(download)

Click here to download:

Sara Zebovitz.wmv (5.06 MB)

 Carol Johnson, the chair of the board for the Council of Great City Schools said, “we are morally obligated to innovate and reform our schools for all of America’s children” (6/30/2010). Over 15.5 million children in the United States suffer from poverty. High-poverty schools are left to handle the grave situations of these children, though some programs have been created to assist in this process. In this paper, I give the background of poverty and the effects of childhood poverty, followed by a history of educational reform. After explaining the background of poverty education, I will differentiate between urban and rural poverty education and the programs created for each. Although there is a stronger focus on urban poverty education than rural poverty education, there have been reforms made for both. Different programs have been created for urban and rural poverty education, and they focus on the needs of the respective areas.

            According to the World Bank,

“poverty is hunger. Poverty is a lack of shelter. Poverty is being sick and not being able to see a doctor. Poverty is not being able to go to school and not knowing how to read. Poverty is not having a job, is fear for the future, living one day at a time. Poverty is losing a child to illness brought about by unclean water. Poverty is powerlessness, lack of representation, and freedom” (Lang, 31).

Throughout Lang’s analysis of poverty and its definition in the world and in American society, he concludes that “an individual is poor if he or she lacks sufficient financial resources to obtain food, clothing, shelter, and medical care and to participate in society” (Lang, 35). The high poverty rate in the United States – 14.3 percent – stems from the unequal distribution of wealth. Based on William Domhoff’s data from 2007, the top one percent of the population possesses 34.6 percent of the net worth and financial wealth in the entire country. The lower 80% of the population only accounts for seven percent of the total financial worth of the United States (Domhoff).  These statistics summarize the extremely uneven distribution of wealth in the country.

Mollie Orshansky, a woman who worked for the Social Security Administration, developed the poverty thresholds in the United States based on statistics of how much of a family’s income is spent on food. Through her research, she settled on one third. Thus, the up-to-date minimum cost of a balanced diet is multiplied by three to set the poverty threshold in the United States. This number is adjusted for family size (Lang, 37). In 2004, the poverty threshold set for a single-person family was $9,827. However, this number is often too low for the realities of living in America, including the varying costs of living.

In 2009, according to the United States Census Bureau, over 15.5 million children in the United States lived in poverty; this sets child poverty rates at 20.7 percent.  Although only 25 percent of the population is children, “of all of the people living in poverty in…2009, 35.5 percent of them were children” (First Focus, 1). Across the United States, 42 percent of urban students live in poverty, based on eligibility for free and reduced lunches, the measurement by which poverty is measured among school children (Anyon, 6). Based on the same measurement, 36 percent of rural students live in poverty (Rogers, 1).

Childhood poverty has a lasting effect on children. “Inadequate maternal nutrition during pregnancy prepares biological systems for a life of scarcity after birth – a life in which the baby must make the most of limited nutrients… Hence the result of poor prenatal nutrition can be increased likelihood of obesity in childhood and adulthood, as well as hypertension and heart disease” (Shonkoff, 12). Children in poverty tend to have less developed language skills; they enter first grade with an average of 25 hours of reading (often with parents), whereas children of upper income families have an average of 1000 hours of reading prior to first grade (Evans, Brooks-Gunn, Klebanov, 18). When looking at the standard deviations of separation between low and middle class ten to twelve year olds, the low income students are between 3 and 4 standard deviations of middle-class children in terms of language skills, long term memory, working memory, and executive control (Evans, Brooks-Gunn, Klebanov, 18). This sets these children behind more affluent children in academic achievement, measured by testing in schools.  This disadvantage continues throughout a child’s education, leaving children who were impoverished in childhood farther behind than their middle class counterparts.

In the United Nations International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, adopted in 1966, education was stated as a human right. Article thirteen states,

“The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to education. They agree that education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity, and shall strengthen the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. They further agree that education shall enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations and all racial, ethnic or religious groups, and further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.”

Although it can be argued that every child in the United States does have access to an education, the inequalities in the school are frightening. As Jonathan Kozol expresses in The Shame of the Nation, “a high-poverty elementary school that holds about 400 students in New York receives more than 1 million dollars less per year than schools of the same size in districts with the fewest numbers of poor children” (Kozol, 246). A school with less funding is likely to have bigger classes. Bigger classes lead to less individual attention for students, and oftentimes, students in poverty require more individual attention than middle class students. This funding gap also means fewer resources. Fewer books, dilapidating buildings, and lack of clean water negatively affect the education of a child, both mentally and physically. In the Davis Guggenheim film The First Year, a school in South Central Los Angeles had only one speech therapist hired at the school. Tyquan, a kindergarten student, was unable to get the help he needed simply because that “[the speech therapist had] not contacted [him] at all” following an assessment (08:24-08:43). Issues like these are not uncommon in schools with a lack of funding. Based on the data available, it is clear that “public funds are being used to subsidize a service which is used by the white middle classes more than by other groups” (Jencks, 19).

Out of the about 38 million students enrolled in public schools in the United States, 10.4 million students are in urban schools and 10.5 million are in rural schools. Because of the high poverty rates expressed above, urban and rural schools struggle with many of the issues of poverty education, children in poverty, and other issues that come along with poverty in those respective areas. Because of the high rates of poverty in urban and rural schools which are the focus of this paper, schools with higher poverty rates must initiate extra programs in order to keep the poverty-stricken students on the same academic level as the affluent students. However, as stated above, schools with higher poverty rates generally receive fewer funds than those with lower poverty rates.

When students are affected by poverty at a young age, the effects are likely to carry on into their further education and into their adulthood. “The best mechanism for breaking this vicious circle is educational reform. Since children born into poor homes do not acquire the skills they need from their parents, they must be taught these skills in school.” (Jencks, 7). Education, once seen as the great equalizer, has lost its touch. “Schools and colleges cannot overcome the difference between those born on third base and those who are struggling to get up at bat” (Ornstein, ix). There is a visible achievement gap between high poverty schools and low poverty schools: in 1994, a study of 9 year-old children showed the achievement gap in reading skills to be 38 points, which amounts to a three grade gap between these schools. Education should be an equalizer across America; “giving everyone an equal claim” should require that the system gives everyone “more or less comparable benefits over a lifetime” (Jencks, 17).

            There have been many programs created over time that have been directed towards children in poverty. Aid to Dependent Children, later called Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) gives funds to families under the poverty threshold and reduces the poverty gap. This program is commonly known as “welfare,” though officially titled AFDC/Transitional Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). 87 percent of all AFDC/TANF funds go to families that would otherwise be under the poverty threshold (Lang, 63-64). The earned income tax credit (EITC) program gives money to workers with low incomes, ultimately reducing their taxes. However, because this program only helps working families, it has not been as effective in eliminating the poverty gap as other programs have (Lang, 65-66). In 1965, the Elementary and Secondary Schools Act was passed, providing “federal funding and guidance for supplemental compensatory education programs for children and youth in poverty” (Gouwins, 25). Under Title I of this act was a specific effort to raise test scores of disadvantaged children (Jencks, 94). Head Start, also created in 1965, strives to provide economically disadvantaged children with a preschool education. This program has proven repetition of a grade to be 50 percent less likely for participants, and students are more likely to have various immunizations prior to entering elementary school (Lang, 178). In 1994, President Bill Clinton signed the Improving America’s Schools Act, which added money to Title I funds in order to decrease the dropout rate among students, aid educational technology, and increase funding for bilingual education (Educational History Timeline). In 2001, President George W. Bush passed the No Child Left Behind act (NCLB), which set requirements for schools to make adequate yearly progress, measured by scores on standardized tests. This, unfortunately, required schools with little money to spend more money on tutoring programs so their students could reach these goals. This act did not allocate more money to schools to aid them (Kozol, 202-203). The progression of educational policy and poverty policy in the United States has led the country to where it is today.

As made clear above, there are problems with both urban and rural poverty education. However, America tends to pay far more attention to urban poverty education than rural poverty education primarily because there are more impoverished people in urban areas than in rural areas. Organizations have been created that work to change each system, although the programs for each do not work together. Even though the necessities of urban and rural education are similar, there are many differences in the characteristics for each, as described below. The programs created for urban and rural poverty education focus on various needs of the poverty education system in their respective areas.

In 1994, “over 80 percent of concentrated poverty areas in the United States were found in the nation’s 100 largest cities” (Anyon, 5). However, only 29 percent of the nation’s population lived in cities at the time of the census. “Large cities cast less than half of the votes in most states,” so the inner city members are not adequately represented in the governments. Out of the eight largest cities in the United States, only two (Philadelphia and San Diego) do not have a majority of “minorities” within the city limits. Because of the political and racial isolation of urban areas, people who live in cities are also isolated from the economic mainstream of middle-class jobs. Even though the poverty rate of children under the age of eighteen in the country is 20.7 percent, the poverty rate of children in cities exceeds that by over twice the amount: 42 percent. When looking at data from the United States Census Bureau from 2009, urban school districts in the northeast region of the country have poverty rates between 0 and 67 percent, with the middle 50 percent of urban school districts in poverty with a poverty rate under 20 percent. Less than 50 percent of entering ninth graders in the large city systems graduate from high school in four years and less than 50 percent of all urban students are above national achievement norms (Anyon, 5-6).

The Council of the Great City Schools is the only national-level organization that focuses on urban schools. The amount of funding given to poor urban schools is about a tenth of what is spent by suburban schools (Anyon, 7). The schools in these urban areas are often falling apart and the classrooms are overcrowded. Jonathan Kozol shares a teaching experience:

“we shared an undivided auditorium with 35 other children in another fourth grade class, and with a choral group, and with a group rehearsing for a play…and with a class of fifth grade girls… One windy afternoon that fall, an entire frame of windows in our makeshift class collapsed… Some of the children seemed to have accepted these conditions…” (Kozol, 3).

The Council of Great City Schools (CGCS) “see[s] a future where the nation cares for all children, expects their best, appreciates their diversity, invests in their futures, and welcomes their participation in the American dream. The Great City Schools are places where this vision becomes tangible and those ideals are put to the test” (CGCS website). Its goals include engaging parents, involving the community, and creating a positive learning environment inside and outside the classroom for the urban schools that are members of the council. The CGCS enrolls seven million students nationally, and 60 percent of those students are eligible for free and reduced lunch. 12 percent of the students have Individualized Education Programs. The program strives not only to help students in the ways mentioned above, but also to increase the amount of federal funding given to urban schools in order to reduce the inequalities in financial assistance nationally. It also works to get dilapidated buildings repaired and to “enhance the abilities of urban schools to use Medicaid for health” (CGCS Annual Report). The CGCS also focuses on closing the achievement gap created between various racial groups. Additionally, the program assists with professional development, as the skills and attitudes of the teachers are essential to changing the status of the schools. As a continuing program, the CGCS has made great strides in making various contracts and amendments to programs and government acts in order to improve the urban education situation.

            Smaller organizations, too, focus on the plight of poverty education in urban areas. Professors at two universities in New York created a research project on professional development in urban schools. They created a literature circle, in which ten teachers got together on multiple occasions to read and discuss a book called The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education. This program was created to encourage new teaching styles, the sharing of ideas between teachers, and to realize that adults learn in a similar way to children – thus, understanding the way one learns is essential to understanding how one teaches. The literature circle was also created for a more effective professional development program – the others were said to be boring and not interactive. The teachers in the pilot program valued the diversity of opinions in the group and the ability to feel safe expressing themselves. The different teachers expressed various methods and concerns about their teaching, and shared ideas to better their own classroom environments. Through the process of the literature circle, teachers understood that they had been trained to focus on testing in their classrooms as opposed to the material itself. One teacher, when discussing better ways to teach, said,

“More stimulating, a different train of thought, different thinking, a broader spectrum…we are very focused on those tests and standardize this and New York standards and all that that this is a new way of looking at it.”

Children in poverty need interactive learning and patience. Through the effectiveness of urban professional development, the teachers can continue to develop along with the developing system (Monroe-Baillargeon).

            Overall, reform of urban poverty education is a major focus of many organizations. Within schools, reformists have been making progress in daily life: joint decisions are made by administrators and teachers, teachers team together, groups of students of multiple ages are put together for various aspects of the day, there is more flexible scheduling, and there is core planning in individual schools (Anyon, 10). The main school district in New York City was broken into smaller districts, allowing schools more choice and smaller environments. This decentralization has been seen in other cities as well. This helps “reinvigorate intellectually and professionally the educators, reengage the students, [and] to organize the parents” (Anyon, 11).

Rural poverty education reform is at a very different place than that of urban poverty education. There is almost the same amount of children in rural poverty in the United States as in urban poverty: 10.5 million children. Rural school districts have a 36 percent poverty rate, nationally, which is similar to that of urban school districts. When looking at data from the United States Census Bureau from 2009, rural school districts in the northeast region of the country have poverty rates between 0 and 100 percent, with the middle 50 percent of rural school districts in poverty having a poverty rate between 15 and 23 percent. Rural high-poverty schools often cannot offer Advanced Placement courses or certain language courses, due to lack of funding. However, unlike urban schools, many rural areas avoid high crime rates and have more open space. Unfortunately, however, many of the students must take long school bus rides to their schools, and cannot ride their bikes or walk, as many students in urban areas can. It is also more difficult to put on drama performances, music schools, and sports teams. It is more difficult to get financial assistance when living in rural areas, as well, because agency offices and employment opportunities are father away and hard to get to without a car (Kathy Ciolino, 4/18/2011).

The Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program was created under Title VI of the Elementary and Secondary Act to provide funds to help rural schools with high rates of poverty make the adequate yearly progress (AYP) required by NCLB. The most common goals established by many RLIS districts were improving the quality of instruction and improving student achievement. The funds are used for teacher recruitment and retention, teacher professional development, support for educational technology, parental involvement, drug awareness programs, and other programs funded by Title I. Schools that get funding from RLIS must not be eligible for a grant from the Small, Rural School Achievement program (described below), must have at least a 20 percent poverty rate, and must be classified as a small town, rural town, or rural near an urban area. In 2007-2008, the RLIS districts generally had more students than other rural districts, yet fewer than all districts nationally; they were generally concentrated in the South; student-teacher ratios were lower than districts nationally but higher than other rural districts; they served a higher percentage of free or reduced meals and of students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) than districts nationally, including other rural districts. In the 2009-2010 school year, about 29 dollars was awarded per student in RLIS districts. Over the course of the 2007-2008 school year, the improvement in math and reading in districts that received RLIS finding was significantly greater than in districts that did not receive the funding. 54 percent of the districts met their AYP goals. The RLIS program also provided their districts with assistance in planning and carrying out their programs, and achieving their AYP goals. Based on the official report of the RLIS program, the funds were primarily used for teacher pay, educational technology, professional development, and materials for the district (Executive Summary). The Small, Rural School Achievement (SRSA) program provides assistance for rural districts with fewer than 600 students or in extremely sparsely populated areas. Any school that is eligible receives funding for its projects. SRSA’s goals are also to assist schools in reaching their AYP as required by the NCLB act. Its funding often goes towards paying for programs required and created under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Schools Act (­US Department of Education).

Mrs. Kathy Ciolino, the principal of Biglerville Elementary School in Upper Adams school district, a rural school district in Pennsylvania, spoke to the struggles that come with poverty:

“Children can sometimes come to school hungry, tired (because they need to sleep on a couch) or poorly dressed (no coats or mittens)… Children in poverty have poor diets and therefore many health concerns.   Many children are a result of very poor pregnancies where their mother was drinking or using drugs... Many, many children are in single family homes.   This makes it very difficult to have the time to spend with their children if they are working… It also limits any outside opportunities such as scouts, church, [and] visits to the library” (April 18, 2011).

Additionally, many children have to ride forty-five minutes on a bus to school each morning and afternoon. Ciolino speaks about the programs that Biglerville Elementary has created to help students and their families. The school holds food drives, and then distributes boxes of food at parent-teacher conferences. If students are tired in class, they are sometimes sent to nap at the nurse’s office. Because many students do not have coats, hats, or gloves, during the winter, Biglerville keeps a box of coats and other winter items near the door for children to use during recess. Biglerville has received help from the South Central Community Action Agency, which provides opportunities and services for the poor in Upper Adams County. It funds the Winterization Program which provides insulation and better heating for families in the winter, the homeless shelter in the area, a food pantry, and Circles, a program that helps people pull themselves out of poverty. The Lincoln Intermediate Unit pays for the Migrant Education Program and helps middle and high school students to plan for their lives after high school. Ciolino’s teaching philosophy is that of persistence and patience:

“Because children of poverty have limited experiences and limited vocabulary, we need to factor that into any lesson. We need to give them lots of background knowledge and teach vocabulary directly. It doesn't work to just teach all children in the same way and it doesn't work to yell at children because they don't get it the first time or the tenth time. Good teaching is about finding the ways that work for the students that you have and not wishing that you had different students. So it doesn't work to just plow ahead without checking for understanding and re-teaching as many times as necessary.”

All of these programs have produced positive results, as well as Ciolino’s leading of the school. With the continuation of progression into equality of students and schools, the achievement of children in rural poverty will be almost indistinguishable from that of affluent students.

            Another organization that focuses on rural education is the Rural School and Community Trust (RSCT). This organization does not focus explicitly on the schools and their issues, but strives to create strong bonds between schools and their communities. “The Rural Trust provides a variety of services—training, networking, technical assistance, coaching, mentoring, research—and materials to increase the capacity of rural schools, teachers, young people, and communities to develop and implement high quality place-based education” (RSCT website). They also are attentive to policy changes and strive to create a better financial and social situation for high-poverty rural schools. However, data on the Rural Trust’s accomplishments and successes are not listed on their website.

There has not been much focus nationally on rural poverty. It is difficult to find data directly about programs created for rural poverty, as most of the attention given to poverty education is focused on urban poverty. Because the bulk of the impoverished people in the United States live in urban areas, many researchers do not give their attention to the dire situations in rural areas. There are fewer programs focused on rural poverty, and not very much data about the programs created or the number of children in rural poverty. In the United States Census Bureau, information about the number of people in rural areas is not available when compared to poverty; the only distinction is urban areas and outside of urban areas. This statistic puts rural areas with suburban areas; suburban areas have a very low poverty rate. Organizations such as the Council for Great City Schools focus their time on passing legislation to help the situations of urban schools in terms of funding, certification, and the ability of a school to engage its students. There are not organizations like this for rural areas, aside from the Rural School and Community Trust. Unfortunately, data on the success of this program are unavailable. Many organizations that are focused on rural schools give funding to contribute to Title I programs; this does not help the children who cannot travel to school nor does it help the schools to add various classes into their curriculums, such as Advanced Placement classes. If there are organizations that are focused on the legal lobbying for rural schools with high poverty rates, they are not very active and are difficult to find.

