An excerpt from The Politics of Education K-12, available on Amazon
There is one thing stopping us from combining resources in schools that nobody talks about because we like to think we’ve moved beyond it — segregation.
The cost benefit of combining school resources resurfaced in a recent newspaper article and readers even took it one step further, asking: Why won’t New York State consolidate hundreds of small school districts and save lots of money?
There are multiple reasons why consolidation is unpopular: jobs and job loss, unions that would rather negotiate at the local level, differing local tax rates, mascots, etc. All reasons we’ve read about in the past. However, there is one reason that seldom makes even the comment section — ethnic and socioeconomic segregation of students who come from our most needy families.
Never having considered a career in education before the Vietnam War interrupted his plans to obtain a Ph.D. in physics, the author’s approach to education was different from many of the teachers, administrators and school board members he came in contact with — and in some cases clashed with — during his tenure.
Our present geographic system of school districts in New York State is no accident. Do wealthy schools want to be in the same school district as high poverty schools? No. Why not? Segregation. District boundaries guarantee those students stay over there.
It’s the same driving force behind charter schools. Segregation in schools has actually increased since the 60s, according to research I did for my book, The Politics of Education K-12, and made it impossible for urban and rural schools to compete. Think about it: Teachers in third grade at a wealthy suburban school district have classrooms of 20-25 students, with one or two receiving free or reduced price lunch and three or four children who need lots of extra daily help, tutoring and attention to have a chance for success.
In high poverty districts, class sizes are still 20-25, but the number of students receiving free or reduced price lunch increases to 18-22 and the number of children needing lots of daily extra help, tutoring or attention increases to over 20. Teachers in high poverty districts are overwhelmed and compared unfairly when test scores come out. Its statistically impossible for them to produce suburban test scores. Yes, many poor-performing urban and rural schools serving high-poverty populations can do a better job with the students they serve. But even if they do the best possible job with disadvantaged students, they still won’t match the results of their wealthier counterparts.
New York State could adopt a county-level model without impacting student achievement. However, it would require the state to admit that we segregate so the most affluent of our citizens can send their children to schools where they have a much better chance for success, while we relegate most of the students who come from poverty and their teachers to increasingly vanishing odds of success. I thought our country and our state were all about equal opportunity for all. What happened to that principle?
The author of The Politics Of Education K-12 taught math and science and became principal and later superintendent of schools in New York State.
Never having considered a career in education before the Vietnam War interrupted his plans to obtain a Ph.D. in physics, Palmer’s approach to education was different from many of the teachers, administrators and school board members he came in contact with — and in some cases clashed with — during his tenure.
#schoolvouchers #schoolchoice #publicschool #ThePoliticsofEducationK12 #charterschools #educationchoice #TxLege #vOUCHersHurt #education #WethePeople #txlege #novouchers #redfored #constitution #ruraltexas #txed #HB3 #SB2 #SaveOurSchools #NoVouchers