
I agree that in a lot of cases schools that serve poor and minority students get the short end of the stick, thereby making the school look even more unattractive for affluent white parents. But even when a majority minority school is well resourced and a good school in all the ways parents say they want, white parents still often won’t send their kids there.
LikeLike
The diverse school district in which I taught was an integrated school district with a full range of socioeconomic levels. It was a well resourced district with a very active PTA that bent over backwards to include my students in everything. My poor ELLs were able to avoid attending a poor under served school, and it helped them tremendously. Maybe we should take a cue from Canada.
LikeLike
Unfortunately, the rise of charter schools has provided an easy out for any parent who is afraid of having their child with “those children”. Instead of putting resources to improve public education for all kids — most low-income urban schools don’t have elementary school science labs and robotics programs like the writer’s school — they put resources into charter schools that keep only the best behaved and best performing low-income students. The public schools — with all the leftovers (usually kids whose parents have little political clout) — are even less appealing to middle class parents and it becomes a vicious cycle. Especially when the charter schools claim they are doing the job with 75% of the funding, so why not cut even more money from the budgets of public schools that educate those unwanted “leftovers”? Who are almost always the at-risk kids who need small class sizes and better funded schools the most.
LikeLike
My thanks to the owner of this blog for this posting.
Based in part on my own experiences, I am (in general) for diversity in public schools, staff and students & their parents as well as programs and offerings.
However, IMHO, there is no one-size-fits-all formula for what that diversity should be or look like. Like a “better education for all” there is no snappy cheap rheephorm gimmick that substitutes for constantly changing and adapting to new circumstances and needs.
The one constant: always striving for genuine learning and teaching environments.
I look forward to reading the comments on this thread.
😎
LikeLike
“However. . . needs.”
Well said KTA, very well said!
LikeLike
Probably more of an issue of economic class than race, though some racial attitudes play a part. If more people of a certain race fall into a class, than they may be unfairly judged by the actions of a few. Families struggling economically have more stressors that show up as problems in school, whether black urban or white rural. The rural areas around here have problems with addiction, teen pregnancy, and poverty, too. But is may be more diluted.
Not so funny example was my daughter in elementary who had best friends from India till the parents told their children not to be friends with her because she was not Indian. With all our common DNA, the tribal instinct can be strong.
LikeLike
While I don’t doubt the truth of your experience, it is certainly not the norm with Indian people where I live. I am actually surprised at what you have related. I think that in the time of just one more generation, this behavior will disappear.
LikeLike
Certainly not all people from India or China or Canada. I was shocked at the time and that came out of the blue for us. It really upset my daughter. I’ve had a Chinese American student very upset one day because someone yelled a racial comment from a car. We talked about it, but it shocked and surprised him and saddened me to see such a good kid having to hear that garbage. Race is so darn complicated, you never really know where people stand. We’ve buried the issue a bit in this country but it seems to simmer under the surface. We really need more dialogue.
LikeLike
Likewise, as an ESL teacher, some I would get a few Eastern European, Russian or Asian students that joined my mostly Haitian and Latino classes. The Asian and Russian parents were eager for their children to exit from ESL. The reality is that they got along well in class, and they learned not to believe all the prejudicial stories they had been told. One of the funniest stories I recall was a discussion between a Sri Lankan and Haitian trying to decide “who is blacker.” Race, color and hair texture was definitely on students’ minds, and students were sometimes painfully honest about their feelings.
LikeLike
NYC Parent – Yes, you are exactly right. But I only commented on the aspect of sending white kids to predominantly black schools and to just what good reasons there can be in doing this, not getting into the other dimensions you so correctly refer to. Seeing to the needs of the kids at the very bottom of the achievement level requires draconian measures that should be, but (I believe) never will be implemented. It will require a form of social engineering that the political conservatives in government will never allow.
