A YouthBuild Providence Classroom Update


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

I want to thank you for your ongoing support of and commitment to teaching and learning opportunities for all of Providence’s residents. And I invite you to learn more about YouthBuild Providence and ask that you lend your vision to our pioneering educational program for out of school youth as we transition toward a diploma granting institution.

What we are embarking on as a community is quite remarkable. Other states are already looking to Rhode Island and YouthBuild Providence as a model. Too many students age out of our public schools after a personal crisis. We are taking a stand by saying that young adults who have left school for whatever reason and want to return to the classroom should not be excluded from a brighter future. We are re-engaging drop outs by exposing them to new worlds, developing their identities as scholars, and sparking their engagement as citizens.

I am pleased to share that our students attended the preview performance of “It’s a Wonderful Life” at Trinity Repertory Theater. YouthBuild students gave the performance a five star rating.

We are building an ongoing relationship with Trinity Rep. A few weeks ago, on a service learning day, our students toured the theater. As we were leaving the building, one of the students spotted actress Annie Scurria and introduced herself. It was a sweet and inspiring moment. Our student and Ms. Scurria had a second chance to speak on December 9. After a standing ovation for their performance, the company actors met with our students in the lobby. It made our night.

Attending local performances has proven to be a vibrant educational tool. After seeing two shows, we have had dynamic conversations about what community means, and about questions of history, representation, and authenticity. You can see the impact first hand in student Ervin Figueroa’s video:

Our students are asking for more theater opportunities, which is a request we can’t deny. During our spring semester, YouthBuild will host a local playwright and retired theater teacher who will develop one act plays with our students.

We are proud to include Rhode Island’s Future as a friend and partner in the fight against anti-intellectualism, low expectations, and poverty.

P.S. YouthBuild Providence relies on individual donors to sustain our theater arts program. Bring history and literature to life, consider making an online gift to the Balcony Fund.

Meritocracy or hypocrisy?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

A friend of mine just had a tragedy in the family—his grandmother passed away. It has been difficult for him, but the good news is that his grandmother lived a rich, full, and happy life and died surrounded by a large and loving family.

But talking to my friend really got me thinking about some of the major assumptions that inform public policy in this country, particularly the idea that America is a meritocracy. My friend’s grandmother was a very wealthy woman, and she left her grandchildren each with substantial trust funds (and by substantial, I mean substantial — as in as much money as I will ever make in my entire life if I continue in the non-profit/community organizing field).

We might think that a nation as deadset against “free handouts” as ours would try to restrict this most extravagant of free handouts. But the reality is quite the opposite — the United States greatly subsidizes these kinds of handouts by taxing capital gains and estates at a far lower rate than any other industrialized nation in the world. What we say in this country, in effect, is that it’s more important to ensure that a friend of mine on one end of the socioeconomic spectrum get wealth he did not actually work for than, for example, another harder-working friend of mine be provided with bus passes so that he can get to school every morning without having to walk nearly three miles through the winter chill.

It’s just hard for me to understand how folks can claim that legitimate social services designed to help those constrained by structures of inequality will create dependence and a lack of initiative, but the ability to live comfortably the rest of one’s life without doing a lick of work is alright as long as its restricted to those who are already greatly privileged. If anyone can explain to me how that can possibly make sense, I’m willing to listen. Until then, I will remain confused.

Would I send my child to this school?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Bari Katz, the co-founder and former Director of Student Life at the Achievement First Crown Heights High School, has written on Achievement First’s model, describing both its strengths and what she described as its fundamental flaw. If you have given any thought to the Achievement First debate, please take a moment to read her words:

“Would I send my child to this school?” This is a question I asked myself every day while working at Achievement First and helping to build their first high school in Brooklyn, NY in 2009 and 2010. I served as the Director of Student Life at Achievement First Crown Heights High School (now called AF Brooklyn High School), which entailed developing and managing all after-school and summer enrichment programs, building the advisory system for both college skills and character development, counseling students, and organizing and leading community events each week to contribute to school culture. As a member of the founding team, I was involved in almost every aspect of the school, from hiring, to behavior management, to building systems for school culture and discipline, to working with others in the Achievement First network to find and implement best practices for our new school.