Because the plights of rural schools are different than those of urban schools, simply focusing on urban poverty education will not fully transform the educational system and cannot improve education for each student in the United States. There are more students in rural poverty than urban poverty. This does not mean that research and efforts should be put fully towards rural education, but more equally distributed to affect more children nationwide. The bulk of the students in the United States live in affluent suburban areas and the poverty rates in these schools are much lower than in urban and rural districts, yet their funding is much higher. Because the homes in suburban areas cost more than rural and urban areas and the incomes of the residents are higher, the taxes collected to fund the schools can be raised to higher amounts. However, this only increases the disparities between the areas. The lack of information and research about rural poverty education stems from not only the focus on urban education, but also from the overwhelming amount of funding that is given to suburban schools. Urban poverty education organizations receive excess funding or advocate for more funding for their programs; the lack of rural organizations advocating for that funding results in less funding and less research for these areas. In order to truly affect the educational system as a whole, more organizations need to focus their time and money on rural programming, as 10.5 million children’s education is endangered through this neglect. Attention needs to be paid to the struggles of rural poverty in general; those in poverty have difficulty getting help because agencies and welfare offices are in cities. Many families in rural poverty do not own cars, and because of the lack of public transportation in rural areas, these families cannot get to offices to get help. Because of these problems, people in rural poverty work multiple jobs and often do not have an education. This results in children in rural areas not getting homework help or encouragement from their families. There must be more organizations, research, and help provided for rural high-poverty schools because of these problems and those mentioned above.

(download)

Click here to download:

Mike Burgoyne.wmv (3.61 MB)

Education in America has been over growing importance over the last fifty years. So much so, social programs have been granted at the federal level. This need for social programs stems from the lack of state level support, funding, and capability to enforce such programs. Beginning with Lyndon B. Johnson and the launching of his War on Poverty, social programs to further domestic policy became a staple of the Democratic Party. Problems in education range from dilapidated, over-crowded schools, insufficient funding, irrelevant curriculum, and inequality of education throughout the country. This lack of equality is a major barrier for many students and is what social programs aim to overcome. Equaling the playing field in education would be an enormous step towards rectifying problems with the current educational system. Social programs have brought bounds of progress in this respect.

            The increasing number of social programs brought forth by the War on Poverty attempted to not only equal the educational playing field, but also provide funding for better schools, teachers, and programs to provide children with proper resources to enhance educational opportunities. These types of programs “provides federal funding and guidance for supplemental compensatory education programs for children and youth in poverty” (Gouwens 25). Programs such as HEAD Start, Migrant Education aids, and other tutoring/mentoring programs help children in school by providing services otherwise not already available. Providing these programs again equals the playing field to allow disadvantaged children a way to overcome other obstacles presented in their life. It is true there are some drawbacks to social programs, like misappropriation of funds and a bad overall strategy, overall social programs prove to beneficial to the targeted group. Social programs initiated since the War on Poverty have attempted to handle things such as programs for minority children, balancing the educational playing field, as well as creating opportunity for children.

            Minority education has been of growing importance over the last few decades. Starting in the 1960’s, programs have aimed to aid certain groups of minority children. For example, migrant Hispanic students have received notable attention from social programs because of the hardships endured trying to achieve an education. Tutoring programs help minority students to “catch up” with their schoolmates. Because some minority students are migrant workers, it is even more important to overcome educational obstacles. Minority students are at a disadvantage because they are usually Hispanic, at least at Biglerville Elementary, so they must overcome the lingual barrier, and often move so they do not receive as much schooling as necessary. Programs to help overcome these language barriers prove irreplaceable to students. There are programs that help track migrants credits so they can be carried over from school to school. Lastly, there are on-line schooling programs so students can work on their school work around their migrant working duties.

            Tutoring is an advantage for minority students because it helps them to overcome certain shortcomings normal classes cannot. Being involved in a tutoring program, I was able to see the effects personally. Throughout the twelve weeks I spend tutoring, I was able to see the grand benefits to personal school attention. Whereas students do not always get the personal attention needed in class, tutoring programs provide a more individualistic approach where the needs of the student come first. In Biglerville Elementary’s case, the tutoring program was cut, but personal volunteers stepped up to run a free program. It is these types of programs that provide great assistance to students who need educational help. As Biglerville Elementary Principal Mrs. Ciolino says, “The after school tutoring program has provided not only the extra time for children to practice skills but also the opportunity for meaningful relationships with adults”. These programs provide students who have fallen behind fellow classmates, or the grade level, to catch up and stay on track to progress to the next grade level. Hopefully tutoring programs can be enhanced because they are an inexpensive, fun, and extremely productive way for students to advance their knowledge.

            A major obstacle for minority students to overcome is the language barrier in educational systems. When Hispanic students enter schools, the usually speak Spanish, which causes problems simply because they do not speak English. At Biglerville Elementary, they have an ESL Program, or English as a Second Language, where Hispanic students go to learn English. Mrs. Ciolino says about the program, “I see children come into Kindergarten not speaking a word of English.   By third grade they are writing long stories in English and you would not be able to tell them apart from those written by native English speakers”. Mrs. Ciolino firmly believes programs like this are the most beneficial to Hispanic students because without a strong base for education, the English language, the rest of learning will be very difficult to come by. Because of the increasing role English as a Second Language has, “Hispanic children have a real chance to compete and succeed educationally” (Kathy Ciolino Interview).

            The idea of transferring migrant youth’s educational credits is not new. Dating back to the early-1970’s, transferring credits was seen as a way to keep track of a migrant student’s progress as he/she travelled from school to school. The Migrant Student Record Transfer System which was “intended to receive, maintain, transmit the education and health records of migrant children as they travel from school to school” (Gouwens 27). Though this sounds like a good idea on paper, but in practice, there are many flaws. For one, the mailing of school credits and information usually is too slow to keep up with the migrant student. By the time the credits and information reach the new school, the migrant student has likely already moved on to another school. There needs to be a faster method to transport students’ records to keep up with the migrant travelling. Another example of a flaw within the education system is the lack of a universal curriculum. So even if migrant students successfully transfer credit, the credits might not count towards their new school. This would then cause the migrant student to either be held back, or take placement exams. With consistently being held back, migrant students usually decide to drop out because they would rather focus on their working duties as opposed to school.

            With the rise of technology, there have also been easier methods to improve upon the problems associated with migrant education. Starting in 2001, there have been attempts to create an on-line curriculum for migrant students that would satisfy their educational needs and graduate with a high school degree. This way there would be no need to transfer credits or deal with the bureaucracy involved. Instead, students would be given a laptop with the schooling program downloaded. This way, migrant students can learn at a pace that is suitable for them and their working schedule. Grant it, this is not the optimal way to have students receive an education; it might be the only way that is capable of being done successfully.

            There are many positives to social programs utilized for minority and migrant students. They have attempted to keep minority and migrant students at equal footing with their schoolmates. Programs such as these have immensely helped minority and migrant students’ adapt to their educational surroundings. Of course there have been issues with certain social programs, but they are being changed, and new ideas for programs are being developed. Programs like the ones mentioned help to balance the educational gap between schoolmates of minority and migrant students in America. But balancing the educational field involves more than just minority and migrant students.

            Schools throughout America are not all the same and do not include equally advantageous aspects to them. When one school is properly funded and allocates its funding correctly, there is another school that is poorly funded, or does not give the students the right type of education. Also, the schools themselves may not be equal. Richer schools usually have a better aesthetic feel, where as poorer schools are decrepit and overcrowded. Lastly, there are inequalities in socioeconomic status. Throughout class, we have learned that African Americans have had disadvantages educationally because they are usually in more impoverished school districts. Equality of race within schools has also shown advantageous results for African Americans. Equality is a major part of the educational system and there have been several programs that have tried to meet this balance.

            In Jonathan Kozol’s book The Shame of the Nation, he talks about a girl who had potential to move on to college, but was not receiving the correct courses to make this a reality. She was taking basic classes that would not help to advance to the next level. In it, Kozol states, “When I asked her why she had to take these courses, she replied that she’d been told they were required,” (Kozol 178). Kozol continued to talk about how the elective courses were less rigorous than those that served the middle class or upper middle class. These issues are still apparent today. There needs to be some sort of legislation to fix these problems in the school system. The problem is misallocation of funds is the main problem and it is hard to keep control of such a thing.

            Allocation of funding has been a major problem throughout school districts in America. Money spent per student, which has become a very common way to gauge the funding of schools, is not always an accurate way to gauge whether or not a school is properly funded. In class we have seen examples where schools spend a very high amount of money per student, but still do not offer the proper necessities to its student base. What has been found is that school districts that receive a lot of funding tend to just “throw money” at schools, rather than coming up with solid plans to help the school succeed. This is especially true in urban school districts, where there happens to be more African American students. This act of “throwing money” at schools allows the schools to have a lot of money, but it is not shown in the schools. Most schools in the inner-city are decaying or overcrowded. When social programs are used to provide funding for schools districts, there needs to explicit plans to fix necessary items to stop misusing the funds.

            This misuse of funding could be better spent in several different ways to benefit the students. One of these includes keeping the appearance of the school appealing and ensuring schools have enough room to facilitate all of the students within their district. In Jonathan Kozel’s Book The Shame of the Nation, he mentions overcrowding of schools and poor conditions of schools, while tying in how these factors affect students attending the schools. “Hundreds of thousands of our children are trying to learn in overcrowded, out-of-date and unsafe classrooms or in temporary trailers” (Kozol 169). These types of budget deficits cause schools to have to cut back on desks, textbooks, and other necessary materials that help students learn.

            More often than not, these rundown schools contain a majority of African Americans in the inner-city. There is a positive correlation between African Americans and poor test scores, but also coincides with inferior school conditions. There has been research done that has shown as the more equal student body of schools become, racially that is, the better they do academically. Where schools are only limited in racial mixing, African Americans do worse on test scores than the Caucasians who are in the same schools. But, as schools become more equally mixed, African Americans have higher test scores. An idea for a social program would be to increase the amount of racial mixing with schools. The problem with idea is that richer schools would not want to mix with poorer schools to meet such quotas. If it was forced, richer parents could send their children to private schools, thus the idea of racially mixing by increasing school district size would not make a significant impact.

            Balancing the educational playing field is more difficult said than done. With the current situation in education, there are obvious flaws that social programs do not fix. In order to the funding situation to be handled correctly, there needs to be more oversight with the programs. It would help to have nice schools that can fit everyone as a starting point in education. From there curriculum could be worried about when it comes to equality for students to go to college. Also, if schools were less segregated, studies show that it would have positive effects for both African Americans and Caucasians. There needs to be a lessening gap in equality to allow all of the student’s equal opportunities.

            Not only does equality need to be fixed for school districts nationwide, but there needs to be opportunity available for each student to advance as far up the education totem pole as possible. There have been several social programs that have provided opportunity for students who otherwise would not have had them. Fernando Reimers says in Unequal Schools, Unequal Chances “the poor have less access to preschool, secondary, and tertiary education; they also attend schools of lower quality” (Reimers 55). The HEAD Start program helps with young children age’s three to five with their early education. Free and reduced lunches offer children the opportunity eat a healthy lunch, which otherwise would be difficult to come by. It also offers breakfast to children, one of the most important meals of the day. Big-Brothers Big-Sisters provides from low-income, single-parent households, with adult volunteer mentors who are typically young and well-educated. The Perry Preschool Project provided high-quality preschool education to three- and four-year-old African-American children living in poverty and assessed to be at high risk of school failure.    

            The HEAD Start program is one of the most notable social programs aimed at education in America. It started under Lyndon B. Johnson and his War on Poverty. Head Start provides education, health and social services. HEAD Start includes preschool education to national standards that have become normal standards for all US preschools. Health services include screenings, health check–ups and dental check–ups. Social services provide family advocates to work with parents and assist them in accessing community resources for low income families. The program has been successful in providing children with early educational opportunities that might not have been available before. Studies have shown at HEAD Start significantly reduces the chances of a child repeating a grade. As opposed to other programs, HEAD Start has shown significant advantages including pre–reading, pre–vocabulary, and reports of higher literacy at younger ages. The benefits of HEAD Start are improved with early participation and varied among racial and ethnic groups, which is great considering high rates of minorities make use of the program.

            Free and reduced lunch provides a great opportunity for children to eat healthy lunches, and now breakfast, at school. These prove to be beneficial because rather than not being able to eat lunch, or not have a healthy meal, children are able to have lunch are a reduced rate. Little things like this provide a great opportunity for children in impoverished areas to receive proper nourishment. There are obvious positive effects when children are able to eat consistently throughout the day. These effects include less fatigue, increased focus, and overall better attitude throughout the day. “Free and reduced lunches are covered by Federal Funding and therefore do not come out of the district budget, which is helpful to school districts. Instead of having to cut this wonderful program, districts can focus on other programs that may not be as effective” (Kathy Ciolino Interview).  

            The Big-Brother Big-Sister helps adolescents by providing them with someone to be a role model for them. They are supposed to act as a friend, rather than someone trying to correct the child’s behavior. By doing this they can instill good values, solid study skills, and knowledge to help them grow as an individual. This does not completely coincide with education, but it serves the child with a support system rather than a parent or school. This is similar to the tutoring program we were involved with class. We did help the tutee with homework, as can the Big-Brother Big-Sister program, but we also served as mentors and dependable people for the child. According to Mrs. Ciolino, “I believe that the encouragement of the college tutors and those of you who came during the school day, just helps children to know that there is more to life and more opportunities than they would have known otherwise”. In my opinion, that served more important than the homework. Having someone who serves as a dependable person to be there for the children on a consistent basis is invaluable to a child’s life.

            The Perry Preschool Project was a test to see how the affects of high end preschool education to African American students living in poverty. Though it was just a project conducted in the 1960’s, the results proved to be favorable to the children as they got older. This is actually one of the few programs that has statistical data to show its effectiveness. This program really shows the importance of early education among children. It especially shows the importance for children in poverty to receive educational opportunities at a young age. According to the Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy, the Perry Preschool Project had resulted in a “44 percent high school graduation rate, 50 percent fewer teen pregnancies, and were 46 percent less likely to serve time in jail”, as compared to the control group. These numbers represent a great deal of promise for the future. Though this program does not still exist, it offers a base for future social programs that could be instilled throughout the country.

            The opportunity presented by social policies is irreplaceable. They provide great ways for children to acquire early education otherwise unobtainable. As Kevin Lang states in Poverty and Discrimination, “by getting a good education, disadvantaged children can make up for their disadvantages” (Lang 211). The social programs also provide children with a mentor not currently in their life, who provides not only temporary guidance, but hopefully lifelong support. HEAD Start provides children with early education and has shown to be absolutely useful in early education. The Free and Reduced Lunch Program makes available breakfast and lunch, which the federal government pays for, which greatly, helps the students’ activity in school. Without these programs, children in poverty would not have the same opportunities as children who are better off financially. Lastly, the Perry Preschool Project shows first hand that education early in one’s life, no matter the odds they are against, significantly helps them. It just goes to show, opportunity is the key to success in education.

            Education is truly the most important thing to help an individual succeed in life. I parallel this to what John F. Kennedy said of education, “Our progress as a nation can be no swifter than our progress in education. The human mind is our fundamental resource.” For the United States of America to advance as a whole, each of the parts needs to increase its educational level. This idea can only be realized when the masses realize troubles that are currently inhibiting the educational system. There are flaws within this system, but governmental programs have been used in order to combatant the disadvantages in opportunity and equality in education. Further progress must be done to continuing education progress, but there are bright spots already in place. Continuing with these programs should enhance future successes of children throughout the country.

            The increasing numbers of social programs following the War on Poverty have done a lot of good reaching children as their primary targets. This creates a solid base for learning to help further the child later in life. Programs such as HEAD Start and Free and Reduced Lunches are ways to increase opportunity for impoverished students. By helping migrant and minority students to learn English and aid them early in their education, it made it easier for them to adapt to the educational system. Though there needs to be more equality in the educational system in dealing with school appearance and misuse of funds, overall the social programs have been more beneficial to students. Without the efforts of governmental programs, migrant students would have a very difficult time with schooling as they moved around the country, minority students would be limited in what they would learn in school because they would not understand very much, and early education for people in poverty would be nonexistent. Yet it is there programs that help nearly 15 percent of our country to receive an education.

(download)

Click here to download:

Margaux Audett.wmv (4.79 MB)

In this country, we are guaranteed certain unalienable rights. We are guaranteed life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness by the Declaration of Independence, but what does that mean? It means that we are guaranteed as citizens of the United States to dream and work hard and maybe eventually make that dream a reality. This dream is often referred to as the American dream; a classic rags to riches story. We see it happen in movies, on television shows and on the news. This is a guaranteed American right, and yet the people who actually reach the American dream seem so rare. Theoretically, the fact that it is a right should mean that all citizens have an equal chance of being successful and living the American dream, but it is painfully obvious that this is not the case. Although sometimes hidden, the evidence of poverty is usually something no one can ignore. We see it in the shame in the eyes of a homeless man holding up a sign that says, “U.S. Vet out of work. Please help. God bless” in the parking lot of the grocery store. We see it in the disheveled trailer parks with broken lawn chairs and toys in their front yards. Poverty in itself is a dauntingly large problem that affects every country all over the world. In America, we believe that if one tries hard enough they can pull themselves out of the cycle of poverty. We believe that in order to that, the first step is to do well in school so they can go to college. An education is the building block of a successful future. We even assume that someone who didn’t do as well in life that they were not a good student. How can we say something like that in a country where education isn’t even a guaranteed right? By default, in a country where education is not a constitutional right, children are not going to receive the education they deserve. They are going to enter into an educational system where they are given what little resources their district can bear to spend, and as a result get a minimal education. Therefore, they are going to enter into a world trying to compete against people with a far better education, and will rarely be able to succeed.

In our country, “the state is the central actor in any claim to the right to education: it is the prime duty-bearer and the prime implementer; it is the guarantor; and it is the state´s signature vis-à-vis the international norms and standards which binds it to respect, protect and fulfill the right to education” (2). We leave it up to the State’s to determine how they want their educational system to work, because according to the tenth amendment to the constitution “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The fact that an equal education is not delegated in the constitution automatically makes it a responsibility of the states to ensure that all children get an equal education, which by definition is unequal. Allowing States make regulations on education directly makes the quality of education unequal between, at the very least, different states. This probably only compounds itself as it gets down to the local levels, where sometimes schools that are fifteen minutes away from each other are drastically different. Clearly, it is impossible to make every school have exactly the same amount of funding and the same quality of education, but there should at least be some federal base of education that ensures that every child has, at the very least, a good quality education. Some kids may not go on as many field trips as others, or be able to have a spectacular spring play every year, but they will have the skills they need to go after their dreams and achieve great things. If our country were to recognize education as a national right, as a guaranteed policy that every state must enforce in the most fundamental ways, then more children would get the education they need and deserve.

Clearly, something needs to change in the system to make it easier for children to escape the conditions they were born into and achieve a better, happier life. There are inequalities among racial and socioeconomic lines that are unjustly keeping the poor in their impoverished trailer parks and allowing the rich to just get richer. There are many small and large changes that have been made over the past century that have helped improve conditions on a local scale, but it seems like one group of poor have simply been replaced by another. Before 1960s, when blacks and whites went to separate and unequal schools, there was a clear demarcation of who had a better future. Now, as Kozol argues, when people claim that schools are not segregated, the lines are a little harder to draw, but still are blantantly obvious if you bother to walk in the front door of the school. In his book, The Shame of the Nation Kozol argues that although legally the schools are unsegregated, the way the education system as a whole is set up on a local level makes them actually very segregated. The fact that poorer districts will receive less funding is one issue, and therefore the more affluent families move into wealthier districts in order to get a better education for their children.

