Monday, July 11, 2011

Charter Schools

In my thinking regarding American education, I always thought of charter schools as only slightly less problematic than private schools. However, while reading Whatever It Takes by Paul Tough on Geoffrey Canada and the Harlem Children's Zone, I think I've opened my thinking up somewhat.

My initial gripe with charter schools is that, similar to private schools, not everyone can attend them and they increase gaps in education. Public schools can't compete, and not everyone has access. It would be better to eliminate them to even out resources and the playing field.

However, the playing field in America simply isn't even right now. And eliminating private and charter schools would certainly even the playing field, but it might not fix the problem. Right now, black children are too far behind for this to solve the problem by itself.

The Harlem Children's Zone is taking a crack at fixing this problem by changing black culture regarding education. It's a good program - it immerses poor minority children in learning and produces results. But it's limited in the amount of students it can accept, and it isn't very reproducible (at a whopping $76 million operating cost).

But does it have to be reproducible?

If the Harlem Children's Zone works to close the racial and socioeconomic gap in American achievement, ultimately more kids will be getting out of poverty. You can't reach every kid right away, but if the program lasts long enough then eventually all of these poverty stricken families will have a shot at the program. The ones who are getting their shot right now should be lifted out of poverty, creating opportunities for others and creating gradual change.

So...charter schools are a temporary solution. If they close the achievement gap long term, then eventually they can be shut down and all schools can be equal again. But a culture of learning needs to be transmitted through such intense programs so that a level playing field will be played on by equal talent.

Not everyone can be admitted to these nice charter schools now, but hopefully over years and years everyone can be. Change takes time and a lot of effort. With charter schools, we can make charter schools obsolete again.

It might not be totally fair now. But in the long run...it might be.

Friday, July 8, 2011

Why are poor people poor?

The epidemic of poverty in America is a controversial topic, one with no true answer regarding its cause. Of course, am I going to take a stab at it on my blog? Of course.

If poverty in inner city areas is perpetuated by itself (a.k.a. poor people are surrounded by poor people so they don't have reason to believe they should change or that change is the norm), then how do you escape this cycle? The arguments that more government funding is the solution and the argument that no government funding is the solution are commonly thrown around. In my opinion, funding isn't the key issue. The issue is the creation of jobs.

When jobs existed for African American families (that didn't require higher education), a steady flow of income and the mixture of middle and low class families provided a stable environment for kids to grow up in. The employment rate for young African American males fell from 82% in 1965 to 58% in 1984. The employment rate for young white males barely moved from 80% to 78%. So what happened?

First off, it's clear that unemployment for young black males is a huge factor in the poverty cycle. Just to be clear. So how to fix it?

First of all, with more young adults going to college, jobs began to seek more educated employees. Jobs for high school graduates left cities, and jobs for college graduates came in. This created a huge gap.

This gap can still be seen today - it's because jobs are being outsourced! People around the world will do menial labor for cheaper, so the jobs are leaving America. These opportunities are dwindling. How can we fix that?

Bring back our jobs to America. However, the problem is that people won't do these jobs for the same low rates. Why not?

Because the standard of living in America is higher than in other places. Why is the standard of living so high?

Because we have an enormous wealthy elite that are living at levels way above everyone else. Simply put: the range of wealth in America is greater than most other countries. For example: China's poverty rate is 2%. America's is 12% (approx. 2009).

So here's the chain:

Enormous wealth disparity -> Disproportionate standard of living -> Outsourcing of jobs -> Poverty


You figure out what to change.

Thursday, July 7, 2011

Education & Economic Ideologies

I just finished reading an excerpt of Grading Education by Richard Rothstein for class. In general, Rothstein is raising questions of school goals and accountability. I began thinking about the idea that schools bear the responsibility of educating children, and we expect them to fix society's problems. Some would argue that other issues, especially moral education, are up to the family (and community). Who is correct?

The argument could be made that these issues are separate. Educating children morally should be left to families, and schools should fix our society by providing academic tools. Right? Problem solved. Not that simple, of course...schools are going to teach children morals one way or the other. Even if it is merely by observation and behavioral conditioning, they are learning morals at school. So the problem cannot be so simply divided. Schools do have a moral responsibility.

I would argue that part of the problem is American economic ideologies that are in opposition to each other. Simply put: public education is a socialist goal, and private responsibility is a capitalist ideology. Are these two ideologies creating the disconnect between expectations of moral education?

I would say so. I've just begun thinking about this issue, so my thoughts are not well formed. But I think it makes sense. A purely capitalist society would oppose public education. We have conflicting ideologies in place: a socialist idea in a (mostly) capitalist society. So where does the responsibility fall? I would say it must come from both places. But that means schools do have a responsibility to educate morally.

This is probably one of the most amorphous, unclear blogposts I've had...maybe ever. All that is to say, if anyone is reading this (maybe you, Ray Jones? Brad?), PLEASE feel free to contradict what I'm saying and weigh in. Just thinking through some stuff.

Maybe my next post will be more concrete. Here's hoping.