There are many things to say about my time at Achievement First; some of them personal opinion, some experiences shared among many. Let’s start with some of the things AF does really well. AF hires incredible teachers. Walking through the halls of almost any AF school, you will find hard-working, dedicated and passionate educators in front of our children. The principles behind a longer school day are right on—to keep kids off the streets and out of trouble, and in classrooms getting extra academic time to support their achievement. Systems and data are both priorities, from my experience, in the AF network. For example, every behavior management system we tried at the high school in our first year was systematized in a way that ideally would have allowed every adult in the building to enforce these norms. Also, data-driven instruction is the driving force I would argue behind teacher development. Teachers and their coaches (usually a senior member of the school leadership team) work with both daily and long-term assessment data to improve lesson plans and increase student achievement.

While the strengths I mentioned above are real, the underlying approach to youth and community development are, in my opinion and experience, fundamentally flawed. This has a detrimental impact on the students and families in Achievement First schools, specifically in high schools.

The majority of my students at AF Crown Heights High School were fed in from AF Crown Heights Middle School, with approximately 10% being accepted off the wait list. Almost all of my students had relatively positive experiences at the AF middle school, due largely in part to their principal and teaching staff. When they arrived at high school, it became apparent to them and their families very quickly that this was a different AF than they had known before. As the Director of Student Life, I too became frustrated early on with the philosophy of youth development the school administrators (backed strongly by the AF network) were implementing.

I believe, especially at the high school level, that there must be a balance between structure and flexibility, between rules and independence, and between thinking inside a predetermined box and creative thought. Unfortunately, I witnessed time and time again students being pushed to “fall in line” with the rigid behavior system (sitting up perfectly straight in class; not wearing any jewelry or headbands for girls; having a closed bottle of anything other than water on their desk; making eye contact 100% of the time when being addressed by an adult; etc.). Rules are important. However, these examples are a few of many that AF labeled as character development, which I disagree with.

Character development for high school students is about having the opportunity to make one’s own choices and sometimes fail, but being able to meaningfully learn from those mistakes.Character at AF was defined as “doing the right thing when no one is looking.” However, because of the extreme emphasis on these small behavioral “infractions” to the system, there was a culture of conformity rather than critical thinking that was created. This resulted in students superficially following the rules but feeling like they had to hide their true selves while at school. We often saw students get in trouble for losing their temper because they felt so repressed by the culture of the building, which AF labeled as a character flaw on the part of the student.

In addition to being developmentally inappropriate for the age of our students, the school system was oppressive in other ways. I would receive phone calls from parents and families on a daily basis because they felt disrespected by AF leadership. Many parents felt the rules in the school were over the top and not beneficial to the “college preparatory mission” of the school. Many parents were called up to the school on a regular basis to have meetings with school administrators to address student discipline issues, often times even for minor infractions. Usually, students were not allowed to attend academic classes until these parent meetings happened (students in this situation would sit alone in a classroom or in the main office all day and independently do work assigned by their teachers even though they often couldn’t complete the work because they hadn’t received the lesson for the day. Perhaps because their shoes were 98% black instead of 100% black. For instance). Parents reported feeling devalued, disrespected, and frustrated by AF’s condescending approach to family involvement.

This leads me to my second concern about Achievement First’s proposed expansion. AF works in low-income communities of color in urban areas in New Haven, CT and Brooklyn, NY. From my experience, the mentality by many at the head of the organization and by association many of the school leaders as well, is one of disregard for the indigenous community they are entering. Rather than becoming a part of the neighborhoods in which they operate, AF most often runs schools that end up isolating the community in the surrounding area. Instead of valuing the parent and family contributions of their student body, many AF schools underestimate the power and capability of the families they are supposed to be serving. I always got the feeling that “we” were there to “fix a problem.” “We” were there to “save these kids.” The message to our students was often, “if you don’t do things ‘our’ way, you will never be successful in the ‘real world.’” As an organization working to serve urban populations, this kind of cultural insensitivity and sense of superiority are deeply harmful to the students, the families and the communities in which AF operates schools.

This is not about me. And I don’t want it to be about my experience. I left AF after my kids finished their ninth grade year for many reasons. I still speak to my kids and their families on a regular basis. When I left, half of the founding team left as well. By the start of the school’s second year, the 10th grade class (my kids) was down to a group of approximately 45-50. This year, the third year of the school, the founding class is down to around 35-40 students. This is the same trend in the AF high school in New Haven, which has graduated less than 30 kids the last two years (which they call a 100% graduation rate). I wanted to make sure that the voices of the families I’ve worked with for the last several years from AF Brooklyn High School were represented in this statement. They all asked me to keep their names confidential as they did not want their kids, some of whom still attend AF Brooklyn High School, to be penalized in any way for their speaking out.