Children have no lobbyists. They do not have bank accounts or lawyers or even a right to vote. They cannot speak for themselves, even though many of them are aware that they are part of an unjust system. Kozol cites an example of a third grader who said, “‘We do not have the things you have’ . . . ‘can you help us?’” (Kozol 263). She knows that she is going to a school with below the acceptable standards of the building, of the teachers and the overall atmosphere. Although she is aware of the problem she does not have the ability to do anything about it. Every day you hear politicians speak about the promises for a better tomorrow, that we will make this world a better place for our children and our children’s children. But what about the children right now? The most important thing we can do for them is to provide them with a good education. They need an education now, not sometime in the future. They cannot wait for some underfunded program that will most likely be cut due to limits on the budget, to hopefully make some changes. These programs are often only local too, so therefore not all places that need help are getting them. The most basic thing that we can do for them, is at least guarantee them the right to an education. Although it’s a daunting and arduous task, it will change the way policies and laws are shaped around education. Instead of doing the bare minimum to get kids through schools, they will make them so that they give kids the opportunity to learn. Although there are tons of programs and NGOs that are looking to help these children, there needs to be a national change to make sure that all kids are getting the education they need. All parents want the best for their children, but some parents can’t give their kids everything they would like to.

There are some who have tried to fight against the system in order to plead for better funding for schools that are in poorer areas. For example, there was a school in Edgewood district of San Antonio whose students were 96 percent nonwhite and lived in a very poor area. Even though these parents “paid one of the highest property tax rates in the area, the district could raise only $37 for each pupil because of the low value of its property. Even with assistance granted by the state, Edgewood ended up with only $231 for each child. Alamo Heights, meanwhile, the richest section of the city but incorporated as a separate schooling district, was able to spend $543 on each pupil” (Kozol 242). Initially, the court ruled that this was unconstitutional, but the case went to the Supreme Court where it was overruled. When at the Supreme Court, Justice Lewis Powell and Justice Thurgood Marshall were in opposing corners of the argument. Powell believes that because the right to an education is not protected by the constitution, it allows children in poorer districts to have relatively poorer quality education.  The opposing side argued that this is not unconstitutional because it is not written in the constitution and doesn’t need to be because its “understood” as a right. “Justice Thurgood Marshall, . . . challenged the notion that an interest, to be seen as ‘fundamental,’ had to be ‘explicitly or implicitly guaranteed’ within the Constitution. Thus, he said, although the right to procreate, the right to vote, and the right to criminal appeal are not guaranteed, ‘these interests have nonetheless been afforded special judicial consideration . . . because they are, to some extent, interrelated with constitutional guarantees.’ Education, Marshall said, was also such a ‘related interest’ because it ‘directly affects the ability of a child to exercise his First Amendment interests both as a source and as a receiver of information and ideas . . .’” (Kozol 243). Although most Americans would like to see education become a guaranteed right, one of our own Supreme Court Justices believes that that fact that it is implied in the Constitution as an applied use of the first amendment is sufficient. He is clearly an intelligent person, and understands that there are inequalities in the way the school system is funded in the United States; however he refuses to acknowledge the need to make it a constitutional right.

In March 2003, Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. “proposed a constitutional amendment that would guarantee the right to public education ‘of an equally high quality’ to every American child” (Kozol 251). He said that, “‘the entire present system it its structural irrationality needs to be rooted out’ –‘root and branch’ . . . ‘and there is no way that this is going to be done but by the passage of a constitutional amendment’” (Kozol 252). Unfortunately, Jackson’s efforts got minimal attention and were widely ridiculed, as if any change to the constitution is almost seen as insulting to Americans. In fact, most other efforts to try and give equal education to all children on a national level have been restricted to the state level. The reason for this is largely because whenever the cases are taken to court, their lawyers do not have the ability to use a national document to support their argument. Nowhere in our national records does it state that an equal education is a right of all citizens, and because of this the lawyers have little to support their argument. “The most important disadvantage advocates for equal education or for adequate education have to face is that attorneys are unable to incorporate within their pleadings legal claims deriving from the U.S Constitution – the only constitution that has truly elevated moral standing in the eyes of most Americans- and cannot, as a consequence, defend the rights of children” (Kozol 249). Therefore, how can progress possibly be made? Granted, there have been victories on the local level, but these battles were long and hard fought. The battle to make education a right would be a longer and harder fight, but it would be well worth it. If advocators were finally able to use the constitution to bolster their arguments, no Supreme Court Justice would turn that down. Equality of education would come flooding throughout the countries and change the lives of some otherwise poor children.

School is supposed to be an inspirational place where kids are challenged and their imaginations are fueled by new knowledge. However, in some schools, they are danger zones. They are areas where no one would want to go voluntarily, let alone send their children to every day. In some districts, these parents don’t have a choice.  A huge reason why the federal government has to do something about this problem is the inherent parental characteristic to do anything and everything they can to make sure their child has a better future than the one they had. Therefore parents in wealthier neighborhoods flood their schools with fundraisers and charitable donations, which in turn unofficially increases the amount of funding that school receives. There is no way to tell these parents not to donate money, and there is no reason not to allow them to do so. However, it leaves the districts with parents that can barely put food on the table out in the cold. They cannot afford fundraisers, and even if they tried raising money through donations in their area, they wouldn’t accumulate a significant amount. *cite Kozol example If equal education became a national right, it would lessen the burden on parents to try and find a way to raise money for their children’s schools, and give them the peace of mind that their child is getting a good education.

 “Most Americans are unaware that children have no constitutional protection where equality of education is at stake. The notion that education is not a protected right under the U.S. Constitution comes as a surprise to the majority of citizens. . . ‘Most Americans believe that education is a fundamental right and when you tell them that it’s not, they say, ‘It should be’’” (Kozol 254). In fact, it is recognized in multiple international documents that education is a human right. One example, is the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights” where in Article 13 it states that, “education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity, and shall strengthen the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. They further agree that education shall enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations and all racial, ethnic or religious groups, and further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace” (1). This was signed by 160 countries including the United States, on December 16, 1966. It is one of two parts of what the General Assembly refers to as the International Bill of Human Rights, the other part being the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which was adopted in 1948. Both of these treaties were signed by the United Nations, and both declare education to be a human right. These international treaties, that are recognized and signed by the United States, clearly state that every single human being, no matter their race or socioeconomic class is guaranteed an education. But nowhere in our own constitution does it state that as a country we believe and support these treaties in their totality. In fact, a group that promotes there is a group called The Right to an Education Project, that works internationally to, “promote social mobilization and legal accountability, looking to focus on the legal challenges to the right to education” (2). Under the description for each country, they outline the status of the right to an education. In the description of the United States they wrote, “The constitution is the fundamental law of the country, reflecting the underlying and unifying values of society. It spells out the basic rights of each person; it serves as a framework for all other laws and policies” (2). However, it does not recognize education as, “a basic right of each person.” Some, like Justice Marshall, claim that it is understood and therefore does not need to be written into the Constitution as an amendment. Others pass it off as a responsibility of the state. How can we sign a legal international treaty saying that we agree that education is a fundamental right, but not actually have it enforced or simply written into our own?

Writing equal education into the Constitution, or at least nationalizing it in some way, would make all the difference to young American children. It would allow advocators an avenue to equalize the playing field in the courts, and maybe they would even start to win a few cases. It would give the children the right to move forward, and become greater than their parents. They would have the tools to live a full life, and they would be given those tools by their own country. Giving them a proper education would prepare them to return the favor later in their lives by becoming informed American citizens, who will collectively better our country as a whole. We do not defend our children like they should be defended. If you ask anyone, they would say that they too would like to see better education across the country, and yet obstacles remain that hinder any progress. “As things stand today, the children in schools we have examined in this book are not protected by their nation. Yet they are expected in school to perform at national standards, are graded on what are, in fact, no less than national exams that measure their success or failure according to nationally determined norms, are expected to vote someday in national elections, compete for earnings in a national job market, and because of their race and poverty, are far more likely than most other citizens to imperil their lives by serving in our nation’s wars. They illegitimacy of the uneven social contract by which they are bound invites a more aggressive scrutiny than it can be accorded in the courts of separate states. These children are not citizens of Illinois, New York, or California. They are (most of them are at least,) the citizens of the United States; yet the flag that hangs above their classrooms and their schools does not defend their interest where it comes to preparation for adulthood in their nation, and the words of the pledge we ask them to recite can only mock their actual experience” (Kozol 262). We guarantee life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but how can one pursue happiness without the basic tools needed to succeed? An education should be an easily granted right to all children. Give them that, and we give them an equal opportunity to make that American dream more than just a movie, it will make it their lives.

(download)

Click here to download:

Lizzy Palmer.wmv (4.16 MB)

“I don’t want you to go home at night and not be able to sleep.  It’s not something to be scared about.  You’re going to know the things you are going to know and you’re not going to know the things you don’t know.  These tests don’t say how smart you are,” says teacher Nate Monley, protagonist of Davis Guggenheim’s documentary The First Year as he calms his bilingual fifth grade class at Ford Boulevard Elementary in East Los Angeles.  Although Monley tries to settle his students’ nerves about the upcoming California standardized tests, not all of what he says is true. While the tests may not say overtly how smart Monley’s students are, the tests definitely will affect the students' futures.  Although standardized testing has been a part of much of the history of public education, only recently has it held such high stakes.  The 2001 implementation of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, more commonly known as 'No Child Left Behind' [NCLB], has set unachievable standards and goals to remedy problems within our public education system.   NCLB has overemphasized the importance of standardized testing, overly relying on scores to determine funding.  Consequently, disadvantaged schools like Ford Boulevard must make drastic changes to their curricula to keep up with the demands of NCLB.  Programs like No Child Left Behind that rely heavily on high-stakes standardized test examinations widen the gap between lower and middle classes, rendering impoverished students stuck in an imbalanced education system.

            Standardized testing has been in long existence in the United States and in countries worldwide: the earliest records of standardized testing date to 6th century China.  Early tests were not used in education.  Instead, as Time journalist Dan Fletcher notes, “hopefuls for government jobs had to fill out examinations testing their knowledge of Confucian philosophy and poetry” (1).  These versions of standardized tests were both summative and predictive: not only did they depict what an individual had learned, but they also served to foresee his aptitude and capability.  Over time, standardized tests became more focused in measuring the quality of education.  Fletcher aligns this shift  with the Industrial Revolution, as it “took school-age kids out of the farms and factories and put them behind desks” (1).  The emphasis moved from work ability to the importance of  education and the need for a fast and simple way to evaluate students’ achievements and shortcomings.

            Despite this shift in priorities, standardized testing during the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries focused on the intelligence of  an individual, not the productivity of a school.  In 1845, Horace Mann, secretary of the Massachusetts Board of Education, was one of the pioneers of standardized testing.  According to Mark Garrison, author of A Measure of Failure, Mann created tests to “mitigate disputes between schoolmasters and families who charge them with favoritism and the inevitable negative impact such chargers have on the credibility of schools” (96).  This example of one of the first uses of  standardized testing in public schools did not live up to expectations -- irregularities and  lack of consistency led to flawed results.

During the 1880s, Francis Gallon played another important role in the evolution of standardized testing.  In contrast to Mann, Galton did not focus on the role of the school at all.  Instead, he used standardized testing to access the intrinsic knowledge of individual human beings.  In her book The Assessment Debate, Valerie Janesick notes that “Galton attempt[ed] to prove that intelligence tests can select the best and brightest for breeding” (91).  Galton’s interest in eugenics caused a variety of problems.  His premise served to reinforce the barriers of social stratification and discouraged belief in equality.  This widened the gap between the wealthy and the poor, as Wayne Au notes in Unequal By Design, “the shift toward genetically-based aptitude and the use of tests to measure such aptitude correspond with the ascendancy of bourgeoisie as the dominant class within capitalist production” (37).  Although Galton’s work aided in refining the methodology for standardized testing, his way of thinking contradicted the overarching goal of creating fair and equitable schools.

French scientist Alfred Binet challenged Galton’s beliefs.  While Galton believed intelligence was fixed, Janesick asserts that Binet “[did] not believe one single score [was] the measure of intelligence.  He openly [wrote] of the possibility of error in testing” (91).  Binet was revolutionary in suggesting that intelligence is something that can be improved; it is not a fixed inherent quality.  By realizing the erroneous ways of testing, Binet created a test that could measure not only  intelligence but also memory, visual traits, imagination and language skills.  Binet’s methods of testing eventually evolved into the modern IQ test known as the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test.  Binet focused on a variety of aspects to evaluate a student’s performance; his willingness to accept more than one rigid, correct response helped education move towards a similar balance within the school systems.

            Standardized testing grew increasing popular during World War I.  Certain tests, known as Army Mental Tests, became standard practice to determine duty for U.S. soldiers.  While these simplified army recruitment and assignment processes, various problems arose.  Dan Fletcher asserts that “grading was at first done manually, an arduous task that undermined standardized testing’s goal of speedy mass assessment” (1). This roadblock fostered a need to evaluate tests quickly and proficiently.  In 1936, the first automatic test scanner, the IBM 805, was developed by Reynold Johnson.  Like many of the standardized tests used today, the first automatic scanner “used electric current to detect marks made by special pencils on tests” (Fletcher 2).  Most scanners today require the use of a No. 2 pencil; the persistent relevance of the mark required now and by the IBM 805 demonstrates the efficiency of Johnson’s invention.  As a result, the technical advances of automatic test scanners has drastically increased the productivity and popularity of tests.

            While standardized testing has evolved into an efficient, systematic assessment, what does testing contribute to the outcome of public education?  Garrison claims that “changes in standards for education initiate changes in the aim and philosophy of education. . . efforts to change a standard reflect efforts to change power relations, as well as the aims and values guiding social practice” (99).  This is an idealistic way of looking at education.  Just as standardized testing underwent many changes from 6th century China to the post-World War era, education should also be undergoing change.  Standards of education should reflect goals set by equal-opportunists such as Mann and Binet, but this is not the case.  Education seemed to be mediocre, causing many citizens to question the workings and funding of public school systems.

            In 1983, the Reagan administration published A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Education Reform, criticizing lackluster standards in public education.  Reagan and his administration claimed that America was too consumed with the current times and the  imminent presence of war to worry about the future of American students:

If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war. As it stands, we have allows this to happen to ourselves. We have even squandered the gains in student achievement made in the wake of the Sputnik challenge. Moreover, we have dismantled essential support systems which helped make those gains possible. We have, in effect, been committing an act of unthinking, unilateral education disarmament (National Commission on Excellence in Education 5).

Reagan asserted that the state of public education was in critical condition and Americans themselves were responsible, and further claimed that education had been ignored in order to tend to more seemingly pressing issues.  America had long been a powerful nation.  The document declared that America’s “once unchallenged preeminence in commerce, industry, science and technological innovation is being overtaken by competitors throughout the world” (1).  Education prepares individuals for times ahead. In creating a mediocre system, Americans place their futures in jeopardy.  The issue of decent, effective public education as a necessity for a successful future was brought to light, and opened the door to public criticism for years to come.

            The Reagan administration made recommendations to reverse the damage done to American public education.  The National Commission on Excellence in Education sorted these remedies into five categories: content, standards and expectations, time, teaching leadership and fiscal support.  A Nation at Risk was a catalyst for many successful changes in public education, such as a more intensive curriculum, specific graduation requirements and longer school days.  For many, the best way to monitor the progress of these changes was through standardized testing, and many states opted for this immediately.  Overall, A Nation at Risk had tremendous results, “set[ting] the trajectory of education reforms into the 1990’s, where 43 states implemented statewide assessments for K-5 by 1994, and by the year 2000 every state but Iowa administered a state mandated test” (Au 53).  The Reagan administration confirmed that as Americans, we needed to rely on standardized testing to track the successes and shortcomings of our public education systems.  When the problems in education have such great magnitude, the easiest solution seems to be to rely on speedy, efficient tests to point to areas of weakness.

            Reliance on standardized testing skyrocketed during President George W. Bush’s creation of the 'No Child Left Behind Act' in 2001.  Under this act, all public school students between 3rd and 8th grades are required to be tested in reading and math. Students’ performances determine whether or not individual schools receive funding.  If schools fail to perform optimally, they are forced to present improvement plans or potentially restructure the inner workings of the school itself.  To ensure fairness, schools report scores by demographic and various subgroups that include racial and economic statistics.  By 2014, 100% of students are projected to be proficient in math and reading. In 2001, these measures were widely perceived as acceptable, as author Lorraine McDonnell notes, “at the time of its enactment, NCLB, endorsed by huge majorities in both houses of Congress, represented a remarkable consensus between the two national political parties, and reflected President Bush’s campaign pledge to leave no child behind” (6).  This Act would offer a potential answer to the accumulated problems associated with public education, and it seemed as if people across the board wholeheartedly embraced the premises of 'No Child Left Behind'.

            Unfortunately, NCLB did not live up to its expectations, and has added to the problems within our public school systems.  No Child Left Behind created impossibly high standards for America’s schools and children. The Federal government has assumed too much control, as TIME magazine journalist Alex Tehrani asserts, “NCLB takes the Federal government--which spends 9 cents of every dollar on US Schools--where it’s never gone before: telling states how to measure school success, specifying interventions for failure, mandating qualifications for teachers and even telling the nation how to teach reading (1). The Act increased competition between schools, ultimately widening the gap between lower and upper/middle classes. School in impoverished areas have suffered greatly and often have had to alter their curricula to meet statistical benchmarks that may not correspond to good education.  Because disadvantaged families rely upon and often have no choice other than free public education, many children from these families are mired in school systems that must accept inequitable treatment.  Sadly, it seems as if NCLB created more problems than it solved.

            No Child Left Behind creates competition among public schools. Instead of focusing on improving children’s education nationwide, a successful public school may keep its methods to itself. The schools doing well will continue to do so, while struggling schools may be left in the dust. Au notes that NCLB “creates conditions where schools compete with each other in the “free market” of education. Failing schools will be shut down or reorganized under new management” (62). In fact, it is believed that many schools will be considered failures by 2014. What does this mean for the future of public schools? What will happen to the children who attended these failing schools? Mark Garrison claims, “by 2014, the vast majority of public schools will be deemed failures by NCLB. This failure will shift control of education to for-profit educational management organizations, tutoring agencies and test prep companies and other commercial endeavors” (109). The commerciality future for education puts disadvantaged children at risk. This is not a successful tactic. Ideally, schools should be helping each other get to a common goal: the proper and fair education of children.

            There is still great injustice within our school systems and the pressures of No Child Left Behind have only worsened the situation. No Child Left Behind has put a great deal of stress on not only schools but also students. Standardized testing under No Child Left Behind has put a greater strain on underprivileged schools, while better funded schools continue to carry on. Mark Garrison equates this to something known by educators as the zip code effect. Because of the way schools are composed, there can be great discrepancy in social status between schools. Garrison summaries this in relation to his teaching experiences in a Berkley high school, claiming, “the effect was a crude approximation for relative levels of academic achievement at Berkley High. Graduation rates, grade point average, discipline rates, dropout rates and standardized test scores could be relatively accurately predicted by. . .where in the city of Berkley a particular child lived” (1). It is unfortunate that a school’s surrounding area can so accurately predict its future. The reliance on standardized testing keeps schools only more homogenous, ultimately harming those who cannot afford other options. Garrison notes that, “while all students are feeling some effects [of NCLB], the weight of the high-stakes testing environment falls heaviest on the shoulders of low-income students and students of color who are consistently found to be negatively and disproportionately affected by high stakes, standardized testing” (3). A troubling reality is that No Child Left Behind is hurting the children the program originally designed to help.

