Kozol-Chpt 4

            Chapter 4 presents a program, called school-to-work, some inner-city schools follow based on the premise that school is a place that makes students ready for the workplace.  Kozol points out that as early as kindergarten, students are exposed to the idea that the school work they do is worth monetary value.  Their school work worth is kept track of on an earnings sheet, with grades being transferred to equivalent monetary values.  Students also apply for and interview for managerial positions in the classroom which range from being the ‘line manager’ to ‘pencil sharpener manager’ to ‘soap manager.’  Some programs are being financially supported by businesses, which makes me feel dirty to think of members of the private sector being involved in public education.  These programs support the notion that inner-city students will not amount to much, and so because of this program, “these robots will never burglarize your home…never snatch your pocket books…are going to be producing taxes” (97-98).  Kozol also states that “children…are regarded as investments, assets or productive units-or else, failing that, as pint-sized human deficits who threaten our competitive capacities” (94).  This is truly a terrible way to think about children.  Kozol points out that it is a different matter when combining work and school occurs in high school, but that doing so in the primary grades is just wrong; I agree.  One teacher, quoted in the chapter, said that the school-to-work program leads to “trapping these young ones…in low-paying jobs” (103).  This is a sad fact.  Many teachers, when faced with the program described, feel they have to let go of “an ideal of education that they valued deeply when they started their careers…in order to respond to the realities before them in the neighborhoods they serve and to deliver those empirical results that are demanded of them” (108).  Perhaps changing the system starts with these teachers, but it is a fact that they have to eat and pay for a place to live and support their families; they may be scared of what will happen if they speak up.  I know that although I like to think it would not be a difficult decision to make, in reality, if faced with the same choice, it would be. 

Kozol-Chpt 3

In Chapter 3, Kozol talks about the curriculum some inner-city schools are given to follow that are presented as a part of school reform.  However, “although most educators speak of these agendas in a broad language that sounds applicable to all, it is understood that they are valued chiefly as responses to perceived catastrophe in deeply segregated and unequal schools” (64).  These ‘reforms’ follow ideas of B.F. Skinner; Kozol points out that similar methods are used in jails and drug-rehabs.  The program Kozol discusses is called SFA (Success For All).  It is a scripted program that has odd language and seemingly tedious methods for recording student proficiency.  Students are even graded on their abilities to line up! Is this what education is and should be about? In his visit to one school with this program, Kozol states that he saw “nothing even hinting at spontaneous emotion in the children or the teacher” (68).  I was struck by the weird Hitler-like salute the one teacher did to signal ‘silence’ in the classroom.  I was also shocked at the assembly where the kids from each level had to raise their hands, except for the kids in level one who were totally ignored.  It is no wonder that there is such a feeling of anxiety in the school; it trickles down from administrator to teacher to student.  This is not an environment for a student, a child, to be in.  One of the saddest parts of the scripted curriculum is that “there is little sense that anything a child learns has an inherent value of its own” (76).  Kozol also points out that “although the principles and teachers in this school are constantly reminded to hold out high expectations for low-income children…the intellects of children were debased when they were asked to parrot language that they did not understand and weren’t invited to explore and figure out” (84).  This scripted program takes away an essential part of the education and learning process, that being exploration, inquiry, and conversation.  When these students graduate high school and make their way to college, how will fare in this type of environment? The college classroom is less structured and coming up with your own ideas is something that is highly valued.  Kozol quotes a teacher he spoke with who said, “‘if there were middle-class white children here, the parents would rebel at this curriculum and they would stop it cold-like that’” (75).  This brings the issue back to race, which is time and time again pointed out as the reason for the discrepancies in education.  I am curious as to why so many are hesitant to acknowledge this seemingly obvious fact.    

