Discussion
About David Berliner’s “Our Impoverished View of Education Reform”
Dear Teachers Network Leadership Institute (TNLI)
MetLife Fellows:
November
is literally around the corner—which means it’s time once
again to begin our TNLI monthly listserv reading program—-in
order to make the most out of our connection as a national
group, and also help ensure we all stay up-to-date on relevant
field literature. Given everyone’s time constraints, you’ll
be happy to know that we try our hardest to keep these readings
as manageable as possible; directly applicable to our work;
and, we provide you with a URL/link so you can access this
information directly online.
Just
as we have done in past years, TNLI listserv discussions will
run from November through May (so you’re not particularly
overwhelmed at the beginning or end of the school year). During
each month, a different affiliate will “host” the conversation—and
one fellow from that affiliate will serve as moderator throughout
that month to help prod and cajole the conversation &
elicit as much participation possible. Please remember that
the TNLI listserv serves as our major forum for discussion
as a national group—so while you may feel hesitant at first
to chime in, the whole point is to share amongst ourselves,
learn from each other, and advance “the teacher’s voice”—representing
teachers throughout the country—and THAT’S YOU!
**Having
said this, New York City has agreed to host the November listserv
reading and discussion. Our moderator will be NYC TNLI MetLife
Fellow Daric Desautel—and the reading is as follows: “Our
Impoverished View of Educational Reform,” by David C. Berliner.
TC Record. August 2, 2005.
Thanks
so much—and please join us in supporting Daric in getting
this November reading and discussion off to a great start!
Ellen
and Peter
|
Greetings!
My name is Daric Desautel and I am a fellow in the New York
affiliate. I am also a general ed. teacher in a 2nd grade
classroom in a NYC public school in Queens. I am excited to
moderate the discussion for November on the David Berliner
article, Our Impoverished View of Education Reform (Published
by Teachers College Record, August 02, 2005).
Berliner's piece
is long but it is fascinating and well worth reading. In anticipation
that it may take a couple of days for us all to read through
it and reflect on it, I'll offer a very short summary and
some general questions/points to frame your reading and our
discussion.
Berliner's overarching
argument is deceptively simple: that poverty adversely affects
education and that education reform is limited to the extent
that it doesn't include socioeconomic reform. His method is
to synthesize wide-ranging conclusions from research in various
areas, from the health sciences to economics to education.
He begins by reminding us all of the many hours that our students
don't spend in our schools, and the mounting pressure that
schools are under to produce students that perform well on
assessments (increasingly in the form of standardized tests).
He then paints a very clear and very sad picture of the weight,
scope, and duration of poverty in America. Next, he combines
this picture of American poverty with the performance of our
students in key international academic assessments, noting
the achievement gap between social classes and race groups.
Berliner then presents an extended analysis of the question,
"Can a reduction in poverty improve the achievement of
the poor and the schools they are in?" This analysis
leads him to discuss what he calls "the expression of
genetic talent," health issues that affect the poor,
and how poverty defines a neighborhood as an environment.
He spends the remaining pages of the piece reflecting on the
research that has shown a positive correlation between income
increases and academic achievement growth, as well as offering
his conclusions. These conclusions take various forms but
all amount to creating a more economically equitable America.
He ends with a long and familiar passage excerpted from Jonathan
Kozol's Amazing Grace.
With such a powerful
and wide-ranging article to discuss, I though I'd suggest
a few discussion questions to begin, and offer more as our
dialogue finds its form.
1. First, do you
buy this? Are educators obligated to look beyond the school
walls at the economic conditions in their schools' communities?
2. Is this a useful area of focus for teachers? What is the
trade off between teacher-reformers advocating for a specific
bill (such as The Schools for New York's Future Act
in NY) or wide-ranging economic equity?
3. How would we answer a critic who suggested that Berliner's
piece was a convenient way for educators to say that they
can't achieve the results that an "accountability"
movement demands of them?
I look forward
to hearing all of our amazing and insightful thoughts on this
piece. It is a powerful and worthwhile bit of writing.
Daric Desautel
New York City
11/2/05 |
|
Greetings, TNLI community! I’m Jennifer Chen,
Program Associate at the TNLI Headquarters in NYC. Thanks
to Daric Desautel for starting the discussion and generating
such a great summary and questions. I wanted to respond to
November’s listserve discussion reading, “Our Impoverished
View of Education,” by David Berliner.