            As Garrison points out, NCLB adversely effects both disadvantaged students as well as children of color. Low-income minority students cannot catch up to their white, middle class peers. NCLB is a skewed system, and Garrison concludes that, “high-stakes standardized testing connected to grade promotion increasing drop-out rates, produces no lasting educational benefits, and impacts Latino and African American children disproportionately in schools” (3). These underprivileged children are being cheated by the system. The government’s attempt to improve these children’s situation has only rendered them more immobile. If students continue to drop out, or no longer increase their knowledge, what will come of them? Without a decent education, these deprived minority children have no hopes of improving their social status.

            Impoverished children may also remain stuck in the cycle of poverty because many disadvantaged schools have made extreme adjustments in their curricula in order to devote more time to test preparation. Since NCLB only requires testing in reading and mathematics, other academic disciplines are treated as if they were electives. Many children do not receive what we may consider to be fundamental parts of education. While visiting a school in the Bronx, author Jonathan Kozol comes to an alarming discovery: “two of the children told me that the country we live in is ‘the Bronx.’ Two others said it was ‘New York.’ One of the children, when I handed her a dollar bill and asked her to study it awhile, ventured that it might be ‘the United States’ but voiced this with a question mark” (118). Kozol’s discovery is a heartbreaking reality for some children forced to attend schools in significantly deprived areas. Kozol often notes that because of the stressed importance of standardized testing, “traditional subjects such as history, geography and science are no longer taught” (118). While reading and mathematics have their importance, a child with no formal education in these disciplines will live an extremely limited life. It is virtually impossible for a student not knowing basic geography to break out of the cycle of poverty.

            Although a school may make progress in its students’ proficiency, No Child Left Behind is set up with so many requirements that schools are almost destined to fail. In order for schools to receive positive NCLB reviews, the school must complete a number of specific goals. While schools may improve in some areas, it is nearly impossible to satisfy each goal. Alex Tehrani criticizes No Child Left Behind, claiming, “there are too many ways to fail, even when a school is moving in the right direction” (2). There is no gray area with NCLB, so these schools would ultimately need to come up with improvement plans. An example of this is the Bud Carson Middle School in Hawthorne, CA. According to Tehrani, “in 2005, the school, which is 92% Latino and black, pulled out the stops to reverse its failing record and hit 20 out of 21 [NCLB] goals, lifting scores for blacks, Hispanics and special-ed students. Nonetheless, the school remained on the ‘needs improvement’ list because it narrowly missed the reading-score goal for its English-language learners” (2). It is difficult to meet every demand of No Child Left Behind; schools suffer despite their great improvements. If NCLB examine schools only based on whether or not these goals have been achieved, students will continue to be punished for their efforts.

            While NCLB has many shortcomings, it also has brought some positive changes to public education. Kathy Ciolino, Principal of Biglerville Elementary believes, “the No Child Left Behind law expects that all children will be proficient by 2014 and we know that that will be impossible. We use the [standardized test] results to analyze our curriculum and teaching practices and work to enhance any areas where we see most of the children below average”. While Ciolino recognizes the impracticality of NCLB, she has been able to take something positive out of its requirements. No Child Left Behind has given her the tools to be able to see how her school is working and what she can improve on. Although it is a disadvantaged school, it is doing fairly well for NCLB demands. Ciolino appreciates the testing scores, as it is “good to know that we are performing at a good level and that even though we are a small rural school, we are doing as well as most schools in the state”. While for now, the future looks bright for Biglerville Elementary, but Ciolino expresses uncertainty: “so far we have done well. The targets keep getting higher and higher”. Although schools may be able to currently stay afloat, the ominous 2014 expectation that students will have 100% proficiency remains.

            How can No Child Left Behind be altered become more efficient? One way is to eliminate different standardized tests in each state. If a national standardized test was required, there would be uniformity. Each school would be held to the same standards: “one nation, one test create strong incentives to move away from 50 different standards and 50 different tests. . . this would stop the states from watering down their standards--one of the most damaging side effects of NCLB” (Tehrani 3). By administering one test, schools would be looked at more fairly. If we continue to hold students to different standards nationwide, we lack cohesiveness. While some students will succeed, others will slip through the cracks due to some state’s low expectations. There needs to be uniformity in order for students to receive better public education overall.

            Providing one test for the entire county is only one solution. Other issues need to be addressed, such as the widening gap between disadvantaged and succeeding schools. Tehrani suggests a solution for this: “better teachers for bad schools improve federal funding formulas so that schools in poor neighborhoods have the resources to address their weaknesses and, most especially, could afford to hire experienced teachers” (3). Good teachers can have great effects on disadvantaged schools. Experienced, effective teachers pave the way to good education and a strong education is the foundation for a bright future. Educators agree that powerful teachers are they key to improving the current state of public education. Film maker Davis Guggenheim aggress, “the one thing those who work in the trenches know is that you can’t have a great school without great teachers” (Waiting for “Superman”). If we can create a uniform curriculum and assessment while providing disadvantaged schools with strong teachers, we can combat the longstanding problems associated with public education. Teachers can be a great resources, linking children to the knowledge vital to their success.

(download)

Click here to download:

Leigh Weitzmann.wmv (3.93 MB)

When Jonathan Kozol (2005), a teacher and writer known for his exposés on American public schools, asked a group of fourth grade students from Boston to describe their school, one wrote,

“In my school I see dirty boards and I see papers on the floor.  I see an old browken window with a sign on it saying, Do no unlock this window are browken.  And I see cracks in the walls and I see old books with ink poured all over them and I see old painting hanging on the walls.  I see old alfurbet letter hanging on one nail on the wall.  I see a dirty fire exit I see a old closet with supplys for the class.  I see pigeons flying all over the school.  I see old freght trains throgh the fence of the school yard.  I see pictures of contryies hanging on the wall and I see desks with wrighting all over the top of the desks and insited of the desk” (p. 162).

Heart-wrenching narratives such as this one are not hard to find; shameful conditions of public schools are now common across the county.  In 2001, in the Campaign for Fiscal Equity vs. the State of New York, the Supreme Court of New York stated that: “[…] the physical condition of New York City’s schools has a negative effect upon the academic performance of the City’s public school students.  However, the magnitude of that effect is unclear from the evidence at trial” (Duran-Narucki 2008: 278).  Also in 2001, 40% of American public schools reported unsatisfactory facilities (Lyons 2001).  Then, in the 2002 case of William vs. the State of California, it was argued that “the poor condition of school buildings contributes to ‘systematically under-educate poor and working class youth, and youth of color’” (Duran-Narucki 2008: 278).  When students are placed into dismal and unsanitary conditions, it is an indirect way of telling them that their wellbeing is of no concern.  It is through daily experiences with physical and social surroundings that individuals learn about their value to society (Duran-Narucki 2008).  In a report compiled by the American Association of School Administrators, it was stated that:

Students are more likely to prosper when their environment is conducive to learning.  Architecture can be designed to support greater safety and security.  Environmentally responsive heating, air conditioning and ventilating systems, for example, either in a new or renovated school, provide a more comfortable learning environment.  Such well-designed systems send a powerful message to kids about the importance their community places on education (Lyons 2001: 6)

The condition of school facilities is one of the most influential factors when evaluating academic achievement. 

            Much of the disparity between schools is because of the allocation of funding.  Local property taxes are responsible for 47.4% of all school expenditures, which means that school districts with low socioeconomic status populations will have fewer economic resources compared to those with higher socioeconomic status populations (Wenglinsky 1997).  School districts with wealthier populations are known to spend up to three times more per student than impoverished districts (Condron and Roscigno 2003).  Because of local funding discrepancies, the federal government will provide disadvantaged schools with additional financial aid in the form of Title 1 funds.  Additional government support can have adverse effects, though, and many school boards will disregard proposals submitted by destitute schools because they receive federal assistance.  When schools have insufficient funds, the children are subject to larger class sizes and an inability for administrators to provide adequate surroundings.  School boards faced with these circumstances often succumb to spending what little funds they do have on trivial programs (Wenglinsky 1997).  When wealthy parents are unhappy with public schools, they have the option to send their students to private school; many other families do not have this alternative (Borland and Howsen 2003).  Many parents of students who attend schools in desolate conditions spend so much time working that they do not even have the opportunity to assess the school environment, let alone do anything about it (Lyons 2001).

            In 1930 there were 262,000 public schools; today, despite an increase in student population of twenty-two million, there are only 91,000 (Lyons 2001).  Research has shown a lack of consensus regarding an ideal school size.  Borland and Howsen (2003) found that when school size increases, budgets and resources do too.  This can result in a diverse curriculum, qualified teachers, and better facilities.  These gains are often counteracted when students begin to feel less of a connection to their surroundings and this, Borland and Howsen (2003) say, outweighs the benefits and can lead to a drop in test scores. Through their research, Borland and Howsen (2003) found the ideal school size to be 760 students.  Branham (2004), on the other hand, found that smaller schools are positively related to student achievement.  Problems that can arise from an over enrolled school are best described by Kozol.  Looking back at his time teaching in a Boston public school, Kozol (2005) said his class had to share “an undivided auditorium with 35 other children in another fourth grade class, and with a choral group, and with a group rehearsing for a play that somehow was never produced, and with a class of fifth grade girls” (p. 3).  Not even the best of students can be successful in an environment like the one Kozol describes.

            On the average school day, 20% of Americans spend their time in a school building (Schneider 2002).  Within this large portion of the population, many people are experiencing squalor levels of heating, air, noise, and light.  This can range from the presence or absence of air conditioning units and windows, to how recently walls were painted, and how noisy surrounding areas are (Earthman 1995).  More than half of American schools have insufficient indoor air quality (IAQ) (Lyons 2001).  Kozol (2005) found that some classrooms “‘do not have air-conditioning,’ so that students ‘become red-faced and unable to concentrate’ during the ‘extreme heat of summer’” (p. 177).  Control over temperature and ventilation of classrooms is important to ensure an environment conducive to focus and learning.  Many schools fail in this area because of HVAC systems that are of poor design, outdated, or unmaintained (Lyons 2001).  Schneider (2002) also found that classrooms without adequate ventilation prevent students from functioning and learning at full capacity.  Schools subject to poor HVAC systems are disproportionately comprised of students living in poverty.  Schneider (2002) found that,

“schools where less than forty percent of their students were eligible for free lunch, approximately sixteen percent reported unsatisfactory IAQ, but of schools where more than forty percent of students were eligible for free or reduced cost lunch, almost twenty-three percent reported having unsatisfactory IAQ” (p. 6).

Rob Summers, working at a Baltimore City high school with 65-70% of the students eligible for free and reduced lunch, has had troubles with his students being comfortable in the classroom.  Despite his own personal satisfaction with the temperature of his classroom, his students always find it to be “hot as shit” or “cold as shit.”  Like Kozol, Summers sees that the heat can have adverse effects on his students.  Describing his own observations, Summers said, “the air conditioning sucks once the temperatures get into the 90s.  Kids do lose focus, but it’s hard to say if it’s this or that it’s usually June when this happens.” 

In addition to poor air circulation having a negative impact on student achievement, noise levels also prevent students from hearing instruction and concentrating.  Most classrooms are built with hard walls and flooring, which can generate poor acoustics.  Proper acoustics are essential if students are going to be successful academically, yet those in many classrooms make achievement nearly impossible (Schneider 2002).  Excess noise can come from outside, mechanical sounds from between rooms or corridors, and sounds from within the classroom itself—including the ventilation system (Lyons 2001).  Summers also mentioned that the noise from heaters and air conditioning can cause problems in the classroom.  Students drop worksheets and pens into the vents, which causes them to rattle.  Summers considers himself lucky compared to some other teachers, though.  He said, “I’m kind of handy, though.  I can open them up and take the stuff out so this isn’t too much of an issue for me.  I know other teachers who give up on the units when they make too much noise, and this can make their classrooms miserable (either in noise or in temperature).”  Teachers should not have to choose between having their students be able to hear them and having a classroom that is a comfortable temperature. 

The visual environment of the classroom is just as important as what cannot be seen.  It has an impact on the mental attitude, class attendance, and performance of students (Lyons 2001).  Simply improving the lighting in a classroom can improve test scores and keep students on-task.  Summers has had quite a few problems regarding the lighting of his classroom at Heritage High School.  He always seems to make the best out of the situation, though—even if that means not having lights in his room.  He explained his lighting situation as, “I have some fluorescent lights that used to blink kind of annoyingly, but now they’re completely out and this suits me fine.  The windows are cool.  I wish I had blinds.  I use cardboard boxes and wedge them in or use chart paper when I need it to be dark in my room.”  Unfortunately, not all teachers are as accommodating and resourceful as Summers.  Other parts of classroom aesthetics, such as paint, have a large effect on student learning.  While a newly painted classroom can have a certain visual appeal, one that has not been repainted in decades can have hazardous impacts on student health.  During his research, Kozol (2005) found that teachers had sent home a letter recommending parents have their children tested for lead poisoning.  The letter was titled: “WARNING to the 75^th Street School Parents” (Kozol 2005: 172).  In another instance of disregard for student health, Kozol recalled the account of a fourth grade student named Daniel.  Daniel described an experience of his as, “I saw a rat in room 28.  The room smelled very bad and it made me sick to my stomach.  There was blood all over the place” (Kozol 2005: 177).  Teachers everywhere are acknowledging these problems, but administrators have yet to catch up.  In Chicago, 26% of public school teachers have reported that school facilities cause health problems among themselves and their students; in Washington D.C., 30% of public school teachers reported the same problem (Schneider 2002).

            Behaviors and practices are often shaped by the physical environment in which they take place; school features play a pertinent role in this development (Duran-Narucki 2008).  The way people involved with specific schools interact with one another is directly related to the physical state that school is in.  Especially for students who come from disadvantaged home lives, school should provide them with a sense of ease and comfort.  In situations where facilities exhibit a lack of respect for those working and learning there, the reverse can happen and students will begin to act out (Uline and Tschannen-Moran 2007).  In addition to students spending the majority of their day in decrepit school buildings, teachers and administrators must do the same.  When leaders of the school and the classroom become discouraged by the conditions they face it can create an even more inhospitable atmosphere for children.  Students placed into classrooms and school buildings that are falling apart are likely to take that as a message that education is not important and no one will care if they do not do well; they are more likely to stay home and place school work on the bottom of their list of priorities (Branham 2004). 

Attendance and dropout rates are greatly affected by school infrastructure; schools in need of repair and the use of temporary buildings both deter students from coming to school (Branham 2004).  Summers has noticed many problems with attendance and dropouts in his school.  Last year, fifty students, out of a total school enrollment of 820, at Heritage High School dropped out—and this is even a low number; the dropout rates in Baltimore have been on the decline for the past three years.  Summers is lucky in that his class sizes are relatively small with an average of eighteen students, but only twelve to fifteen will be in school on any given day.  Branham (2004) also found that custodians per square foot, an indirect assessment of school condition, was a strong measure of school attendance. 

Uline and Tschannen-Moran (2007) verified the role custodians have in student achievement.  They found that schools that were swept and mopped frequently and where graffiti was removed from walls fostered an atmosphere that led to almost immediate gains in test scores.  Graffiti is ever present at Heritage High School.  When asked about the presence of graffiti in his school, Summers wrote, “…most of our facilities were repainted this year, so some of our current students are definitely responsible.  Most graffiti is gang related or wanna-be-gang related stuff.  Even my desks, which were painted by a friend and me in August, have some of this.”  The fact that there is so much graffiti in his already rundown school is consistent with the findings of other researchers, that students who attend schools in disrepair are more likely to have less respect for the value of their education and for their surroundings.  Summers has also found that it is not always easy to get the custodians to perform, which exacerbates the students’ feelings of worthlessness.  Referencing struggles with the ventilation system, Summers said, “maintenance will take their time coming around—the only way to get action sometimes is to bug your favorite principal until he/she makes the request for you.”  When there is a problem, especially one that can have such a negative effect on the students, it is vital that maintenance workers fix the problem as quickly as possible.  With all of the other responsibilities and worries that teachers have, they should not have to constantly bother the principal in order to get something fixed.  Uline and Tschannen-Moran’s research also concluded that lockers and classroom furniture that was of high quality and in good condition increased scores.

Many researchers believe that increased spending is the solution to unacceptable school building conditions, but, as discussed earlier, most of the schools under these circumstances are this way because of lack of funding.  Spending can eliminate the leaky roofs, crumbling walls, and unsanitary conditions that inhibit learning (Condron and Roscigno 2003).  Most schools were built in the 1960s, and administrators are now facing problems never imagined when the structures were originally designed and constructed (Lyons 2001).  Some researchers continue to believe that it is not the age of a building that matters, though, but the budget.  Uline and Tschannen-Moran (2007) found that older schools can appear to be very high quality in comparison to new ones if they can sustain a high standard of maintenance.  Schools that are well taken care of also attract better teachers, particularly those with at least a master’s degree.  Condron and Roscigno (2003) found that “not only are such schools likely to be in better physical condition, but they are in ‘better’ neighborhoods—a potential magnet for teachers with seniority, credentials, and thus the potential for mobility within the district” (p. 30). 

When broken property, such as a window, is not repaired, it sends the message that no one cares and more things will continue to be broken; this results in disorder and isolation among those in the damaged environment (Branham 2004).  In other situations, students are not even provided with a window to be broken.  As Kozol (2005) discovered, “some classes also took place in converted storage closets— ‘windowless and nasty,’ said one of the counselors—or in converted shop rooms without blackboards (p. 176).   Summers has experienced first-hand the struggles of working in a room that was never meant to be a classroom.  Because he was the first teacher to conduct lessons in his current room, Summers did not have any boards or a projector screen in the beginning of the year.  He was able to hang the projector screen himself, but the boards caused more of an issue.  Explaining the situation, Summers said, “it took a while to get my boards up in here…I got them myself from an unused part if the school building, and then bugged my principal until she got maintenance to hang them for me.”  Boards, something most people think of as being essential to the high school learning process, were not something Heritage High School administrators felt they needed to make a top priority. 

There were other cases where it did not matter if students had a classroom or not because they had no supplies.  In 2002, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the state of California on behalf of students and teachers in the California public school system.  Some of the court papers revealed that there were, “chemistry labs with no chemicals at all,” “literature classes without books,” “computer classes where, according to one student, ‘we sit there and talk about what we would be doing if we had computers,’” “classes in which students were forced to stand or to sit on bookshelves, cabinets or window sills,” because there were more kids than chairs” (Kozol 2005: 171).  Summers has experienced many of Kozol’s trials, though his students are slightly more fortunate.  While the social studies department in Summers’ school has a laptop cart with a wireless router, only about twelve out of twenty-four computers work.  Despite yearlong efforts to get more operational, Summers has had little success.  He illustrated his troubles by saying, “I fight with them a lot, and have managed to fix a few, but in spite of requests IT hasn’t worked on them all year to the best of my knowledge.  So, the laptop situation is good and bad.”  Summers’ students are also at a disadvantage regarding their textbooks.  He was excited about the fact that he got a few new books for his electives this past year, but his government texts are from 1999.  As Summers put it, this “is less than desirable.  A lot of history has happened since then, and current events really help making the material relevant.”  Outdated government texts pose a particular concern because of the High School Assessment (HAS) in government.  Though it is being eliminated after this year, the HSA is a Maryland state test that all students must pass.  It is outrageous to expect students to do well on a statewide test about the government if their textbooks are twelve years old.  To try and compensate, Summers has had to make a lot of photocopies and has even created some of his own materials.  At times, though, he has actually found it necessary to make his own handouts in order to accommodate his students’ very low reading levels.  Even his best students read on only an eighth grade level—with most closer to a sixth grade level or lower—“you have to figure out how to make readings that are on a high school level in content (law or government) make sense to someone who is reading on a middle school level at best.”  Summers summed up his thoughts about resources by saying, “so we have great needs for materials, but we can only order so much, and it’s really only once a year.  That situation is rough.”  Unless provided with the proper tools and environment conducive to learning, children battle forces beyond their control.  These factors are, tragically, added to the challenges they face outside of the classroom.