Kozol Chps. 1 & 2

As I read the introduction and opening chapter of Kozol’s book, a theme from our last class meeting kept coming to mind – segregation and racism are still alive and well, they are just much better hidden today. As Kozol went through lists of high ninety percent minority schools, many of which were named after civil rights leaders, it became harder and harder to deny that. Page 18 in particular seemed to be aimed right at me; “Many Americans… who live far from our major cities… have a rather vague and general impression that the great extremes of racial isolation… have gradually, but steadily, diminished…” It would appear that that is simply untrue. Kozol exposes a system that has not only not made steady progress, but has reverted to levels not seen in decades. Blogger utchem felt that this probably has more to do with SES, and I would certainly agree that SES has a lot to do with it. The problem is that in many cases problems of low SES and ethnicity are nearly inseparable. Though many would like to think there has been a great deal of progress made in the last few decades, I submit that it would be hard to follow Pineapple for a week, look her in the eyes, and tell her that things are getting better.Chapter 1 is very aptly titled.

The idea from Chapter 2 that hit me the hardest (and apparently everyone else as well), was the statistics given on the amount of money spent on different school districts. These numbers are staggering, especially when considered in an equity as opposed to equality setting. The schools that could benefit most from more attention (money being a part but not all of ‘attention’) seem to be the schools that are receiving the least. Another striking point, which is somewhat related to the one above concerned pre-school attendance. The students from low SES homes would be the ones who need pre-school instruction in order to level the playing field, and they are the ones least likely to get it. A child is much easier to teach as a young child – it is then that they learn the habits that, sadly, might determine much of their future. If I were going to propose a solution, I believe that it just might be pre-K instruction for a significant part of the day.

Kozol–1&2

Prior to opening this book, or our discussions in class, I knew that segregation in schools was still a very real problem. My mother works in a school that is almost entirely minority, but I think the real problem that leads to this large degree of segregation is the same as that in the area in which my mother teaches—it is a socioeconomic issue. Unless there is a large degree of busing, schools will remain segregated, and I believe the SES segregation is the more important issue. As far as busing is concerned, deMarrais stated that in the past there has been opposition to this, even by the students being bused and their families. Also, Kozol brings up an example of a school built in an upper class neighborhood where the families who lived in the neighborhood sent their children elsewhere when low SES students were brought into the school. And we know that there are very few high SES parents who would stand for their children being sent to a segregated low SES school, such as those described by Kozol.

As I said, although I believe minority segregation is a major problem, I feel the real problem with the school segregation is the SES segregation, and the resulting disparity of funding. It is absolutely amazing to me that one 3rd grade student in New York public schools was only “worth” $8,000 per year, while another merited $18,000 per year. This absolutely astounded me, especially since these funds feel along SES lines and the pupil who was already having $18,000 of public funds spent on him was attending a school where the parents could raise over $100,000 per year for the school (and specific programs or more teachers), if they so desired. It’s no wonder the students in these poorer, segregated schools, with a few exceptions, don’t excel in the same way students from wealthier schools might. I am also amazed that there are some individuals who think money does not play a factor, after viewing the results, or lack there of, after one year of increased spending. I agree that there are personal factors that need to be overcome, but more importantly, that the effects of under spending and under attention are cumulative. If you want to make a difference, you need to start early (as early as Kozol states upper class parents do) and continue for the duration. This system is definitely not fair, as pointed out by some very young children. As far as the use of public funding is concerned, it is an outrage to me that the chancellor of school funding could reject the use of private funding to reduce class size, only to come up with public funds for this very same school, while other schools, worse off to begin with, continue to suffer because parents do not raise the same kind of stink or, perhaps, do not have the same kind of influence. Further, if we know that it is important to start early, why are public funds used to partially underwrite the cost of preschool for middle class children, while so many poor children receive little to no preschool (according to their kindergarten teachers). I especially like the statement of a former NYC principal to sum this up: “‘I’ll believe money doesn’t count the day the rich stop spending so much money on their own children.’”

(One thing I want to comment on, that is slightly off topic, is the idea of parents sending their children to an 11 hour program, as early as the of two. No child, especially a two-year-old, should be spending 11 hours in any kind of schooling program. And, if they are in preschool for 11 hours, what time do they have with their parents? It seems as if these parents are paying to have someone else raise their children, not just give them an academic advantage. Just because they can afford it doesn’t make it right.)