From a family member who still has a child in Achievement First:

“The focus is always on discipline and consequences. It makes the kids not want to go to school. Even the really good students don’t want to go to school. My experience is probably way better than another parent’s because my daughter is academically and socially sound. But I’ve sat and chatted with so many parents and know the horror stories are more the norm than not. If we had to rely just on Achievement First to get my daughter what she needed for college, it would never happen. They’re setting the kids up for failure.”

From a parent who pulled her daughter out of AF:

“The AF teachers are dedicated to the success of the students and the school. Public schools are difficult because achievement is not always the focus. Charter schools are good for lower grades because it gives kids the discipline they need. But my daughter gained a sense of purpose from the great teachers and mentors at AF, and the fact that she knew everyone had one goal which was for her to succeed. But at the upper grades AF is training the kids to do what they want them to do and AF won’t relinquish control. They’re supposed to be allowed to use what they know, to let their budding minds grow. They aren’t allowed to think for themselves. AF is an experiment to see what ‘kids who wouldn’t have a chance otherwise’ can do if they follow the AF model. They push the discipline too much. But you can’t run an experiment on the backs of the children who are really trying. Our children are not getting what they’re supposed to get.”

From a parent whose daughter still attends Achievement First:

“All of the good counselors and teachers are leaving or have already left because they feel trapped and confined. The children are caged—they treat the children like it’s a boot camp. The good kids are made to feel like they’re bad kids and in prison. The kids are just hanging on to get out and move on with their lives. As a parent who speaks her mind and stands up for my daughter’s education, they shut me down and now they don’t even talk to me anymore. They are disrespectful and mistrusting of the parents like we’re crazy.I think it’s a race thing. These people come from all over the place to hold back our kids. The people who really love our kids do not get the time of day to do things for our kids. There are teachers who would do anything for these kids but they get brainwashed or they leave. They don’t want the children to associate with the teachers who really love them because it undermines their control.”

I’ll say the same thing to anyone reading this statement as I said to everyone I worked with at Achievement First: If you wouldn’t send your kid here, then it’s not good enough.

Bari L. Katz

Is Rhode Island Afraid of Young People?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Not in the slightest – we keep electing them into office!

In the weeks since I’ve announced my candidacy for Providence’s State Representative District 8 (Federal Hill, Olneyville), I have fielded a lot of questions from friends, family and neighbors. One that keeps popping up, along with “are you nuts?” and “what do state reps even do?” is the one about my age: “aren’t you too young for that?”

Anyone who has worked with me knows I love a good spreadsheet. So I put one together on this question. I’m likely missing several examples of people under 35 elected to the RI General Assembly, but the list was more inclusive than I expected, and is certainly enough to prove a point – Rhode Island likes them young.

And at a glance, it even seems fairly representative of the larger General Assembly in terms of male/female and Providence/Northern RI/West Bay/East Bay.

I’d be interested to see someone else continue asking questions: are young people elected more or less often than their older peers? Who is the youngest person to successfully challenge an RI incumbent legislator? And of course, there’s all the data on the other end of the spectrum. In 2009 when I was around the State House a lot as a volunteer lobbyist for Fair Elections, Representative Peter Martin would joke with me that he was the oldest freshman that year, at 67 years old. What does the historical competition for that honor look like?

Have You Seen the New Freedom From Religion Foundation Billboard?

The Madison, WI-based Freedom From Religion Foundation has put up a 14 by 48 foot billboard on Interstate 295 at Route 2 in Warwick.  This is the first billboard by the organization in Rhode Island, but the 695th in 61 cities since 2007.

Annie Laurie Gaylor, Foundation co-president, said it’s fitting that the campaign has expanded to Rhode Island, which was founded by Roger Williams, a strong advocate of keeping religion out of government and vice versa.

“Although Williams was a religious man, he believed deeply that civil and sectarian authorities should not intrude on each other, for the good of both,” Gaylor said.

She noted Williams’ famous statement that “forced worship stinks in the nostrils of God.”

