By Tom
We’ve all just endured two weeks of party conventions, highlighted by a speech from a former community organizer and a former mayor who isn’t sure what a community organizer does.
And I think I’ve got some advice for the man who eventually wins this election.
But first let me tell you a story.
Twenty years ago I had a kid in my third grade class that we’ll call Marcus. Marcus held two distintions: He was the fastest and the smartest. He won the school-wide spelling bee wearing cleats. (He wore cleats everyday because they gave him an edge in kickball.) There were a lot of other things I remember about Marcus as well, many of them unpleasant. There were times when I scolded him. Lots of times. There were times when I called his mom so that she could scold him. And there was a time when I drove him home after he did something unmentionable, scolding him all the way, then passing him off to his mom, like a baton in some kind of wierd scolding relay race. (This was back when you could have students in your car.) We were actually a pretty good team, his mom and I. We both had high hopes for Marcus, yet we both knew that his neighborhood was holding him back. He was growing up without a father or older relatives. The only adult men that he saw away from school were living well outside the law. His apartment complex was full of drugs and prostitution and even hosted the occasional murder.
Things got so bad there that in the early 1990s the local police department set up an outpost in one of the units. (Remember when BIll Clinton funded 100,000 new police officers?) Initially we thought it was simply a way for the department to save on gas money, but gradually, things in that complex changed. The criminals moved away in frustration, and new families, most of them from different countries, moved in. The school district opened an afterschool homework club on-site where kids could come for support. This change reflected itself in the larger community, which in turn changed our school. My school now serves a very different population than it did twenty years ago. Income hasn’t gone up that much, but hope and pride certainly have. Families stay together and they support their kids and their school. Things aren’t perfect, but compared to 1990 it’s like night and day.
By the way, Marcus came to see me a few years ago during Open House. He thanked me "for being so strict." He had finished school and was working, planning to start a family.
So Mr. President, whoever you are, here’s my advice: Our schools will look a lot like the communities that surround them. If you want strong schools (and you’ve both told us that you do) do what you can to build strong communities. Create jobs for the people who live there and make sure that they all have health care. Don’t let whole neighborhoods become havens for criminals. If you do those things, you’ll find that the quality of the schools (and even the test scores) will improve. Because schools will always reflect the neighborhoods that surround them. And by the way, you’re going to need help from both mayors and community organizers.
Exactly, Travis. What came first, the functional nieghborhood, or the effective school in the middle of it? I think it’s the neighborhood. So what made the neighborhood functional? Guys like you, probably, who have jobs, health care, hope and pride.
(Just thinking aloud) I think the creation of jobs is crucial. I used to think that education was the answer to everything: if a person were given the chance to receive an education, the knowledge and skills would open the world. And while this is true, there is a second part–employment. Employment is often based on skills/education, and employment gives families a way to use the employment. It is sort of a cycle. I cannot tell which one comes first or is of greater need. However, I now find no reason to figure that out.
I lived in a poor neighborhood when I first came to the city in which my first job was. Quite poor. But I liked the house and the proximity to my school. Me wife and I painted out house, redid the yard, and planted trees. Pretty soon, the houses around us were doing the same. What I noticed is that when people feel they have something of worth–their neighborhood, they will maintain it, better it.
I think this could be applied to having a job as well. If people are employed they have ownership of things. That ownership gives a reason to be part of the system or the desire to have more opportunities.
Education, employment….both wonderful ideas to give to the next president. Thanks Tom.
Thanks for elaborating your point. I recognize the sentiment. Yet, I also accept your example that a single teacher or another educator can individually do things that increase student academic performance irrespective of policies. As you know, project Follow Through demonstrated that it’s the teacher who controls the academic achievement level, not a president’s policy position. The Q, then, is why teachers do not use the procedures of Project Follow Through. Yes?
Every school “reflect(s) teachers’ efforts,” Bob, just as every school reflects the efforts of the children who study there, as well as that of the parents who send them to study there. That said, I assume you’re implying that there are schools achieving beyond the level that one would expect, given the nature of their surrounding neighborhoods. Indeed there are, just like Mickey Mantle was able to achieve greatness on the baseball field despite the fact that he ignored practically everything that every baseball coach ever told him about proper nutrition and sleep habits. Likewise, if you look carefully at these unique schools, you’ll find they tend to have two things in common: They are driven by exceptionally talented people, and their success is unsustainable beyond both the careers and realm of these individuals. One of the problems with the educational policies of the current administration is that they failed to understand this. In many ways, their policies were shaped by what they learned from the very best schools in the country, assuming that they need only publicize these special places and then mandate that their success be replicated across the land. I once attended a conference session led by Yvonne Chan, who founded a highly successful charter school in inner city L.A. I was struck not only by her talent, energy and charisma, but by the fact that almost none of what I saw would fly in my own school district. There’s nothing wrong with studying and celebrating over-performing schools, but I’d like to see the next administration try to understand what really happens in and around the vast majority of the schools in America, and to use this understanding to craft policy that yields steady, yet sustainable, improvement. Just because inner-city L.A., with all its crime, drugs and hopelessness, happens to contain a wonderful, vibrant school doesn’t mean we should expect successful schools in horrible neighborhoods. Any casual glance at the vast body of evidence should discourage that approach, just as any casual glance at the condition of most men’s softball teams should discourage the approach that Mickey Mantle took to his pre-game preparation.
How then should we account for schools that reflect teachers’ efforts in spite of distractions and surrounding environments?