LikeLike
It is interesting to look at the public schools in Brooklyn. There are many neighborhood schools that were – circa 2002 or so — primarily low-income minority students. Middle class parents who were not afraid of poor children started using the schools and working to raise money, and the DOE seemed to also direct more resources to them (or perhaps they were just able to get grants). There was probably some moment in time where they were the ideal diversity with equal numbers of all races. But some are now primarily white and affluent because that is the composition of the students zoned for that school. It didn’t happen because of any engineered segregation, but simply because it reflects changing demographics of a neighborhood and the willingness of parents who live there to use the public schools.
I don’t know if you can engineer diversity, but you can certainly engineer improving public schools for the people who live in that neighborhood, regardless of whether all of them are poor. Have trained adults — as many as needed — to address the needs of the disruptive 5 year olds who interrupt the learning of the other children. Slow down the curriculum for the kids who need to go slower without “failing” them because they aren’t right at grade level, and speed up the curriculum for the kids who need it. Have chess and robotics and science labs and everything else it takes to engage children that private schools have. If a teacher is phoning it in and refuses to do her job, hire someone whose job is only to document the laziness to get rid of them. But my guess is that most teacher want to teach, and given the right support so that they aren’t thrown into a class of 25 or 30 struggling at-risk kids and told “make them scholars” are happy to see them learn.
The danger is in creating “choice” schools that have no obligation to educate the toughest kids anymore. We have created a reverse incentive for choice schools to get rid of those kids because the fewer they have, the better the remaining ones perform and the more they are showered with donations. So instead of spending the money to provide a good education for all at-risk kids, we spend it to provide a great education for the most motivated at-risk kids, and ignore the needs of the others. And those schools end up far worse.
LikeLike
Unfortunately, what “choice” often seems to do is leave public schools with the neediest, most difficult and expensive to teach, and the bulk of the money and resources have gone with the students that chose a charter school.
LikeLike
prenestino and NYC public school parent: thank you for your comments.
Riffing off of your comments let me throw this out: the movers and shakers of self-styled “education reform” are always strutting their “bidness” smarts and 3DM [data-driven decision making] expertise and devotion to “hard data points” and such.
Ok. Let’s use their lingo and frame of mind for a second. When it comes to education/pedagogy, the main thrust of rheephorm is to advocate for, mandate and impose perverse incentives and disincentives. Why? Because when $tudent $ucce$$ is the bottom line then other things get pushed down the list of “must-dos.”
Like what? Well, you can frame it in one of two ways: 1), there is a profound disincentive to recruiting, retaining and properly educating the hard-to-teach students aka expensive students aka a great many of those attending public schools; or 2), there is a profound incentive to find the relatively small number of students that are a good fit for keeping the bottom line black not red, and to discourage, keep out or expel those that harm the bottom line.
Let me make this clear: I am not talking about individual parents or community members. Refer back to my second paragraph: the “movers and shakers.”
In other words, contrary to touchy-feely slogans and snappy feel-good assertions, it’s only “all about the kids” when the kids serve the interests of those few adults that run rheephorm edubusinesses and push rheephorm eduproducts and so on.
Are there exceptions? Sure, but that’s not where the train wreck that is rheephorm is mainly heading…
Just my dos centavitos worth…
😎
LikeLike
Exactly. The reformers are big on “the market”, but “the market” doesn’t want to educate the most expensive kids! That is why certain things aren’t priced for the market.
Private hospitals are similar. If medicaid doesn’t reimburse enough, they don’t want sick medicaid patients. If hospitals advertised “cure rates” the way charter schools advertise state test scores, hospitals would have the incentive to get rid of the sickest patients and send them to an underfunded public hospital to die. Especially if they were financially rewarded much more for those advertised “high cure” rates than they ever were for taking on the expense of treating a person with stage 4 cancer. We have created this reverse disincentive in public education and the “reformers” who are the biggest promoters – with their corporate backgrounds – should have been the first to recognize the problem. Instead, they pretend it doesn’t exist, which makes the rest of us question their true desire to improve public education.
