Public Education’s Dirty Secret
quillette.com
quillette.com
But the sweeping conclusion that the students behave this way because "they know deep down that due to the color of their skin, less is expected of them" is thinly supported. Maybe she would feel differently if she had also taught in majority-white schools where students also raise hell.
I know that white students can get away with most of this anti-social behavior too, because I met one online in the early 2000s. I was a sophomore in college and he was a sophomore in high school. We were both interested in chemistry and computers and started chatting through the PM system of an overclocking forum.
He was bored in school. When he wasn't reading about chemistry and computers on his own he was booby-trapping teachers' equipment and classrooms and spreading mocking nicknames for people he didn't like -- teachers and students alike. He ignored most of his assigned work. He once kept his father's handgun in a backpack through the school day just to see if he could get away with it. His friends were people that he got to work on undermining teachers with him. After a year he ran away from home, got as far as the West Coast, reluctantly returned when his parents said he could leave school, and dropped out to get his GED after returning. After that he went straight to college, grad school for a couple of years and then dropped out, went into software development. AFAIK his antisocial and even criminal behavior fortunately stopped after high school.
He got away with pretty much everything while he was still in high school. This was in an affluent majority-white suburb, and his family was even higher income than the area average. Still it seems that teachers had little power to reign in his antisocial behavior.
What can we do with school-aged children who have no interest in learning and actively sabotage the educational opportunity for students who show up willing to learn? I don't know. But policies that keep them in school alongside willing learners are not helping. Teachers shouldn't have to be good babysitters and jailers in addition to being good teachers.
This is largely separate from her suggestions as to what might solve the problem, or at least reduce it. It's not obviously correct, but I wouldn't be too quick to write it off... she presumably thought about this for a while, and whether or not it would work, it communicates at least something about the students' mental state.
I would be curious to hear what sort of system you think your hell-raising overclocker might have benefitted from. In some non-US systems, enough of this would eventually land you in a track which is pretty close to army boot-camp -- very very rigid with lots of focus on standing in line & saying "sir", none at all on french poetry. Do you think this would have improved his life (or that of his classmates)?
"Go to college early" is only a solution for a specific, unusual kind of troublemaker. I sympathize more with his teachers. His teachers and fellow students shouldn't have had to endure that behavior from him. Apparently many public school districts, whether poor or affluent, don't ensure that disruptive students can be removed from the classroom. That's what is necessary for teachers to actually teach. What to do with the disruptive students after they're removed from classrooms, I'm not qualified to speculate about. I'm just saying that leaving them in the classroom is also sabotaging all the students who did initially show up willing to learn, and it's hell for the teachers too.
But I do wonder for how many more "do something meaningful" might be a solution. Guys perfectly qualified to be the bricklayer's apprentice... who we've decided must sit still in school until they're 18, even if it's a sad pretence of schooling.
It's not just race, it's also class.
What is more is this uninformed person, doesn't seem to know why it is not OK for a "white person" to use certain words. Showing that she has no understanding of recent history and how words take on a different meaning depending on who is saying them. This isn't a new concept; natural languages(unlike say many computing languages) are VERY context sensitive and have always been so.
This article reveals that it is, in fact, too the teacher who is lacking education. Here I yield to works like that from Robin DiAngelo and Ken Wytsma.
What do you mean by "uninformed"? From the article it is apparent the author actually worked in the school as a teacher for years, and she writes about the experience. I am sure people may disagree with the conclusions, but calling her "uninformed" just sounds out of place to me - if the person literally doing the thing for years is not informed, what does that even mean?
> system is producing students who are going to be unresponsive to a traditional school system
What you mean by "traditional"? I've been in school outside the US, and what she describes looks nothing like any school I've ever been in. I have also read there have been lots of reforms and various approaches tried, with various degree of success, in various US schools. In what sense is the experience she describes "traditional" and what non-"traditional" approach would you advocate?
> What do you mean by "uninformed"?
I mean that the author doesn't seem to be very informed with respect to race relations or social equity issues.
> What you mean by "traditional"?
