Parents v. Seattle and Meredith v. Jefferson
Landmark case that directly comments/re-interprets Brown v. Board and forbids public schools for discriminating enrollment by race. Being (a) a minority, and (b) a teacher, of course I have something to say. But since I'm not in the country right now, and China is decidedly racially homogeneous, this is an issue that does not get a lot of coverage here, so, a brief opinion.
At first, my feelings were mixed. After all, as mentioned before, I don't like that race is such a big issue in the US, and the only way to make it less of an issue is to, well, make it less of an issue. In other words, stop discriminating by race, whether positive or negative. By that count, I should approve of the Supreme Court's decision. However, a likely result of this decision is greater de facto segregation in schools. Schools in predominantly white neighborhoods will remain white, and vice versa, since the incentive for busing is now diminished.
Which reaches the crux of the problem: just because public schools are not supposed to discriminate by race, the rest of society still does. Real estate agents and apartment landlords still consciously or subconsciously perpetrate de facto racial segregation. There is still the white flight to private schools, leaving the public schools more minority-dominant. And even though the entry into public school is no longer race-discriminant, the school system itself might still be, through teachers who encourage some students to take AP classes and other students to stay in the regular lane. Teachers who fail certain students while giving others the benefit of the doubt.
School is supposed to be the great equalizer, yes, but it's swimming against the current of society, and it is not independent from it. For example, there was a kid in my class who is very bright, and a natural history student -- inquisitive, asks all the right questions, thoughtful and makes the right connections, can judge the significance of events and evaluate the validity of their source. A solid B+ student in the class. But when he asked me if he should take AP US history the following year, I hesitated, and eventually said no. Why? The AP US History course is very heavy reading and a lot of writing. In-class writing. And 2 chapters a week of reading. Although he writes well, he hates writing in-class. (Whenever he turns in type-written essays, they're always beautiful. Whenever he turns in any class-work, he writes one word answers). Nor does he have the prior training and the home environment for him to read 2 chapters a week. I was worried that AP would not give him the opportunity to shine, and would just fail him because he can't handle the dry work load. AP is intense because that is what the standards require, and the only way to cover that much material in 8 months is to cram.
So in my choice in not recommending that he take AP, am I continuing all of the racial baggage that society has given him? (And thus lowering his chance at college) Or am I saving from failing in a track that wasn't designed for him and has no real bearing to real history anyways? I don't think I was personally racially motivated. If he was a white kid or an Asian kid and had the same temperament and background, I would have recommended the same thing. But fewer white kids and Asian kids need that additional boost in terms of work ethic and academic literacy.
Yes, I could have done more. I could have spent more effort this year getting him AP-ready. I could have had a more extended talk to him about the consequences of the choice, etc. I am learning, and I hope to do better next year. But this is also a case of race in the social sense, and how it connects with race in the school sense. How is this decision going to affect the society's discrimination of race? Is it going to start a domino-effect that changes how we think about race, or is it just going to perpetuate existing social inequities? I'm worried that it will be the latter, but hope that discussion around the case might start people thinking about the former. In any case, something needs to be done in society as a whole, and not just with public schools.
At first, my feelings were mixed. After all, as mentioned before, I don't like that race is such a big issue in the US, and the only way to make it less of an issue is to, well, make it less of an issue. In other words, stop discriminating by race, whether positive or negative. By that count, I should approve of the Supreme Court's decision. However, a likely result of this decision is greater de facto segregation in schools. Schools in predominantly white neighborhoods will remain white, and vice versa, since the incentive for busing is now diminished.
Which reaches the crux of the problem: just because public schools are not supposed to discriminate by race, the rest of society still does. Real estate agents and apartment landlords still consciously or subconsciously perpetrate de facto racial segregation. There is still the white flight to private schools, leaving the public schools more minority-dominant. And even though the entry into public school is no longer race-discriminant, the school system itself might still be, through teachers who encourage some students to take AP classes and other students to stay in the regular lane. Teachers who fail certain students while giving others the benefit of the doubt.