LikeLike
In my experience in a majority minority school system, where diversity is hard to come by, parents choose charter schools even with the same demographics because they are looking for safety. To them, the fact that charter schools can expel the disruptive, troubled student and the neighborhood school cannot is indeed an advantage. This is something that is rarely acknowledged. Yes, there is racism, too, but safety is a concern for all parents.
It is ironic that even with this advantage the charter schools never outperform the neighborhood school with the same demographics. (Some have claimed greater ‘growth’, but this turns out to be meaningless except in the funding game.) It is also ironic that the concept of the charter school, as originally envisioned, was one of a laboratory of innovation that would specifically target the disruptive, troubled, hard to teach students. If I were in charge of the world, I would allow charter schools for these students only.
LikeLike
When I was little, my parents lived in two different districts. They both lived in nice neighborhoods, however, my Dad lived in an “excellent” school district, which was 97% white. My Mom’s school district was about 60% black, 30% Hispanic, and 10% white, and had a notorious negative reputation. Most of her neighbors had kids in private school. Although I lived mostly with my Mom, my Mom listened to her neighbors and decided to have me use my Dad’s address and enroll in the “better” school district. I received a good education, but then in 7th grade, the district launched an investigation and had detectives film me and my family secretly at both residences. They proved that I spent more time with my Mom and asked her to transfer me. Fortunately, they didn’t file any charges, even though they could have. My Mom immediately moved to an illegal basement apartment in the “better” district to keep me in the good schools. I was forced to move from my childhood home in order to stay in the better school district.
Race plays a huge factor in how people view school quality. Although the supposedly “better” school district did indeed have high test scores, it was 97% white, less than 4% students received free or reduced-price lunch, and there were ZERO English language learners. I found the district to be quite overrated. My Mom ended up moving again in a year due to finances and social problems I was having in school (mostly classism) and we decided to try a new district. The new district had a somewhat negative reputation; it was about 75% white and had a large population of foreign-born white students (particularly from Poland) who were ELLs. Although the scores were lower than in my old district, the teaching staff was MUCH better. I loved it, despite the ratings.
In conclusion, this article presents a blatant truth-people have a habit of thinking that a school with less white students is lesser quality. Some people, such as my mother, will commit fraud in order to get their child into a school that is more white. It’s crazy.
I’d like to thank you for posting this, as well as all the pieces on your blog. I’m in college now, studying to be a teacher, and your book “Reign of Error” was a required reading for my class in education history. I just wanted to let you know that your book was an inspiration to me. Not only did you make education policy much easier for me to understand, you also made some subtle predictions that became completely true: Common Core, as you implied, was a complete disaster, at least in New York. As a future teacher and a strong supporter of public schools, I am glad to have someone as intelligent and heroic as you to look up to.
Thanks,
Tyler
LikeLike
Your experience reminds me of where I taught, a diverse school district about 70% white, and the remainder were minority, many of whom were poor ELLs. It was a fantastic, creative school school district that sent kids to both Ivy League schools and trade schools. My individual school was a Blue Ribbon School. The mostly all white school districts surrounding us had higher test scores, but it didn’t matter because we had a high graduation rate, and most our students attended college.
LikeLike
Well stated. This has been my life story and the quest of my mother also. When we lived in New Orleans, LA she drove us out of the white neighborhood To a diverse school. She often asked people “have you gone to tour your neighborhood public school” when she would hear them not even considering a public school. Some of them did and they thanked her later for suggesting it.
Sometimes I wish I could get over my preoccupation with the future of public schools. It’s on my mind all the time. It’s almost the only thing I post about on FB. Sometimes I wonder if it’s just because of how I was raised with this issue at the forefront. . .so when I see an article like this, I feel a little better that at least I’m not the only one wondering about this stuff.
This article is good. But will people listen and think?
LikeLike
The reality of racism in America.
LikeLike
That is the long and the short of it, I’m afraid.
I trust that the authors of the indispensable American Apartheid won’t mind my quoting a few paragraphs from the introduction:
“Segregation cannot be attributed to income differences, because blacks are equally highly segregated at all levels of income. Whereas segregation declines steadily for most minority groups as socioeconomic status rises, levels of black-white segregation do not vary significantly by social class. Because segregation reflects the effects of white prejudice rather than objective market forces, blacks are segregated no matter how much money they earn.
