Recently, a commenter on this blog wrote that he finally understood why some schools are succeeding and others are failing. He said he realized that children in affluent communities have well-resourced and successful schools, while children in impoverished communities have terrible schools. I tried for the umpteenth time to explain to him that he was reaching the wrong conclusion. The only measure he was using was test scores, which reflect family income. I suggested he consider that the schools in poor communities did not get the same resources as those in affluent communities. The schools he called “failing” very likely have dedicated teachers who are working hard despite large classes and inadequate support. The problem is not the schools, but society’s refusal to pay the cost of making every school a good school.
Peter Greene explains the point in more detail in this post about the Journey for Justice Alliance.
He begins:
“If you’re not regularly exposed to the problem, you might think that finding the ways in which non-white non-wealthy students are shortchanged would require deep and nuanced research. As it turns out, finding the ways in which education fails to serve those students requires no more careful research than finding the nose on the front of your face.
“The Journey For Justice Alliance is based in Chicago, but it’s an alliance of grassroots community, youth, and parent-led organizations in 24 cities across the country. They are working and organizing for community-driven alternatives to the privatization of and dismantling of public school systems. They’re the folks behind the #WeChoose movement (as in “we choose education equity, not the illusion of school choice.” Look at their member groups and you’ll find honest-to-goodness community grass roots organizations, not just one more astroturf group funded by Gates, Walton, et al. Their director, Jitu Brown, is one of the most powerful speakers for education and equity it has ever been my pleasure to hear.
“Last spring they issued a report– “Failing Brown v. Board”– that looks at the gap between the schools that serve primarily wealthy white families and those that serve non-wealthy families of color. Their findings are not encouraging.
“The report says: The fact is, public schools in Black and Latino communities are not “failing.” They have been failed. More accurately, these schools have been sabotaged for years by policy-makers who fail to fully fund them, by ideologues who choose to experiment with them, by “entrepreneurs” who choose to extract public taxpayer dollars from education systems for their own pockets.
“The report also rejects the notion that money doesn’t matter, or that somehow the children and their families are responsible. And they know what successful, fully-resourced schools look like
They offer a culturally relevant, engaging and challenging curriculum, smaller class sizes, more experienced teachers, wrap-around emotional and academic supports, a student-centered school climate and meaningful parent and community engagement. These are the hallmarks of what Journey for Justice calls sustainable community schools.
“J4J performed a fairly simple piece of research– looking at course offerings in various schools across twelve cities. They acknowledge that such a comparison isn’t perfect, that schools may offer courses that are never actually taught, that the course offering list doesn’t tell you about the quality of those courses. But the findings are still pretty stark.”
In every pairing of black and white schools, “majority white schools offered both more academic subjects and more “enrichment” subjects in the arts than majority Black and/or Brown schools. Majority white schools offered more foreign languages, more high-level math options, more AP courses. The range of offerings in arts, music, dance and theater was far greater in majority white schools…
“Charter fans are going to say, “See? That’s why we need to build more charters, so we can get some of those children of color out of there,” but why should those children have to sacrifice the other big benefit that majority white schools enjoy– a school in their own community that they can attend with their neighbors? And why do we need a complicated web of privatized schools to fix the problem. We know how to fix the problem, as witnessed by the fact that politicians and leaders have fixed the problem for each of the affluent majority white schools.
“It’s like you have twenty kids in a cafeteria, and ten sit down with a steak dinner and the other ten get bowls of cold oatmeal, and when someone complains about it, a bunch of folks pop up to propose some complex system by which one of the oatmeal kids will be sent out to a restaurant across town. No! Just get back out in the kitchen and use the same tools and supplies that you demonstrably already have to make steak dinners for the rest of the kids.”

Agreed. The “bottom line” approach is one of the dominant factors that have brought us to the further marginalization of students of color. What is not considered in the public school debate is the objective of education is qualitative, not necessarily quantitative. Education is not producing widgets, education is supporting the development of critical thinkers with a conscience.
LikeLike
I am a firm believer that separate is never equal in a public school or a charter. Integration works wonders for poor students, but we do not have enough resolve to integrate schools. Charters enhance segregation, and leave the public schools depleted of resources with the most expensive and neediest students to educate. Common schools should aspire to create equity and access for all students regardless of color or family income. We are not solving our problems with privatization. We are exacerbating existing problems and creating a whole host of new ones.
LikeLiked by 1 person
additionally, research argues that kids who grow up with poverty must have integrated access to children who did not grow up with poverty in order to watch role models and thus figure out how to survive the school/college system
LikeLike
Diane, Yes, it’s the schools. However, there is a whole other research group that addresses adult education and that shows a direct correlation between a mothers’ quality of education and the educational growth of her children, in early-ed and onward.
My take on the situation is that, with cultural crossovers in pre-K onward, there is still some cultural bias going on from the research side of the equation. However, I still think that the evidence shows that, without ongoing educational activities of parents and integration with the schools, formal schooling is already set up to receive children who will be “low achievers” just by the several-year patterns (and lack of them) that are ingrained in their early home environments, e.g., regular reading.
It seems to me (though I am out of the field now), that the continued separation of research fields between adult and children’s education needs to be re-revisited and rethought where parents are considered a working part of the whole picture. Some places are doing this; but it’s not systematic that I can see, and it needs to be. Here is a recent cross-post from the National Literacy Association:
On Sunday, September 9, 2018 at 4:57:51 AM UTC-7, David Rosen wrote:
Yesterday, September 8th, was International Literacy Day. In recognition of the importance of International and U.S. literacy, I invite you to consider this September 8th South Carolina Post and Courier article, “South Carolina spent $214 million on child literacy. It didn’t work” about a failed elementary school literacy intervention that was not based on evidence-based practices, and a September 7th letter by an adult literacy practitioner, “Shining a light on literacy” that appeared a day earlier in the same publication, that describes the underpinning need to address family poverty, and a different strategy that begins with parents’ basic skills education. This strategy is supported by evidence that the number of years of education the parent, particularly the mother, completes affects how well the child will do in school.