School is supposed to be the great equalizer, yes, but it's swimming against the current of society, and it is not independent from it. For example, there was a kid in my class who is very bright, and a natural history student -- inquisitive, asks all the right questions, thoughtful and makes the right connections, can judge the significance of events and evaluate the validity of their source. A solid B+ student in the class. But when he asked me if he should take AP US history the following year, I hesitated, and eventually said no. Why? The AP US History course is very heavy reading and a lot of writing. In-class writing. And 2 chapters a week of reading. Although he writes well, he hates writing in-class. (Whenever he turns in type-written essays, they're always beautiful. Whenever he turns in any class-work, he writes one word answers). Nor does he have the prior training and the home environment for him to read 2 chapters a week. I was worried that AP would not give him the opportunity to shine, and would just fail him because he can't handle the dry work load. AP is intense because that is what the standards require, and the only way to cover that much material in 8 months is to cram.
So in my choice in not recommending that he take AP, am I continuing all of the racial baggage that society has given him? (And thus lowering his chance at college) Or am I saving from failing in a track that wasn't designed for him and has no real bearing to real history anyways? I don't think I was personally racially motivated. If he was a white kid or an Asian kid and had the same temperament and background, I would have recommended the same thing. But fewer white kids and Asian kids need that additional boost in terms of work ethic and academic literacy.
Yes, I could have done more. I could have spent more effort this year getting him AP-ready. I could have had a more extended talk to him about the consequences of the choice, etc. I am learning, and I hope to do better next year. But this is also a case of race in the social sense, and how it connects with race in the school sense. How is this decision going to affect the society's discrimination of race? Is it going to start a domino-effect that changes how we think about race, or is it just going to perpetuate existing social inequities? I'm worried that it will be the latter, but hope that discussion around the case might start people thinking about the former. In any case, something needs to be done in society as a whole, and not just with public schools.
2 Comments:
At June 29, 2007 11:04 AM , Eric said...
This ruling doesn't necessarily have to result in successful cases of enforced racial integration losing ground to the social forces that de-integrate our schools. If they changed the criteria for selection to economic background instead of racial background, they would still disproportionately select for minorities (and particularly those minorities worst hit by poverty) while Johnny T. Suburb and his mother Belinda J. Spitefulbitch couldn't complain that they were suffering from reverse-discrimination. While I know there are differences in school performance even at equal economic levels, I still don't think impoverished white kids are all that better off than their black counterparts, so this way disadvantaged kids of whatever racial background would benefit from a preference system. While you don't have to look far to see racism still alive and kicking in American society, I think poverty and growing polarization of wealth is a lot more dangerous to the well-being of our society and a lot less difficult to tackle. Additionally, I'm hesitant to demand that a middle-class black kid be treated preferentially to a middle-class white kid. Call me a fifth-columnist for the liberal cause, but I think that, once your family's managed to get out of poverty, you need to stand on your own feet and fight for what you want.
At June 29, 2007 3:56 PM , Sushu Xia said...
Eric... I wholly agree that class is a much bigger issue than race, in terms of who lives where and who rides the bus and has free and reduced lunch, and that poor white kids deserve as much of a chance as poor black kids. But I think that race complicates the class issue, because we expect people of a certain race to be a certain class, which is really the problem. We look at a black or latino kid and assume that they're on free and reduced lunch, that they don't have a computer at home, etc etc. I think it's much harder to assert your middle-class-ness if everyone expects you to be lower-class. The black person who gets watched in stores when shopping may have more money than the white kid loitering about, but that's how it is.
I agree: a middle-class black kid should not be treated preferentially to a middle-class white kid. Ideally, they should be treated equally. But when walking down the street, they're not.
There's also the issue of education. There are some very poor Chinese immigrants who come with a lot of education, so their kids start off with higher academic literacy than, say, a kid whose parents are middle class, but don't have 50 books in their household.
You also say "once your family's managed to get out of poverty, you need to stand on your own feet and fight for what you want." I think it's harder fighting for certain races than for others, because that's how America works. The question is how to make it equal.
Post a Comment
<< Home