“Although whites now accept open housing in principle, they remain prejudiced against black neighbors in practice. Despite whites’ endorsement of the ideal that people should be able to live wherever they can afford to regardless of race, a majority still feel uncomfortable in any neighborhood that contains more than a few black residents; and as the percentage of blacks rises, the number of whites who say they would refuse to enter or would try to move out increases sharply. . .
“Prejudice alone cannot account for high levels of black segregation, however, because whites seeking to avoid contact with blacks must have somewhere to go. That is, some all-white neighborhoods must be perpetuated and maintained, which requires the erection of systemic barriers to black residential mobility. In most urban housing markets, therefore, the effects of white prejudice are typically reinforced by direct discrimination against black renters and homebuyers, and a recent comprehensive study carried out by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development suggests that prior work has understated the incidence and the severity of this racial bias. Evidence also suggests that blacks can expect to experience significant discrimination in the allocation of home mortgages as well.”
This was written in 1988. It is disheartening to consider how little things have changed, and to realize how these systems contributed to the devastating losses experienced by minorities during the recession. Whites are probably slightly more willing to live alongside minorities in gentrifying urban areas than they used to be, even if, as this piece highlights, that willingness might not extend to their kids and where they go to school.
However, I’m struck by how little media attention is paid to the vastly larger problem of residential segregation throughout cities and metropolitan areas. Does a white person who lives in a city and is unwilling to have their child educated alongside a certain percentage of minorities deserve some scorn? Certainly. But where is the scorn for the dozens of millions who live in metropolitan areas who have chosen the avoidance route and live in all-white or nearly all-white neighborhoods and communities? Theirs is the choice that creates and sustains inequity and segregation.
LikeLike
You make some excellent points but NYC seems to defy some of that logic:
There are neighborhoods in Brooklyn like Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, and Bed Stuy (and others) that used to be primarily African-American. That is no longer the case and they are now far more diverse. However they are not as diverse economically and it is poverty more than race that undermines neighborhoods (and schools). But it is obvious that people are now willing to pay well over a million dollars to live in neighborhoods that are still primarily African-American.
There are schools that used to be primarily minorities and white parents started to send their kids to them and many others followed.
What is clear is that too many people are hung up on “the best”. A public elementary school has mediocre test scores so parents are afraid their child will be irreparably damaged if they aren’t at one with top scores. A charter school markets to them touting their top scores, so it must be better. Mayor Bloomberg establishes a very silly thing called a “citywide gifted elementary school” and parents who would never leave their perfectly good neighborhood school for a district g&t program now are desperate for their child to attend because they want “the best” for their child. And “the best” is what other people think is the best and those that settle for less “don’t care about their child’s education”. The privatizers of public education feed on this insecurity. And so much money is spent to prove their school is “the best” because they desperately want the parents who care the most about giving their child “the best”.
The rest of us know that when you are talking about K-5, as long as a school is safe and the teachers have resources and support, a child will learn exactly what he needs to learn in elementary school. It doesn’t matter if only 25% of the children next to him are above average, or 10% of them are above average, or 100% of them are above average. But in this era of economic insecurity, if you aren’t giving your child “the best”, you are dooming him to a life on the dole.
On the contrary, if you give a child a supportive school where he feels wanted, and you give the teachers the resources necessary — classes as small as privates if the school is high needs — it doesn’t matter whether the children sitting next to your child are red, white, brown, yellow or orange. It doesn’t matter if they are very rich, very poor, or middle class. It doesn’t matter if some are brilliant and some struggle to read low level books.
We used to know this. We STILL know this in places in other parts of the country where all children – rich or poor – go to the same public school and the only children who go to private schools are rich kids with learning issues. When we understand and support public schools, they are good. When we try to divide out those who learn quickly with perfect comportment from their public schools and leave the rest behind, what have we done?