            It is clear that there is a problem with many of the schools in America.  Particularly as a result of the socioeconomic status of the students, many schools are in disrepair and lacking in necessary materials.  If schools were able to renovate the buildings and provide students and teachers with even the most basic supplies, it would send a message to everyone in the community that the students who attend that school matter—that their success is essential to the overall success of society.  It is unacceptable that the students who have the most worries in their home lives are also faced with the most deplorable circumstances in school.  When trying to evaluate the factors of academic success, though, Summers feels that the conditions of schools are almost irrelevant compared to the backgrounds many of his students face.  He describes the plight he witnesses daily by saying,

“Overall, materials can definitely be a concern for my students, but I think these issues are far outweighed by the home life and background of my students. Dysfunctional families, poverty, lack of a belief in the value of education, sense of hopelessness, crime, gangs, drugs, hunger, bad living conditions, teen pregnancy... all of these issues are huge challenges for students and teachers to overcome. We make the best of what we have, because the other struggles are so huge.”

Clearly the challenge of educating students amidst all of these influences is enormous.  Of the factors that can be addressed most directly and immediately, improving school environments for teachers and students seems well worth the effort.

(download)

Click here to download:

Mason Powell.wmv (4.77 MB)

In my last video blog I spoke about a unique experience that I had with one child while tutoring at Biglerville Elementary School.  While quizzing him on his multiplication tables he became embarrassed when he was not getting the answers right.  He said, “It is just really hard, I have so many things in my head, but when I ask my mom at home she tells me she doesn’t know and that she is watching TV.”  Although this brief remark was the extent of our conversation, the child’s statement left me with a number of unanswered questions.  I wondered what is it that keeps a parent from helping their child.  And more importantly, what kind of effects this parental of educational assistance in the home could have on a child’s development. Knowing that Biglerville has a large rate of poverty, I wanted to explore the effects of poverty on children’s education, but other possibilities as well.  According to Kevin Lang, in his book, Poverty and Discrimination, there are an array of factors that could impede a child’s education at home. I decided to explore these issues so that I could maybe understand just what that child was experiencing.  In my interview with Mrs. Ciolino, the principle of Biglerville Elementary, she told me,

Parents want the best for their children.  But many just don’t understand all the pieces that have to be put in place, and all the practice that needs to be done.  We want to think everything is instant but it isn’t.  You can do some practice at school but obviously the children who have people helping them at home but also cheering them on are going to feel like they can do it.  

This statement brought up some interesting points that I confirmed in my research, like that practice outside of the classroom is just as important as the work in the classroom, factors such as the atmosphere at home and the importance of expectations for the students all can either impede or help a child succeed in school. 

I will begin by recognizing the importance of home life for the intellectual and physiological growth of a student.  Mrs. Ciolino told me about a project they had in the school: “On Thanksgiving we said here’s a picture of a turkey, take it home and decorate it with your family.  The ones who did it with their family were decorated and elaborate.  The other ones were not.” This turkey, though a simple exercise intended to be fun, shows the importance of home life.  Dorothy Rich states that many teachers feel that home life in many ways is more important to the child’s success than the actual schooling.  She writes,

In 1981, teachers were asked: recognizing that both home life and schools are important, which of the two do you think is more important in determining whether or not a child achieves academically?  Teachers ranked home life at 87.9 percent, school at 12.4 percent.  It can be seen as a recognition of the significance of the home as an educational environment. (24)   

The overwhelmingly large proportion of teachers who voted for home life reveals something important about home life.  When Rich discusses an “educational environment,” she is talking specifically about the type of resources the child has at home with regards to his parents.  When the student told me that his mother couldn’t help him with his homework, I first wondered if this was because she was incapable of helping him.  “Homework” or work that is done outside of the classroom, is vital to a child’s education.  Because a student spends a limited amount of time learning material in class, it is crucial that the child spends time at home to go over that material and have someone capable of helping them if problems arise.  For children of migrant workers, many problems arise in this area.  “Many migrant workers have low levels of education themselves.  They would not be able to assist their children with homework, even if the time were available to them”.(17)  He proclaims that many parents in poverty are not intellectually capable of helping their children succeed as they themselves have not been educated.  Mrs. Ciolino confirmed this problem in her school when talking about a particular child.  She alleged, “One girl has a very low IQ and the father told me that he was having trouble with her reading.  She was in the third grade.  That is a cycle that is hard to break, sending home a book won’t help her.  ”  Because this child is only in third grade, it is hard to imagine how the rest of her academic career will go without competent help at home.   “Families across the nation need similar kinds of information to help their children learn.  Materials should be available to them in easy to read, easy to use leaflets(Rich 27)” This solution could help address the problem if the parent is currently interested in helping their child but is intellectually incapable. 

Another problem that can occur in home life is that, due to work, and a low economic state, parents are often not able to help their children at all.  Mrs. Ciolino commented on this problem when she told me, “Some people in poverty manage to help their children with their work, others have lives that are too complex.  If they are working two jobs trying to find ways to support their families they cannot help with schoolwork.”   Also, she addressed the problem that many of these families consist of a single parent, usually a mother, which makes the whole situation even more complex.  She told me “Raising a child by yourself is a difficult thing for anybody.  Single parents will often say you take care of the academics at the school because I have other things to do.”  Barbara Schneider expresses the importance of the mother’s availability to the child.  She writes, “Labor force participation of the mother is likely to impact the resources available to the family and to the children…employment will bring income but may cut into the time a mother may otherwise spend on family related activities”(79).  Similarly, Rich stresses the importance of the mothers attention in her child’s academic life: “The needs of working mother’s and single parents for such child care can no longer be ignored.  They impact upon the amount of time parents spend with their children and the level of parental support for their children’s schooling”(27). Also, many parents who work long strenuous hours in manual labor, such as migrant workers, may not have the energy to help their children.  These problems that arise so often in parenting from work have strong adverse affects on the development of children.  Anyone of these factors may have prohibited the child’s parent from helping him.

Although one would like to believe that it is something out of the parent’s control that is prohibiting them from helping their child, such as demanding work or low intellect or education, parental disinterest and noninvolvement are other important problems that impedes child development.  Mrs. Ciolono told me of one child who lives in such circumstances.  She said, “There is a young girl whose dad cares a lot about the child, but doesn’t spend the time with her.  He has her siblings talk to her about school because he is always with his girlfriends.”  Although it is nice that the child has siblings that care enough to talk to her it must be hard on her, to not get the attention from her father.   Schneider addresses this problem when she writes, “In part, the impact of parents’ education and income on a child’s academic performance can be explained by differences in the involvement of parents”(9).  She says that the involvement of parents in their children’s lives is important.   She goes on to say that the help with homework is only part of it, as parents need to be involved in their school life in other ways as well.  Schneider writes, “Talking about current experiences in school is strongly associated with higher test scores”(85).  This shows that something as simple as general interest in the child’s success can help improve their education.  Mrs. Ciolino said that a parent that cheers their child on will cause the child to feel “like he can do it.”  This encouragement is very important to a child’s growth as a student.  The child must have somebody that makes him feel that what he is doing is worthwhile.  If he is shown no interest or encouragement by his parents, this could deter him from trying.  Robert Evans amplifies this idea when he talks about the importance of “nurture” by parents as a means to build self-esteem.  “It will make them better participants in the communities to which they belong, first at school and later in the larger world”(22).   Paul Amato introduces the idea that, due to poverty and stress, many parents fail to give their kids the “nurture” they need with their schoolwork.  He writes, “The stress of trying to make ends meet under conditions of economic hardship tends to deplete parents’ coping skills, leaving them irritable and more coercive in their dealing with children”(51).

Along with an environment where the parents show interest in the child’s education, discipline in the home life is also seen as important for the progress of a child’s education.  Mrs. Ciolino spoke of one student in my class who lived in this type of environment that lacked discipline.  She said, “He has a very high IQ, but he also has a very dysfunctional family, there is no organization and it can be seen in his behavior at school.”  Academic discipline by a parent is important because it is hard for a child to discipline himself at such a young age.  Even if the child has the intellectual ability to succeed, he cannot without some form of discipline.   Schneider reinforces the importance when she writes, 

A parent might set forth a rule restricting the amount of television the child is allowed to watch ….The parent might also think that this will encourage the child to do more homework and thus achieve higher grades in school.  Some research suggested that “family regulation” is related to academic outcomes and especially the deterrence of negative ones. (21)

Similarly, a lack of discipline can be detrimental to a child’s growth.   If a has no academic rules at home or fails to enforce them, then this could keep the child from accomplishing his work.  Leonard Berkowitz comments on this relationship between lack of discipline and success in school: “Parental indulgence or carelessness can apparently produce weak achievement in boys”(40).

            Along with parental interest and discipline in the household, direct parental interaction with the school has also been proven vital for a child’s success.   Schneider discusses the importance of parent and teacher interaction in stating “Parental participation in PTO (Parent Teacher Organization) is positively related with test scores”(89).  This improvement in test scores by simple involvement in the school comes from a variety of factors.  Schneider suggests that one factor is information made available to the parent through interaction with the teachers. “Becker and Epstein found that parents who are involved in parent-teacher organizations have access through the meetings to information about how to help the child with schoolwork at home and information about what is taught in the classroom”(94).  Mrs. Ciolono talked about the importance of parent teacher conferences in her school.   She said, “We have parent teacher conferences twice a year and we are persistent until we get one hundred percent.  Its interesting, five to ten families don’t want to talk to us about their kid…That can be difficult for the child when the parent doesn’t want to be engaged with the school.” She brings up the notion that parent teacher interaction shows the child that the parent is interested in his progress, which in turn can motivate the student.   Another study about the outcomes of parent teacher interaction suggested similar results: “Preliminary results of Joyce Epstein’s Maryland study indicate that students whose teachers were leaders in parent involvement made greater gains in reading achievement than did other students”(10).  Perhaps by being involved with the school, parents become more interested in their children’s education.  Mrs. Ciolino said at Biglerville, “Teachers do a lot to try and keep parents involved right from the kindergarten.”  She sees the importance of involvement of teachers in the school and attempts to create that relationship as early as she can.  She also spoke about the importance of newsletters as a way to get parents involved in the school and keep them updated. Lynne Strieb talked about how the newsletters helped her interact with the parents when she was a teacher.  “Most of all, the newsletter were my invitation to parents to enter into the school lives of their children, both in school and at home”(31).

            Parents who show interest, are involved with their child’s education, and interact with the school are fostering a valuable academic environment at home,   but probably the most important tool that parents can use to help their child succeed is expectations. “Subsequent research, however, demonstrated that it is the parents’ emphasis on achievement and not independent achievement alone that seems to be related to strong achievement motivation in their young sons”(40).  Berkowitz also shows that by setting up expectations they will be able to reward their children: “Parents who have appropriate expectations for their children will not only have natural reasons to praise their children, they will give their children the chance to earn a sense of accomplishment”(40).  Unfortunately expectations from parents often comes with a socioeconomic divide.  Parents of low socioeconomic status do not always have high expectations for their children.  Many people that come from poverty are pessimistic about the educational system.  Mrs. Ciolino spoke about this, saying, “ Some people in poverty feel like its fate and if you feel that way then you’re not going to want to get out.  According to Amato this feeling of expected failure in education translates to their expectations for their children.  He writes,

Parents who experience poverty or economic decline are more pessimistic about the future  (both for themselves and their children) than other parents…adolescent children growing up in poor homes think their chances of going to a four-year college are lower than do other adolescents. (153) 

Schneider says that if people can recognize that education is a means of social mobility, then expectations may be created for their children: “Parents who view education as a means of upward social mobility may have educational expectations for their child that are higher than their own attainment”(15).  On the other hand, parents of high education and socioeconomic status often have different expectations for their children, as “Highly educated parents have high expectations and help their children achieve these expectations through a system of rewards and punishment…helping young people with their homework,  becoming involved with children’s schools and encouraging them to attend college”(151).  These tools that highly educated parents use can also be used by non-educated parents.   The problem is helping people in poverty understand that education is not a lost cause.  By doing this parents might set higher expectations for their children and possibly help them reach them. 

“Mrs. Ciolino said “All parents want the best for their children.”  This might be so, but the desire to help a child is not the same as the action.  Schneider reinforces this idea in stating, “Thus, it appears that while many parents begin with the desire to help their child’s education in some way, the translation of this desire into action is much more difficult for lower-class parents”(120).  Poverty seems to play into all factors of why children cannot get the proper help they deserve at home.  Rich believes the answer to the problem is to make legislation that inform the parents to get involved with their children in school, “federal and state legislation programs should be amended as necessary to provide for family education programs at the local school level.  These programs should emphasize the supportive educational role of the family”(27).  This seems like a good idea but it would also be very difficult to enforce. Lang covers one way of enforcing it, though “the typical program includes home visits by a professional or paraprofessional who provides counseling, conducts developmental (and sometimes physical) screenings, and may also provide links to a broader range of services”(175).  However, the real dilemma that rises from these types of programs, is how does one take time away from a parent in poverty that needs those hours in order to work and bring home income to support the family? 

Mrs. Ciolino believes you can try your hardest to improve the home life for a child but ultimately it is the schools responsibility for the academic success of the child.  She states this clearly, “45 percent of the kids are eligible for free and reduced lunch.  No one knows who these kids are.  But if we just said, ‘well their parents can’t help them so they’re just not going to do well.’... would we really want half of the kids in the school not to make it?  So we have to find ways to give them those tools so that they can believe they can make it.”  Knowing that teaching professionals like Mrs. Ciolino understand the importance of home life and are trying to to provide parent support that can make a strong difference in a child’s life made me feel comforted about the interaction I had with that student.  She told me of some ways that they accomplish this with extra help at school.   She talked about one government program that had been helpful at Biglerville called Title 1.  “It provides a literacy coach for children with the lowest reading skills.  It teaches them skills that they should already know.  But the only way they are going to learn it is to get more help than the kids in the class room.”  Another way is through an instructional support teacher that helps with children’s specific needs after school, which “takes individual children and small groups that need help.” Also, I didn’t realize the role of my tutoring at the time but she revealed that the tutoring sessions in which I was participating were used to reinforce material that they weren’t getting at home.  She also said that we student tutors are important as role models since many of the children don’t have them at home.  “The thing I feel when the college students come here is that most of you have caring parents and dedicated teachers.  We can’t give up on these kids, and we need to find ways to make it possible for them to be successful.”  She asserts that if parents are not going to set expectations or goals for academic success or even the possibility of college, the school will and we student tutors can play a role in this worthy cause.      

(download)

Click here to download:

MacDougall_VideoBlog.wmv (13.94 MB)

The migrant worker population makes up one of the most exploited and ignored, yet highly in-need social groups in America today. Before the release of Harvest of Shame, there was little public knowledge of the extreme poverty, highly mobile lifestyle and perilous working conditions experience by the migrant worker population. There have been numerous attempts, some menial and some more substantial, at trying to alleviate the problems and barriers faced by migrant workers and their families. Yet regardless, the levels of poverty and exploitation that migrant workers face has improved only minimally at most. On top of this, the population is only increasing, only expanding the population of the impoverished in the country. According to the Geneseo Migrant Center, 1 million to 3 million migrant workers leave their homes each year to work in agricultural fields, providing the labor that is so vital to the upkeep of our economy and society. They come here in hopes of a better life, a second start in the land of equal opportunity, yet they find themselves in a precarious position of social immobility, confined by the lack of opportunity instilled in the migrantlifestyle. But why has this stratification occurred? And more importantly, what factors and forces contribute to the upkeep and perpetuation of the history of poverty and inequality in the migrant worker population in the United States?Many theories and concepts have been developed that attempt to explain the causal forces that create and reinforce the high degrees of social stratification we see in America today, all of which can help explain the situation of migrant poverty. But, most significant force, mainly because it is the most easily socially controllable force and we likely have the means to that control through the education system, is generational poverty.

            Generational poverty is the passing down of traits, knowledge, wealth, customs and other social assets indicative of one’s culture, social class, and social-identification from one generation to the next. These social assets come in the form of social capital. The concept of social capital can be seen in the work of Bordeiu. Social capital is cultural knowledge and knowledge of social systems and their norms, expectations, and codes that enable an individual to operate within a society’s social structures. Bourdieu found that there were three main categorical types of social capital- embodied, objectified, and institutional. Embodied social capital is knowledge, physical and mental traits, and characteristics that are necessary or advantageous to posses while operating within the established social system. An example of this would be the language barrier that Migrants have to deal with, as they often do not speak English. They lack the ability to speak the dominant language in American society, hindering them from being fully operational. Objectified capital is social capital in the form of objects that either literally or symbolically hold social value. Money is a form of objectified capital. The migrant population receives extremely low-wages, often below minimum wage. Institutional social capital comes with social recognition on the institutional level. By being recognized on the institutional level means to be represented, taken care of, and positioned in a more privileged social sphere.

            Migrants are in a unique situation and position in American society as compared to the rest of the population and other generally less fortunate social groups. Migrants go through their own struggles and experience their own problems when trying to operate in American society.

            Generational poverty is the passing down of this social capital from generation to generation when that social capital is based on a culture and surrounding of poverty. Migrant parents and the surrounding community and social networks lack the social capital necessary to operate in American society, and therefore the children of migrant workers do not acquire the necessary social capital. Bourdieu explains,

         Capital, which, in its objectified or embodied forms, takes time to accumulate           and which, as a potential capacity to produce profits and to reproduce itself in         identical or expanded form, contains a tendency to persist in its being, is a   force inscribed in the objectivity of things so that everything is not equally         possible or impossible. And the structure of the distribution of the different         types and subtypes of capital at a given moment in time represents the        immanent structure of the social world, i.e.,       the set of constraints, inscribed in          the very reality of that world, which govern its functioning in a durable way,            determining the chances of success for practices          (Bourdieu 1986: 241).

Much of the levels and characteristics of the social capital that are evident in the migrant population in America are subordinate to the dominant social system, hinder their ability to operate in society, and thus causing the levels of poverty seen in the migrant population. The passing down of this subordinate and ultimately harmfully useless (only in the context of the immediate surrounding society) from generation to the next creates the historical continuance of the existence of this inequality.  As Marger points out, “Inequlaity in income and wealth in the United States is higher and intergenerational mobility lower than in any other economically advanced societies (Marger 2011: 233-234). This pattern of inheritance creates a self-perpetuating cycle of poverty through the lack of intergenerational mobility. Because the engine of generational poverty is the inheritance of social capital, children are the most innocently susceptible to the cycle. They are susceptible to the limited social capital and social networking available. And the adverse physical and emotional effects of a migrant lifestyle hinder their ability to succeed. However, assuming this perspective, many educators, theorists, and social programs have argued that early education can break this cycle by teaching the necessary skills, behaviors and knowledge to be better prepared to succeed.

