
Public Education’s Dirty Secret - smsm42
https://quillette.com/2019/02/10/public-educations-dirty-secret/
======
philipkglass
The stories of attempting to teach adolescents who have no interest in
learning are as appalling as they are familiar. I have long heard similar
stories from people who went into teaching.

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.

~~~
iguy
Her the description of the problems is vivid, detailed, and sadly not
unfamiliar.

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)?

~~~
philipkglass
He personally benefited from skipping the last year of high school and
attending a university early. That was the first time in his life that he
actually found school interesting more often than not. I could sympathize with
that because I too thought that school was almost always a boring time-waster
before I started attending a university; I almost didn't go because I found
school so often pointless for the first 12 years.

"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.

~~~
iguy
Thanks. I agree that those for whom "go to college early" is a solution must
be a small minority, although they do exist.

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.

------
zxcvbn4038
NYC schools are pretty aweful unless you live on the upper west side. The few
years of his life my son was in a Montessori school, but the cost was more
then my rent, so I decided to enroll him in a public school - it was a block
away from me so I saved four hours of commuting and a couple grand a month. He
walked in the door with basic reading, writing, and simple math skills. The
receptionist looked up his birth year on a chart, and informed me my son would
be placed in kindergarten where they were learning colors - no possibility of
him testing out, no possibility of sitting in with a 1st grade class, he was
born in year X so the chart says he is in kindergarten. So he spent two days
doing colors, on the third day his name came up in a lottery for a charter
school, and I started getting up everyday at 4am to take him to Brooklynn
where he was doing 1st grade work again. The charter schools are unique to New
York City I believe, they are publicly funded but have a lot more discretion
in everything they do. Whereas the dropout rate in NYC is around 30%, and of
the 70% that do graduate only 48% graduate on time. For the charter schools
it’s closer to 90% graduate on time. When you factor in races - the NYC public
schools have their worst stats in black and Hispanic neighborhoods - no
shortage of data to back that up in Google - whereas the charter school stats
in the same neighborhoods equal or exceed the stats in the wealthiest
Caucasian neighborhoods.

------
thatfrenchguy
> Why should millions of perfectly normal adolescents, not all of them
> ghettoized, resist being educated? The reason is that they know deep down
> that due to the color of their skin, less is expected of them

It's not just race, it's also class.

------
externalreality
I don't agree with this article. The article presents the very narrow
perspective of an apparently uninformed person who thinks that invoking the
names MLK or James Baldwin will help their case. People like the author of
this article avoid, in their reasoning, any conception of income disparity, an
intrinsically racially prejudice curriculum, micro-aggressive and biased media
(to which students are constantly exposed), and any such thing that would lead
to a rational that an unfair system is producing students who are going to be
unresponsive to a traditional school system that is based on a presumption of
equality and social equity.

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.

~~~
smsm42
> of an apparently uninformed person

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?

~~~
externalreality
That you for "respectfully" disagreeing.

> 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.

~~~
smsm42
> I mean that the author doesn't seem to be very informed with respect to race
> relations or social equity issues.

"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?

~~~
externalreality
> "Race relations" is kinda wide topic

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.

~~~
smsm42
> The author is unaware of that and is thus uninformed.

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.

~~~
externalreality
> Can you provide some examples?

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.

~~~
smsm42
> In the USA you don't have to mine.

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".

~~~
externalreality
I'm going to put this to bed by just calling you a (non-racist) bigot who
wants to see things your non-racist but bigoted way. On the one hand you admit
there is a huge problem but on the other hand call "sensitivity" to this
"life-changing" sometimes "life-ending" problem "misguided". So my friend it
seems you are a bigot.

