War of Words

So the listserv war has begun. As usual, the participants seem to be talking past each other rather than to one another, but I will try to summarize some of the debate.

1st email: An internship posting by someone who works in the grad program office, highlighting an internship with the "Hispanic Council for Reform and Educational Options" (Hispanic CREO), a group that supports school vouchers.

2nd email:
FYI to All Concerned.

HCREO is a far-right wing organization whose mission is to advocate vouchers and de-fund public education. I would urge anyone considering an internship there to check out the group thoroughly to make sure you can stomach their ideology.

3rd email:

Everyone,

It is very unusual that I respond to the listserve, but I feel the need to respond in this case. I fear that our conservative classmates, who are in the minority in the college from my experience, will further keep their views and perspectives to themselves if we do not create a culture where everyone's perspective is valued. Though I appreciate [the above] email about gaining information about an organization for person-fit purposes, the inadvertent use of language (i.e. "stomach their ideology") may ostracize our classmates who identify themselves as conservative. I personally struggle with ways to address this issue especially
in the classroom. Thoughts?

Then a flurry of responses, one of which was mine:

I wrote a note to [the above author] personally, but realized that it might be a good idea to post to the whole community. I thanked [him] for raising this point. Diversity can also refer to diversity of opinion. Some of us do not choose to align with a particular political orientation and rather "try out" viewpoints in their writings and conversations in an attempt to find what best fits their personal orientation. While "trying on" these viewpoints, debate is useful and productive, but personal attacks and negative language are not.

I'd like to extend a big thank you to the individuals in this program who make classrooms feel like a safe place to explore issues fully. Voltaire may or may not have say "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it," but the idea behind the statement is one we should all strive for. The ACLU, seen as a liberal organization, has even defended the right of extremist groups such as the KKK to protest in public. While they certainly do not condone the message, our Constitution protects their right to express it peacefully.

During most of our classes, we identify ourselves with our name, our career, and our research interests. Perhaps if we could also identify ourselves as open-minded by saying, "My personal political orientation is liberal/conservative/moderate

/independent, but I welcome debate and I will always listen to you and respect your opinion if you disagree with me" as part of our introduction. That way, those in the class who hold different beliefs or are unsure would know you as a safe person to whom they could express their thoughts. Kind of cheesy, maybe, but we all have a right to feel safe and respected among our peers.

Thanks for reading this.

The author of the initial email stating that Hispanic CREO has extremist right wing beliefs responded, stating:

My use of language was not inadvertent, it was intentional.

Yes, yes "conservatives" should be included in the conversation and made to feel welcomed and all that.

If you are someone who believes that public schools should not be adequetly funded and that allowing parents to use public money (vouchers) to send their kids to private religious schoolsis great, then by all means call HCREO and sign up. You
might also call the Black Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO) or the Alliance for School Choice - it doesn't really matter since they are all funded and run by the same crowd.

I'm not looking down on conservatives and I don't think people who agree with the right-wing anti-public education movement are immoral or evil. They are just wrong. If you want to be wrong too - HCREO has internships available.

[Inital author] and other - do you have an argument in support of the voucher movement's agenda, or is this just a chance to complain about how hard it is to be a conservative in the College?

Apparently all we do is complain about how hard it is to be conservative. Which, apparently, is different than "conservative." No, I kid. I don't mean to stoop to his level. When someone responded to this email stating that the emails about tolerance were attempting to establish an environment in which people could debate freely, K (the author of the last email), said that we should stop talking about language and tone and start debating. I think he missed the point. No one, certainly not the minority "conservative" (and please, people, you know I'm a moderate) voices, is going to open himself up to the blistering criticism K lambastes people on the listserv with on a regular basis. What point is there in debating an issue with someone who already thinks you are wrong for not agreeing with him?

Besides that, I'm unsure of how I feel about vouchers. I need to do more research. And I'm certainly not going to post my research on the listserv to unsympathetic ears. I know I have favorable opinions of some alternative school choice, due to my own positive high school experience in a magnet school. However, I'm unwilling to preach when I myself don't hold a strong opinion. I'm in a graduate program to learn, to listen, and to form my opinions based on readings, research, and what I discover about my own values and ethics. Not just to espouse the opinions of the status quo in our department.

Listserv Rumblings

There may be a war brewing on the listserv distributed to the community of my PhD program revolving around liberal vs. "conservative" (meaning, not extreme left wing) views. I'll post it here if it's of any interest.