I mean a school system that fails to take into account or fully address the same issues that I state above.
It is hard to tackle these issues because it is still too hard to have a reasoned conversation on race and the great injustices of the past (both very intentional and unintentional) that have lead students to the despair they find themselves in today. The author of this article is part of the problem IMHO.
"Race relations" is kinda wide topic, encompassing more or less the whole human history. It would be more useful if you point out which relevant aspects of this huge topic, in your opinion, the author got wrong and how, in your opinion, it influenced her discussion about education. I understand this could potentially also be huge, but at least 2-3 of major examples would be very helpful.
> I mean a school system that fails to take into account or fully address the same issues that I state above.
Yes, but address how? Any school system could fail to fully address one or the other aspects of the full history of race relations and social issues. It is impossible not to - it's the whole human history in all its vast diversity, and nobody would ever be able to account or fully address all aspects of it. Pointing out which aspects and how are not addressed would be much more interesting than just saying "oh, race relations, therefore whole article is invalid". I don't see how it adds anything, it just sounds dismissive of an experience of the real person and painstaking work she made of recording it and sharing it with us. What do you thing she have done wrong, specifically?
> It is hard to tackle these issues because it is still too hard to have a reasoned conversation on race
True, it is not easy. But I think that's not the reason to not try?
> The author of this article is part of the problem IMHO.
I do not see how. She honestly tried to help those students who want to learn and advance, despite harsh conditions that surround them, and she found her efforts consistently being contradicted and nullified by the system, which does not help people who want to learn, and allows people who behave destructively to continue their behavior not only to their own detriment, but to the detriment of others. She spent a lot of time and effort trying to teach people despite these circumstances and despite constant assault on her human dignity. If that counts as being part of the problem, what isn't?
What I mean by race relations is directly related to how the teacher did not know why it is not OK for her, as a white women, to use a particular word. Her stance: "why can't I use it, you used it." This shows a complete lack of understanding regarding the history of the word and how it was reclaimed and repurposed by large segments of the African American community. In short (very short) the word is not hurtful coming from the mouths of certain people when spoken a certain way (anyone who has lived in a foreign country and learned a foreign language would know that some words/phrases should not be spoken by foreigners - its kind of the same thing here). The author is unaware of that and is thus uninformed. The author believes that she is actually teaching the students when she is the one that should, in fact, listen to what the students are trying to tell her.
> True, it is not easy. But I think that's not the reason to not try?
Trying has little consequence for white Americans, trying has very grave consequences for African Americans. I've seen whites deny accusations of racial mistreatment to the point where they are seriously contemplating having the African American committed.
> I do not see how. She honestly tried to help those students who want to learn and advance.
If feel the adjective phrase "students who want to learn" is an unintentional euphemism for "White students". Know that some students are in a society that from day one tells them they are worthless and are undeserving. Any human being would develop psychoses in such an environment. It doesn't help that the majority of self-positive imagery for these students (imagery that show, at least, healthy, un-impoverished individuals with confidence) comes from explicit rap videos, not royalty in ancient castles, scientist, tech entrepreneurs, or otherwise.
smsm42, I hope you understand.
No, I think she understood perfectly well the usual taboo. And snapped and used the forbidden word anyway.
And then used the episode as a teaching moment, maybe the only time (in the article) when she had the students' attention. And managed to point out to the students how thin their logic around this taboo actually is.
Is this the only way in which you think her uninformed? Your comments seem to come back to this one point repeatedly, which sounds like it occupied 15 minutes of a decade's experience.
It not that I keep revisiting the same topic. No, in contrast , its just that I keep getting asked the same question so I keep giving the same answer.
I think the author is perfectly aware of this theory (pretty much everybody who have learned to read by now has). Whether she agrees with it or not is another thing.
> The author believes that she is actually teaching the students when she is the one that should, in fact, listen to what the students are trying to tell her.