Ellen
Meyers (TNLI National & NYC Director), Darren Johnson
(NYC TNLI Fellow), and I recently attended a two-day symposium
at Teachers College, Columbia University on “The Social Cost
of Inadequate Education.” The conference focused on lectures
from education academics in the areas of crime, health care,
poverty, welfare, and potential work force in relation to
education. Not surprisingly, the academic research found that
if a student doesn’t graduate high school, they are will lack
adequate resources to health care and higher paying jobs,
etc. It’s common sense that if a mother doesn’t receive adequate
health care during pregnancy then her child is more likely
to suffer from health issues. Children with health issues
attend school less often and fall behind their peers. This
is just one example from the conference.
In David
Berliner’s article, he asks if reducing poverty can improve
our schools. I say yes. Poverty affects not just a student,
but a community. At the Teachers College conference, NY Congressman
Charles Rangel made an important statement, one that I had
to write down to reflect on, “Kids are coming from communities
that don’t allow them to dream. One thing you can’t measure
is a kid without a dream.”
As a daughter
of immigrant parents, I know my family’s great hope was in
American schools and how public school education could help
us have a better life. As school vouchers and privatizing
schools increase, the hope for all of our citizens to have
access to a sound education decreases.
One last
comment I’ll make is the link between poverty and race. Berliner
mentions that, “New immigrants, African-Americans, and Hispanics,
particularly those among these groups who live in urban areas,
are heavily over represented in the groups that suffer severe
poverty. Thus, while this is a paper about poverty, it is
inextricably tied to issues of race in America. I have found
no way to separate the two, though here I focus on poverty,
perhaps the more tractable issue.”
I think
it’s important for us to think about poverty and education
in relation to race, as well. Racism and poverty go hand in
hand.
Any thoughts?
Comments?
Jennifer
Chen
11/8/05
|
|
I have had so many thoughts after reading
Berliner's article. I keep wrestling with the question of
"what is poverty".....yes, I know all of the statistics,
wages,health care, etc. And what a typical family needs to
make to be above the poverty level. But what I think we are
dealing with is a "poverty of spirit"....picking
up on Charles Rangel's
comment: our communities are raising children who do not dream.
I agree.....but this does not necessarily have anything to
do with material poverty.
I taught in the city of Atlanta for 15 years.
The city schools for the most part are black and poor. I worked
with children who lived in homes without heat and running
water.....children who had very little. In every sense they
were physically poor and so problems resulted from this. I
am now teaching in the Highbridge section of the Bronx. The
physical poverty level is not the same....some of our students
have the latest of everything.....not of course, everyone,
but more than you would think. This community is an immigrant
community and the density of population is incredible......and
this of course creates problems.
I think that a real part of educational reforms
in the inner city schools must include family services. The
family structure is falling apart and there is no one picking
up the pieces. Schools and teachers are working harder but
the missing piece of this puzzle is the family. I believe
that there is an incredible need for counseling services,
for mental health interventions, for housing services.......wouldn't
it be great if a parent could come to the school and work
out all the difficulties he or she has.....not with the principal,
but with the social services agencies. We need a coordinated
service point, where interventions can happen. The school
is a natural gathering place.
The problems that the children in my class are experiencing
are in many instances the result of broken family relationships
and other mental health issues. The challenge for me and the
teachers that I work with is to direct families to the appropriate
helping agency.
And maybe children will begin to dream again. Maureen Connelly
New York City
11/13/05 |
|
I would have to agree with you. I work in
the rural area of Sussex County, Delaware and I see much the
same issues that you see in the Bronx. I have children who
have material possessions, but have no spirit. They can't
dream because they are too busy worrying about what their
parent or parents may be doing while they are away, or even
if there will be anyone there when they arrive home that evening.
While these children have the latest in video games they are
being bought by their parents instead of guided and loved.
They are not being given the kind of support that allows them
to excel in their academic endeavors. They also are not being
given the needed encouragement to believe in themselves and
therefore to dream or even be able to begin to reach a goal.
I think that "poverty" in our schools and our children
is not always measured by the amount of wealth their families
have attained, but by the amount of support and encouragement
those same families can deliver to their children. While health
care, wages, etc. are indeed factors that lead to many children
having difficulties in school, there are many other factors
that also make the children in our classrooms "poor."
Denise
Snyder
TNLI Delaware
Gr.1/K teacher in Sussex County, De.