Girls who are boys who like boys to be girls...

Oh, wait, that would be a different post.

This is all over the place! Well, not so much. From Newsweek to the Today Show, educators have lamented the tragic decline of boys in our schools. They're seen as "faulty girls." (Well, aren't they?). They need to run around. They need more variety in activity. The presentation on "how we should teach boys" struck me as "how we should teach," regardless of gender.

According to a report from The Education Sector, entitled "The Truth about Boys and Girls" (I sense gender bias! They put boys first!), boys are making substantial gains; however, girls are making them faster. Lower-income and minority boys (and girls) are the ones who are falling behind in school. So something the popular media has portrayed as a gender difference is a socio-economic and race difference. Maybe we're just tired of talking about those.

When I read the full report, I will give you a full report! Because I care.

"The Truth about Boys and Girls." (Mead, S. 2006. The Education Sector. Washington, DC)

Virginian-Pilot Letter to the Editor

I'm on this new kick of writing letters to the editor. Suggested, quite intelligently, by A.! Thanks!

As evidenced by the recent article, “For some immigrants, English is a lifelong challenge” (June 19^th, 2006), non-native English speakers in the U.S. fully recognize the value of learning our language. What good, then, does designating English as our “common, unifying” do us? Why make English the “official” language, when even immigrants recognize its importance?

Just as it is hard for immigrants to learn English, it is equally difficult for Americans to learn Arabic, Farsi, and Chinese. Why don’t we capitalize on the knowledge of the native speakers of these and other languages in the U.S. to fight the war on terror intelligently? English First laws serve only to undermine bilingualism in our country, and put our ability to gather intelligence and keep our nation secure at risk.

In reference to: "For some immigrants, English is a lifelong challenge." (Virginian-Pilot, June 19th, 2006)

Why You Failed High School French, Part II

More evidence that it is difficult for adults to learn a "foreign" language (only in this case, the "foreign" language is most of our native tounge, English).

"Learning English: Not as easy as it sounds" (Boston Globe, June 18th, 2006)

"For Some Immigrants, English is a Lifelong Challenge" (The Virginian-Pilot, June 19th, 2006)

Even Iraqi Students Do Better in Math!

I'm really into sarcastic titles today. In any case, I thought I could demonstrate to you how diverse I am becoming in my resources, so I clicked on an article in the International Herald Tribune on Iraqi schools. (I keep wanting to write "Iraqui"). In any case, it turns out their article came from the New York Times. -Sigh-

Imagine attending school in a country where bomb attacks, IEDs, and house-to-house searches happen on a daily basis. And imagine to going to schools that are in a state of disrepair (no, not in the Bronx - although they are there too!), and where "Only 20 percent of schools in central and southern Iraq had working toilets, the ministry report said. A quarter had trash bins." (NYT, June 26th, 2006)

And yet these kids come, and their parents are involved in making them attend school, even when exhausted and grief-stricken by the ravages of war. I can't imagine it must be easy to teach these children, but thank you for heroic teachers! If American children attended school in these sort of circumstances, they would be inundated with grief counselors. For Iraqi children and their families, perhaps the stability and hope of attending school every day is enough. I find it both sad and inspiring. Think of those teachers going to work tomorrow while you're on your commute - they need all the good thoughts they can get.

"Amid Iraqi Chaos, Schools Fill After Long Decline" (NYT, June 26th, 2006)

In an Era of Megachurches, Megamalls, and Megameals, Megaphilanthropy!

I assume you have already heard about Warren Buffet giving about 85% of his fortune to the Gates Foundation. I mean, I heard about it on the Today Show, so it's really all over the news. That was between the segments on summer camp and why you should eat brightly colored foods (like Green Slurpees?), hosted, quite humorously, by David Gregory, NBC White House correspondent. Bet he gets make fun of in the White House press pool.

In any case, Buffett is giving $30 billion to the Gates Foundation. According to the Wall Street Journal ("Warren Buffet Gives $30 Billion to Gates Foundation," June 26th, 2006, Page B1)

The agreement has the potential to mark the beginning of a new era of megafoundations. Mr. Buffett's gift to Mr. Gates is "revolutionary," says Daniel Borochoff, president of the American Institute of Philanthropy, a watchdog group based in Chicago. "Rather than competing, they are going to pool their resources for common causes. They are going to affect millions of lives."