That's kinda her job - to teach the students. That's why she is called "teacher" and they are called "students". To listen to the students to tell her they don't want to be taught is not her job. Her job is to overcome this natural infantile attitude and still teach them. Kids are often lazy and dumb - not all of them, not all the time, but these are some of the natural states that kids - and adults - fall into, I know, I was an unruly kid once. The good teacher knows how to get the kid out of this state and into the state where he or she can be taught. The good system supports the teacher in this. This is not what is happening.
> Trying has little consequence for white Americans, trying has very grave consequences for African Americans
Grave consequences like what? I did hear about white Americans being fired from their jobs and make unemployable for saying single wrong word in a wrong time - without intent to hurt anyone, just mentioning the word exists, but intent does not matter anymore. I haven't heard about African American committed because they discussed racial relationships - maybe in 60s in the South, but now? Can you provide some examples? That of course would be very bad - nobody - not white, not African American, not non-African and non-American - should ever be hurt for just trying to discuss things and explain their position.
> If feel the adjective phrase "students who want to learn" is an unintentional euphemism for "White students
You are of course wrong. And I must suspect the reason you are wrong is that you are trying to mine the situation for a racial angle. This is the only reason one might make a conclusion like that - other than being so much of a racist as to declare no single non-white student ever wanted to learn. I don't think even David Duke would say something like that, even for him it's too obviously false. It's obviously false for you too, so I conclude you just trying to mine a racial angle when there's none.
The problem of course is not "white" against "non-white" students, but students that are from vulnerable communities - including African-Americans - that want to learn and improve their conditions, but lack the support system. They try, to only to be suppressed by both their peers (which is expected, kids can be dumb) and by adult and school system (which is unbelievably cruel, idiotic and inexcusable). The problem is not white students hurt, the problem is smart students hurt - and most of those hurt aren't white, because those hurt are those that lack existing strong support systems, and guess who those are.
> Know that some students are in a society that from day one tells them they are worthless and are undeserving.
That's exactly the problem I describe above. When the student tries to prove her worth, to achieve something, she gets pushed down, gets impeded and gets no support from the system. And if some brave teacher decides to support the student, the teacher gets punished and told not to do it again.
> It doesn't help that the majority of self-positive imagery for these students (imagery that show, at least, healthy, un-impoverished individuals with confidence) comes from explicit rap videos
It doesn't. But when somebody tries to come and tell them - hey kids, maybe instead of listening to songs about killing cops and beating up bitches we listen to some nicer things, they get called ignorant racists. I think some conversation should also go into maybe changing that.
Google Dr. Robin Diangelo? She puts it best. You'll likely disagree with everything she has to say because you want to. However, I challenge you to at least listen to her. After that look for some more research into implicit bias. You'll find everything from Xbox Kinect experiments that show how the body language of White teachers can change (for the worse) when talking to minority students and more things that will change your perspective. That is if you want your perspective to align with the truth. I am guessing that you are most comfortable with your existing point-of-view.
> You are of course wrong. And I must suspect the reason you are wrong is that you are trying to mine the situation for a racial angle.
In the USA you don't have to mine. Race plays into many (if not all) situations in the country whether you want to believe it or not. This one most definitely does. The article explicitly uses certain words. Race is right there in the article my friend.
> That's exactly the problem I describe above...
I would have to agree with that statement. But I don't see this teacher as one who has the proper education and empathy to help. If she really, truly, wants to help she can first further educate herself in race relations and the mentality of the disenfranchised.
In this case, you had to. The situation is "poor people (yes, mostly African American) against the system that is built to keep them down". You make it to be "white people against black people". This proposes all the wrong solutions - instead changing the corrupt system that hinders students' advancement and keeps them from getting out of the cycle of poverty, you would promote "racial sensitivity" and "listening to the students" and "white people shouldn't try to do anything before they read all my favorite books" - with the focus, as it turns out, on enabling and protecting disruptive and non-learning students and supporting their negative attitude towards learning and advancement. not only for themselves but spilling out to their peers. Instead of working against the corrupt system that makes it impossible for a bright student to achieve success, you are working against the white people that try to help this student, because they are white, so they must be the problem. This makes - already made - the situation worse.