11/13/05
|
|
Hi: Excellent thought.
Esther Roberts
Delaware
11/14/05
|
|
Berliner’s
article does an impressive job at providing data to support
the causal relationship between educational achievement and
poverty. Although educators seem to understand this relationship,
it has not made its way into the consciousness of the American
public.
Thus,
Berliner’s analogy of the 600-pound gorilla in the room that
no one is speaking about is particularly apt. It is interesting
to think about why this may be so. I tend not to be a conspiracy
theorist that believes wealthy white men are working to promote
the status quo where it is to their benefit to keep portions
of the population poor and uneducated (although I do believe
that racism has played a powerful role in American history).
I also do not think that Americans are uncaring people. Even
though statistics demonstrate our government gives a smaller
percentage of foreign aid than many other developed nations,
there are also figures showing that American private donations
to domestic and world tragedies are among the most generous
in the world. This seeming contradiction between entrenched poverty
and a caring society, I believe, is related to the way Americans
think about the role of government and the role of the individual
in society. Our society has evolved into a system of mixed
capitalism, which allows for a more expanded role for government
than would be the case in a pure capitalist society. This
economic and political system reflects a set of values. We
can look closer at these systems to see how they affect the
way America deals with poverty.
On one hand, in America, there is a certain mistrust of large
government with the concentration of power and resources in
a centralized location. This is one of the underlying beliefs
behind the argument of lower taxes. The philosophical underpinnings
for lower taxes is that the wealth of a nation should be spread
across many individuals who are in a better position to act
flexibility to the conditions and opportunities presented
and make smarter decisions regarding those opportunities than
if the wealth is concentrated in a centralized government
who then redistributes the wealth for the benefit of society.
On the other hand, there is philosophical belief reflected
in our political system that the government should provide
a safety net for those who are truly needy and vulnerable
in our society. Thus the sacredness of Social Security, which
even during this high water mark in conservative thinking
is not able to gain traction with the public. There are people
outside of mainstream thinking on both the left and right.
On the right, there are people who believe that the government’s
primary responsibility is national security and not to attend
to the social needs of people. These people have a different
philosophy about how to meet the needs of the vulnerable in
society, which is through charitable giving and an individual
sense of social responsibility for helping
those less fortunate. On the left of the political spectrum,
you have people who believe there should be higher taxes with
progressive tax rates, which then provide revenue that can
be redistributed in a more equitable way.
So why is there such a lack of consciousness among the American
public regarding the causal relationship between educational
achievement and poverty and how is it related to the political
and economic structures in America? I believe there are several
factors that make this a hard idea to sink into public awareness.
As discussed above, there are deeply entrenched ideas reflected
in American’s political and economic systems. These ideas,
which translate into cultural values, reflect how people believe
revenue should be raised and spent. America operates from
the belief that if taxes are too high you stall the economic
engine that produces jobs.
Jobs, it is thought, are best created in the private sector
where there is a need that must be filled based upon demand.
In this way, the jobs can be self-sustaining and not depend
on the continued funding from the federal government. But
this is not the whole story. America, as noted is a mixed
economy and not a purely capitalist one, which means that
although there is a strong belief in the private sector, there
is also the recognition that there are social responsibilities
that the federal government should assume beyond national
security issues. There is also the recognition that the private
sector, like the government sector can be corrupt and abuse
power and so regulatory systems are put in place to monitor
the private sector, which would not be the case in a pure
capitalist society, which would allow the markets to regulate.
I would posit that the political and economic systems of
America exist within the tension between these ideas of the
responsibility between the public and private spheres and
shift in balance with the needs and demands of the time. I
would offer that one reason for entrenched poverty in America
is that the tensions inherent in the political and economic
system do not allow for a direct revenue stream that can address
the issue of poverty. Since private and public responsibilities
exist within this tension rather than in a clearly delineated
relationship, programs are not permanently put in place, which
can address the complex issue of poverty.
The strength of the American system is its ability to shift,
albeit slowly, when a consensus arises that there is a problem.
Once a problem rises into public consciousness there is a
discussion about solutions. Out of the discussion of possible
solutions policy is formulated and programs are then designed
and funded. On the most grand scale, we saw this with FDR’s
programs during the Depression and Lyndon Johnson’s War on
Poverty. There is much that America can learn from countries
that have low childhood poverty rates and systems in place
for getting people out of poverty like those that Berliner
discusses in his article. My intention has not been to argue
for the status quo but rather to provide a structural framework
to think about the problem. Given the nature of the American
system, I believe that change only occurs when a critical
mass of people reach consensus on an issue. Berliner’s article
provides data to support what many people feel is intuitively
true. This data is a necessary first step to persuade others
of a point of view, which can lead towards building a consensus
about the casual relationship between poverty and educational
achievement.
