<p>
</p>
<p>Of course not! Heaven forbid their child be denied the best, but if you want to deny other people’s children the best, then that is no problem. </p>
<p>I really despair for this country sometimes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, please. What kind of revisionist history is this? Never did the poor wash upon our shores, no, of course not. It was those people who were doing well in their home countries who just packed up and moved to America, for absolutely no reason, I might add.</p>
<p>My poor, uneducated grandfather arrived here with nothing, as did most of the immigrants of his era. Read a history book, for goodness sake.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>mncollegemom—The programs that are aimed at the kids in the schools DO get the kids involved, by definition. My Dd’s outreach science program, for instance, brings a hands-on experience to elementary aged kids, geared to their interest level and very well thought out to inspire and motivate, and plant the seed that science is an exciting field. They are all involved just by being there, and for the most part, they love it. The kids come running from the playground and surround her with, “Yea! We’re getting science today!” So yeah, they do take advantage of it, and they have an opportunity that others in similar schools don’t have because this is a privately funded grant-based program that only allows for a small number of participating schools. I wish it were more common, but the money only goes so far. ( Dd is not working for free- 26 years old and needs to pay the rent.)
So, kids are involved. Parents? I can’t speak to that, as they aren’t involved in this particular program, but their lack of involvement hasn’t hindered its success.</p>
<p>A few pages back, we heard this from Hyperjulie:
</p>
<p>I feel this is extremely germain to this discussion, as schools- teachers in particular- can be very instrumental in being that “other” for the child with an uninvolved or otherwise difficult home-life.<br>
Which is why we need to invest in better teachers, better schools, and better opportunities for those especially unlikely to make it out of poverty- those children in our poorest communities.</p>
<p>It isn’t either or… Either it is parents’ attitudes and home life that fosters achievement, or it is community support and good schools that foster achievement, or it is an individual child’s unique curiosity and drive that foster achievement…</p>
<p>Rather, all of these factors coalesce… or fail to cohere in support of a child. </p>
<p>Again, I refer back to the Harlem Children’s Zone philosophy… Read Paul Tough’s book, “Whatever It Takes.” (sorry, can’t seem to underscore here). They actively recruit (going door-to-door even) pregnant parents and parents of infants to their Baby College, including “incentivizing” attendance (gift cards, baby care items, baby showers). That is, they absolutely want to enroll those parents who are trying to do well for themselves and their children-to-be, those who want to learn everything they can about early childhood development and the community resources available for their families. </p>
<p>But just as much, they want to reach those parents who have never given a thought to how to make things better, the parents who may have been on drugs, the parents who were abandoned by their own parents, or grew up with domestic violence, with no model of a what a good home life might be. They want to begin to put in the mind of those parents that things can be different for their children and to empower them to help their children. This program acknowledges the role of parents in their child’s development, without blaming parents who, by virtue of their own upbringing or lack thereof, failed to absorb caring parenting by example. And, this is also a program that includes respect to both parents (finding their strengths) and to their cultures (serving mainly AA and Latino parents, with most staff from similar cultural backgrounds).</p>
<p>But, the early start is not enough. The idea is that if you are in a chaotic environment (neighborhood with many males gone–in jail, gang violence rampant, poor quality housing, a paucity of safe places to play, erratic or poor performing schools (however much money the schools receive)), it will be harder (not impossible, but much, much more difficult) to maintain positive effects (achievement or other) throughout childhood. So, they are trying to follow Baby College with strong preschool programs, including a parent-education component, followed by strong charter elementary, middle, and high-schools. This is in addition to the usual stand-alone support programs (afterschool supports, etc) for kids not in the more intensive supportive system. So far, they are having marvelous results. </p>
<p>OF COURSE IT TAKES AN ENTIRE CHILDHOOD. How many of us would have taken care of ourselves (or spouses) only during pregnancy, but once the child was born consider that, other than providing for their physical well-being, our jobs were over? Or, after having ensured that our children received what they needed during the preschool years, would we have taken the position that, from that point forward, schools, homework help, extracurricular activities, moral support, these were irrelevant? Would we have put our children in the very poorest performing schools, failed to provide them with help if they needed, and expected them to do well? So very American of us to expect a quick fix for other people’s children. The kids had Head Start, why have they fallen behind by high school? A few reading volunteers-- why isn’t that enough? </p>
<p>While the following is anecdotal, I have been surprised at how many of my well-educated, professional acquaintances have had children who floundered during high-school or early college. These are kids who were failing classes or were disengaged or struggled with mental health issues that sometimes arise in this age group. All of these parents were savvy enough to find other options for their kids-- middle college programs, independent study, gap years (City Year, Americorps, etc.), charter schools, private schools, or appropriate counseling/therapy if needed. All of these kids entered high school with age-level academic skills if not above grade-level attainment… In similar situations, many lower-income students would simply have dropped out of school (and may have been struggling with a less supportive home life and academic skills deficits entering high school.) The earlier group will be indistinguishable ten years from now from kids who entered college or work training programs straight out of high school. The latter group we seem to judge as failures.</p>
<p>Yes, not everyone could or should go to college. But, with the decreasing percentage of people in the middle class(es), and the increase of children in poverty, the fact that poor children on average are doing so much more poorly academically than their wealthier peers should concern us all. We no longer live in a society in which hard physical or unskilled labor will provide an income to provide for a family. Ultimately, if we have increasing numbers of people remaining in poverty, how does this provide for the tax revenues that our country needs? How do we compete with other countries in terms of innovation in a knowledge economy? Yes, there still may exist outliers who grew up in poverty, but succeeded against all odds. But, can we take the chance that these individuals will exist in sufficient numbers to offset the lack of earning power and need for safety net support by those increasing numbers who remain in poverty? In this global economy in which many of our competitors invest in their “human capital”, we may well see our country’s standard of living fall if we fail to see every child as important to the country’s success. E pluribus unum… what kind of “One country” do we want to be?</p>
<p>I like your expanded description of the high school divide, ‘mamita’. Being able to “read, write and subtract” might get you through 8th grade, but the curve is much steeper moving from freshman year to Junior year. The things that my kids do in HS as nothing like what we did in a suburban public “college prep” environment 25 years ago. And mncollegemom, there aren’t enough hours in the day that the school computer lab is open to do the amount of homework expected during non weekend, non vacation school hours. That is, assuming you attend a school that has a computer lab.</p>
<p>" That is, assuming you attend a school that has a computer lab."</p>
<p>or are allowed to stay because you don’t have to go babysit your B or S.