Yes, USA has a long history of racial issues. But the way it is approached now - especially in the education system - does not work to heal this history and make things better. It works to keep people that were left behind for historical reasons - still left behind, now for reasons of broken policy and misguided "sensitivity".
Here you present a hypothetical (people are are getting called racist for [respectfully] suggesting that students should stop listening to some explicit forms of rap music) while asking me for concrete examples. When has a person been called racist for such a thing? Can I ask you to stop with your double standards?
And Again you are only looking at it from your (privileged) perspective. What if the only "positive" imagery you could relate to was not so positive. You would still have little choice but to relate that imagery for self esteem. And what if somebody from another group who has the privilege of an abundance of relatable alternative positive imagery came and told you not to relate to that single source of positive imagery available to you. Until race becomes a non-issue (I don't see that happening anytime soon) one thing that you can do to help is support alternative positive imagery for minorities. Find a minority politician (Ocasio-Cortez maybe?) you like and support her... have a James Baldwin meetup. Tell people the truth about Christopher Columbus and how sophisticated the people who were subject to his genocide were. Spread positive image about people other than whites and you will surely start solving the problem. Being the angry white guy that keeps saying "Stop listening rap music" is probably not going to work.
Please note that there is nothing wrong with spreading positive messages about whites, but ensure that you are not doing so at the expense of the truth or at the expense or exclusion of other groups. This is root cause of the problem and the article does not even touch upon it!
* And yes there are positive role-models in the African American community but not enough to counter the overwhelmingly biased media.
Why can't they relate to other imagery? Maybe because they have been told since birth that the only imagery they could relate to is of someone who looks exactly like them?
And why isn't there better examples? Why rappers singing about killing cops and raping bitches get showered with money and adoration, and never get called out on the impact they make on the community by their example? Why it's not a topic of the discussion? Social impact of business is all the hot topic now, but try to find an article about social impact of gangsta rap and its glorification on the African-American community? Why people like Herman Cain - successful businessman, author, publicist and politician, or Benjamin Carson - pioneering neurosurgeon, holder of 60 honorary doctorates, recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom - are not getting even one hundredths of an adoration a rapper does? Who is to blame for that? Who is calling out this and trying to change that? Who is responsible for the fact that much more kids want to be Tupac, a convicted rapist, than Carson, a neurosurgeon with Presidential Medal of Freedom?
> Find a minority politician (Ocasio-Cortez maybe?) you like and support her
Rather bad example. I already lived under socialism, I don't need another one. Especially not one with intellectual capacities so limited as AOC. If you wanted to promote your cause (though I frankly don't care too much if politician is "minority", I care for her or his views, principles and capabilities), it's better to choose some politician that is not the laughingstock of the nation. AOC is of Puerto-Rican descent (well, she's from Bronx, but her parents come from Puerto-Rico). There are by now dozens, if not hundreds, prominent politicians of similar descent. Why should I choose the worst example? If I'd rather choose Nikki Haley, who is a very successful US ambassador and I hope one day will become a successful presidential candidate.
> Tell people the truth about Christopher Columbus
Columbus was a terrible person (among hundred others terrible conquistadors), but who cares now? Do you thing a young person in poor school that dreams of one day getting to college and becoming a neurosurgeon but can't really study because his peers are unruly and they'd mess him up if they learn he's trying to get ahead and study instead of listening for gangsta rap and smoking ganja like normal people do - do you think he cares about how white people view Columbus? Do you think that is his or her primary problem that we need to solve now?
What I read was a teacher describing her own experience working to try and fix a problem and discovering that nobody else involved has any interest in seeing that problem solved.
Here is my take: none of the historic examples of wrongdoing by this group or that have anything to do with getting educated or embracing a mindset of achievement as opposed to one that will keep them in a state of economic dependency forever.
Ask yourself: what kind of person is more useful to a politician trying to stay in power than one who will always need that politician to secure financial benefits for them? Someone who is capable of standing on their own two feet or someone who believes that the deck is stacked against them?
I know who I believe in this story.