Kozol One and Two

Having read a Jonathan Kozol book before, I knew that this book would be sad and shocking.  Kozol brings up some of the segregated schools that he has visited and gives statistics and figures.  I found it disturbing how this is still happening in the United States.  One of the quotes that caught my eye was “To give up on integration, while aware of its benefits requires us to consciously and deliberately accept segregation, while aware of its harms….Segregation, rarely discussed, scarcely even acknowledged by elected officials and school leaders.”  This is something that made me wonder….why are we so concerned with making sure that every child learns, but not concerned with every child having a place to learn.  The stories in the chapter are so sad and some of the stories reminded me of the video we watched in class, “A Girl like Me”.  I also thought it was interesting to see the correlation between naming a school representing a black leader and the number of minority children enrolled.  “If you want to see a really segregated school in the United States today, start by looking for a school that’s named for Martin Luther King or Rosa Parks.”  I found this chapter to be sad and hard to swallow.  I have worked in an inner city school in Tennessee and it was nothing like what Jonathan Kozol described in this chapter.  I always thought I wanted to work in an inner city school, but I can only imagine how those teachers feel hopeless with the lack of materials or even rooms.  I also wonder why our government is not working hard to alleviate this problem.

          “There are cheap children and there are expensive children.”  Wow, what a powerful statement.   This makes me feel so bad for the type of education I have had throughout my life because I have taken it for granted.  I always knew that the people around me thought that I had an endless amount of potential and never understood what it would be like to not have someone believe in you.  Just as the children in the beginning of the chapter had said, don’t all children deserve the best?  All these children wanted was a park, music, art, and other things that seem taboo not to have in probably most of the school systems we were all brought up in.  How can these children even get what we consider to be “normal” if the funding is not there?  Kozol brings up private funds as a means to funding schools.  The estimates were astonishing, as white schools produced thousands and thousands of dollars, while the lower class minority schools could barely raise any money.  Kozol also brings up the idea that some children are going to amazing preschool programs and are prepared for entering elementary schools, while lower class minority children are sitting in front of a television or looking out the windows of their slums.  This cycle of poverty seems to be never ending and it looks like all of this can begin within the schools.

Kozol 1 and 2: (De)segregation

“To give up on integration, while aware of its benefits, requires us to consciously and deliberately accept segregation, while aware of its harms.”

With the inclusion of the word, “apartheid” in the title, it is no surprise that Kozol’s very first chapter jumps into the issue of the (de)segregation of schools. Recently, in replace of attempts by the government and individual school systems to integrate different races into the same schools, “segregation has somehow come to be viewed as a type of school reform.” Schools are almost entirely Caucasian, and in other neighborhoods, almost entirely African American and Latino. Kozol gives examples of cities around the countries that have schools are 95-99 percent minorities. Incidentally, these schools are often named after Martin Luther King Jr. or Rosa Parks, creating a oxymoronic situation in which those that fought for integration are immortalized in segregated institutions.

Lonsdale Elementary in Knoxville is a perfect example of the disproportionate ratios of students of different races. In the class I work with, there are ten African Americans and five Latinos. The teacher is also black, meaning the entire class is part of a minority group. The building is not up to par with many others in Knox county, and their technology is not equal either. Still, even if the actual structure was equal to others, Kozol argues that separating students creates unequal opportunities simply because of the peers you are surrounded by.

Kozol poses a question that many educators have asked: whether we should aim to simply strengthen the neighborhoods the minority groups are already a part of, or should we completely break down the neighborhood delineations and start everyone together from square one? I lean towards the option that internal development and strength is necessary before a new system can be initiated, unless it is absolutely impossible for a group to be vitalized. In that case, reformation would be necessary, which would require support from outside groups.

In many cases, it is not yet drastic enough the minority groups have no hope of inner-revival. However, if the schools continue reinforcing inequality among students because of segregation and subtle messages that some students probably aren’t going to succeed, a new approach may have to be considered.

The truth is: not only is inequality present, but students are consciously aware of these differences. Many students have the mindset of “us and them,” evident as they tell stories of “the other people…” The teachers also are aware of the vast differences, evident in their pay! For teachers in New York of the inner city and affluent white suburbs, the latter earn almost double the former!