            The education system has the ability to provide the means through which the cycle of generational poverty can be broken through intervening in Migrant Children’s development of social capital.As Ornstien describes it, schools can act “as the social vehicles for upward mobility” (Ornstien 2007: 118).  They can instill equal knowledge of and provide equal access to all three forms of social capital. However, the state of migrant education today and in the past in America has not reflected the validity of this philosophy.According to Gouwens, “of all groups of children in the country, those of migrant farmworkers are the most undereducated and the least likely to complete high school and go on to postsecondary education” (Gouwens 2001: 2). In a study of the effects of migrant lifestyle on quality of education, McKenzie estimated that living in a migrant household lowers the probability of completing high school by 13 percent for males and 14 percent for females. Furthermore, he concluded that living in a migrant household lowers the probability of having 9 years of completed education by 22.5 percent (McKenzie2006).

            The original philosophy though, was that regardless of background or social class, education has the ability to place every student on a common starting line.In this sense, this ideal view of education is opportunity based, not results. Education can provide equality of opportunity, acting to ensure “that children born into any class would have the opportunity to achieve status as persons born into other classes” (Ornstein 2007: 118). However, it can be argued that the results found here are simply a strong implication of the numerous difficulties pertaining to migrant lifestyle and positioning within society that reduce the opportunities of educational success for migrant students.

            Ideally, the education system in America would have relatively equal rates of academic success and failure among different social groups. Unfortunately, that is not the case. With such a diverse, and regionally and nationally changing population compositions in the U.S., it is difficult to meet all the diverse and specific needs of every social group. Because the migrant population in America is one of the most cast-aside, exploited and in-need social groups in America, migrant children experience and deal with some of the most difficult and conditionally specific barriers to achieving success in the education system. To better understand the issues that migrants face with the education system, the many difficulties that they face will be discussed structurally in the categories of the three types of social capital- embodied, objectified, and institutional. Although, many of the issues can fall into more than one of these categories.

            Migrant families and children lack much of the embodied social capital that is necessary to work within the education system. The most pertinent of them all is language. Many immigrant children do not speak fluent English as their parents most likely came from a foreign country and they grew up speaking Spanish. Although many programs such as ESL have been put into place to aid in this aspect of integration, the inability to speak English greatly limits students’ opportunities in school in America. Furthermore, there have been studies by Schwieter (2011)that show that while ESL programs do teach minimal English, that level of English developed by students on average is not nearly enough to provide the communication skills to succeed. Many students in ESL develop was Schweiter called, survival English, indicating that students only learn the minimum to get by at that moment, and that much of that language is learned from the street and other informal settings. As such, “students survive in the educational institution without the language abilities that allow them to be able to engage themselves in their own learning” (Schwieter2011: 44).

            Another form of embodied social capital that is disadvantageous to migrant students is the lack of parent involvement. There lies a fundamental cultural difference in education between the United States and Mexico. Many migrant parents believe, in common thought with the Mexican education system, that it is the schools responsibility to educate their children, and that their involvement in their child’s education would only impede on the processes of the school workers. To many parents, parent involvement was an unknown concept (Simich-Dudgeon, 1986). The issue that is created from this cultural difference is that migrant students lack the support group of the family that is, an emobodied social capital that is built into the processes of the education system.

            Furthermore, Márquez-López (2005) argued that many teachers are not prepared to deal with linguistically and culturally diverse student populations. In fact, approximately 70% of the teachers surveyed in Márquez-López’s study admitted that they felt “moderately or not at all prepared to address the needs of students from diverse backgrounds including students with limited English proficiency” (227). The children then embody these lower expectations, and do not behave and act and develop to the same level of other students.

            The lack of objectified capital in the migrant population is not nearly as substantial, but is just as significant as the lack of embodied capital. The most obvious objectified capital that migrants lack is money. The lack of money reduces the opportunities for extra help in school if needed, and lack of ability to attend a good public school as much of school funding is provided by property taxes. The other objectified capital consists of a lack of growing up in physical surroundings consisting of material wealth that fosters high intelligence.

            The most substantial and most significant cultural capital, the one that allows for the most control to alter or change, is institutional capital. Because the education system is an institution and itself, and migrant work can be considered an institution in America as well, the most substantially lacking form of social capital for migrant workers is institutional. Firstly, the very institution of migrant labor has substantial effects on migrant education in that they are constantly moving, and always working. Constantly moving makes school attendance a big issue for migrant children. Many miss weeks at a time due to season job opportunities. It is difficult for the students to keep up to date with work when they miss large chunks of time from school. Furthermore, school attendance can be a problem also because migrant children often have to stay home to take care of siblings, or stay home to provide extra labor. The extra labor can then become a problem in that students come to school unprepared, and physically and mentally exhausted. Furthermore, because migrant workers move, as parents, they have time to integrate into the school’s social system and social network and therefore cannot participate in and understand the processes of their child’s education where their involvement is crucial. The very institution of the educational system is not adept to support and adhere to the mobility and time-involvement of children of migrant workers.

            Another institutional problem that Migrant students face is that teachers are not as well prepared to teach them as other students. Márquez-López (2005) argued that many teachers are not prepared to deal with linguistically and culturally diverse student populations. In fact, approximately 70% of the teachers surveyed in Márquez-López’s study admitted that they felt “moderately or not at all prepared to address the needs of students from diverse backgrounds including students with limited English proficiency” (227). When the teachers are not prepared and unable to teach migrant students, the migrants are put in an institutional disadvantage.

            Because the forces that lead to the issues faced by migrant children are in so many ways fundamentally institutional, that means that we as a society have the most control over them. Because institutions are a social construction, we have the power to create, shape, alter and destroy them, mainly (and most democratically) through the means of policy legislation and social programs. While it’s effectiveness is up to debate, the education system does provide the means through which migrant students can develop and gain the social capital necessary to operate in society, There are many policies and legislations and that have been put in place and programs that have been created that attempt to expand and improve the education system’s ability to provide the necessary help and aid in addressing the specific needs of children of migrant workers, some of which are effective and some of which less so, but all of which attempt to instill in migrant students and migrant culture the knowledge of and access to one (or more) of the three forms of social capital.

            Most programs that attempt to provide more equal opportunity to migrant children in education stress the importance of and act to equalize the development of embodied social capital. The Leipsic, Ohio, Summer Migrant Program tries to instill high academic expectations in its students by having high expectations for them and communicating that the programs expectations is that “they can and will succeed” (Gouwens 2001: 106).  The BEST S.E.L.F. program is designed to “inspire students to have a positive association with learning” by using fun methods and field trips to help kids learn (ibid. Gouwens 2001: 113). They do this in hopes that the students’ embodiment of a willingness and excitement to learn will help in their future student career. Many of these programs have an effect, but because of their subjective nature, the results of the effectiveness of these programs are many times inconclusive.

            There are also many programs that attempt to alleviate the lack of objectified and embodied social capital simultaneously that migrant children do traditionally develop. Estrella is one of many programs that provides their students with laptops, giving them the means to communicate and research an gain important cultural knowledge. But the program also stresses the importance of technological literacy. The program teaches migrant students to use technology so as to better equip them for an employment opportunity outside of traditional migrant work. Conexiones is another program that is geared to train students to become more “fluent users rather than passive consumers of technology” (Gouwens 2001: 128).

            On top of objectified and embodied, many programs are designed to mitigate the problems that migrant students face on an institutional level. An example of this would be The University of Texas at Austin Migrant Student Graduation Enhancement Program. The program is designed accommodate the curriculum and the means through which a student can obtain course credits to the mobile lifestyle of a migrant student. The program uses distance-learning technologies to expand the opportunities of education for migrants that are often taken away due to their need to work. There is also new implemented programs of file-sharing systems within school districts that tend to have a large migrant population. The New Generation System, implemented in twenty-nine states, implemented a system of Internet based file sharing, making it easier for migrant students to change schools and quickly get back on track with the curriculum, allowed for faster completion of each grade.

            While all of these programs address specific needs of the migrant population and their access to a quality education, the program whose attempt to fix this inequality is most fundamentally based upon the assumptive effects of social capital and generational poverty is the National Head Start Association (NHSA). The NHSA is an organization that attempts to instill equal opportunity in education. It’s main purpose is to provide disadvantaged children in America “the opportunity to start kindergarten and elementary school with the same knowledge and skills that their less disadvantaged peers enjoy” (Gouwens 2001: 54). They do this with the assumption that the poor and impoverished have less educational opportunity than the middle and higher classes, and that instilling equal opportunity will allow for those impoverished to more successfully function within society and ultimately improve their situation through upward mobility. The NHSA recognizes that education provides the opportunity to break the cycle of generational poverty, and this can bedone by having education become a more primaryactor in the socialization process so as to instill the necessary knowledge and traits into students so that they can function in American society. And furthermore, they act under the philosophy that the younger one is when the starting line is equalized, the more susceptible they are to their external influences, and therefore, the more likely they develop adequate social capital.In an interview with Tommy Sheridan, the Legislative Associate of the National Head Start Association, he explained the basic focus of the program:

            “Head Start specifically focuses on engaging the whole child (meaning their           physical health, mental health, brain development, language acquisition,       social development, etc) as well as engaging parents. This cannot be done            effectively without encouraging staff to be culturally cognizant - especially in        working with parents.  In fact most (if not all) Head Start classrooms have at            least one staff or volunteer who speaks the native language of every child”. 

            The Head Start program is aimed to help all those who are disadvantaged in America. However, the because of the level of aid needed and particularly low levels of education and unique position within society, the NSHA does specifically target the needs of migrant children. The Migrant Head Start Program attends to the specific needs of Migrant Students in that it encourages parent involvement. Based on studies, Head Start concluded that a strong predictor in a child’s academic success is the literacy level of that child’s family. Recognizing the low literacy rates and low rates of fluent English speakers, Head Start “broadened the cope of the program beyond early childhood education to include family literacy” (Gouwens 2001: 55). And not only does Head Start help with literacy by providing family classes, but they also provide aid in cultural assimilation, as Tommy Sheridan explains “Head Start programs also often offer culturally appropriate trainings for parents - one example of this is a health literacy training that acknowledges cultural differences in what medical practices”.

            Head Start does not only attend to the specific needs of Migrant children through encouraging parental involvement, but the program also adjusts to the mobile lifestyle often evident in children of migrant workers as Tommy Sheridan describes,

            “Head Start service is delivered by regions, like most Health and Human    Services programs. There are 12 regions, ten are geographic and the other       two are Migrant/Seasonal and American Indian Alaska Native.  The service             delivery is quite different for Migrant/Seasonal families than regular Head Start programs but they also differ massively depending on the location and             community's needs.  For example, if there is a certain crop that has a picking            season of about 6 weeks - Migrant/seasonal programs will only run then,     whereas normal Head Start will go on a schedule similar to the school year. This in and of itself also creates several differences.  In Head Start, children are required to be screened within the first 45 days of the school                 year.  Obviously this differs, in Migrant communities just based on the       differing timing of service delivery”. 

The NSHA altered its Migrant education program from the original Head Start program in order to accommodate the mobile nature of migrant work and to therefore not let that lifestyle become a disadvantage to the child.

            Lastly, the one of the main elements that makes Head Start so effective is the programs attention regional and geographic differences that the implication of them. Each program is localized, and developed with the local culture and needs as the main priority. It is not just one specific generalized goal that is implemented nationally with no regard for regional or cultural differences.

            “I'll just mention that Head Start is built on serving a specific community's             needs and that there are even massive differences between service delivery                among Migrant programs.  All of it is based on a grant that is written to best serve that specific locality ie a migrant program in rural Arizona may look   very different from a more urban migrant program in Miami or another rural       program in northern Minnesota.  This way, Head Start becomes tailored to     each community and not a one size fits all program”.

            Head Start is an effective program in that it attempts to solve the problem of generational poverty by fixing the fundamental cause of the cycle created, and that fundamental cause is the lack of inheritance of the forms of social capital that have become necessary to function within society. Head Start levels the laying field of education at the earliest age possible, providing equal opportunity for every child regardless of socio-economic and family background, thus mitigating the perpetuating effects that those two socio-environmental characteristics can have.They do this through attending to social groups’ needs that are culturally and socially specific, and localizing the programs so as to design the programs based around the community, not have the community adhere to the program.         

            But is this right? To force cultural assimilation and force integration through acceptance and adoption of the dominant culture? Well in order to break the cycle of poverty due to generational social stratification, it is necessary for the education system to teach and provide the necessary social capital so that everyone has an equal chance to succeed. This does not mean that the cultures of those in lower classes should not be fully respected. But there are certain institutions, norms, expectations and social patterns in America that have become inseparable from the culture of success and opportunity (defined in relative terms to wealth), and socially constructed roads to success, and these are all social forms that one must gain knowledge of and understand in order to succeed while operating within them. The education system has the potential to provide the knowledge and sources of social capital to migrant and other disadvantaged children while still being cognizant and respectful of their culture, thus leveling out the playing field at an early age and providing the ideal of equal opportunity.

(download)

Click here to download:

Alex Dodge.wmv (5.29 MB)

“Eighteen American war veterans kill themselves every day. One thousand former soldiers receiving care from Department of Veteran’s Affairs attempt suicide every month. More veterans are committing suicide then are dying in combat overseas.”[1] It is undeniable that the costs of war go far beyond the dollars and cents attributed to it by the policy makers in Washington. The human cost of war is often lost in the chaos of our daily lives, drowned out by political pundits with conflicting messages.  And it is not just the physical damage that can be clearly seen, there is also the dark psychological damage that haunts dreams, and drives people to seek refuge in suicide.

But are these costs being distributed equally throughout the population, just as the costs of maintaining our cities are to be evenly distributed? It is clear that they are not, and that most of this burden is falling onto those who are already the most burdened. Miriam Pembelton, a Military Analyst at the Institute for Policy Studies, puts it best when she states, “as people lose jobs, the military becomes the employer of last resort,”[2] something that is increasingly present during the economic slump we’re currently experiencing.

It is once these recruits have returned home after fighting the good fight that their dreams of a better future start to dissipate, although many have already lost their hope (and soul) after watching or committing the atrocities that are turned into a ten second loop on the nightly news (if they make the news at all). Coming home changed people, with a tormented soul, as the parents of Marine MOS (convoy driver) Jeffrey Lucey can testify, “Our marine physically returned to us, but his spirit died somewhere in Iraq.”[3]And then what about the guarantees and benefits that our veterans are entitled to as a result of their service to this country? US Army Medic Eli Wright makes it clear that the US Government does not even care about the physical health of their returning vets, something he makes clear when stating, “We enlisted. We stepped up to serve our country and we haven’t asked for a whole lot in return. Proper health care should be, at a bare minimum, what we’re entitled to.”[4] This comes after wrestling with the Veteran Affairs (VA) system for two years regarding a dislocated shoulder and possible traumatic brain injury from his first deployment, something the US Army only acknowledged after trying to redeploy Wright. And if you have to fight this hard to get proper health care, what it takes to get your educational benefits is unimaginable.

By targeting those who are economically and educationally disadvantaged in this stratified country of ours the costs of the wars currently being fought in the Middle East are being disproportionately loaded onto the poor. But how are they able to do this so effectively? According to a study done by the Rand Corporation, "the greatest enlistment potential exists among two-year (college) students and two-year dropouts."[5] In other words it has been determined that the best places to look for recruits is at the community colleges of America, as well as to those who had dropped out of school after two years. Or as Kurt Gilroy, the former director of recruiting policy for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, stated that it is best to “maximize return on the recruiting dollar (because) the advertising and marketing research people tell us to go where the low-hanging fruit is. In other words, we fish where the fish are.”[6] So it seems that when the military is looking to ramp up it’s efforts in their wars of choice they simply go to where the most desperate people are and entice them with the hopes of good pay in the name of a just cause.

On top of the selective targeting taking place it seems that the recruiters are not always entirely honest, omitting key points and forgetting details. Although there are a plethora of videos on the internet depicting this unfortunate reality I think that Chris Dugan, a former Marine recruiter, says it best, “If I recruited someone that would count towards points that would help me become a Sargent before I got out of the Marine Corps. So I’m willing to manipulate the truth to these people… You’re a sales man, you have a quota.”[7] This is by no means standard operating procedure across the military and there are certainly honest recruiters that will tell it you like it is, and give you a full picture. However, when you consider that “Currently, the United States Military is an All-Volunteer Army. This places heavy importance on recruitment - without it we would lack the necessary number of troops.”[8] And as a result of this it is clear that the pressures placed on recruiters to sustain the size of our military are driving recruiters to some morally flexible tactics, something that can be seen in the 6,600 allegations of wrongdoing on behalf of military recruiters in the year 2005.[9]This is out of a mere 22,000 military recruiting personal as of the year 2006, 14,000 of which were “front line recruiters” who do the face-to-face time with monthly recruiting quotas (the remaining 8,000 held administrative positions).[10]Unfortunately this has the potential to only get worse as the drums of war begin their slow build up in the wake of Osama Bin Laden’s death.

            It is interesting to note that on the side bar of nearly every anti-military (recruiting or otherwise) video or Google search there is a conveniently placed military recruiting advertisement. So it seems as though the US Military is able to allocate some portion of it’s four billion dollar annual advertising budget[11] on internet advertising in the place where all of the doubtful or confused kids go to try and find some form of objective reality regarding their potential futures. As a result there a soldier who does not identify himself, but is from the First Calvary Division in Fort Hood Texas, who created a YouTube video with the intention of helping others “make the right choice, the most informed choice. Versus an emotional choice or a choice made by recruiters.”[12] In his informative video his primary point is that “before you go to a recruiter, or sign any papers, you got to do your research. You got to find our what you want in the Army, the reason you’re joining the Army. What you want to get out of the Army.”[13] In other words if you are looking to join the Army you have to take responsibility and do your own research about what joining the military can do for you, because you won’t necessarily be getting an accurate depiction of the potential benefits and costs that come with joining the military, according to someone who has gone through the process and experienced it from the side of the recruited.

            The worst part about the crooked and broken machine that is military recruiting is that even the advertising is deceptive, as though it’s not enough to only be deceptive in person. This can be seen in the testimony of Demond Mullins, who stated;

When I was 19 I saw this National Guard commercial where this National Guardsman is driving a tank and the tank jumps over a berm. When I enlisted and I went into tanks I realized that if you did that to a tank, the tank would break. You see this on the commercial, and then at the end of the commercial it says you could still be home in time for dinner, and it showed the guy eating dinner with his family. But you didn’t really think of that when you sent him to Iraq. He’s not going to be home in time for dinner, and some won’t come home at all.[14]

So in one simple television advertisement for the National Guard, they have depicted the National Guard as this amazing organization that will give you the opportunity to do fanciful things on top of increased opportunities in life, all while allowing you to be home in time for dinner with your family. Is this the case though? Does the National Guard give you the opportunity to jump tanks over berms or fly in a helicopter to some type of catchy rock tune, and still be home in time to relax with your family? This could be the case if Obama were to actually pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan like he said he would. But right now this is clearly not the case with our continued presence in the Middle East, all while tornado’s and floods wreak havoc producing millions in damage throughout the southern states (where the National Guard is truly needed and supposed to be).