LikeLike
I hope it’s clear when I listed that random list of colors that I didn’t mean to be offensive. I should have added blue and green as well, since all were intended to be imaginary colors. But I apologize for any unintended offensive.
LikeLike
NYC parent–Well stated. I totally agree. In fact, a child may gain a better view of the world by working well with others that are different from him. It’s a life lesson.
LikeLike
According to the Wall Street Journal today Oct. 21, 2015 the Harvard economist Raj Chetty, who is fixated on standardized test scores as predictors of the future income of students, has met with Clinton more than once, with one meeting in Spring 90 minutes long.
Chetty and colleagues are now looking at the issue of income inequality and “income mobility” but without touching on race.
The sound bite version of Chetty’s latest research:
“Bad neighborhoods and bad teachers rob poor children of the chance to climb into the middle class.”
Solution: Raise test scores and move poor families trapped in housing projects and section 8 housing, especially families with children age 13 or less.
Try some version of “Moving to Opportunity (MTO) vouchers” for rental housing in areas with less than 10 percent poverty.
MTO vouchers were offered in an experimental HUD program in 1994, with follow-on research 15-18 years after (using federal tax records to study adults who moved as children). Major finding: Growing up in a low-poverty neighborhood raised incomes by 31% by the time those children were in their mid-twenties. Effects were evident for children who moved before age 13 but not after.
Chetty et al have calculated the odds of “income mobility” into adulthood for a child born into a low-income family. By his calculations (with Nathaniel Hendren, Patrick Kline, and Emanuel Saez) the odds of a poor child at or below 20% of the income distribution rising to the 80th percentile or above as an adult are about 8 out of 100 children.
Of course the WSJ could not resist taking a swipe at Diane Ravitch for her views about Chetty’s uses and abuses of test scores. Diane is portrayed as representing “the educational establishment” and resisting Chetty’s ideas. The quote from Ravitch is brief: “The unintended consequence of Chetty’s work is a tremendous demoralization of teachers. It make test scores not a measure of education but the goal of education.”
Readers unfamiliar with the absurdity of Chetty’s caculations and policy recommendations can find a long history about these using the search engine on this website. The report in the WSJ about Chetty’s research never mentions a relationship between income and race.
Economist’s proposals on inequality draw interest on both sides of the political aisle
http://on.wsj.com/1Gomz9Z
LikeLike
What’s absurd about his research on housing vouchers?
LikeLike
You can read the study and decide for yourself. Here http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/hendren/files/mto_paper.pdf?m=1442042679
For other stats you can take a look at Income and Poverty in the United States: 2014
LikeLike
I know I can read the study and decide what I think about it for myself. But I can’t decide for myself why you think it’s absurd. That’s what I was asking. But you don’t need to tell me if you don’t want to.
LikeLike
Let’s hope this research is more grounded in reality than VAM, junk science, but I have a feeling he is underestimating the variables again.
LikeLike
You can read the study and decide for yourself. Here http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/hendren/files/mto_paper.pdf?m=1442042679
For other stats you can take a look at Income and Poverty in the United States: 2014
LikeLike
Laura-I read through the study, and it seems that changing housing patterns of the poor can make a lasting impact when children are young. I am not surprise by the results since I taught in a diverse school district, and many of my poor ELLs managed to go to college, start their own businesses and enter the middle class. New Jersey has had an affordable housing law for many years. I wonder if anyone ever studied it, and if it has changed the lives of the children that were able to move into middle class areas. Frankly, I think this would be a hard sell to a Congress that chooses to ignore poverty.
LikeLike
Aren’t the statistics about how high and low poverty schools perform on international tests/PISA really a different way of confirming what Chetty is saying? I am certainly not a fan of his VAM research, but I am not sure what I am supposed to dislike about this line of research. What I really dislike is having statistical models drive public policy without substantial field testing. What I object to is the really foolish pushing of untested ideas without the necessary groundwork. In what industry or profession is the entire framework upended to fulfill someone’s curiosity?