“There are cheap children and there are expensive children.”
Kozol presents an idea whose reality becomes solidified in its practice: some children are inherently worth more than others. This dehumanizing way of looking at children as investments, where some will result in greater profits than others, is manifested in the funding of the schools that Kozol investigates. In the case of New York, the present per-pupil spending in some areas is around $11,000, while it exceeds $22,000 in other areas. So do students in wealthy suburbs really have twice the potential of students from the inner-city?

The division of students begins early, even before kindergarten, which is why pre-K programs are becoming so popular. With Head Start, a federally funded preschool program, the government is seeking to provide an opportunity for these “less profitable” students to catch up with their peers. However, in areas where this is most needed, many families are being denied the opportunity. This leaves some young children without stimulation while others are attending elite “Baby Ivies” which catapult the richer kids ahead before kindergarten has even begun!

The question that all of these issues surface is: can poor education and inequality be remedied by equally funding teachers, schools, and students? Would it level the playing field to level the payroll? Of course money is not the panacea for American education, but without it, everything else is moot. Proper attention to pre-K programs, as well as programs that address concerns of a family living in poverty, will be necessary to complement equal finances. Equal opportunity does not mean enforced separation, nor does it mean being accepting of such radical discrepancies in child and teacher funding. When we can put our money where our mouth is, we will begin to see change, instead of just hear about it.

Kozol– Chapters 1 & 2

The main thrust of Kozol’s book thus far is that inner-city schools get the short end of the stick. They get no respect, they get no funding and classes must be conducted in less than ideal classrooms. The buildings are in disrepair, the faculty is disheartened and the children are doomed to fail. Conversely, schools in predominantly white neighborhoods are well-funded and there is an underlying assumption that the students will succeed. 

What Kozol refers to as ‘apartheid schooling,’ in which the government (represented by Caucasians) keeps minorities down by keeping them separated from the rest of society seems suspect to me, especially after reading deMarrais’ discussion of youth culture and peer groups. “Part of the herd instinct that afflicts young people involves role-modeling and trying on different identities exemplified by their friends or significant adult figures. Another part involves learning the norms and values of a group and trying to stay within them. (deMarrais, 99).” It is instinctive for people to want to be with people who are like themselves.  All the forced segregation in the world will not defeat human nature. If there is a sense of apartheid in the inner city, it is something the people there choose, either consciously or sub-consciously.  Their family is there, their community is there, their history is there. The system that keeps them in place is one they have instituted themselves through decades of repeated behavior.

As Kozol points out, why are all really segregated schools named after black civil rights leaders? Martin Luther King and Thurgood Marshall, once names representational of hope and greatness, now seem to represent poverty and despair. It isn’t that the dream is over, it has simply given in to human nature. The dream seems unattainable, so those who would dream find other things to fill their days.

In chapter two, Kozol points out certain upscale neighborhoods have engaged in fundraising in order to bolster the faculty at their schools. One school had raised enough cash to hire on a writing teacher and two more teachers besides. Kozol states this could never happen in the inner-city because there aren’t as many funds to be raised.

The real question here is, why should any school have to resort to a fundraiser when the funds are available from the government? How does the government decide which schools get X amount of dollars? The description of the Bush Administration’s “No Child Left Behind” Act states there is 120 billion dollars spent on education per year. How is it not filtering down to the inner-city schools? There’s nothing wrong with buying a candy bar for a school function now and then, but certainly not to keep a teacher employed.

Schools should all have the same governmental funding. It may not be a bad idea for there to be a national curriculum. Everyone complains about how kids from other countries are beating our test scores so badly; why hasn’t the government stepped in?

I don’t think that automatically putting black kids and white kids together will make the rift in learning disappear. And it is possible to have a well-funded school with underachieving students. But we won’t know until all students have the same opportunity to succeed… or fail.  Is integration truly the Holy Grail for inner city schools? I don’t know. I really don’t think so. I don’t think it is bad that black kids go to black schools and white kids go to white schools. Again, it is a comfort zone thing. But let all the schools receive more than adequate funding so they can all have good facilities, attract good teachers and turn out well-educated students.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      

