Citing rising concerns about the academic performance of many of Seattle's students of color, state and Seattle school officials and education advocates plan to gather downtown Wednesday to discuss how to finally close the academic achievement gap ... In recent years, the [Seattle School District] has listed closing the gap as its top priority, but the problem persists.There are many reasons for this situation, which is not about race, but is a problem for all of us. Part of the problem is that few lower-income families have the power of school-choice that upper-income families enjoy. When a critical mass of Seattle's lower-income families start demanding public scholarships for private schools as are available in some other cities, the landscape will change. It's up to those who are currently the least well-served to lead the charge, but they deserve everyone's support. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at November 27, 2006 12:07 PM | Email This
.
Posted by: Tyler Durden on November 27, 2006 12:20 PMIt's up to those who are currently the least well-served to lead the charge...
Think about this statement for just one moment. How can anyone think the people who are least-served are in a position to lead anything, anywhere? It ain't gonna happen. The government schools, if they are going to continue, must be constructed with an eye toward supporting everyone, from the least-served to most-capable. This latter group of constituents has been abandoned by the public teachers, and so the parents of capable students have voted with their feet. The capable students must be won back, but the government schools haven't a clue as to what is wrong or how to win them back, and indeed, they do not want them back.
Any right thinking parent who lives in the boundaries of SPS should have his children's names on the waiting list of private or out-of-district schools.
Posted by: huckleberry on November 27, 2006 12:24 PMThe reasons that this group must lead the charge are simple: First, those with higher incomes who are dissatisfied with the public schools can afford and do buy their way out of the problem -- they move to other communities or they send their kids to private school. They're less motivated to invest the time in political activity. Second, those with higher incomes are less likely to win the sympathy of the liberal voters who have to be persuaded to approve school choice.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on November 27, 2006 12:33 PMIt doesn't "take a village." It starts at home
Stefan is right that the least well-served can do something about this if they are so inclined. That is how we got the African American Academy (incidentally one of the worst academic performers in the whole Seattle district), so change happen. It is up to this group to decide whether academic success is worth fighting for. So far the answer has been a resounding "No" because these folks and the politicians are convinced even more tax dollars will buy the magic bullet they so desperately seek.
The "lesser-served" have offered their collective clout to the Seattle elitists in exchange for "victimhood" and all the excuses and free stuff that come with that status. Standing up and demanding accountability from leftist government officials might spell the end of victim status and put at risk the crumbs they are thrown. In the end, poor schools for the masses produce just what the Seattle social engineers want....a new generation of submissive and obedient "victims".
Posted by: Saltherring on November 27, 2006 01:49 PMLeadership must come from civic leaders, and that is something Seattle has far too little of.
Posted by: huckleberry on November 27, 2006 02:05 PMThe reasons that this group must lead the charge are simple: First, those with higher incomes who are dissatisfied with the public schools can afford and do buy their way out of the problem -- they move to other communities or they send their kids to private school. They're less motivated to invest the time in political activity. Second, those with higher incomes are less likely to win the sympathy of the liberal voters who have to be persuaded to approve school choice.
I am not sure exactly what you are proposing. It sounds like you are saying that affluent citizens who care about public education need to exploit the misery of the underclasses, because liberal voters will not support civic infrastructure for the benefit of the affluent, but only for the benefit of the underclasses. Is that what you are saying? How horribly cycnical, even though it may possibly be true.
Also, the affluent are more capable than the "less well-served", and ought to be more motivated, to influence politics and public policy. If the capable are not up to the challenge of civic leadership, how can you possibly expect the underclasses to achieve it? Are you really advocating that Seattle's affluent people should abdivate their civic responsibilities because they can afford to? Maybe everyone who can afford to should just move to villas in eastern Washington and wait for hordes of Candadians to swoop down and devour what is left of Seattle? Is that your solution? Or is that a description of the problem?
I would prefer to keep repeating the same, tired, old message... making sure to give the same message to all citizens, no matter which socio-economic stratum they may inhabit, that the only way that public education will work is if it works great. If you allow public education to degrade, then the affluent will bolt, the underclasses will bitch, and everything will go to hell.