Frances Schuchman
New York City
11/14/05 |
|
After spending the better part of Tuesday
trying to create an Academic Intervention Plan in literacy
for the most struggling (1's & low 2's) students in my
middle school and then completing the reading of Berliner's
article, I was so stressed out that I didn't get a wink of
sleep. At about 6 am, when I was supposed to be waking up,
my brain decided to rest. During this 15 minute nap, I dreamt
of children climbing up the exterior wall of my apartment
building and into my 5th floor window. They were angry and
some were crying and they all wanted me to do something about
it. So nonetheless, I'm starting today with a real resentment
of the "elephant in the classroom" analogy because
the poverty of every child in my school is a burden that I
face on a daily basis. As educators, we live this with every
child without a jacket in 40 degree weather and every pair
of glasses perpetually held together with scotch tape and
every Title 1 lunch application that we file with the school
secretary and every persistent academic and/or social problem
that even seasoned teachers just can't find a solution to.
I live in a state of turmoil because I know what my students
face as poor African-American and Latino students in Brooklyn
and yet all I can do about it is help them find "a just
right book" or teach them a reading strategy or listen
to their needs or just give a hug. Like Berliner, I think
that "out of school factors associated with poverty play
both a powerful and a limiting role in what can actually be
achieved" and I feel like today, I am at another crossroads
where I don't know that any Academic Intervention Plan is
going to do damn thing for my kids.
I think this text speaks to politicians and decision makers
who just don't get it. If they spent one day in an inner city
school and opened their eyes instead of "politic,"
I think they would see what poverty looks like.
And I agree with Berliner's point that reform point all the
blame on schools and teachers in this quest for accountabilty
without regard for the populations that sit in our classrooms
everyday. But at the same time, perhaps these politicians
do what comes naturally.... take the easy road. Its much easier
to whip regions, principals and teachers into shape because
if they don't comply (i.e. teach this way, assess on that
day) , they'll be out of work. But how would addressing the
nation's poverty look? A check for everyone below the poverty
line? Additional tax credits? Creating jobs is a nice idea
but from where, to perform what duties? I don't at all profess
to be an economist but I do know that this dealing with this
gorilla called poverty is no simple undertaking. And at the
heart of the matter, do the people on top really want that
to change? Isn't there some inherent benefit to them being
educated and wealthy while others are uneducated and poor?
So I'm now reading No Excuses: Lessons from 21 High-Performing
High Poverty Schools because I have to find ways to make my
school a better place. I agree with the idea of community
center schools where parents and children can receive the
services they need like housing info, medical care, counseling
etc. in one central location. Perhaps this is the future of
successful inner-city schools. Maybe we can build that village
inside the school building.
And maybe once that happens, I'll get some sleep.
Amber
Moss
New York City
11/16/05
|
To
Amber Moss,
Thank you for
your posting. It's evident that you care deeply for your students
and are actively seeking ways to make a positive difference
in their lives. Instead of giving up with an attitude of "Oh,
well, there's nothing I can do," you are doing what you
can and looking for more. Very inspiring!
Gail V. Ritchie,
MEd, NBCT
National Board Program Manager
Office of Staff Development
Fairfax County Public Schools
11/16/05
|
| A
heartfelt message to Amber regarding your posting...you obviously
love what you do and are willing to sacrifice and work hard
to help your students. I thought about you when I read the following
quote regarding service to our students: Love involves a willingness
to suffer and be inconvenienced...written by Lewis F. Presnall
Best of luck to you...
Whitney Price
Delaware
11/16/05
|
| I
am usually more of an observer to these listserve discussions,
but like many of you that have already posted, this is an issue
close to my heart.
My upbringing in the Bronx was similar to the students that
I teach today in Brooklyn (although I was a Catholic school
kid). I learned about the devastating effects of poverty in
my neighborhood and my teaching experience has shown me its
impact in the school setting. Just this week, I have dealt
with a suspected homeless student and a student who faced
a gun pointed to his head in his sleep during at a police
raid of his home (not poverty driven, but definitely related).
