 |
 
 |
|
Make no mistake about it
In stressful times like these, no one needs anything additional to worry about. That's why I want to clear up some confusion brought to us courtesy of the Secretary of Education, Rod Paige.
According to Secretary Paige, quoted in the Los Angeles Times, "We have spent $147 billion on federal programs since the Johnson Administration," and he wants to know, "Why is it...that 70 percent of our inner-city and rural fourth-graders can't read?"
Before answering his question, let's take a look at the money, always an interesting project when dealing with bureaucrats. The Johnson Administration ended in 1968, 33 years ago, and the American public schools have averaged 42 million kids a year since then. So, with $147 billion spent over 33 years, or $4.5 billion per year, and 42 million kids, the arithmetic works out to about $106 per student per year. Hey, look at that really big spending!
Does Secretary Paige really think that $106 is going to have a major impact on a poor inner-city child's education?
In California, the $106 seems even punier. When you look at what our state spends on education, it becomes downright laughable - except that it's a tragedy in the making. California funds its schools at $7,607 per student, 10 percent below the national average, nowhere near New York at $11,852, Connecticut at $11,569, and New Jersey at $10,941. And remember, California is the richest state in the nation. In fact, this year we passed France to become the fifth largest economy in the world, producing goods and services in excess of $1.3 trillion. We can hardly plead poverty to justify the skimpy expenditures on our kids' education.
Money aside for a moment, it is a sad fact that nationwide 37 percent of fourth-graders can't read. (And if you're wondering about private schools, 22 percent of Catholic school fourth-graders can't read either.) What's going on?
Why does this situation exist in our wealthy nation? We think of literacy as a problem in what we call Third World countries, not in developed nations like ours.
If by Third World we mean poverty, then the answer is not hard to find. We know that poverty is a major factor in children's ability to learn in school, and the United States leads the world in child poverty with 20 percent of American kids living in poverty. California and New York share the shame of being first in the nation in child poverty with 26 percent of their kids living in poverty. Horrifying and scandalous, yes, but not something we as teachers can change. We don't have the political or economic power for such a task. However, we do know that poverty is a profound cause of educational problems, that kids coming from poverty-stricken homes are much less likely to succeed in our classrooms than kids whose homes provide them with an environment that nurtures learning in school. That's a partial answer to Secretary Paige's question.
To further the horror, we must be aware that the U.S. government defines poverty as a yearly income of $16,000 for a family of four. By contrast, the California Budget Project reported in September that for a family in our state to maintain a modest living standard, it would need $52,034 a year. How many teachers get that much money? If we, with our years and years of college and experience behind us, are living below the "modest" level, just think what that figure means for our students.
It is terrible to think of so many children living in poverty, and when you consider how poverty affects their education, the distress really mounts. Statistically, 60 percent of the nation's fourth-graders who are living in poverty can't read. If that figure persists, those kids are doomed to continue their lives in dead-end, low-pay jobs, missing out on any real financial security, and ultimately guaranteeing another generation to follow, equally handicapped.
Apart from statistics, you as teachers know what problems face a classroom populated by children who come from homes - if, indeed, they even have homes - where there is crowding, malnutrition, inadequate medical attention, emotional deprivation and few cultural opportunities; where books, magazines and newspapers are luxuries; where uneducated parents cannot serve as role models; where standard English is not the home's language; and where struggling parents haven't enough time to monitor after-school activities, let alone homework. All the difficulties encompassed by such privations come to school with the child and influence his or her attitudes toward learning as well. It is amazing that any kids at all coming from poverty do learn to read and do succeed in graduating from high school. It is testimony to the hard work of teachers and the encouragement they provide that so many make it under such adverse circumstances.
Yet Secretary Paige seems to think that $106 a year per child is enough to accomplish the miracles needed, enough to compensate for the deprivations of poverty, enough to enrich the child's school experience. Add to the scarcity of funds the fact that the teachers who are expected to create the miracles are told what, when, where and how to teach - often by people who don't have a clue and have chosen not to work in a classroom themselves - and are given insufficient and often inferior materials and textbooks. Combine these factors with the misery of poverty and the barrier of language, and you have a perfect formula for a dysfunctional education situation and disappointing test scores.
Despite all this, public education works! Given the restraints that teachers labor under and the shocking number of our students who live in poverty, the fact that the system works at all becomes a miracle. And it is just that, a miracle forged in the hard work of the underappreciated classroom teachers.
Better funding is a necessary beginning for solving the problems public schools cope with. Along with money, we must have professional control of our classrooms. If we can't abolish child poverty, we can at least mitigate its effects in our classrooms.
Make no mistake about it. CTA will continue to fight not only for the money and dignity our profession requires, but also for the respect we deserve. And we will go on fighting to give a quality education to all of our kids, including the ones whom Secretary Paige understands so little about that he is willing to write them off as failures.
 |
|
|