The billboard’s message is abundantly clear, based on a form of governance that seems to be continually distorted.  The Founding Fathers may have been Deists, and most of them held some sort of belief in a god, in whatever way that was personally defined.  Anything more than that, and in particular anything related to the national government’s support of a specific religion, was out of the question.  The Founding Fathers were fearful of unrestrained government power, and particularly a government that would impose religion on its people.

Many clear examples exist that support this, including our very own Roger Williams, founder of the Providence Plantations colony in 1636, who was a “.”  This was all due to him needing to flee Massachusetts by challenging the political and religious establishments, claiming government had no role in religion and that the Massachusetts Colony was not even legitimate since the land was stolen from Native Americans.

The Treaty of Tripoli, signed by John Adams in 1797 reads:

…the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…

In Thomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists (1802), he wrote:

“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. “

Another stellar example was James Madison’s response to Jasper Adams’ pamphlet (a graduate of Brown University), The Relation of Christianity to Civil Government in the United States, in which he wrote:

In the Papal System, Government and Religion are in a manner consolidated, & that is found to be the worst of Govts.

In most of the Govt of the old world, the legal establishment of a particular religion and without or with very little toleration of others makes a part of the Political and Civil organization and there are few of the most enlightened judges who will maintain that the system has been favorable either to Religion or to Govt.

To put this in perspective, we just have to look at the conspicuous moralism that often accompanies religious-based “discussions” in Rhode Island, such as those about a tree in the State House Rotunda, being pro-choice, or supporting marriage equality.  As examples, in each of these cases, Bishop Tobin was compelled to express his displeasure, not as an individual, but as a representative of the Catholic Church.  As that representative, he holds quite a bit of power over the shaping of political decisions, whether it be exacerbating an uproar over the name of a tree, excoriating former Representative Patrick Kennedy, hindering the expansion of health care coverage, and preventing full marriage equality (which is as clear of a case as I could imagine that creates a government-sponsored, special privilege for religion).

I do think having a discussion about the benefits and drawbacks of any policy are important.  And arguments will be based on individuals’ worldviews.  But there can often be overt religiosity that tries to pass itself for reasonable debate….

And that’s just not right.

The Passing of Robert L. Carter, and School Desegregation in the Metropolitan North


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Robert Carter

Robert CarterI was saddened to hear of the death of Judge Robert L. Carter yesterday, at the age of 94.  The passing of this great generation of civil rights reformers (Fred Shuttlesworth and Derrick Bell are gone too) was of course inevitable — Dr. King would be in his 80s, if he were still with us.  But studying their words and work, one is reminded of just how limited our visions of justice are these days.

I had the great privilege of spending a week with Carter a few years ago, as a participant in an NEH seminar on civil rights up at Harvard.  He was sharp, passionate and inspiring, as he regaled us with story after story about his legal work with Thurgood Marshall and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and walked us through his informative memoir, “A Matter of Law.”  If I remember correctly, I was a bit combative in some of our exchanges.  Carter insisted on the transformative potential of school desegregation cases in the urban North, which he constantly pushed from within the NAACP in the mid/late 60s.  I argued that the real issue was metropolitan housing segregation, and that a focus on the cities alone would achieve nothing more than tokenism, resistance, and white flight.  He countered by emphasizing, rightly, the value of setting legal precedents.  This was, after all, how the Brown decision was achieved in 1954:  a long, slow walk through the court system.  It was particularly important to get the courts to focus on impact, not intent, in the application of constitutional doctrine to segregation in the North.  Once that was achieved, things could open up in much more transformative ways.

As background for my home ownership book, I’ve been doing some research on civil rights, the law and housing policy from the mid-60s to the mid-70s, and I’m in a much better position now to make sense of what Carter was trying to tell me — and of his legacy.  During this all-too-brief period, there was a possibility (albeit a thin one) that the nation might finally confront the pattern of metropolitan inequality and segregation (by race and class) that had emerged in the wake of World War II.  Real discussions of the necessity of ‘opening up the suburbs’ were taking place, not only within the civil rights and fair housing movements, but also within the Johnson administration, the courts, and even in the early days of Nixon’s first term (George Romney, Secretary of HUD, characterized suburbia as a ‘white noose’ around the neck of urban America).  Most parties to this discussion recognized that both access to employment and to quality public education hinged on whether American metropolitan areas could be restructured.  In other words, the future of the American opportunity structure was at stake — but time was of the essence.  The nation was on the cusp of a massive expansion in suburban development (and of home ownership), but the shape which our social geography would take was still somewhat plastic.  The intellectual, judicial and policy tools were there to trace direct connections between social geography and opportunity, and to expand civil rights jurisprudence beyond the limited individualistic ontology that had previously defined it.

