Adventures in Learning

“School choice”: Gee, choice sounds like a good thing, until you realize that school choice has always meant segregation. It meant racial segregation in the South when I was growing up. It is playing out that way here, by way of economic segregation, and in another important way: While we have gained schools with science focus or arts focus, we have lost our capacity to teach science and arts in our neighborhood schools. Good schools mean every child has robust choices close to home, in comprehensive neighborhood schools. We know how to do that, but we can’t do it without financial investment. We have redesigned education multiple times to try to do it for cheap, and the result has been persistent turmoil, not the best environment for learning. I want excellent schools, not just good schools. We know how to do that, and you can’t do that for cheap.

And while I’m on the subject of education, I have another one, sort of a pet peeve of mine: “At-risk children.” This term is often used interchangeably with “poor children and children of color.” I have several problems with this one. The first one is obvious: ALL children are at risk. ALL. The second is sneakier: it makes it sound as though there is something about the kids, some deficiency, that makes them “at-risk.” Barring a medical condition, children are not born “at-risk,” but many of them are born into risky environments. Surround every kid with love and exciting things to learn and they won’t be any more “at-risk” than the rest.

And what about “higher standards”? I say it can’t be “higher” unless JOY in learning is part of the picture. What will we reap, if all of our children, 100%, test well on the part of reading and math that we test, but generally hate reading and math? We need to apply “higher standards” to adults who make these decisions, and stop shaking up our kids educational opportunities based on sloppy or wishful thinking.