Rich kid, poor kid — all must, and can, get an education
What’s wrong with public education in America? Is it the poor quality of teachers — or maybe the low pay offered to teachers? The inflexibility of unions? An insufficiency of charter schools?
We’ve heard all of these, time and again, to explain what is inevitably described as the crisis in U.S. education.
But a couple of recent essays argue that these usual explanations are entirely wrong.
Sean F. Reardon, a professor education and sociology at Stanford, rejects the notion that U.S. education as a whole is slipping. “In fact,” he writes in the New York Times, “average test scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the so-called National Report Card have been rising — substantially in math and very slowly in reading — since the 1970s.”
But progress is not occurring in an equal fashion, Reardon says. There is a growing gulf in grades, test scores, graduation rates, college enrollment and completion.
It’s not a racial gap; the differences between whites and blacks have been narrowing slowly over the past 20 years.
The most dramatic disparities are between the rich … and everyone else.
“The most potent development over the past three decades is that the test scores of children from high-income families have increased very rapidly,” Reardon writes. “The rich now outperform the middle class by as much as the middle class outperform the poor.”
“The academic gap is widening because rich students are increasingly entering kindergarten much better prepared to succeed in school than middle-class students. This difference in preparation persists through elementary and high school,” Reardon writes. He continues:
High-income families are increasingly focusing their resources — their money, time and knowledge of what it takes to be successful in school — on their children’s cognitive development and educational success. They are doing this because educational success is much more important than it used to be, even for the rich.
With a college degree insufficient to ensure a high-income job, or even a job as a barista, parents are now investing more time and money in their children’s cognitive development from the earliest ages….
Meanwhile, not only are the children of the rich doing better in school than even the children of the middle class, but the changing economy means that school success is increasingly necessary to future economic success, a worrisome mutual reinforcement of trends that is making our society more socially and economically immobile.
Meantime, a former history professor and high-school teacher named John Tierney sees a revolution emerging in K-12 public education — a massive, grassroots rejection of the accountability-based reform movement of the last dozen years.
Writing in The Atlantic, he says the weaknesses of the reform movement are becoming increasingly obvious:
Education policies based on standardization and uniformity tend to fail…
Policies based on distrust of teachers tend to fail…
Judging teachers’ performance by students’ test scores is both substantively and procedurally flawed.
What, then, is to be done?
We don’t have an “education problem.” The notion that we are “a nation at risk” from underachieving public schools is, as David Berliner asserts, errant “nonsense” and a pack of lies.
Rather, we have a poverty problem. The fact is that kids in resource-rich public school systems perform near the top on international measures. However, as David Sirota has reported, “The reason America’s overall scores on such tests are far lower is because high poverty schools produce far worse results — and as the most economically unequal society in the industrialized world, we have far more poverty than our competitors, bringing down our overall scores accordingly.” Addressing poverty and inequality are the keys to serving America’s educational needs.
We at Innovations for Learning are acutely aware that too many poor children enter the school system unprepared to learn. That’s the very problem we were created to address.
But we disagree that we must first fix such monumental problems as poverty and inequality if we are to see gains in education.
The work we’re doing in primary grades all across America is showing that if we focus on improving teachers’ tools, content and teaching methods, and provide teachers with adequate training and support, they can help students achieve — even those from high-poverty communities.
“I don’t deny that kids from advantaged communities will have life long advantages,” says Seth Weinberger, IFL’s founder and CEO, “but a basic education should be achievable for everyone.”
— Howard Goodman
Posted on May 2, 2013, in IFL, Innovation, Philanthropy, Reading, Technology, Uncategorized, Volunteering and tagged David Berliner, David Sirota, Education, Education in the United States, IFL, Income inequality, Innovation, John Tierney, Learning, National Assessment of Educational Progress, New York Times, public education in america, racial gap, Reading, Reardon, rich students, Sean F. Reardon, Seth Weinberger, Standardized test, Stanford, United States, Volunteer. Bookmark the permalink. Leave a comment.