"Well, 80% of the teachers there have PhDs, and that just won't be true at a public school"

I've been thinking about writing this blog now for a while, and I just overheard a conversation that made the decision for me. So you can expect a lot of ranting and raving from here on out, as well as perhaps a few constructive criticisms and suggestions on what should be done in the massive, ambiguous and now seemingly all-inclusive field of education.

I was sitting in the coffee shop, really trying not to eavesdrop like usual and do my contracts reading. But instead I was distracted by a conversation next to me. A young-ish woman (lets say 30) and a somewhat older man (lets say 50) were having a conversation about the educational opportunities available to her child. She was asking about quality of instruction, types of opportunities, visiting schools, etc....all the things that a parent should probably do when making educational choices for their child. Except that her child was 2, and most of her questions pertained to tracking him into the best high school. She expressed concern about how if he was accepted to so and so competitive elementary school, x school ended at grade 6 and then there would be a 3 year gap before high school, and where would he go. After all, her husband went to Loyola and he really wants their son to go there. To which her companion said that her husband "really needed to do his research," extolling the virtues of private schools, naming some posh schools in LA and saying "Well, 80% of the teachers there have PhDs, and that just won't be true at a public school." I feel the need to remind you, at this juncture, that the child in question is TWO. The woman seemed to be very concerned about this revelation, and worried that somehow she and her husband may be accidentally dooming their child to a life of misery or failure.

Contrast this to last night, when I listened to a podcast of This American Life from September about Geoffrey Canada. For those of you ("you" being perhaps no one at this point, but let me humor myself and pretend I have an audience) who don't know who Mr. Canada is, he is the founder of the Harlem Children's Zone located at 125th and Madison, and his mission is to send all 10,000 Harlem children to college. He has furthered this goal by creating several charter schools, and most recently, a program called "Baby College," which he started when he realized that his middle and upper class neighbors were providing significantly different opportunities and activities for their small children (ages 0-3) than low income families Harlem. See, what these middle-class families knew that seemingly was not know in the inner city was that the development of a small child's mind is critical for their future success. Hence "Baby Einstein" and all other manner of educational toys, games, and yuppie money making ventures. On average, according to a Kansas City study a child growing up in a family on welfare hears only about 13 million words by age 3. His or her peer in an upper income family hears 43 million (see this study). Mr. Canada thought this was a problem, and with the weight of some significant studies that show the lasting impact of early educational interventions (see for example the Perry PreSchool study), he developed Baby College which seeks to educate Harlem parents about the things they can do to give their child the same advantages and interactions that are typically present in middle to upper income households.

I didn't learn anything new from the podcast....I was already familiar with Mr. Canada's work and the vast disparities in language acquisition in children in low vs. high income groups. But hearing this conversation between two white, presumably (since they were talking about 13 years of private schooling, not to mention college) upper class individuals brought the urgency of Mr. Canada's quest back into focus. The conversation that I overheard is not what I think all people should aspire to be. Competitiveness in pre-school placements is, quite frankly, revolting. But it brings to the surface a larger point: upper class people have the luxury (yes, luxury) of spending an afternoon now and many more afternoons over the course of the next few years, planning their child's future and making CHOICES that they think will most guarantee their precious darling's success. This is not a luxury available to most parents in Harlem. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the public, neighborhood schools in Harlem are not as good as the public schools in Westwood...and yet this woman felt that Westwood's elementary schools were not an option. I'm not advocating for vouchers, nor am I promoting unlimited proliferation of charter schools. I'm just saying that something is not right here. There are issues of choices, and there are also issues of getting a dialogue started about how to help lower income parents start to have these conversations, and a dialogue also about how to get options to them, and help them make those choices a reality. When you can make fairly accurate predictions about a child's ultimate educational attainment based solely on where he or she lives, then we need to admit to ourselves that the American dream of equal opportunities and "anyone can make it" is a myth. Just something to think about. Discuss amongst yourselves.