Kozol Chapters 1 and 2

CHAPTER 1

            This first chapter of Kozol was really an eye opener.  I knew that there were still some racially segregated schools, but never had I imagined that they existed in such vast numbers.  It is sad.  You would think that being in the 21^stcentury things would have changed drastically by now, but apparently this is something that this country has completely put on the hold.  No child no matter what their ethnic background should be deprived of a quality education just because of their family’s financial status, but even though they are attending these schools they are not receiving the type of nurturing, loving, encouraging environments that they should be.  When he shared about the little girl, Pineapple, who in the previous year had been through four different teachers and in the school all together there were 28 new teachers out of 50 teachers total, I was not shocked at all.  Why choose to enter this field if you do not have the passion and willingness to evoke change and promote a safe learning environment for your students? How can we continue to let individuals that we know are not qualified teach our children?  Why do we place them in situation where they will not be learning to their full potential mainly because the teacher is not qualified?  When Kozol mentioned that the students seemed afraid when they met white children, I thought I might be more shocked, but I wasn’t.  I found myself experiencing something similar.  The first time that I ever attended school with people other than African Americans was 9^th grade.  During that year, I found myself being very doubtful of my skills, ready to give up and all in all feeling like I really did not belong.  Luckily I met some really cool people throughout high school who are from varying ethnic communities who made the experience comfortable, exciting, challenging and safe all at the same time.  One thing that really stood out for me was the quote from the 16 year old girl about how she felt
America would be relieved if they just disappeared and sadly that is how a lot of minority children feel.  I have people in my neighborhood that wish they would disappear just to avoid the harsh realities that some feel are nonexistent.

 

CHAPTER 2

            Starting this chapter with quotes from letter of little children was interesting.  I like how they were seeking change.  They felt they deserved parks, music, etc.  They are taking initiative that is not often seen in minority school settings.  Kozol mentions the overcrowding found in these schools and different professionals felt that “it wouldn’t happen to white children.”  He referred back to the “you have, we do not have” statements that were stated in a lot of the children’s letters and alluded to the fact that this was somehow connected to how government and states felt about the children’s worth to us and the contributions that they may someday give to society.  Thinking of it in that terms is really sad because valuing some children’s on what you think they may contribute to society is not the way the educational system or this country should be run.  He then list salaries and numbers in relation to student education and teacher salary and also brings up the issue of schools being allotted private funds to certain schools and other schools not being able to do so.  Having parents that are able to give to the school and are willing to do so is awesome in the advancement of education for students, but the harsh reality that there are some schools that have parents that are not able to do so is even more vivid today.  Is it fair?  I can’t answer that, but I am a personal advocate of parent involvement whether that is through monetary donations, classroom involvement, simple phone calls to check in on their child’s progress, etc.  Focusing on whether or not this is fair something that we should not be focusing on as much, but we should focus on how we as educators can make sure that these students are receiving the best education possible within our means whether that is taking the extra time or simple words of encouragement.  Kozol also mentions the effects on students who did not receive some kind of preschool services before they entered kindergarten and how the government has made it harder for children needing those services to receive them. 

Group Discussion – Friday, 2/23

For our group discussion on Friday, February 23, I think we need to address the following topics:

• School Names (MLK High School) - Why do we do it? Should we?
• Segregation – Is this a social or educational issue? Is it really a problem?
• Monetary Incentives – Should teachers be financially enticed to join underachieving and/or lower-socioeconomic schools?
• School Funding – How can equality be achieved? Are private donations wrong?

Does anyone else have any other suggestions for topics? How do we want to organize the discussion? Please reply back.

Kozol Chapter 1 and 2 – Stop Bashing NYC!

If you are interested in a unique source of information, please sign up for the Daily Candy newsletter at http://www.dailycandy.com. It is where I learned about “Pretty Darn Swell,” an online art vendor that sells limited editions of imaginative pieces that only cost $20, with $5 going to a charity of the artist’s choosing.

I liked some of the points Kozol made about  segregation in public schools, but as it currently stands, I find it to be more of a socioeconomic problem than an educational issue. Public schools serve the neighborhood in which they are located, and when they underachieve, students are given a choice to abandon them for a better opportunity. However, socioeconomic status plays as much of a significant role in the solution as it does in the problem. Students can only make a change if they have the means to transport themselves to a new location. The public school system does not make provisions for transport outside of the neighborhood. It is only the students who can afford to make alternate arrangements that end up leaving the underachieving school, further weakening the overall student body with their absence. My main problem with Kozol is his consistent bashing of the public school system in NYC. After living there for 9 1/2 years, I’m aware of many governmental and educational policies that are trying to remedy the situation. It is not the bleak educational landscape that Kozol presents in his book.

