Disadvantaged children

I used to feel, as do most liberals and progressives, that it's poor (disproportionately minority) students who particularly need the public schools, moreso than middle class (often white) students. If we have public schools to promote egalitarianism and social mobility, then an assault on public schooling is primarily an assault on the economically disadvantaged. But-- perhaps due to funding inequalities, I really don't know-- the public schools are not particularly good at giving equal opportunities.

Among public school students in Virginia, white students test on average in the 60th percentile in math, compared to the 50th percentile for minority students. This math skills disparity is cut in half among homeschooled students, where whites average at the 82nd percentile and minorities in the 77th percentile. In reading, the disparity in public schools is similar, with whites testing at the 61st percentile and minorities at the 49th percentile; among homeschooled children there is no difference. Whites and minorities both average in the 87th percentile. Check out the details (and some nice charts) here.

As for socioeconomic status, it has a large effect on writing and math skills among public school students. While students whose parents have a college degree average in the 61st percentile in writing and the 63rd percentile in math, students whose parents never graduated from high school test only in the 34th percentile in writing and the 28th in math. Doesn't look to me like the public schools are doing a very good job of educating students equally. Among homeschooled students, children score in the 80's regardless of parents' level of education.

We don't have explicit "tracking" in US schools, as they do in Japan and Europe. But we have tracking all the same.

In an open letter of resignation, detailing the reasons why he could no longer teach public school in good conscience, John Gatto wrote:

David learns to read at age four; Rachel, at age nine: In normal development, when both are 13, you can't tell which one learned first -- the five-year spread means nothing at all. But in school I will label Rachel "learning disabled" and slow David down a bit, too.

For a paycheck, I adjust David to depend on me to tell him when to go and stop. He won't outgrow that dependency. I identify Rachel as discount merchandise, "special education." After a few months she'll be locked into her place forever.

In an interview, he describes discovering that a girl in the remedial reading class which he was substitute teaching could, in fact, read quite competently:

There was a reader on the teacher's desk, and she grabbed the reader and said, "Ask me to read anything." I cracked it open to a story called "The Devil and Daniel Webster," which is an extremely difficult piece of American Victorian prose. And she read it without batting an eyelash. I said to her, "You know, sometimes, Milagros, mistakes are made. I'll speak to the principal." I walked into the principal's office and the woman began shrieking at me, saying, "I'm not in the habit of taking instruction from a substitute teacher." I said, "I'm not telling you what to do. It's just that this little girl can read." And she said something to me that, at my dying moment, I'll still remember. She said, "Mr. Gatto, you have no idea how clever these low-achieving children are. They will memorize a story so that it looks as if they know how to read it." Talk about an Alice in Wonderland world! If that little girl had memorized "The Devil and Daniel Webster," then we want her in national politics! The principal said, "I will come in and show you." After school, she came in and put Milagros through her paces. The little girl did well. Then she told Milagros, "We will transfer you." And when Milagros left, the principal said to me, "You will never be hired at this school again."

(The interview is fascinating-- check it out!)

I do feel that the government has a responsibility to assist in the education of our children, for those ideals I mentioned at the start: to foster equality and social mobility, and of course, to have an educated populace. Where possible, it seems homeschooling is superior to formal schooling (and costs on average 1/10th what public schooling costs), but that should leave more funding and space for families who want assistance. I despair of trying to reform the current system. Gatto said, in his acceptance speech for the New York City Teacher of the Year award:

The truth is that schools don't really teach anything except how to obey orders. This is a great mystery to me because thousands of humane, caring people work in schools as teachers and aids and administrators but the abstract logic of the institution overwhelms their individual contributions. Although teachers do care and do work very hard the institution is psychopathic, it has no conscience. It rings a bell and the young man in the middle of writing a poem must close his notebook and move to different cell....

It isn't designed toward progressive ends; it's the Prussian model. Our children have less knowledge than schoolchildren in countries like Sweden, where school lasts only 9 years, not 13. Yet the answer is always more funding, longer days, more testing, earlier schooling, a longer school year. I don't think more of the same is the answer, anymore.