Is it time to focus our attention on a national media campaign that reaches every school district, community, and state legislator about the power of parents’ basic skills education, not only to address the important issue of poverty in many U.S. communities, but also to improve the success of children in schools? Perhaps that would be a good goal to set now and to fully reach by September 8th 2020.
David J. Rosen
Adult basic skills advocate
djros…@gmail.com
Google Groups “AAACE-NLA” group. To post to this group, send email to aaace-nla@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/aaace-nla.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/aaace-nla/a96928e1-f235-434a-87b5-a5ab18fdcc45%40googlegroups.com.
LikeLike
This is excellent, Catherine, and thank you. What you’re proposing, in many respects, sounds to me like a way to ameliorate or perhaps even reverse the Hart-Risley “Early Catastrophe” dynamic in impoverished families.
Yes, by all means, let us help parents attain the education they need to prepare their children to engage in school.
LikeLike
Diane an addendum to my prior note: Yesterday’s election, and obvious problems with racism in Georgia and other places in “the south” (but not only there), though slowly improving, also cannot be untied from the recalcitrance of “low performance” in children entering formal schooling. Making progress IN schools can only be enhanced by forging systematic relationships with parents, or with those OUTSIDE of the formal school environment. CBK
LikeLike
Both posts great, & so refreshing to contemplate a new [to me] additional, crucial piece of “what works,” very much in the vein of “it takes a village.”
LikeLike
Good job, Peter Greene.
Charters = JIM CROW Laws
LikeLike
“It’s like you have twenty kids in a cafeteria, and ten sit down with a steak dinner and the other ten get bowls of cold oatmeal, and when someone complains about it, a bunch of folks pop up to propose some complex system by which one of the oatmeal kids will be sent out to a restaurant across town. No! Just get back out in the kitchen and use the same tools and supplies that you demonstrably already have to make steak dinners for the rest of the kids.”
This is a great illustration but a requirement in ESSA for this year, likely enforced next year, is that districts and schools must report per-pupil expenditures by financial streams–federal, state, local– and connect these with outcomes. The reporting issues are being sorted out–allocating costs of tech, transportation, one teacher in multiple schools, and so on. The aim, as I see it, is to shame schools and districts while revealing to the public which teachers and other staff are highly paid, have the most experience, and what “outcomes” they produce. The outcome measures are sure to include test scores, opt outs, graduation rates and the like.
The quest for productivity measures in education is not new but few people seem to be aware of the ESSA requirement and even fewer understand that this requirement does nothing to address what Kozal called “savage inequities.” It will provide data to justify budget cuts, to offer “proofs” that money can be saved by shiffing funds to more online learning, and so on.
The ESSA reporting requirements do not require a comparison of public schools and charter schools .In June 2017, ED stated that states may request to delay this requirement until 2018- 2019 as long as state education agencies and school districts include the steps they are taking toward making this information available. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/perpupilreqltr.pdf
LikeLike
Peter Greene’s cafeteria analogy at the end of this post is perfect… but it may be unwittingly so. It’s well past the time to provide everyone with the same courses in the school cafeteria instead of providing one standardized meal for free and reduced lunch students and offering a wide array of a la carte dishes for those who can afford to pay for it. In fact, that is the way many districts operate their school lunch programs in an effort to end up in the black at the end of the year and entice affluent children to avail themselves of “cafeteria food”.
LikeLike
Peter is, as usual, spot on with this post.
I’d add that this “underfunding” is moving into middle to upper middle class public schools as well. Partly as a result of public school funding being redirected into charters and also as a result of community/government push against unions.
I recently rekindled a friendship on Facebook with someone I was close to in my K-12 years. He posted an article about how charter schools were outperforming public schools in Detroit and Michigan, as a whole.
I added my 3 cents, but with courtesy and respect. He heard me, but cited the average cost per public school pupil being significantly less than at charters. Then he mentioned how city and state employees were the only ones left with unions that offer pensions. “It might be time for them to get more in line with the private sector’s approach”. He then highlighted how many people were going to be collecting pensions, soon (baby boomers) and the impact this would have on taxes. This is where we moved from the discussion of Detroit into his more immediate sphere.
My reply was that the highest performing states in the area of education were those that had the strongest unions. He knows I’ve worked many jobs; so I told him that teaching was, by far, the hardest, . It’s going to be difficult to lure top talent into a low to middle paying job without other incentives. I didn’t mention a lot of other things, figuring we’d get to that later.
We didn’t. He said this was food for thought…for another day. We remained civil.
Point is: many don’t want to invest their tax $$$ into public education. Many resent unions. From job protections and tenure/due process (a big one) to pensions to summers “off”. So they look for cheaper fixes. Charters with non-union teachers working 12-14 hour days for low pay with no pension works for them. Schools with digital classrooms and/or scripted curriculums, paving the way for a lesser role on the part of the teachers, which will reduce the need for high skilled/higher paid pedagogues rings a bell for them, as well.
LikeLike
Underfunding – or at least a barbershop trim- in mid-/wkg-class schools was immed apparent in 2008/9 in my little bailiwick of for-langs in central NJ: all except highest-tax-paying districts booted Span out of elem. World Langs right back to mid-sch start, where they were before ’97.
Around here I rarely hear complaints about tenure [code for bad teachers], but much bitterness about def-ben pensions & "good bennies," from corp workers who went to 401(k)'s 20+ yrs ago, & whose employer-provided med has been steadily reducing bens & raising costs for same period.
LikeLike