I know that many of you who teach in urban environment have
faced similar situations, when you can't even force the "education
should be your top priority" speech out of your mouth.
Berliner's piece brought several recurring problems in education
and society to mind:
1) Poverty and race are clearly tied to many of the problems
in education today. When you are struggling below the poverty
line, there simply are issues that are more important than
school, for children and parents. While many of Berlinger's
statistics are compelling, many of us knew the ultimate conclusions
before reading page 1. Improving instruction, funding, professionalism,
etc. are all important, but the problems outside of our school
walls are even more severe. There are no easy solutions for
schools to assist, but where we can assist, we can see individual
success stories.
2) Along those lines, I recently read and article about the
"Harlem Zone" started by Geoffrey Canada.
The concept is that key to solving many of the educational
problems that plague poor communities is to strengthen the
community. Even the greatest after-school program only can
affect a minute portion of an urban community, and many of
its successes are undone by the streets. The Harlem Zone provides
prenatal care classes for expectant mothers, child raising
classes, adult education and job-training classes. While its
ambitions are lofty, I do belive that attempting to reduce
poverty and its effects simultaneously is essential to helping
our children succeed. The problem is....
3) The political will be attack poverty in this manner is
almost non-existent in America. We must face the reality that
throughout the history of this country, specifically for African-Americans,
the denial of a proper education was a preeminent method of
preventing equality among the races and classes. Vestiges
of that thinking still exist today. While I am not really
a believer in the idea that the powers-that-be are plotting
in a backroom against minority groups, the obvious indifference
among those powers to educational and other imbalances faced
by minority groups in our society is real. Those upper and
middle class citizens are not very willing to make the sacrifices
necessary to attack poverty and assist the poor, and the politicians
are not willing to ask them. A 50% high school graduation
rate would likely cause riots and/or an Enron-like scandal
in Greenwich or Scarsdale...where's the NY Times/Newsweek
article???
That's my rant for now...let's keep working so that in 3-10
years, many of us are in positions to effect meaningful changes.
Get some sleep; we're gonna need it.
Rich Gadsby
New York City
11/16/05 |
I
am not often moved to reply to list serves, however, your response
to Berliner and the tragedy that is public education really
grabbed at my heart. I recently heard Jonathan Kozol speak on
his research for Shame of the Nation and, at first, I felt that
overwhelming sense of depression that I got from Berliner. Yesterday,
a young African American man I had last year in 10th grade came
to my office to talk about a book he was reading for social
studies. (I had come to his class several times to do a book
talk on The Bluest Eye) After our discussion about his questions
and his draft of the required paper on the novel, he told me,
"Ms. Bates, this is the hardest book I ever read. Do you
know I've never read a book all the way through, and I read
this one three times just to get what she was saying."
I congratulated him on his success and said, "You know,
Darryl, now you are a real reader and you can tackle any book."
Darryl's response was, "Yeah, Ms. Bates, I'm reading three
books all at once right now. I know I can handle anything in
college." If you had seen Darryl in my class last year,
you would not have seen the same kid. All of this is to say,
after thirty years of teaching I've learned one thing - we don't
have to reinvent public education, we only have to touch a life
in a small way to get that spark burning. If we attempt to spark
each kid that touches our lives, we will have been successful.
Those sparks don't burn out. Kozol agrees. He says, no matter
how screwed up the educational system, the difference lies in
one teacher and one classroom all across the US, from the most
affluent private school to the toughest ghetto. We are the change
we want to see in the world. Honor your accomplishments and
know that you do make a difference.
Best of luck,
Diane Bates
TNLI - Wilmington, Delaware
11/17/05
|
| Nicely expressed. And so
true.
Wendy Simeone, nbct
Chair of English
Carver High School
Carver, MA
11/17/05
|
Wow!!!!
This article touches on so many points I don't know where
to begin. Can we go one point at a time? I wonder how John
Dewey would respond to this essay?
He believed ...which
I quote all the time, that school is "an instrument of
social progress and the teacher as the harbinger of social
order."
What does that
mean? Isn't public education the right of every citizen, or
are we speaking about the students who do not have access
because of their economic status? I believe that their is
power inside schools, but this essay describes another picture
into what is really happening in low performing schools. (From
what I've read so far) First I would like to say and I've
only read part of the essay...but we are COMMUNITY SCHOOLS.
Each community is different, and therefore each community
has different needs.