And Carter was right there, at the forefront.  Unfortunately for all of us, this brief window of opportunity to unwind metropolitan inequality had slammed shut by the mid-70s.  There were small victories and experiments at the local and state level, here and there; the Mount Laurel decision, by the New Jersey Supreme Court in 1975, for example.  But my argument about the ‘window’ is mostly aimed at the federal level.

Nixon gets some of the blame, as much because of his racial demagoguery as his urban and housing policies.  His Supreme Court appointments get a lot of it, too.  The San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973) and Milliken v. Bradley (1974) decisions carved a direct path to the urban school crisis we presently confront.  Despite occasional exceptions at the state level, federal courts also continued to limit the reach of constitutional claims against exclusionary zoning, rendering fair housing law a dead letter in much of the country.  Suburban white America captured the lion’s share of the responsibility, and retains it today.  While the Republican Party has become the unapologetic champion of white suburban privilege (see this recent piece by Daniel Denvir, on urban issues in today’s GOP), the Democrats refuse to see what even George Romney (let alone Robert L. Carter) saw 40 years ago:  that racial and class segregation is a recipe for disaster for the country.

Thanks, Mr. Carter, and rest in peace.  That window is still closed, sadly.  But it is surely cracked.  And that, as Leonard Cohen once wrote, is how the light gets in.

Originally posted on Chants Democratic.

Attorney General Kilmartin Announces Rhode Island Criminal Justice Hall of Fame


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Attorney General Peter F. Kilmartin today announced the creation of the Rhode Island Criminal Justice Hall of Fame to honor outstanding professionals who have worked to improve and uphold the principles of the criminal justice system in Rhode Island. Kilmartin also announced the inaugural class of inductees to be honored at a reception on Thursday, January 12, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Warwick, RI.

“From protecting the safety and security of our communities to eliciting truth and ensuring due process of law, the thousands of men and women who make up our criminal justice system help make our system of law the finest in the world,” said Attorney General Peter F. Kilmartin. “By creating the Hall of Fame, we have an opportunity to honor the men and women who have significantly contributed to our criminal justice system.”

Inductees into the Hall of Fame include local and state law enforcement professionals, academics, judges, attorneys and other professionals who have made a significant impact in the criminal justice system through personal and professional achievements. The inaugural class includes:

  • Former Attorney General and Retired Superior Court Associate Justice Richard J. Israel
  • Former Rhode Island State Police Colonel Walter E. Stone
  • Former Rhode Island Chief Public Defender William Reilly
  • South Kingstown Police Chief Vincent Vespia, Jr.
  • Former US Marshal, Cumberland Police Chief and Providence Public Safety Commissioner Chief John Partington
  • Department of Corrections Director A.T. Wall
  • Retired Providence Police officer and National Fraternal Order of Police Trustee Raymond Pezzullo
  • Retired FBI Special Agent and Salve Regina University Professor Dr. James Farrington
  • Retired Cranston Police Sergeant and founder of the International Brotherhood of Police Officers Union Thomas Lanzi
  • Department of Corrections Assistant Director

The selection process was carried out by the Criminal Justice Hall of Fame Board of Trustees, representing all facets of the criminal justice system. The Trustees selected individuals who have distinguished themselves through outstanding personal and professional achievements in the field of criminal justice while maintaining the highest standard of integrity and character.

“I could not envision a more notable inaugural class for the Criminal Justice Hall of Fame,” continued Kilmartin. “Each individual has left an indelible mark on our criminal justice system, and Rhode Island is a better, safer place for their efforts.”

The Community College of Rhode Island Lincoln Campus will house the Criminal Justice Hall of Fame, which is anticipated to be interactive history of the careers of the inductees. The induction ceremony will be held on Thursday, January 12, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Warwick, RI.

Finland Finland Finland, the country where I quite want to teach


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

As it turns out, Monty Python was right:  Finland isn’t just a great place for snack lunch in the hall…

It really does have it all:  social democracy, smoked fish, and a public school system that American reformers are beginning to notice.  Too bad they are noticing the wrong thing.

