Archives for category: Justice

Professor Mike Marder teaches physics at the University of Texas. He followed the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent hearings on affirmative action.

 

When Chief Justice John Roberts and his colleague Justice Scalia asked why diversity mattered in a physics class, the question struck home to Professor Marder, and he wrote this commentary.

 

He pointed out that Texas is now a majority-minority state. Whites are the minority.

 

Many of the jobs of today and the future, particularly in engineering, require strong grounding in physics. Already, companies complain that they have trouble finding suitable employees, to which one of the main responses of physics is to bring highly skilled future workers in from abroad through our PhD programs.

 

This is cost effective while it lasts, but it will not last. The rest of the world is building graduate programs to compete with ours, and as this happens we will lose the ability to recruit and retain other countries’ brightest minds. Then the complaint of companies that they cannot find employees for top-level jobs will move from a murmur to a roar, and we will sit staring at institutional practices that leave much more than half the population of the state feeling unprepared for and unwelcome in our classrooms.

 

We will be unable to prepare either the workers of tomorrow or the teachers to inspire them.

 

As the Supreme Court decides whether to issue a ruling that could derail even the gentlest attempts to increase participation of underrepresented majorities in our classrooms, they should know that these are the issues we confront, and the challenge diversity poses to the future of our state and country.

Dr. Yohuru Williams, historian at Fairfield University in Connecticut, recently delivered a blockbuster speech to a conference on educational justice in New York City.

He begins by quoting FDR on the Four Freedoms, then moves on to weave together the current movements and issues of our day. It is eloquent and powerful rhetoric on behalf of children, justice, and equity.

I promise if you start watching, you won’t be able to stop.

Arthur Camins, director of the Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education at the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, N.J., has a warning for Democrats that school choice is a bad choice.

He omits Republicans because they have become the party of school choice and privatization.

School choice is an alluring term, but the reality is far different from the rhetoric.

He writes:

“In our culture the “the right to choose” suggests an almost inalienable individual right, making for powerfully resonant political rhetoric. However, behind the easy-to-swallow positive connotation of choice, there is underlying message in its use in the context of education. If stated explicitly, the message might cause a little indigestion: Be out for yourself and don’t worry so much about your neighbors or community…

“However, what is moral or sensible for an individual does not make for sound or just education policy for a society. The moral burden falls not on parents, but on those who knowingly advance the wellbeing of the few at the expense of the many….

“Supporters of equity and democracy must depend upon and develop agency and hope for community solutions because when there is only despair, the only rational course of action is individual survival. Ideological supporters of privatization understand this and actively undermine democratic participation and the promise of collective solutions. That is why since the 1980’s they have followed an explicit starve-the-beast strategy to defund public institutions in order to undermine quality, public trust, and confidence. That is why they favor private charter boards over elected school boards.
I have come to believe that the struggle for equity must include a tandem strategy of opposition and advocacy.
Friends of equity need to oppose funding charter school, not because choice is inherently a bad idea but because the spread of charter schools is morally corrosive and drains money from other local schools. Since funds are always limited, the opportunities for the few come with the sacrifice of others. “They are stealing your child’s future,” might be an appropriate opposition slogan. …

“Progress requires an opt-in campaign for local public schools based on community rather than individualist values. Advocacy should highlight the fundamental characteristics of effective public schools both in the U.S. and abroad and contrast these with prevalent market-based solutions….

“Candidates need to hear from the public: There are better choices than school choice to improve education.”

Arthur Camins writes of our nation’s current misdirection and our failure to dream big dreams.

This is an article I wish I had written. Camins nails the paucity of vision that narrows our goal to individual competition instead of seeking a better life for all Americans.

He writes:

“The United States is suffering through the audacity of small hopes. In the shadow of the Great Recession and after several decades of increasing wealth disparity in the United States, the politically and financially powerful have the audacity to call upon the nation to accept small dreams.

“Nowhere is this more evident than in the pathetically small hope that consequential testing and competition — among parents for entry into charter schools, among schools for students, and among teachers for pay increases — can lead to substantial education improvement and be a solution to poverty.

“There were times when our dreams were big. They can be again. The times demand it. A look back at what values and actions have broadened access to a decent life for all can illuminate a path toward greater equity in the future.
Images of workers on breadlines in the 1930s and of fire-hosed civil rights demonstrators in the 1960s catalyzed moral outrage and direct action leading to big dreams and substantive progress toward equality and equity for all Americans.”

He adds:

“To be clear, it was not the leadership, noblesse oblige or largesse of the powerful that led to improvement in people’s lives in the decades after the Great Depression. Nor was it individuals competing with one another for their personal chance to climb the economic latter. It was the values, vision, direct action, and political pressure of the labor movement- embodied in the song, Solidarity Forever- that pushed legislators to enact a new deal to address the needs of a nation that President Roosevelt called, “ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished…..”

“Maybe the most important historical lesson is that only mass collective action guided by a moral vision will pressure elected leaders to prioritize the interest of the many over the selfish demands of the few. Hence, the claims of the empowered to be leading the charge to reduce poverty through their version of education reform should be taken with a healthy grain of salt. An additional lesson is that while the seeds of past triumphs for greater equality and equity were planted through local action, it was only when community engagement culminated in national legislation or Supreme Court rulings that progress was fully realized and secured.

“Unfortunately, those lessons have been obscured through decades of concerted propagandizing. Purposeful underfunding has reenergized the canard that government cannot be a force for general wellbeing. Once again, states rights, long the thinly veiled defense of segregation, is morally acceptable as political posturing. We need bigger, better hopes and dreams…..

“We can be better than the audacity of small hopes. The next anthem for equity needs to include the unifying theme: We’re in this together for jobs, justice, and equitable education.”

Here is the video of an outstanding discussion at the Network for Public Education conference, featuring Seattle teacher-leader Jesse Hagopian and Rita Greene, education director of the Seattle NAACP.

I was in the audience, sitting next to Jose Luis Vilson. I was lucky to get a seat, as the room was packed, and people were sitting in the aisles and lined up against the back wall.

Jesse explained the racist history of standardized testing, and Rita Greene described why the Seattle NAACP had endorsed the Opt Out movement. She encouraged people to work with their local NAACP, since the national organized was supporting standardized testing.

It was a very important and powerful presentation.

Here is the discussion that followed.

This is your homework assignment! It will be on the test.