LikeLike
No, the international tests do not confirm Chetty. They show gaps between haves and have nots in every nation. They say nothing about the effects of teacher A vs. Teacher B
LikeLike
I am referring to this new avenue of research. I agree his VAM research was flawed.
LikeLike
Boy, this issue is really the Third Rail of Education Reform.
It forces everyone to “explain” their thinking and stand naked by what comes out.
The COMMENTS section of the article is a very informative glimpse of what we are up against from “liberal” whites in regard to urban public education.
It is CRUCIAL that their biases and “what’s-good-for-my-kid” gets called out for what it is and if there is an inequality anywhere, it is SYSTEMIC and they too have an obligation to fix it.
Rich, politically connected white people go right for creating charters because they think that it is the schools themselves that are broken instead of the economic policies that have created them. And the kids that will be in those life rafts are NOT the kids that need the most help.
This is from a recent conversation with author Marilynne Robinson and President Obama in the NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS. Ostensibly it’s a very fascinating and intelligent discussion about Christianity and how we navigate faith and our lives. It’s wonderfully interesting in that regard that we have a President who is so literate and engaging (although Obama still remains under the guarded mask of his office in this discussion).
http://www2.nybooks.com/articles/s3/2015/nov/05/president-obama-marilynne-robinson-conversation.html
But here is what Robinson says to Obama at one point:
Robinson: I think one of the things that is true is that many Americans on every side of every issue, they think that the worst thing they can say is the truest thing, you know?
The President: No. Tell me what you mean.
Robinson: Well, for example—I mean, I’m a great admirer of American education. And I’ve traveled—I mean, a lot of my essays, you know, are lectures given in educational settings—universities everywhere. And they’re very impressive. They are very much loved by people who identify with them. You meet faculty and they’re very excited about what they’re doing; students that are very excited, and so on.
And then you step away and you hear all this stuff about how the system is failing and we have to pull it limb from limb, and the rest of it. And you think, have you walked through the door? Have you listened to what people say?
Have you taught in a foreign university?
We have a great educational system that is—it’s really a triumph of the civilization. I don’t think there’s anything comparable in history. And it has no defenders. Most of the things we do have no defenders because people tend to feel the worst thing you can say is the truest thing you can say.
And a little later in the exchange look what Obama says…
The President: Well, that was the lesson of the entire movement to abolish slavery and the civil rights movement. And that’s one thing—I mean, I do think that one of the things we haven’t talked about that does become the fault line around which the “us” and “them” formula rears its head is the fault line of race. And even on something like schools that you just discussed, part of the challenge is that the school systems we have are wonderful, except for a handful of schools that are predominantly minority that are terrible.
NOT that the system and society for these predominantly minority kids is terrible, but THE SCHOOLS themselves are terrible.
So the question begs, WHY are those schools terrible?
And if you look deeper, are the schools REALLY terrible?
What are well-to-do parents saying when they say “the schools” are terrible? Aren’t they really using schools for the racist and classist pejoratives that we can’t say in polite company. It really is an assumption about THE SCHOOLS and WHO POPULATES those schools.
Neo-liberals LOVE having their kids go to schools that have diversity…as long as it is in a “good neighborhood” and that whites are the majority.
That is Obama’s and the Neo-liberal disconnect summed up in a nutshell.
LikeLike
Thanks for your post. Lots of schools are assumed to be terrible because test scores are low. Schools like children are not the sum of their test scores. We also know there are schools that are unsafe and unhealthy for children. We have no excuse for this in America, other than ignoring them because these schools contain poor, minority children. Shameful! Charter schools are making these conditions worse for many children at the same time conditions may be better for a few that escape to a charter. This is no meaningful solution.
LikeLike
I disagree with the statement “NOT that the system…is terrible, but THE SCHOOLS themselves are terrible”. When there are entire urban school districts with multiple failing schools, it has to do with the system. Money may not be allocated. When schools aren’t provided enough funds and hot water is turned off and no toilet paper is present for students, there’s a problem. When a district doesn’t have enough supplies for each school (where books and resources are in one inventory building for the entire district), especially textbooks, there’s a problem. Most importantly, when there’s not enough money allocated by central office for each school for services, especially in high poverty areas, there’s an issue.
