Kozol 2.0
I have previously blogged about Jonathan Kozol’s Savage Inequalities before I read it. I have now read the first half of the book and have a better feel where Kozol was coming from. His exploration of the condition of inner-city schools seems just as relevant today as it did almost 30 years ago.
Kozol is all about money. He theorizes that if inner-city youth were to receive the same amount (if not more) of money that suburban schools receive, then they might have a chance to be successful. Thirty years ago he lambasted the education system. It does not appear much has changed.
In her article, “Jonathan Kozol, still angry after all these years”, Margie Peterson from The Morning Call, a newspaper in Allentown, Pennsylvania, reports on a speech Kozol recently gave at Messiah College. Her reporting sounds verbatim what I read in Savage Inequalties.
So let’s review. In communities with large numbers of children in poverty — many of whom speak English as a second language and move frequently — government spends less to teach these kids.
In wealthier areas, where children grow up speaking English and have many more opportunities — for educational experiences, travel, and even breakfast, for crying out loud — government spends more to educate these kids.
-Government spending less on inner-city youth? Check.
-Government spending more in the suburbs? Check.
-Inner-city schools statistically doing worse than suburban? Check.
-Suburban schools testing better than urban? Check.
After 30 years it does not seem like the math has significantly changed. Kozol’s thesis on the power of money still rings true. To be fair, though, money is not the only issue keeping inner-city children from testing as well as their suburban counterparts. I would argue racism, both blatant and institutionalized plays just as major of a role. The current state of inner-city schools and their children almost seem like a perfect storm of undesirable circumstances. The storm is completed, Kozol argues, but President Bush’s ‘No Child Left Behind’ act.
Inner city schools spend as much as a quarter of the year preparing students for the NCLB-mandated standardized tests, deadening true education and extinguishing curiosity and creativity. ”There’s not a minute to be wasted on a skill that won’t be tested,” Kozol said. ”A child that asks a question that’s really off track becomes a positive threat to the teacher’s tenure at the school.”
Well, this is alarming on two levels. First, I might have to spend a quarter of the year working on test taking strategies? This is not how I envisioned my future self in a classroom. Second, learning in a manner that does not explicitly match the test could be a threat to tenure? Threats and worries about issues such as these make me nervous about being a future teacher. I still want to do it. I want to try and help students learn to the best of my abilities. But I can foresee myself pulling my hair out with frustration if I feel the best of my (and my students) abilities are being wasted taking practice tests. I know teachers experience an incredible burnout rate; with so much riding on a multiple choice piece of paper this is not surprising.
Jonathan Kozol; Still angry after all these years
Margie Peterson
April 5, 2007