As many of you know, Finland is all the rage in education reform circles these days, particularly among those who don’t think that teacher unions and school governance are the primary problems facing American public schools.  Finnish school children have done very well on international tests in recent years (far better than the middling U.S.), prompting a wave of visits to Scandinavia by American politicians and educators, and speaking tours by Finns here.

Most of the discussion has revolved around their model for the professionalization of teachers — kind of like Denver’s experiment on steroids — and on their lack of emphasis on standardized high-stakes testing and rote learning.  All teachers in Finland must earn masters’ degrees from competitive graduate programs, are paid like professionals, and given responsibilities for curriculum and assessment that vastly exceed those of American teachers in the post-NCLB era.

The curriculum, meanwhile, de-emphasizes competition and tracking, and tends to be much more focused on creative play and vocational preparation than one generally finds in American schools (particularly urban ones).  According to a recent article by Samuel Abrams in The New Republic, Finnish schools provide students with far more recess than their American counterparts — 75 minutes a day at the elementary level, compared to an average of 27 minutes in the U.S.  They also mandate lots of arts and crafts, and more learning by doing.

American school reformers seem to see what they want to see in the Finnish success story.  Liberals (if I can use that word in this context) point to their investment in early childhood education and parental leave policies, as well as the teacher autonomy discussed above.  Conservatives point to the ability of Finnish schools to get high achievement out of students despite large class sizes, and regardless of background.  If they can do it, they argue, why can’t our teachers?  Of course, the ‘blame-the-teachers’ mantra is somewhat undermined by the fact that Finnish teachers are unionized at even higher levels than American teachers are, and also have tenure.

It is also undermined by the fact that levels of inequality and child poverty in the U.S. vastly exceed Finland’s — a critical point.

Anu Partanan, a Finnish journalist, published a thoughtful short piece in the Atlantic Monthly in late December 2011 on K-12 education in her country.  The takeaway:  most American observers have really missed (ignored) what’s at the core of Finnish school reform — equity.

Dissatisfied with the quality of Finnish public education at the end of the 1960s, in 1971 a government commission concluded that economic modernization could only take place if schools were improved.  According to Abrams, Finland committed to reducing class size, boosting teacher pay, and requiring much more rigorous training for teachers.

While the US has focused primarily on ‘excellence’ since 1980 (based in part on the mistaken assumption that we had veered too far in the direction of equity since the mid-50s), Finland launched a concentrated effort to use public education to counteract inequality.  It did this, based on the belief that equity would lead to excellence, and enable resource-poor Finland to compete in an increasingly globalized and post-industrial economy.  This effort was supported by relevant social policies too.

Pasi Sahlberg, director of the Finnish Ministry of Education’s Center for International Mobility and author of the new book Finnish Lessons: What Can the World Learn from Educational Change in Finland?told Partanan that the “main driver of Finnish education policy has been the idea that every child should have exactly the same opportunity to learn, regardless of family background, income, or geographic location. Education has been seen first and foremost not as a way to produce star performers, but as an instrument to even out social inequality.”  At its core, Sahlberg says, this means that “schools should be healthy, safe environments for children. This starts with the basics. Finland offers all pupils free school meals, easy access to health care, psychological counseling, and individualized student guidance.”

While Partanan may not be an experienced observer of American politics and society, she is almost certainly correct that the way that American ‘reformers’ are viewing Finland’s success — ignoring the equity goals that are at the heart of it — demonstrates a kind of willful blindness to what is fundamentally wrong with the opportunity structure in the US, and how it undermines both the quality and distribution of public education.

The money quote:

“It is possible to create equality. And perhaps even more important — as a challenge to the American way of thinking about education reform — Finland’s experience shows that it is possible to achieve excellence by focusing not on competition, but on cooperation, and not on choice, but on equity.

 The problem facing education in America isn’t the ethnic diversity of the population but the economic inequality of society, and this is precisely the problem that Finnish education reform addressed. More equity at home might just be what America needs to be more competitive abroad.”

It is unfortunate that so many of the moderates and liberals who formerly served as voices for equality of opportunity in public schools in the U.S. have fairly tripped over themselves — and others — to leap onto the bandwagon of ‘reform’ as its presently understood.

Originally posted on Chants Democratic blog.


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387