Let’s not forget central office controlling of continuous decreasing of benefits and salaries (even though there seems to be millions of dollars available for many other means, and millions of dollars going “missing” to ghost schools, etc.) which affects retention of teaching force and the millions wasted on TFA contracts.
But, it’s not a system problem. 😎
LikeLike
Accountability begins at the top
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Politicians Are Poody Heads and commented:
This is not just about racism, although that continues to be a fundamental and serious problem in this country. It is also about “classism.” The root cause of which can only be addressed by doing something about poverty and income inequality.
All families deserve to live in neighborhoods that are safe, send their children to local schools that are well-funded, and have jobs that pay a living wage.
Until the problems of poverty, including racism and classism, are addressed, and the 1% start paying their fair share of taxes, and society starts valuing every one of its citizens, this will continue to be an ongoing problem.
We seem to be way more willing to spend billions on our military/national security structure, while we are unwilling to spend money on people, communities, and schools that need help.
LikeLike
“Until the problems of poverty, including racism and classism, are addressed, and the 1% start paying their fair share of taxes, and society starts valuing every one of its citizens, this will continue to be an ongoing problem.”
For brevity, I prefer to just say “this will continue to be an ongoing problem.”
LikeLike
And on the same note of “society valuing its citizens”, we will continue to have problems in our education system if our society continues to not value getting an education, teachers, and the field itself.
LikeLike
It isn’t just the 1% who are not contributing. I think the emphasis on what the rich should be doing has the unintended consequence of the other 99% feeling they don’t have to do anything.
My child has attended our neighborhood school since K. 70% of the children get free lunch. The majority of other 30% of the families (a diverse group) give little to nothing to help our school. They have $ to pull their kids out of school to go to the state fair or to go on an out of state vacation, but never contribute in any way to the requests of the PTA. They can attend events, but can’t volunteer at the same event for 1/2 hour.
I have applied to a private school for the next school year (my older child will be in 5th grade) and while I am concerned about the state of public schools, I cannot continue to be heavily involved in a school where the parents do not contribute.
I can give many examples where people could have helped with a little time or money and they don’t. I set foot in my neighborhood school for five years and I am done.
I hope the original poster has a better experience at her school.
LikeLike
I will add that some of the parent who do nothing, get into a charter and all of a sudden they are able to give time and $. They never consider that if they gave time and $ to their neighborhood school, things could be better.
LikeLike
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/selectatest.html
LikeLike
Great comment. That is where most Richmond white and asian students have gone to…..white and private. But sometimes I can understand because Richmond can be so stupid: like our priority school found today that one sped position will be eliminated, even though child study is held each month and more kids are being classified. We received a Standards notebook for second grade from the DOE that is 5 inches thick!!!!! Now, if they think I am going to use it they are misinformed. I don’t have time for paperwork on top of more paperwork. I am tired of it. So, diversity aside, yes, my daughter’s elementary school was quite diverse, and if she were still young, public school would be the only affordable way.
But this teaching to the test has got to end.
LikeLike
I teach at an almost all-white blue ribbon school that is just up the Hudson River from a neighboring town with a minority population. Parents and teachers disparage it constantly, sometimes to my face. Here’s the rub: I live in that neighboring town and I can see my kids will have many opportunities that my wealthier students will never have. My home town has a strong community with an active street life. My son can walk to school with his friends. My son’s middle school has a vast after school program with dozens of classes for the kids, far more than the wealthy district I teach in.
Yes, the district is a little more rough-and-tumble, but these aren’t insurmountable problems. It’s sad though that most middle class families in my town still avoid the local school. It’s practically folk knowledge that the schools are “bad”, even though my direct experience tells me they are not. Even when people know where I teach, my point of view is not enough to pierce this local prejudice. It’s very frustrating.
LikeLike