Mr. Borochoff said that many charities might even redirect their missions to causes that the Gates Foundation supports -- which now include tackling malaria and AIDS in Africa and raising U.S. high school graduation rates. But he warned the enlarged Gates Foundation will need to practice care in fragile places, making sure to stimulate self-sufficiency rather than fostering dependence or the kind of corruption that often follows aid.

The Wall Street Journal adds, "While his decision to give to charity during his lifetime is new, Mr. Buffett's decision against bequeathing most of his wealth to his children isn't. He has long argued that children of wealthy parents can be sapped of motivation and spoiled if they inherit all of their family's riches." Bet his kids are thrilled.

This makes the recent Business Week coverage of the Gates Foundation all the more interesting. How will the Gates Foundation alter their strategy to prevent failures like the Manual school in Denver? Will they stick with small schools, and will they venture into new territory? What kind of research will they use to make these decisions?

According to the New York Times, Bill and Melinda Gates gave Buffett a copy of Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations from their personal library. How sweet.

"Warren Buffett Gives $30 Billion to Gates Foundation" (WSJ, June 26th, 2006, Page B1)
"Buffett Always Planned to Give Away His Billions" (NYT, June 26th, 2006)

Why you failed high school French

Those of you know me will see why this is right up my alley. There's a great article in the NY Times today about how difficult it is for immigrants to learn English, and how Congress legislating "English only" rules will do little to help. There are a couple of reports worth reading - I would summarize, but I'm heading out the door to my other job.

Language Skills and Earnings: Evidence from Childhood Immigrants (darn, this was going to be my dissertation topic!) Bleakley, H. and Chin, A. (2003)

"Legislate Learning English? If Only It Were So Easy" (NYT, June 22nd, 2006)

Minimum Wage

There's an interesting op-ed in the WSJ today about how the minimum wage negatively impacts high-schoolers and other young people in the workforce. According to the writer,

The main flaw in such thinking is that no one has ever demonstrated that raising the minimum wage reduces poverty. How can that be? Well, partly it's because the vast majority of minimum-wage earners are not, in fact, poor. Of an estimated 87% who are not, many live in households where two or more people work and where combined incomes may be two or three times the poverty level. Then there are young people and teenagers, who are more likely to earn the minimum wage than any other group. A significant number of them have high-income parents.

With the economy booming, more young people are finding work, including summer jobs. But economists have long known that when minimum wages go up, the number of jobs for kids tends to go down.

He goes on to state that

Why pay four kids, an employer may well reason, when for the same, now higher, minimum salary I may be able to attract three adults with a bit more experience?

The implications are especially profound for poor and inner-city black kids. Starting at a disadvantage, they have the most to gain from an introduction to the world of work skills. They also face the most predictably bleak future if they miss this foothold.

I never thought about summer jobs this way. I've been working since I was 15 (13 if you count all the babysitting I did on the weekends!). I first worked at an art studio, where my former elementary school art teacher ran a small summer camp. Then I worked at the Gap for about three years. I've worked at Chili's as a hostess (at the Orlando airport!), in a mail room, as a writing tutor, as a tech intern, and as a cocktail waitress. This is all in addition to my "real" jobs in education. I never thought that all those years of clocking in, making it to work on time, learning new skills quickly, and behaving properly in the workplace made me more successful in my "real" career.

For one of my intro ed classes, I read a book called Beyond College for All: Career Paths for the Forgotten Half by James Rosenbaum. The book discusses how only about 40% or so (I actually think the percentage is in the 30s) of Americans between the ages of 24-35 have college degrees. And yet the policy in many high schools is "College for All," when many students may be better served by entering the workforce as an apprentice or in an entry-level, minimum wage job where they can learn skills and move up through the ranks. I have toyed again and again with going into retail - I always enjoyed working at the Gap, and from sales associate you can become manager, and even a buyer or some other higher-level position, without necessarily having a college degree. Even for those who go to college, learning how to "clock in" is such a useful skill. I dated several guys in college who had never had a job. Never. Never mowed lawns, never worked at the Dairy Queen, never tutored, never got any kind of paycheck.