I am in South
Brooklyn and the children I serve are in need of so much more
than just reading strategies, and I do understand that its
important but the requirements of teachers has become not
just the guide on the side but the social worker, the guidance
counselor and the psychologist all in one!!!!
Our role as educators
has become exhausted by standards and assessments that we
know do not accurately reveal who our children really are
and show what they are capable of!!!
I do believe that
children who are "poor" or live in poverty just
want to be listened to, understood, thought of and educated.
They are in desperate need of engaging thought provoking rigorous
instruction that will make them forget about what they are
dealing with at home. And when in those 5000 hours that they
are not in school they can hopefully take ownership of their
learning and make a difference for some one else!!! ......If
not Us than Who? Reform can start in the classroom!
In South Brooklyn, in Red Hook Brooklyn, which is the largest
project in the city, we have 3 almost 4 generations of residents...What
is the impact of that! Yes its poverty, yes they have limited
skills but there are children who are "rich" with
curiosity "rich" with questions "rich"
with ideas that they want to be answered and proven...which
is why the scientific process of thinking is great!!!! sorry
side bar!!! LOL I know I'm going to get some flack but I'm
interested in the attitudes of the teachers who work in these
types of schools and their "real" expectations of
their students!!!! Let's get past poverty and move on to teaching
the whole child!!!!!
I will continue to read the essay and maybe some of these
issues will be addressed!
Aneesha Jacko
P.S./MS 27
Early Childhood Director
New York City
11/17/05
|
| Dear
Teachers,
Many thanks to all the wonderful participants
for their reflections on our November article. If I've been
lazy about moderating, it's because the discussion seems to
have really taken off on its own. David Berliner's piece is
about broadening the debate surrounding education reform,
and it is fitting to see a broad range of reactions and views.
I have found myself thinking of Berliner's
essay as an attempt to weave together three distinct threads.
The first is a condemnation of the inequalities evident in
American capitalism. The second is an illustration of the
effects of that poverty on student achievement. The third
is an exhortation to insist on widening the treatment of education
reform. Along the first thread he illustrates the profound
and embarrassing depth of American poverty, stringing together
data, connections between race and poverty, and comparisons
of poverty among certain countries. This thread is continually
braided into the issue of student achievement, both in evaluative
tests and in the everyday classroom environment. I find myself
referring to the middle of Berliner's essay for the "talking
points" that connect poverty to student achievement.
The overarching, intentional thread that runs
through this piece is a call to include economic reform alongside
education reform. This is directed firstly at teachers, as
Berliner indicts the temerity of educators to speak out, as
professionals, against the destructive influence of poverty.
This call is written into the title, and is articulated in
the beginning (starting on page 3) and closing (beginning
on page 48). Of course, it also runs like an insistent whisper
throughout the piece.
Jen's reference to the comments made by Congressman
Rangel seemed to resonate with some of us, and opened a new
dimension to the issue. Maureen and Denise have offered us
first-hand accounts of students who seem to suffer from a
lack of spirit, or imagination, or love. While Berliner is
certainly trying to broaden our definition of education reform
to include reducing poverty, he doesn't attempt to broaden
our definition of poverty to include a failure to dream. I,
too, am intrigued by the idea of considering the effects of
poverty on the imagination, or on the "spirit" of
a student, and my suspicion is that Berliner stays away from
such an analysis because it is more unwieldy, or harder to
"prove" in a paper that already contains impressive
data.
The idea that poverty can denote a lack of
immaterial things, in addition to material goods and services,
implies that even the financially secure can suffer in America.
That is, a child with adequate nourishment, health, and shelter
can be poor in ways that will harm her. This has been, for
some time, an argument offered not by people who wish to extend
inordinate sympathy to the middle and upper classes, but by
those attempting to criticize a consumer culture that thrives
in American capitalism. When this article was first posted
on the TNLI listserv (in late August), it was suggested that
even the materially (monetarily) poor can suffer this "imaginative"
poverty that comes with a materialistic, consumer culture.
Frances has helped us along with a clear and
streamlined picture of the economic - political apparatus
that we must all work within. The texture of American capitalism
creates the details in the picture we see, and I agree with
her that a strength is the system's ability (and eventual
tendency) to shift. It is worth noting Berliner's reference
to the work of Jean Anyon, who stated that the "structural
basis for failure in inner-city schools is political, economic,
and cultural" (in Berliner, 6). If that is true, then
the political - economic environment that Frances describes
is significantly responsible for that failure.