The governments of New York State and New York City have instituted some programs that provide low-income housing options within high-income areas of NYC. Unfortunately, I don’t recall the specific tax/real estate codes that would allow you to research these programs further. One program offers significant tax credits to real estate developers who are providing new residential housing. To receive the tax credit, the developers are required to set aside 20% of the total available units for low-income families. Another program called “inclusionary zoning” allows developers who are renovating or building residential property to receive tax credits for providing exclusive low-income housing adjacent to the high-income property. These are two NYC programs that are trying to address the huge divide in socioeconomic makeup of  the city’s neighborhoods. However, it should be noted that large urban centers like NYC are often famous for having ethnic enclaves (e.g. Chinatown, Little Italy, etc.) that appeal to residents and tourists alike. While these are superficial examples of social segregation, these ethnic groupings provide opportunities to provide specialized services for the residents who gather in these neighborhoods.

NYC also makes it a point to differentiate its educational system to benefit its students rather than segregate them. No one can deny the social problems thrust upon people who openly identify themselves as LGBTQ. Imagine complicating that situation further by placing LGBTQ students in the microcosm of high school culture. Realizing that the need for a safe place to learn is a basic physiological need, NYC established the Harvey Milk High School (HMHS) that caters specifically to LGBTQ students. Here is some brief information about the HMHS that I pulled directly from its official Web site (http://www.hmi.org/) . 

Q: What’s the Harvey Milk High School?
A:  The Harvey Milk High School is an inclusive voluntary public high school focusing on the educational needs of children who are in crisis or at risk of physical violence and/or emotional harm in a traditional educational environment. The Harvey Milk High School has been in existence for almost two decades, and is now a four-year, fully-accredited high school. 95% of HMHS students graduate, well above the NYC average, and over 60% of HMHS students go onto advanced programs or college.

Q:  Why can’t at-risk children remain in their current schools?  Isn’t this segregation? 
A:These are children that have been in traditional schools, but have needed to leave or have dropped out because of physical violence and/or emotional harm. Thanks to HMHS they have a safe place to learn so that they can graduate with an education, a diploma and their lives ahead of them. Being in a separate space during the school day doesn’t mean that these students will never learn how to adjust to the demands of the larger world. Every day they face real-life pressures, including harassment. It is not segregation to remove a child from a dangerous situation in order to give them a chance to learn safely. HMHS is a successful refuge for a small portion of youth, who have fled unsafe schools in order to secure their right to a safe educational environment; no one is arguing for a totally separate school system.

On a personal note, my niece attends Norwood Elementary, which also happens to be my childhood alma mater. In the recent past, the school has moved toward the lower end of the socioeconomic scale. With a diverse population of students, there is likely to be an equally diverse set of issues presented by the population of learners. Last year while in 4th grade, my niece contracted head lice from her fellow classmates on three separate occasions. This required my brother’s family to scour themselves as well as all of the clothing and bedding in their home. My niece of course took the brunt of the guilt for causing each of three problems. That is a lot for a 4th grade child to be emotionally responsible. She started having psychological problems because of the lice which included bouts of depression and her physically pulling out her hair in a never-ending search for phantom pests. Clearly, she didn’t want to be blamed for infesting her home with vermin again. Personally, I loved my public school education because it enhanced my social skills, but I don’t think it was fair to my niece that she had to go through this experience. Our family contemplated pulling her out of Norwood and placing her in a private school. Largely because Norwood refused to accept any responsibility for the health problems affecting the kids at the school. The blame was placed on our family for issues of poor hygiene. I can only say that proper health maintenance and cleanliness have never been a problem for our family. I wonder what Kozol would say about a 4th grade child developing psychological problems due to her interactions with children from a lower socioeconomic background in this instance. Unfortunately, I think he took a largely superficial look at the overall problem.