Whatever It Takes

I just finished a book by Paul Tough called Whatever It Takes: Geoffrey Canada's Quest to Change Harlem and America.

It was about this guy, Canada, who has this goal to transform Harlem and America by closing the achievement gap and thus getting more low-income (and mostly African American) kids though high school and college. He set up the Harlem Children's Zone where expecting parents learn about parenting. Then their three-year-olds attend a preschool, then a kindergarten, and finally middle school specifically for low-income students of Harlem. It's much more complicated than this, but Canada's goal is to create a net that kids cannot fall through; where they'll have no choice but to succeed because they have all the resources, and everybody around them will be doing the same.

This book wasn't just interesting because of what it taught me about this Harlem project that is going on at this very moment, but it also taught me about why so many low-income Americans are African American. From what I took from this book, more African Americans live with a lower-income and in the projects than do white people because African Americans haven't yet completely recovered from discrimination. (One could also argue that white (and any other color) Americans haven't recovered because they're doing the discriminating...) Many obviously have recovered, but because they tend to live together for support (due to discrimination), African Americans were still discriminated against and left out of the loop that would help them prepare for jobs and teach them how to raise children according to the "correct" middle-class, American standard.

These people aren't bad parents; they're just different. For example, they don't promote eye-contact with their children, which hinders children in a society where strong eye contact is valued. African American families tend to not promote conversations with their children between parents and children. Adults are to be looked up to and respected rather than talked to on level ground with a young child. Again, this isn't the norm with all African American families, but it is with a majority of low-income families, no matter the color. In essence, kids are being raised so differently and in more difficult circumstances, often with a young, single mother with little money and in a society where many families live off welfare and don't have a decent education. And, most schools are of poor quality.

To quote the book: "However you measure parenting, middle-class parents tend to do it very differently from poor parents - and the path they follow, in turn, tends to give their children an array of advantages, both cognitive and non-cognitive: a bigger vocabulary, better brain chemistry, a more assertive attitude. As Lareau pointed out, kids from poor families might be nicer, they might be happier, they might be more polite -- but in countless ways the manner in which they are raised puts them at a disadvantage in the measures that count in contemporary American society."

I'm beginning to better understand how charter schools work. The students are chosen by lottery, but most of the parents who enter their children in the lottery are upper- or middle-class because they're more motivated to do so. Charter schools produce great students and great test scores compared to most public schools, but that's because of the quality of students they have. Most charter schools make the smart and wealthy smarter and wealthier.

This book further convinced me that I want to work at a low-income school. According to this book, experienced teachers can usually choose where they teach, and they almost always choose to go to a wealthier school - where they're needed least. The teachers with the least experienced are left with the jobs at low-income schools where good, experienced teachers are needed most. I think I may have written something about this topic in my blog about Jonathan Kozol's book. But anyway, knowing that I'll be needed more in a low-income school has made me want to teach there even more. Why teach where the kids already have the resources and where there are plenty of great teachers who can teach them the necessary material? It takes a truly gifted teacher to teach low-income students who have grown up disadvantaged from the beginning and how are forced to attend school with limited materials.

Geoffrey Canada said, "I want to get out of the business of trying to save failing students before their lives are destroyed. I've been in that business, and it's a tough business and a good business, and I'm glad some people are in it--but I really think it's the wrong place to focus." What Canada means is that efforts should be focused more on the children at a very young age so that they never get to the point where they're failing or disadvantaged because it takes a great deal of strength, energy, time, and resources to "save" kids. His endeavors with Harlem Children's Zone have proven his point; the kids who are in the program basically from birth flourish while the middle school students who entered the program in 6th grade are hopeless or almost hopeless. I realize that, more than likely, I'll be in the "saving kids business" because I don't want to teach elementary school. I probably wouldn't hate teaching the younger ones, but my niche is with the older kids. I know that a difference can be made, but I'll have to work very, very hard. I'm currently reading The Freedom Writers Diary and I'm starting to get an idea of how to reach kids who are "disadvantaged" and need saving. Canada also said, "If we continue waiting until middle and high school to intervene with poor students of color, I just don't think that we're going to change the numbers in America as a whole." This statement made me a little discouraged. Why should I teach middle and high school if I can't make a difference? Well, Canada isn't out to change a single person or class or school. He's off to change all of America. I'm not shooting for the stars like him, for better or worse. I want to make a difference, and I know that I can do so -- one class at a time. There are so many examples of secondary school teachers changing the lives of his or her students, and I want to be part of those success stories.

Furthermore, there will always be secondary school students who need help, and I want to be part of the help that they receive. In fact, they need help more than younger kids, even if the younger ones can avoid falling into desolation and failure, but the secondary school kids can still be saved from that failure; we can't just label them as a lost cause.

Obama and Canada were once on the same page - before Obama's election, anyway. Obama wanted to create a Harlem Children's Zone-type institute/program in 20 major cities to help the families that need it most, but let's see what Obama really does.

Part of me is really excited to jump into teaching, but part of me is reluctant. Sure, I'm reading a lot about low-income African and Hispanic students and what needs to be done to destroy the achievement gap, but can I do it? How will my reading translate to actually carrying out the act? At any rate, I'm more passionate about this subject than any other, and I'm nearly positive that I want to be a teacher in a low-income school, but I can't say that for sure if it's what I want to do for the rest of my life because I don't really know what it's like.

--Elie