            At this point it is painfully clear that military uses deceptive marketing techniques in order to create the massive world force we call the US Military. But what are the actual reasons many of our soldiers are on the ground fighting in these illegal occupations? Are they there because they are patriotic and want to fight for freedom and democracy? Unfortunately not even our soldiers see these long and drawn out wars as being just, seeing as a mere 20% of enlisted blacks listed the desire to serve their country as the most important motivator for enlisting in the military (it was 38% for Caucasians) according to a survey done by the US Army in 2003. This is opposed to the 29% of enlisted blacks who stated their primary reason as money for education, as well as an additional 18% who listed it as pay and benefits (12% and 8% respectively for Caucasians).[15]This is especially important when you consider that blacks made up 19.25% of the military (they were only 12.5% of the American population at the time).[16] And these surveys were conducted in 2003 when we were still pounding on the drums of war due to our post-9/11 desire for revenge. Seeing this makes one realize that many of the individuals fighting in our military are doing so with the hope that they will be able to advance themselves beyond the poverty they are stuck in. Indeed Gettysburg High School Career Advisor Joe Schaeffer stated in an interview:

The parents often encourage their teenagers to consider the military to pay for their college education.  They understand the kind of debt their children can accrue from attending several years of college or a technical school. Many cannot afford to pay for the postsecondary training for their children, so they see the military as a good means of earning that benefit.[17]

In the end it is clear that a significant portion of our military has joined without any real desire to fight, rather trying to better themselves through a higher education that they cannot afford, and student loans will only incur more debt holding them in the confines of their unfortunate situation. 

            Why is it that there is such a draw to a higher education though? It has been shown that “Higher education confers increased chances for income, power, and prestige on people who are fortunate enough to obtain it,”[18] and it is because of this that people are being ever more attracted to the great benefits of a higher education, something that is becoming ever more necessary for any hope of success in todays society. So with some form of a higher education becoming increasingly required for a job in America it is the poor and impoverished that are being sucked into the military as a source of payment. This is an unmistakable reality when you look at the following; “We estimate that a high SES (socioeconomic status) student has almost 2.5 times as much chance as a low SES student of continuing in some kind of post-high school education. He has an almost 4 to 1 advantage in access to college, a 6 to 1 advantage in college graduation, and a 9 to 1 advantage in graduate or professional education.”[19] This is not a discrepancy based on academic achievement or some learning relevant factor either. This is a discrepancy that has been produced through the growing wealth gap in America, and the economic hardships of the masses being primarily based on “socioeconomic origins, race and ethnic background.”[20]

            At this point it is undeniably clear that a significant portion of our military has been enticed into fighting in order to try and find their own path out of poverty since the American government is doing little to help in this era of budget cuts to those programs deemed unnecessary (such as Planned Parenthood, and welfare). But what of the real cost of war? Are the masses that are calling for war aware of what happens to our soldiers while they are in Iraq or Afghanistan, or more importantly upon their return home after fighting the good fight? The answer to this question can only be no, because if they were aware then this war would have ended a long time ago. In a letter to his girlfriend in 2003 Jeff Lucey wrote, “There are things I wouldn’t want to tell you or my parents, because I don’t want you to be worried. Even if I did tell you, you’d probably just think I was exaggerating. I never want to fight in a war again. I’ve seen and done enough horrible things to last me a lifetime.”[21] Out of a sense of respect and fear many of our soldiers have not spoken up about the atrocities they committed in Iraq, fighting the tension produced by these emotions in the darkness of their minds. Jeff’s mother, Joyce, explains the result the best when she states, “as with so many veterans, Jeff was self-medicating. He often told us that alcohol was the only way he could sleep at night.”[22] This was going entirely overlooked by a VA system that he was not able to fit him in with their busy schedule. Something that can be described with a number most Americans are unaware of, “287,790. That’s the number of returning Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans who had filed a disability claim with the Department of Veteran’s Affairs as of March 25, 2008.”[23]

When Jeff was finally able to make it in to the VA he blew a .328 blood alcohol content, and was involuntarily committed for four-days. Joyce had this to say about the experience, “During his four-day stay he felt like he was being ware-housed. He told the VA about three methods of suicide he had contemplated-overdose, suffocation or hanging. None of this was relayed to us. Instead on Tuesday, June 1, 2004 he was released.”[24] He had very frankly told the system that was supposed to help him how he was planning on committing suicide and they did nothing, saying he had to get off alcohol on his own first.  Joyce would followed that up by saying, “While the rest of the country lived on, going to Disneyworld, shopping, living their daily lives, our days consisted of fear, apprehension, helplessness, as we watched this young man, our son, being consumed by this cancer that ravaged his soul.”[25] On June 22, 2004 Jeff’s dad, Kevin, came home at 7:15 to take his son down from the rafters, and remove the hose from around his neck.[26] This is just one example of what is happening to the youth we are so eagerly sending to Iraq and Afghanistan to fight for freedom and democracy. This is just one story of eighteen that are written daily by people who will not have their names immortalized on a memorial wall but paid the same price as those that will.

So what is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan? US Navy, Flight Director Zollie Peter Goodman had this to say about our siege of Fallujah in the fall of 2004:

The standard procedure that we followed in Fallujah whether written or unwritten was to leave dead Iraqis in the street to be buried by their own. This presented a problem because the sewage system was shut down so sewage started to back up into the streets. There were dead bodies floating in sewage… We ended up sighting our weapons on these dead bodies.[27]

Zollie would later return home and fight with the VA system aggressively and waiting for months in order to get a monthly 15-minute therapy session after he realized a side effect of the medications they were trying to prescribe him was “suicidal thoughts and suicidal tendencies.”[28] Another example of the inhuman atrocities committed in Iraq comes from US Marine Corps infantryman, Jason Lemieux, who was relayed this story after watching it unfold during a two-day fire fight in the Anbar Provence; “He watched the commander who had given us an order to shoot anyone on the street shoot two old ladies that were walking and carrying vegetables. He said that the commander had told him to shoot the women, and when he refused, the commander shot them.”[29] Maybe this is the result of a few isolated incidents, but when 287,790 returning soldiers are trying to get some form of disability benefits and countless others lost to the system. And there are Iraqi civilian casualty counts ranging from the WikiLeaks count of 109,032 between January 2004 and December 2009, to the more realistic Opinion Research Business (ORB) poll count of 946,000 to 1,120,000 deaths as of 2007.[30] It appears as though these “few bad apples” are a much more pandemic problem then we realized.

            Listening to these stories, and reflecting on these numbers makes it painfully clear that many of our delusions regarding how this war is being waged are much worse than we thought they could ever be. It also becomes clear as to why so many have been driven to seek refuge from their torments in suicide.This is what happens when you take a good and decent person that only wants to get an education and better themselves and their families in the world, and put them in a situation where they are forced to watch as their commanders shoot innocent women trying to get home.  The mind is not meant to endure experiences like these, something that is only exaggerated when they return home to a system that does not acknowledge their problems, forcing them to ruminate over these negative emotions turning into a cancer that will ravage the soul leading to depression and anxiety.[31] In the words of US Army Reserve Voice Interpreter Adrienne Kinne “the best preventative health care for our soldiers is to not use them in to fight illegal occupations,”[32] something that rings true as we watch over 500 returning veterans kill themselves every month.

            This is the burden we have placed on the soldiers that we have enlisted to fight Americas war. When our economy takes a steep dive due to toxic housing assets, driving people to homelessness and rampant unemployment, we heard that an increase in military spending would be a good thing because it would create jobs. Something former Reagan economic advisor Martin Feldstein made clear when he stated the following in early 2009, “it would give us the ability to use increased defense spending as a way of creating jobs.” How much clearer does it need to be that the US government planned to use an increase in defense spending as jobs for the poor since “A large proportion of these soldiers were recruited from the most disempowered segments of American society-the poor, people of color, high school students. Recruitment often takes the place of financial aid or a decent job, and it is grossly unfair."[33] In essence burying our country in a mountain of debt and giving these kind and gentle people PTSD in the process. They have been recruited when they were the most vulnerable so that they could breed fear and hatred into everyone involved on several continents. So that they could kill the innocent, and be left with the torment when they return to the monotony of society. On top of which they get to pay the bill when its all over since the rich and powerful who are reaping the benefits do not want an increase in their taxes and have produced a monumental propaganda campaign in order to achieve this reality.

            At this point there are five truths that cannot be avoided any more, hidden behind the ignorance of the masses; (1) the military has used questionable tactics in their recruiting practices (2) that are targeting those from the lower levels of the socioeconomic ladder enticing them with the dream of success. (3) This dream is only crushed by the torments of their experiences leading normally gentle people to do horrific things. (4) And when they ask for help from the people who promised they would help them mountains of paperwork and long waits for “processing” turn them away. (5) In turn placing a disproportionate amount of the burden on those who were looking for a job when the times got bad.[34] Does this seem to be at all fair when it is the rich policy makers that are reaping the benefits from these drawn out occupations, seeing as “Vice President Dick Cheney’s stock options in Halliburton rose from $241,498 in 2004 to over $9.2 million in 2005, an increase of more than 3,000 percent,”[35] a number that has undoubtedly grown in the time since. How is it that Dick Cheney is able to turn an investment of $241,498 into over $8 million in one year due to no competition contract bids, while people such as Jeff Lucey are driven to suicide because they cannot get the health care that they deserve for their service to this country? The answer comes in the following, “There is currently a complete divide between the individuals voting and strategizing our involvement in wars and the individuals actually risking their lives to fight.”[36] Or as syndicated columnist and TV commentator Mark Shields remarked, "Those at peril are completely divorced from those in power. It's 'Patriotism Lite' -- you put a sticker on your SUV."[37] This psychological distancing between those in power and those at risk has enabled these wars to drag on for almost a decade of innocent deaths on every side of the battle. When you are personally connected to those that are being killed then all of the sudden those death counts start to have a much greater meaning. In fact Representative Charles Rangel of New York argued for the reinstatement of the draft because “if indeed the president believes war is necessary in terms of our national welfare, then he has to believe that sacrifices need to be made, and those sacrifices need to be shared… If we bring back the draft, people will focus on who is put in harm's way."[38] Undoubtedly this was a lone voice that was not heard though seeing as:

There are those who say that we as a nation didn’t learn the lesson of Vietnam. But unfortunately for all of us, the decision makers did learn the most important lesson: be sure the vast majority aren’t directly affected by the war, and silence the rest with lies and fearmongering. Also be sure that the sons and daughters of the rich and powerful are not affected or even inconvenienced by the war.[39]

Click here to download:

Caroline Nathan.pptx (100 KB)

(download)

Click here to download:

Caroline Nathan.pptx (100 KB)

“…America is the land of opportunity and Americans are the lucky ones….No country has taken the idea of equality more seriously than the United States” (Ornstein 88, 117).  When I started the semester in my Interdisplinary Studies class Poverty, Education, and the American Dream,  I did not know exactly what to expect.  On the first day I learned that I, along with the rest of the class, would be tutoring elementary - aged students one day a week at Biglerville Elementary School in Biglerville, Pennsylvania.  I started off the semester with only one student to tutor but a few weeks into the semester another student, Karla, was given to me to work with on Tuesdays.  I really underestimated how much the tutoring program would affect the kids I tutored, as well as myself. 

              Karla is the child of migrant workers. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reported: “Migrants are migratory workers, or the children or spouses of migratory workers, who relocate in order to obtain seasonal or temporary employment in agriculture or fishing. The educational disruptions that result from repeated moves and irregular attendance often impede migrant students’ chances for school success” (1).  The publication "Migrant Education" shows that since “Harvest of Shame” was made in 1960, things have definitely not improved much for the children of migrant workers.  “Most migrant families (in the 1990s) move more than once a year.  A survey 1993-1994 Migrant Head Start parents found that the majority (67 percent) of migrant farmworker families lived in two or three locations each year.  Twenty-two prevent lived in only one location, and 11 percent lived in four or more locations” (8).  Although these figures are from the 1990s, they are still very much realistic, as they are only from ten to fifteen years ago. 

              As I tutored, I learned a great deal about the special needs of migrant families' children  and their special educational challenges.  According to NCES: “Migrant students are a unique at-risk population.  They face frequent educational interruptions as their families relocate to obtain seasonal or temporary employment in agriculture or fishing. In addition, migrant students’ academic difficulties may be compounded by other problems including poverty, language barriers, and unique health problems” (1).  According to The Networks of Experts in Social Sciences of Education and Training (NESSE)  : “Migrant students are disadvantaged in terms of type of school, duration of attending school, indicators of achievement, dropout rates, and types of school diploma attained” (7).  Principal Kathy Ciolino of Biglerville Elementary School, who I interviewed, commented that there are some big learning issues with migrant children: “The biggest problem in general is that these children have large gaps in their learning because they have moved around so much.   They may be using different math and reading programs and thus they will have confusion about what they should be doing.  Also there are usually weeks when they are traveling and they do not go to school at all….They might just be getting the hang of a program and then they are moved to a different school.”     

             I followed up in my interview with Principal Ciolino on the topic of what she has seen concerning how much support the migrant workers are able to give the children when it comes to their education.  In response to my question  about how migrant parents value, or not, giving their kids a chance to be in school and stay long enough to learn effectively , Principal Ciolino said  : “I do not believe that any family truly chooses to move around all year long.   This is really the best work that they can get for one reason or another.   Many previously migrant families have chosen to remain here so that their children will have a more stable life.  But that is really dependent on someone giving them a stable job and also on their willingness to spend winter in a cold climate.  For some, this is very difficult.   I believe that all families are doing their best to give their children the best chance possible, and in most cases their children have it better than they did.”  I think it is really important to note what Ciolino points out, that although this kind of lifestyle is very difficult on the children, most of the parents really try to do what is best for the kids.   I got the same reaction from Jodie Miller, a Student Support Specialist for Migrant Education and ESL Programs in the Upper Adams School District:  “All the parents whom I have ever met are completely supportive of their child's learning. Many parents who are not fluent in English find it difficult to help with the homework. But as in Mexico, they place great respect and confidence in the school's role of educating their children.”   

              The Networks of Experts in Social Sciences of Education and Training (NESSE) says on its website:  "Immigrant parents generally do not seek contact with schools.  Mentoring in different forms and by different actors can substantially improve school attainment” (8).  I certainly do not believe that a tutor, especially a tutor who is there only a day or so a week, can make up for what a parent cannot do, but I do believe that mentoring makes a difference in how a student feels about herself or himself.  While for some students the tutoring program is really important in their lives primarily for the tutoring, for Karla the tutoring program is really important in her life as a mentoring program.   I think the first time I realized the impact I was having on Karla was only the second or third week of tutoring her.  I only tutored on Tuesdays,  but I went in on a Thursday to take pictures.  Karla saw me and instantly had a smile on her face,  asking Katie if I could be her tutor that day.  When Katie said no, I could see a change in Karla’s eyes that made me really realize and appreciate the positive change that I was impacting on Karla. 

            I think one of the most important reasons for having the after-school program for migrant children like Karla is that it provides the children a constant stable environment twice a week.  For children of poverty, but especially children of migrant workers, “constant” and “stable” are not  common words for them, and their parents are not always able to give them good support for their educational needs.  The website for NESSE says this:  "Since the central motivation for migration is to improve the life of the family – which was judged not to be possible at home – the parents are in principle highly interested in educational and social mobility of their children.  However, the parents often lack knowledge about the education system and experience a social distance from schools in the immigration country…In addition, immigrant parents may have quite different ideas regarding the proper role of schools and parents than do their children’s teachers or feel diffident or embarrassed interacting with teachers, especially if they lack fluency in the language of the host country or have little education themselves” (53).   I have not interacted with Karla’s parents at tutoring, because she goes home on a bus with other migrant children, but I have interacted with other parents who do not speak English and it is very hard for them, and myself, to communicate and they always seem very uncomfortable.  My interaction with Karla was always extremely positive.

         Karla almost always was able to complete her work without needing help, and when I double-checked her work it was almost always perfect.   Jonathan Kozol says in The Shame of The Nation: “Those who search for signs of optimism often make the point that there are children who do not allow themselves to be demoralized by the conditions we have seen but do their work and keep their spirits high and often get good grades, and seem, at least, to have a better chance than many of their peers to graduate from high school go on to college – and in any case, whether they do or not, refuse to let themselves be broken or embittered by the circumstances they may face” (60-61).  Karla definitely fits into this category of children who despite the circumstances keep working hard.  In my interview with Jodie Miller, the Student Support Specialist for Migrant Education& ESL Programs in Upper Adams School District, she gave some interesting insight on her interactions with the migrant children.  In response to whether the kids are eager to learn she said: “The Elementary level migrant children are like children of just about any culture. Most of them seem eager to learn, but there can always be exceptions. A few might lag a bit behind in reading or math, but in general they all seem to do well, or very well, in school.” 

     I have almost no knowledge of Karla’s family life except that any notice to her parents goes home in Spanish, so her parents must speak little to no English.  On April 12^th at tutoring, Karla commented on the bad sunburn that I had gotten the day before at a golf tournament.  She told me that her parents are in the sun a lot, too.  I thought that was an interesting comment by her, and it was the only comment she ever made that referenced her parents being migrant workers. I did not know if she lived in satisfactory living conditions or if she was living in conditions like those shown in the documentary “Harvest of Shame.”  We talked a lot in class about the problems that occur with children who have parents who speak no English and although I cannot say with 100 percent certainty, I feel that the fact that Karla’s parents speak almost no English cannot be benefitting her much, especially since Karla attends a school that promotes speaking English in every way possible. 

       Prior to this class I had no knowledge of the kind of lifestyle that migrant workers lead.  I did not realize the grinding realities of not really having a set place to live.  I did not realize how much the lifestyle not only affects the workers themselves, but their children, and their children’s education.  From NCES:  “The academic difficulties experienced by migrant students may be exacerbated by other factors, including poverty, health problems, and relative isolation from the community.  Therefore, migrant students may need various support services…” (2).  Kathy Ciolino explained the response in Upper Adams County of all the moving migrants make on the kids and their education: “Here in Adams County the Lincoln Intermediate Unit runs a six week summer program for migrant children.  This helps the children to keep up their learning while their parents are working.  The program works on reading and math skills to help children stay on grade level and maintain what they have learned.  While it is difficult to be on grade level, that is a common problem for many children.  What is important is that we do not penalize the children for their situation, but adapt to their needs as much as possible.”  Ciolino commented in my interview with  her that how much each child understands English completely depends on each child.  She said: “Not all migrants are Hispanic or Haitian.  Some are poor Caucasians.  We test children when they come in and then if they qualify for ESL services we provide it.”    

          According to NESSE: “Investing in quality early childhood education and care is crucial, as it is at this stage that the foundations are laid for subsequent learning and achievements, and also because it is shown by research to contribute significantly to breaking the cycle of disadvantage” (7).  The film “Harvest of Shame” really brought these realities to life, as did my tutoring experience .  Although many of the problems shown in “Harvest of Shame” have improved since it was first shown , the overall themes of these problems remain the same.   As Allan Ornstein says in Class Counts: “The poor live without a social contract….The poor have no government that represents them; they are constrained, checked, and choked by policymakers, the arm of law, and their own miseducation and misfortunes” (88).  For one thing, in addition to the education problems, there are health problems.  The Migrant Clinicians Network has this information on its website:   "Migrants' children are at increased risk for respiratory and ear infections, bacterial and viral gastroenteritis, intestinal parasites, skin infections, scabies and head lice, pesticide exposure, tuberculosis, poor nutrition, anemia, short stature, undiagnosed congenital anomalies, undiagnosed delayed development, intentional and unintentional injuries, substance use, and teenage pregnancy. Immunizations and dental care are often delayed or absent. Many children have never been screened for chronic disease or vision and hearing impairment. Providing health care services for these children benefits the children, the family, the community, and the country” (1).