Frances' comments also move swiftly to the
issue of consciousness, or the balance between awareness and
caring. Many of us, including Amber and Richard, have strong
feelings about this tension between public awareness and public
concern. After quoting Anyon, Berliner refers to those entrenched
and institutionalized collective beliefs that undergird American
capitalism (7). I suspect he is right when he implies that
an important collective myth in which many Americans believe
is that there will always be poverty (that someone must always
be poor).
I also sense a little tension between this
idea of advocating for economic reform and the realization
that we, as educators, touch individual lives in many countless,
sometimes unknown, ways each day. If that is true, than why
advocate for economic reform? And if we should embrace both
levels of improving lives, how?
All of this leaves me with several questions:
1. Is it useful for educators, as educators,
to advocate for a more equitable America? That is, why should
educators be messing around in these other social sciences
(economics, etc) to advocate for better educational reform?
2. If it is useful, how do we do it? What
can we do specifically, as educators, to raise public awareness
and compassion for the problem of the 600-pound gorilla?
Towards this last question, I have been thinking
about the section at the end of Berliner's piece that begins
on page 48 (What we need to do). I have also been thinking
about the suggestions that participants in this conversation
have made about family services, and the comments made by
participants in a conversation from last year around David
Matthews' article "Is There a Public for Public Schools."
That conversation took, as its starting point, Matthews' statement
that "reforms have to start in and with the community
if they are ever to move into the classroom."
Following this engaging conversation has been
great, particularly at the time of the year when we are moving
from parent - teacher conferences to thoughts of our own families
and holiday celebrations. Thanks for all your thoughts and
have a happy Thanksgiving!
Daric Desautel
New York City
11/18/05
|
| As
occasionally happens (more often on Friday afternoons), I had
what seemed like an important thought just a little too late.
After posting the previous (and perhaps tedious) message, I
realized that much of my practical concern surrounding Berliner's
article comes down to this question:
If you found yourself in an elevator with
the Mayor, or the Deputy Mayor for Policy, would you talk
about curriculum and assessment or minimum wages and health
coverage?
I'm not suggesting we must always decide on
one or the other, and I believe our pitch would change based
on the audience, but how do we balance our interests as educators?
Once again, thanks for your input and keep
up the great work!
Daric Desautel
New York City
11/18/05
|
| Dear
TNLI National:
The TNLI NYC Fellows had a very productive Saturday meeting
on 11/19 where we had the opportunity to discuss in small
groups the David C. Berliner article, “Our Impoverished View
of Education.”
Below are the comments that came out of our small groups.
Feel free to agree/disagree.
From Erica Litke, Jen Dryer, Nicole Nadeau, and Jen
Flandro:
“It is so much easier to talk about ‘school reform’ where
there’s a constituency than other types of reform (healthcare,
etc.) where there isn’t as powerful of a constituency.”
From Trudy Kane, Maureen Connelly, Sharon Chapman,
Becky Ponka, and Karen Ramirez:
1. “There are different kinds of poverty (rural areas vs.
city areas). Poverty is relative.”
2. “Value of education—varies from culture to culture.”
From JoAnna Bueckert, Jessica Harvey, Sam Stoddard,
Daric Desautel, Amber Moss, Elizabeth Gil, and Amy Kopchains:
“I’m concerned that consumer capitalism is also a 600 lb.
gorilla.”—Daric Desautel
“Poverty in this country is inextricably tied to race and
culture.”—Amber Moss
“Pointing only to increasing income as a solution is not adequate.
Having more money does not ensure that certain actions will
be taken—it’s also a mindset.”—Elizabeth Gil
“Our society becomes more economically and socially divided
with each generation. Over 50% of the members of Congress
are multi-millionaires. Do you think they truly understand
poverty or have any idea of how to break its cycle?”—Amy Kopchains
From Rebecca Rufo, Michele Allison, Reid Schwebach,
Wanda Dingman, and Megan Bender:
1. We agree with the fact that bad education and social poverty
go together but he does not offer solutions—so many issues
out of school reform. Where does that leave us as teachers?
2. Putting money in to poor neighborhoods—this must be done
in the right way. It’s not just having money, it is what to
do with it.
From Lisa North, Judi Fenton, Jessica Lipschultz,
Liz Sisson, and Keri Rodgers:
“Closely connect schools and services to the communities in
which they exist. Schools can help provide services and communities
can use schools. Schools get more support from community—develop
shared ownership.”