Stefan, I really don't see you offering a solution, here. You seem to be saying let the poor eat cake, and they'll come crawling back to the elites when they tire of starving. Again, there may be some truth in that, but please don't package that message up as some noble approach. There must be a more democratic and humane solution.
Stefan, I may have misunderstood what you were saying, and I have undoubtedly mischaracterized it. Can you try once more to explain to me what it is you are proposing as a solution to the problem of sucky government schools in Seattle?
Posted by: huckleberry on November 27, 2006 02:24 PMIt doesn't have to be this way. Marva Collins was one of the first to prove race doesn't matter if the parents are serious about education. Same with the No Excuses campaign. And it wouldn't take a bazillion dollars to implement a good system. The Seattle Schools need to do three things to get moving in the right direction--dump the busing, go back to phonics and standard math, and enforce the school discipline rules.
For example, I think any student who steals a test answer key and sells it to her friends so they can all pass the test without studying should be at least suspended. But all the student had to do was play the race card and nothing was done. No wonder the teacher decided to retire mid-year.
Lack of enthusiasm is not necessarily restricted to any one group. I have plenty of relatives who thumbed their nose at getting a decent education (one even turned down a full college scholarship) and then they whine about being stuck in dead end jobs. But on the other hand, I know of many who overcame a lot of obstacles because they knew education was their ticket to a better life.
I just think it is very unfortunate that there seems to be a cultural attitude in certain communities that shuns quality education. I would be interested in hearing what ideas you may have for changing such attitudes.
I believe the gap is real, and will only get "realler" as long as government schools as currently constructed exist.
Posted by: huckleberry on November 27, 2006 04:13 PMIf they really wanted to close the gap, they would identify students working below Standards and move them into an extended, intensive and enriched program to accelerate their learning until they were working at Standard and then return them to their regular classroom. Why haven't they done that? Why haven't any of their efforts to close the gap involved identifying students working below Standard and teaching them better? It's like some bizarre surreal culture where problems are solved simply by talking about them without ever doing anything about them. Freaky.
Posted by: Charlie Mas on November 27, 2006 08:45 PM2. The politicians keep trying to fix an insitutional structure that no longer works. Politics is the art of the possible. The Education
Commission of the states has proposed an insitutional structure called a charter school district. All schools in the district become charters. Since they are all public schools, that overcomes the objections of taking money from public schools. Money follows the kid and schools are allowed to fail and grow if more kids go there. Allow vouchers for kids who have been the worst served by public schools to allow them access to other choices.
3. Dr, William Cosby A/K/A Bill Cosby is right to call for reponsiblility on the part of families of color:
a. don't have a child unless you can be responsible for that child.
b. discipline and monitor your children
c. value education
4. Hip hop culture is destroying a generation of kids, other than P. Diddy or whatever he is calling himself, JZ and the rest of those jerks, few kids will get rich, many will die, and this culture does not prepare a kid for a productive role in commerce.
5. Worry less about segregated schools as John Stanford correctly opined, but put the emphasis on quality schools. Secretary of State Rice graduated from segregated schools, she has loads of opportunity to interact with all colors now. Put the emphasis on achievement.
IMO where your child is educated is more about the convictions and beliefs (and sometimes of work schedule) of parents, and less about the money. I'm sick of hearing about money, and the poor disadvantaged students. In my 12 years of observation, is is more often a matter of parental priorities. Social engineering and government intervention are not substitutes for adult parenting.
Posted by: dl on November 28, 2006 12:21 AMNickled and Dimed is indeed a good resource. Although, the minimum wage is $7.63 and higher the the US standard, one cannot raise a family on that. Many poor people do in fact have two or more jobs just to make ends meet. Generally, it is recommended that housing take no more than 30% of a budget. Because of high housing in Seattle, it may be 40% or more. One can rail against choices people may or may not have made or will make. The fact is that those making minimum wage or very near minimum wage have public schools as their primary choice. One of the tenants of econ 101 is that information is not free. You are right many private schools offer aid, but many low income people do not know how to navigate the forms and procedure. I suppose that one can blame them for that, but in my opinion, that is not helpful. Why not have public schools that actually educate children, so that no matter what the situation of the parent, the child has a chance.
Posted by: WVH on November 28, 2006 12:38 AM