Or a host of other reasons that lots of privileged people don’t have any idea exist.</p>
<p>Excellent post, mamita.</p>
<p>We have a problem with education in this country. We can’t expect children born into poverty, with uninvolved and uneducated parents, to escape their poverty. How are they supposed to do that without help? How can they not turn into their parents without education, role models, and hope? You can’t blame a child for being poor and having parents who don’t know how to parent. You can’t blame a child for not being “plucky” enough, when they have been raised in an environment that isn’t educating them or giving them any promise of a future that looks different than their parents.</p>
<p>
That hasn’t been my experience with my students. Exactly the opposite, in fact. They would tell you that their children’s ability to learn English is severely compromised by the “support services” forced on them. Those who understand how important English language skills are have to work very hard to make that happen for their kids. There is an entire bureaucracy with a very lucrative vested interest in keeping those kids from becoming fluent in English.</p>
<p>I also have never met any illegal immigrants in all these years who were wealthy in Mexico or Guatemala or China. Particularly with respect to Mexico and Guatemala, they tend to be the poorest, most vulnerable citizens whose interests are of no consequence to the governments who exploit them for their remittances, the employers who exploit them for their labor, and the do-gooders who exploit them for profit.</p>
<p>^^^ I think kids do learn English quickly when they are very young if they are surrounded with English. I agree that efforts to teach in their native language can be more harmful than helpful, depending on how it is handled. While some of the teachers in Dd’s school are bilingual, there is no bilingual program, and kids are taught in English. As a former elementary school teacher, I strongly agree with this approach. Kids can learn English when they are 6, 7 and 8 fairly quickly, even if Spanish is spoken at home.</p>
<p>mncollegemom:
Wow! My ancestors did not get this memo. Uneducated - um, does illiteracy count? My great-grandparents “had the money to come here” in the early 1900s as a result of working for years at unskilled, poorly-paying jobs and saving - much as the immigrants of today do.</p>
<p>When you make assertions that are unfounded in fact, people are less likely to buy your argument.</p>
<p>
Unfortunately, in NYC that just doesn’t happen and I don’t think it is in the least helpful.</p>
<p>mamita:
</p>
<p>This pretty much sums it up. Thank you.</p>
<p>"Unfortunately, in NYC that just doesn’t happen and I don’t think it is in the least helpful. "</p>
<p>That is also true in the inner cities in CT. Most people who came to the US early in the last century like my grandparents were almost illiterate. I don’t think any of my grandparents went beyond 5th grade in their homeland. They left their countries because they were poor and lacked opportunities. Why would they come here if they were wealthy?? However, at that time there was more of a need to assimilate into our culture and they were proud to be Americans - I don’t sense that is as true today of many immigrants.</p>
<p>Anecdotally, I know a few homes where the native tongue is the only language that is spoken (even though in a couple of them the parents speak reasonably good English but want to make sure the kids don’t lose their “other” language). In all of these cases, the kids speak English just like my kids or anyone else’s kids that I know. You would never guess they weren’t good old American children. </p>
<p>Are some of you saying that some children of immigrants don’t learn English well even if they start very young and are taught in English speaking schools?</p>
<p>Yes - I gave you an example already.</p>
<p>TV4caster–I am well aware that those issues exist and have stated as such–the rest of what I posted was “talk to the teacher and make arrangements”. </p>
<p>Also, I have yet to hear of a school that does not have computers these days…if they can’t do the work at home, work in a study hall into their schedules during the day where they can access the computers. Also, in communities that don’t have high access rates to the internet, the schools would not HAVE online assignments, etc. It works here because 98% of the homes in our community have internet access…the few that don’t can use any of the 400 computers in the school.</p>
<p>Tvcaster, yes in Los Angeles it is a real problem. In some schools, four out of five students are not proficient in English after 6 years of schooling.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Umm, it might be different in a poor, inner-city community, where some people live miles from a grocery store much less have wi-fi at home. And, as saintfan pointed out, it is not practical for a student to do all his or her homework at school! This thread could go on for five years and you would never admit that, as TV4caster points out above, people in some communities might not be able to take advantage of certain resources “for a host of other reasons that lots of privileged people don’t have any idea exist.”</p>
<p>frazzled1–and did you ask them who sponsored their immigration? Please review your history books and go talk with immigration officials about current and past immigration standards in the US. It was NOT free entrance to anyone that wanted to come. Many people were turned away. People had to prove they had marketable skills to get past Ellis Island and other ports. It wasn’t just a free swinging gate to get into the US.</p>
<p>absweetmarie–and AGAIN, taking this out of context, I said before that statement that online homework works here because of the access to the internet and THEN I said, in areas that don’t have high internet access at home would not HAVE online homework assignments…</p>