            One issue that interested me is how the children of migrant workers are accepted by other students, especially because they change schools so often. When Principal Kathy Ciolino spoke to our class ,  she stated that although at the school they recognize that some students have family/poverty problems, the school treats every student the same.  That is very good to hear, especially because some schools are not that helpful.   In addition, in my interview with Ciolino, she commented on how non-migrant students treat migrant students: “The biggest problem in general is that these children have large gaps in their learning because they have moved around so much.  They may be using different math and reading programs and thus they will have confusion about what they should be doing.  Also there are usually weeks when they are traveling and they do not go to school at all.  As I said before, they might just be getting the hang of a program and then they are moved to a different school.”  Ciolino added that luckily when looking at the students in a classroom you cannot tell which students are migrants and which students are not.   According to NESSE, it works best if some of the teachers are from backgrounds like the migrant children: “Low teachers’ expectations towards minority students generally have a negative influence on their performance.  Teachers of a migrant and minority background have a positive influence on migrant achievement in schools” (8).  It seems hard to imagine that there are enough such teachers to meet the needs around the country, but it is an important goal, especially because the poor and Hispanic population is increasing.  It is so important that every student feel that their teacher understands their needs both in terms of the actual education, but outside the classroom as well.  In my interview with Ciolino she commented on how migrant students are served by the public schools: “I hope that we are always getting better at assessing students abilities when they get to our school and then that we pass on good information to the next school.   When children come back to our school every fall we are better able to meet their needs then if they end up in Gettysburg or another school district that has never seen them.”   She added that it would be helpful if  there “…would be universal forms that gave information in one format so that each school would have an idea of what had been covered, achieved, etc.  Perhaps with the adoption of Common Core Standards in the future this will be possible.”  Kozol comments: “One of the distorting consequences that is taking an especially high toll on children of minorities…is the increasing practice of compelling children to repeat a grade or several grades over the course of years solely on the basis of their test results and, in some districts, almost wholly independent of the judgments of their principals and teachers” (117).

         I think there is a great importance  for these children that we tutors are Gettysburg College students.  A few times Karla has mentioned going to college and I think it is very important to have someone  who goes to college in her life, since most likely Karla’s parents did not go to college.  Even if it may be unrealistic at this point to expect that all these children of migrant workers can achieve college as a goal, it is valuable, I believe, for them to have a goal that could be so helpful in improving their lives in the future.  NESSE says on its website:   "Foundations and other civil society actors have begun to create programmes for very talented and engaged migrant students. This will contribute to upward social mobility of migrants, create role models and help to change the image of migrants as primarily a problem group” (9).  

         Alex Dodge, one of my classmates, posted in the blog on March 28th: “I'm pretty sure that Eric is a migrant student - I know his family speaks Spanish at home, he speaks in Spanish on occasion, and has mentioned his father working on a farm. I wonder about his educational future - if he will stay in Biglerville, or move around so his father finds work during a different part of the season. While he does seem to struggle with his assignments and work, I wouldn't say that his struggle with the material is serious. These could be to some of the factors listed above. I just hope that both he and Gabe are able to acquire a good education and succeed in life.”  I also have that hope that Karla and the others we have tutored will have better futures.  On my last day of tutoring Karla asked me if I was going to be her tutor next year.  I had not even thought about tutoring next year because of my schedule, but when Karla asked me, the look on her face made me realize the differences we make being there just once a week.

(download)

Click here to download:

Emily Smith.wmv (4.76 MB)

The afterschool tutoring program at Biglerville Elementary has far reaching effects throughout the community for not only the children involved, but also the college students who act as mentors. The need for programs like these across the nation in similar rural impoverished areas such as Gettysburg is profound and widespread. These economically disadvantaged Latino populations have an increased risk for academic failure and rely heavily on extra academic assistance. These populations are especially at need for extra attention due to a lack of financial and linguistic support that separates them from successful middle class students. Biglerville Elementary itself is an excellent example of an institution that is doing its best to help these at-risk student populations. The facility is extremely nice, the teachers and administration is excellent, it has a highly qualified and professional superintendent, and an effective and cost efficient after school program. Yet all of these great circumstances are often not enough to combat the problems at –risk Latino students already have when arriving to school.

Latino education in the United States is an issue of critical importance that affects the future of this country and its citizens. The Latino population in the United Sates is currently 16.3%, which is a 43% rise since 2000. (U.S. Census) With such a quickly growing population, enormous pressure is put on the public school system and many Latinos are at an educational disadvantage due to poverty and language. This creates a large educational gap between Latinos and other racial groups resulting in Latino students having the highest dropout rate of all racial groups. (U.S. Department of Education) I am personally interested in this topic after tutoring a Latino child for a semester in an after school program. The program was held at Biglerville Elementary and was excellent, yet the student I was tutoring did not seem to be able to reach his academic potential. This has caused me to research the topic of Latino education focusing on the elementary level, and compile my results.      

Latino students in particular are at risk for high dropout rates often due to a low socio-economic status, language barriers, and new immigration status. While the dropout rate has recently declined, it is still highest among Latino populations, and second highest among American Indians/Alaska Natives in the United States. The Latino dropout rate was 18.3% in 2008, compared to 4.8% for white students and 8% for all students. This has decreased from 35.2% for Latinos from 1980, yet is still an alarming number. (U.S. Department of Education) Latinos are quickly becoming the largest minority in the United States with 16.3% of the US population and 20.4% of the students in the Upper Adams School District (Ciolino, 2011). This national percentage of Latinos has risen 43% since 2000. (U.S. Census) According to Biglerville Elementary test scores, Latinos are the lowest performing group of students, aside from migrant students. In reading, Latino students were 31% below basic compared to 19% for all and white students. In math, 37% were below basic compared with 11% for white students and 15% for all students. (NCLB report card) At Biglerville, Latinos clearly have a real disadvantage shown through test scores, which ironically hinders funding for programs that could help raise these test scores.

Although low test scores on the PSSAs could hinder some federal funding to the school district, most of the funding comes from a local and state level. This can often lead to problems and vast differences in districts as the wealth in each area changes. Since the residents of the Upper Adams School district tend to be economically disadvantaged, the schools in the area that rely on local funding are often underfunded. Some initiatives that help to combat the effect of local poverty and make schools more equal are the Title 1 program and the English Language Acquisition program. Title 1 is “the largest federal K-12 program” and provides “over $13 billion to local districts to improve the academic achievement of children in high-poverty schools” (U.S. Department of Education) The English Language Acquisition fund gives $675.8 million to states to assist schools in helping “limited English-proficient children by teaching them English and helping them meet state academic standards” (U.S. Department of Education). Biglerville Elementary does receive Title 1 funds, which greatly help with balancing the budget, and also receive English Language Acquisition finds from the state. (Ciolino, 2011)  

Another reason of why this tutoring program is so essential is that it does not use many precious funds due to the volunteer tutors. Possibly one of the only major expenses is bussing to Biglerville after school for students that attend other schools in the district. According to the Superintendent of the Upper Adams School District, Eric Eshbach, within the past year, his main job has been to balance the budget and deal with the problems that arise due to financial constraints. With the recent economic downturn and rise in situational poverty among families in the district, programs are frequently cut and many extra curricular programs that rely on local funding are being called into question. Without the volunteers for this tutoring program, it would probably not be able to continue and many of the students that greatly benefit from the one-on-one attention and extra help would further risk academic failure. Especially since this program only benefits the students that attend it and there is not an opportunity for every child to take part in it, parents would much rather choose a program that benefits all children rather than only a few children when considering programs to cut. Also, generally speaking, the children that are most at risk and involved in a program like this tend to not have parents who are not actively involved in the school system, and so it would be up to the program’s supervisors and participants to advocate for the program. 

Many students that are participants in the tutoring program suffer from poverty and therefore are at an increased risk for academic failure. Poverty in the Upper Adams School District is one of the most crippling effects that lead to a decline in academic success. Speaking with the Principal of Biglerville Elementary, Kathy Ciolino, enlightened me to many issues related to poverty that have a large impact on the educational environment and directly affect the success of the students in the school system. Many students come into school under resourced without books and materials, which greatly impedes a child’s progress. Since 51% of Biglerville students qualify for the free and reduced lunch program, they are considered economically disadvantaged (Ciolino, 2011). This rate has risen significantly in the last few years due to the economic downturn and the new prevalence of increased situational poverty. Many families that are in a state of poverty often had parents growing up in poverty, making it exponentially more difficult for advancement. According to Lang, “the longer people have been poor, the harder it is for them to leave poverty” and “people who have been poor for ten years, on average, remain poor for another ten years” (Lang, 56). This type of poverty is called generational poverty and is very prevalent among families and students in the Upper Adams School District.

The prevalence of poverty, especially among Latino populations, causes a plethora of problems for the students in the area. According to Jensen, the effect of poverty on a child’s brain is very significant due to an expose to toxins, chronic stress, substandard cognitive skills, and impaired emotional-social relationships. Toxins could include “a food toxin such as artificial additives, coloring or those with carcinogens, to environmental toxins such as lead, noise or smog” (Jensen, 2008). Also, “those living in poverty experience a chronic stress overload greater than in their higher socioeconomic class counterparts.” (Jensen, 2008) Cognitive skill development is also decreased in impoverished children as parents in poor household use fewer and less complex vocabulary and “low SES (socio-economic status) parents are only half as likely to read to their kids as compared to high-income children.” (Jensen, 2008) Less parent involvement and fewer social ties also increase the likelihood that they will make poor relationship choices in the future, such as joining gangs or having pre-marital children. All of this data concludes that children of poverty have suboptimal brains due to their environment, but through “novel complex learning, physical activity, hope, managed stress levels, and a supportive, hopeful social climate” brains can reverse the effects of poverty and show positive change. (Jensen, 2008)

These socio-economic conditions that affect brain development are very prevalent among the Hispanic population. A rapid rise in the U.S. population of Hispanics has resulted in an “aggregate Hispanic buying power- or after income tax- increase of 70% between 1982 and 1990, signaling increases in the Hispanic population as a whole” but this has not resulted in a proportionate rise in “educational attainment, economic stability, or political power” (Pérez and Salazar, 45-46). This large increase in population allows Hispanics to be “two-and-one half times as likely to be poor as non-Hispanics” (Pérez and Salazar, 46). Due to the recent influx of Hispanics into in the United States and their low socio-economic status, the effect on education for Hispanic youth is greatly affected. The Hispanic school population has increased proportionally more than any other ethnic group and “moreover, the proportion of the student population in the elementary grades that is Hispanic has increased whereas the upper grades have experienced a decrease in Hispanic student enrollment” (Pérez and Salazar, 47). Measurements taken in 1988 show Hispanic enrollment going from 11.6% in grades K-4 to 9.6% in grades 11-12. This change is not seen in the white population as enrollment increases from 15.1% in K-4 to 15.7$ in 11-12 (Pérez and Salazar, Table 2.1). The dropout rate has gone significantly down since 1988 and in 2008 was 18.3%, yet Hispanics still obtain the highest dropout rate of all racial groups in the United States. (U.S. Department of Education)

Latinos continue to have low levels of educational attainment due to their high dropout rate, as they “continue to have the highest dropout rates of any major U.S. population group”(Pérez and Salazar, 53) This high dropout rate along with the poor educational status of migrant students create major socio-economic problems as the U.S. Latino population ages and enters the workforce. Some major reasons for dropping out are listed as a loss of interest in school, personal reasons such as pregnancy or peer-pressure or the need to make money for their family. (Pérez and Salazar) Due to the often low socio-economic status of Hispanic families, many cannot afford to have a child in school when the child could alternatively provide income for the family. This lack of an emphasis on education and delayed gratification is seen throughout many families in generational poverty and is one of the factors that differentiate them from middle-class families and achieving advancement. (Pérez and Salazar)

The academic underachievement of Latino students ultimately comes down to the perfect storm of socioeconomic, cultural, developmental, and linguistic disadvantages. While it is difficult to point to one cause of the educationally disadvantaged state of Latino students, “research findings do point to linguistic proficiency as the single most important mediator of academic achievement for Latino students” (Mestre and Royer, 39). Often students who lack English comprehension skills are forced into context-reduced situations, such as when a teacher gives one set of instruction and no further explanations or help. When students are able to reach out for help to a peer or ESL teacher within the classroom, they are involved in a context-embedded situation. These context-embedded situations are much more conducive for learning in a foreign language, as the student often just needs help with clarification or vocabulary. (Mestre and Royer, 44) Testing especially negatively impacts Hispanic students due to the fact that testing (standardized and not) is a very context-reduced situation. Especially dealing with comprehension questions, if students do not understand a key word or phrase, they often have “nothing to do but guess and hope for the best” (Mestre and Royer, 44). These problems with testing often cannot be remedied by converting a test into Spanish as some meaning could be lost in translation or the context may not apply. Also, many students have not had former schooling or grammar instruction in Spanish. (Mestre and Royer)

These common issues with testing Latino students are clearly prevalent in Biglerville Elementary and the Upper Adams School District. As stated previously, test scores for Latinos are far below those of white students and the average of all students. Especially in the reading section of the PSSA test, Latino students in the Upper Adams School District fell significantly behind their white peers with 31% below basic, and 42% below basic for migrant students. In the category of reading, only 6% of Latino students achieved advanced, compared to 34% of white students, and 31% of all students. The results were slightly less dramatic with math scores, but still followed the same trend with 40% of white students with a score of advanced, compared to 38% of all students, and 25% of Latinos students. 

The Migrant population that attends Biglerville Elementary is of large concern to the administration due to their frequent mobility and absences. Mrs. Ciolino spoke about migrant Latino students, but explained that much of the mobility seen throughout her school is from students that are not children of migrant workers. “There is actually a lot of mobility at our school that is not only migrants, but all children. Some of this is a result of the economy and families loosing their homes, moving to shelters, moving in with relatives, etc” (Ciolino, 2011). Recently, the school has been under even more stress due to the settling migrant population and the economic downturn, as a larger Latino population is becoming more stable, and previously stable students are now more mobile.

The “English as a Second Language” program is another tool at Biglerville Elementary that is extremely beneficial to many Latino students and families. After students are assessed for language, those needing help are split into two categories: those with a large need for help meet with an ESL teacher for 90 minutes per day, and those with less need meet with one for 45 minutes a day. This allows for intensive, individualized attention necessary to learn the language and vocabulary, but does not take up a large portion of class time. Also, the ESL teachers “try to work in conjunction with the classroom teacher to make instruction meaningful and similar to what they are learning in class. For example, if there is a social studies unit on communities, then the ESL teacher may pre-teach some vocabulary such as city, town, and urban, so the ESL students will be better able to participate in the discussion when it occurs” (Ciolino, 2011) This aspect of the program is especially important because it encourages and gives students the tools to participate in normal class time, and builds their confidence talking with other English speaking children, and gives a context to their vocabulary. 

Due to the large Latino population that attends school in this district (20.4%), communication between school officials and parents could be impeded due to a language barrier. Mrs. Ciolino explained that Kindergarten registration was quite hectic this year because there was only one translator, and many of the parents who wanted to register their children for Kindergarten only spoke Spanish. In order to deal with this problem, the school has a fluent Spanish speaker who is a full time staff member. Also, during parent teacher meetings, the school provides a translator if the parent would like one, and “during parent teacher conferences we had four translators at our school”(Ciolino, 2011) In addition, all handouts and newsletters sent home to the parents are in both English and Spanish. This is a large step towards increasing parent involvement within the school, and goes a long way in setting up the children for continued and future success. Mrs. Ciolino is also grateful for the large Hispanic community that attend her school as, “many families have risk their lives and left their families to come to this country with the hope that their children will have a better life” (Ciolino, 2011).

When asked which two programs are most influential in the development of children who would otherwise be at a disadvantage, she cited the Biglerville High School one-to-one laptop program and Full day Kindergarten these programs have helped disadvantaged students make the most progress and are now essential to the school system. The school laptop program loans a laptop to each freshman for four years, but they must pay a one-time $50 insurance fee. In order to receive the laptop for free without the $50 fee, a parent must complete need-based forms, which qualify a student for the free and reduced lunch program. This is a good process because often families often do not fill out the necessary need-based forms for these programs, and this gives them incentive to fill them out so the school gets a more conservative estimate of how many of their students are in poverty. The full-day Kindergarten is anther great program because it introduces children at a younger age to a full school day, allows them to develop social skills, and adds convenience to parents that would otherwise have to pick up or drop off their child in the middle of the day.

Latinos have educational disadvantages due to language, mobility, and poverty, but various standards based education policies have been praised as effective in helping to overcome these challenges. Attempting educational reform for Latino migrant students, the Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence (CREDE) has compiled “five standards for effective teaching and learning “, which are joint productive activity, language development, making meaning, cognitive challenge, and instructional conversation. These teach the student to interact with the teacher and the rest of the class, allow them to develop their language skills in a comfortable manner, and relate the language to their life. (Gouwens, 93) Ms. Ciolino has also compiled some standards by which her staff should follow in order to instill confidence and good study skills in all students. These include standards based education, hope building, arts and advanced placement, retooling the brain, and engaging instruction. These five principals are used in the school to help reverse the detrimental effects of poverty and increase a child’s chance of postsecondary education. (Ciolino, 2011)

According to the CREDE, another study was preformed to find the best methods for teaching language to minority students after investigating a wide range of strategies. The results were that teachers, in order to best teach language, should “understand the language needs of students, explicitly plan to meet those needs, deliver instruction, and assess students’ comprehension” (Gouwens, 93). These steps have proved effective for minority children of all ages regardless of grade level, and focus on the concept that “language can and should be developed as a key element of the entire school curriculum” (Gouwens, 93). Some key pedagogical adjustments that help to implement these standards are based on the individual and class participation, such as “active, interactive classrooms where talking about the learning is encouraged” and “a focus on learning rather than on teaching, and on appreciating and building on students’ expectations and linguistic and cultural foundations” (Gouwens, 94). These language strategies and standards are important to maintain across classrooms with ESL students because they are already at an educational disadvantage and are less likely to take part in class participation.

The overall needs of Latino students are felt both by the public school system and the economy. As public schools continually fail to meet the needs of the fastest growing U.S. racial group, they are inadvertently forcing them into low SES lives and jobs. Due to the recent immigration of many Latino families, generational poverty in the United States is not common among them, however many are already suffering from poverty upon entering this country. As the U.S. economy slowly transfers from a manufacturing-based economy to a service-based economy, many jobs that Latinos have the skills for, such as agricultural work, are becoming less relevant. The Latino boy that I tutor will grow up in the United States as a second generation Latino along with millions of others, and while he is in a great school system, his SES status, reading comprehension skills and environment could hold him back from reaching his potential. He is a very smart 10-year-old and, while rambunctious at times, is determined to do well in school. I hope his determination and hard work are enough to combat the odds of Latino educational failure, and that other Latino children like him take advantage of the small opportunities that are given to them by the U.S. educational system in order to compete with students who do not need to overcome such obstacles.