From Leslie Jirsa, James Kopchains, and Rich Gadsby:
“I wish he would stop apologizing for his research! Never
apologize for your research.”—Leslie Jirsa
“Poor schools and poor children, this debate is like explaining
why tomato soup is read. I would like now some action and
pulling together of educational resources.”—James Kopchains
“Conspiracy towards poverty—we know it exists, but what is
the level of commitment to really changing to “really” solving
the problems. Eliminating the barriers outside school.”—Rich
Gadsby
Jennifer Chen
New York City
11/21/05
|
Dear
Teachers:
I've gotten in on the tail-end of this discussion. I will have
to say that, although the article was quite interesting and
Berliner puts forth a strong argument for the correlation between
poverty and achievement, I found the many responses I read and
the accompanying articles provided equally as thought provoking.
This is precisely why I wanted to be a part of TNLI!
What Berliner has to say isn't new as he indicates in the many
articles he sites as reference material. However, he has compiled
some compelling data in the form of charts that, on their own,
are quite an indictment about the culture in this country. As
many of you have already stated, I am more interested in solutions
then restating the facts. How do we mainstream the thrust of
his argument in a way that Americans will be moved to broadening
the solutions sought to close disparities in education to include
economic reforms along with educational reforms? I do agree
that the achievement gap encompasses more than merely what happens
in the classroom, and I do believe that educators have a role
to play attacking this problem within and outside the classroom.
But, how do we best accomplish this? I think TNLI is a great
step in the right direction!
One area of the article that I would have liked for Berliner
to give a little more time to was minority students that transported
from their communities to attend middle and upper-middle class
schools that resulted in improved their test scores for those
students. On the surface, it would seem to support the argument
that it is the schools themselves that make the difference.
I know that this was not his intention, but I needed more clarity.
I wish you all well, and look forward to the December discussions.
Asa L. Salley, 3rd Grade Teacher
Sacramento, CA
11/26/05
|
Greetings
teachers!
I wanted to thank all of you for contributions to the November
listserv discussion on David Berliner's piece, Our Impoverished
View of Education Reform. I'm sure I am not alone in saying
that this dialogue has enriched my understanding of Berliner's
text and the larger intersection of poverty and education.
I was excited
when we decided on this piece as the focus of the initial
listserv discussion of the year. I began to worry, however,
after returning from the Delaware conference. Was this article
too general and wide-ranging? Was the relationship between
poverty and academic disadvantage too obvious? Would we be
able to find anything useful in this?
Certainly, I thought,
many of us have stories that embody the very figures Berliner
has compiled, and illustrate the relationship he describes.
Are these stories a policy, though? And does he really want
us to boycott Wal-Mart?
As the discussion
unfolded, people pointed out that many questions were emerging
but "action plans" and solutions were not. What
also emerged, however, were the stories that we can all tell
about the impact of poverty in our classroom or in our neighbor's
classroom. I began to realize that telling these stories is
a very important way to testify to the condemnable influence
of poverty on our work as educators and the lived experience
of our poor. Maybe these stories can be part of an "elevator
moment:"
"Gosh, It's
getting so hard to hold my students' attention; they keep
fainting in class because they aren't eating enough. Oftentimes
they don't even stay in the classroom long enough to make
it through lesson before going to the nurse for their asthma
/ headaches / eyestrain / chronic illness. She's so overworked
- she sees 50 children a day because she's the only health
care they have."
Maybe these stories can also still touch the lives of those
in the academic fields and in the general public who mean
well but ignore the plight of the poor, or have learned to
believe that "someone has to be poor."
To the extent
that this article has made us mad and roused some deep passion
within us, I believe this article must also be kept in our
minds as educational reformers. I encourage all of us to remember
the facts and anecdotes from this piece whenever we (collectively)
are backed into a corner by politicians, pundits, and academics
who ask us "what are you teachers doing about the achievement
gap, huh?" After we detail the lengths to which we've
gone to improve our practice we ask them, the politicians
and pundits, the economists and business people, the powerful
and the wealthy, "what are you doing about the achievement
gap?"
We need not be timid about speaking to social and economic
issues. While we may not all boycott Wal-Mart or follow health
care legislation, we can all demand our country's support
in the effort to educate and enrich its citizens.
Thanks again!
Daric Desautel
New York City
11/30/05 |
|