My parents "encouraged" (ahem) me to work, and at the time I didn't much care for "clocking in," but now I'm so thankful that I learned the value of a dollar through making minimum wage. I used to get up every Sunday morning and clean the Gap at the Fashion Square Mall - get on a ladder, dust the outside sign, vacuum the whole store, dust every shelf, and take out the trash. I worked in a mail room where I got paper cuts. I got blisters on my feet delivering cocktails to wealthy Long Island so-and-sos at The Chalet. Sometimes I'd earn $300 bucks a night, but sometimes I'd come home with $40. There's a great book by Barbara Ehrenreich called Nickeled and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America. She works at WalMart, as a maid, at a HoJo's restaurant, etc, and writes about it. I worked those jobs, mostly while living with my parents, but I know that some of those jobs are really hard work. Much harder than filing and sitting at a computer all day, and actually much harder than being on my feet in front of 15 children.

Should we up the minimum wage? The WSJ claims that

And what about the broader "poor" that Senator Ted Kennedy talks about helping with a minimum-wage raise? In truth, his proposed rate of $7.25 an hour won't lift many poor families out of poverty because as many as 64% of the earners in these families already get paid more than $7.25. New research by Joseph Sabia at the University of Georgia and Cornell's Richard Burkhauser indicates that factors other than wages -- such as working fewer hours and supporting large families -- are holding them down.

As painful as it is to think of such people working hard and not getting ahead, at least they are on a payroll and can hope to improve their skills and prospects. It's those unskilled young people, Mr. Burkhauser notes, who are "the most vulnerable part of the population."

And while we can still debate how best to help them, one thing is clear: "What we are doing with a minimum-wage increase," Mr. Burkhauser says, is making sure "that for the folks who don't have the skills to be worth $7.25, they are not going to have a job."

I'm not sure (no citations on the stats), but it is interesting. Oh, and I'm quoting so much of the article because I don't believe that you can access it without full WSJ subscription, but I'll put the link here anyway.

"Labor Lost" (WSJ, June 23rd, 2006)

More Verification

So I started thinking about my last post, and realized that it's based on an assumption that many African-American residents of the District (well, in the NE/SE quadrants) come from lower-income and perhaps single-parent households. While this may be true, I need to verify this assumption before basing any theories on it. (Of course, no matter what the data proves, I still believe that the cultures we're brought up in - black, white, latino, asian, immigrant, etc are different and we have different "codes" we follow).

According to the 2000 census, DC has 572,059 residents. Of these, 343,312, or exactly 60%, are African-American. While not broken down by race, 24,561 people, or 9.9%, live in households with a female householder with her own children under 18. This didn't seem that high to me. I checked some of the zip codes I drive through - they tend to be have a higher percentage of African-Americans, more like 75%, but similar numbers of single mother households, 9.1% for the 20017 zip code, 9.7% for 20018 (both in the District). Once you cross the state line into Maryland's Prince George's county, the percentage of single mother homes goes up to 11.9% in 20712 and 10.5% in 20782.

Like I said, these numbers didn't seem so high to me, but I needed something to compare them to. So I checked the zip code where I grew up, 32812 (in Orlando, Florida). The first thing I noticed: the percentage of whites was 75.1%, and African-American/Black 12.3%. Those numbers are almost the reverse of many of the neighborhoods I drive through! However, the percentage of single mother homes is not much lower, 8.2%. Then I checked the zip code of the hospital where I was born, in Wheat Ridge, Colorado (outside of Denver). Similar stats for the white/black population as Orlando (in fact, I think they are exactly the same). The percentage of single moms? It's 7.3%.

My assumptions about children growing up in single-parent (mom) households, then, seems to be a bit exaggerated. The comparison of race, however, is pretty significant. Perhaps the school factor plays a more important role here. As I said before, I went to a school with an extensive driver's ed program and an entire course set up for driver's ed.

If we just take one zip code, 20017, 85% of the children enrolled in nursery through 12th grade are in public school. The real test here is to call up those public schools (the high schools) and ask about their driver's education programs. That may be a job for tomorrow, since I'm sure they close after 5:30pm, especially during the summer. In my hometown zip, 32812, 87% are enrolled in public school. So we're comparing similar public school enrollments. Next? Really, I should narrow this down to just high school students, and then find out how many of those schools have driver's ed classes and what kind of resources they have for them.

For another day. Don't you love that this has become a research project? It's also an interesting way to think about research design.

U.S. Census Bureau: Census 2000 Gateway (click on "American Fact Finder" to find out information for a particular zip code)