It's ok for your children, but not for mine

Inner city Dallas is just like every other inner city across America. Liquor, wine, and beer stores are everywhere! I remember when I went to San Francisco a few years ago how amazed I was that there were so many Starbucks...often located directly across the street from each other. If you've been to San Francisco, imagine that times 10. In South Dallas, there are certain pockets where there are probably 10 or more liquor stores in a one block area. Many of us who live in South Dallas don't want the concentration of these stores in our neighborhood any more than someone in a wealthier part of Dallas would.

Several years ago a law was passed (the article attached to this blog explains more). The law stated that no beer/wine/liquor stores could be built within a 1000 feet of a school. The law, however, grandfathered in the already established stores. Knowing that children walk by these stores every day on their way to/from school and knowing that the more concentrated alcohol establishments in an area can be directly related to the increase in crime in an area, South Dallas leaders have worked and continue to work hard to do what they can to move these establishments out. It is not an easy battle.

Yesterday I attended a court hearing protesting one of the beer and wine stores by the school. What struck me as I was sitting there was the argument of the beer and wine store's lawyer. As the witnesses gave their testimony about what the beer and wine stores do to the community, the lawyer kept refocusing their statements to ask if this particular store could be proven to create the unsafe atmosphere in the area. I could see where he was going. He was trying to keep the heat off of his client by saying that their one liquor store does nothing bad in the community. They are perfectly legal in what they are selling and, he even went on to argue that they are a "good neighbor" in the community because the owners actually keep crime off of their property.

I realize he's a lawyer and lawyer's are supposed to defend their clients whether they believe them to be innocent or not. But I would be interested to know where his children go to school and whether he would want them walking by liquor stores and the people that frequent them every day. Actually, as he argued that Buy and Save was actually a "good neighbor" that keeps crime away, I wanted to challenge him to walk from Pearl C. Anderson to any one of these kids' homes. I would almost bet my last dollar that he, a grown man, would probably be scared and would refuse.

So why is it ok for our South Dallas children to have to deal with that? Don't our children in South Dallas deserve the same healthy environment as any other kid? Or do we pay no attention to it because it because if we don't live there it doesn't affect us and our children?

It's a frustrating battle. I agree that Buy and Save Discount Beer and Wine is not the sole reason there are drugs, crime, and prostitution in South Dallas. However, it is a contributor. We're working to get those "contributors" out one by one.

Nothing better to do??

As I was listening to the radio this morning, I heard the report about the flag burning amendment not passing. As I listened to the report, I was amazed. Does our Congress really have that little to do that it needs to focus on flag burning??

John Kerry did speak up and suggest that there were more important issues at hand. However, Oran Hatch refuted him saying that banning flag burning is *the* most important thing we could be doing right now. He wants to send a message people that says, "You cannot usurp the power of the Congress of the United States."

Let me think about that a minute. There's nothing more important than making sure people don't burn the flag and show disrespect for this country? Maybe he's right. What could possibly be more important than that?? Let me ponder on that...

...teenagers who can't read who are expected to pass a test to graduate in a school that is given the No Child Left Behind law but no resources to implement what it will take to get them there?

...adults who have little job skills but are expected to get into productive jobs to contribute to our economy?

...schools that are drilling the kids with tests instead of teaching higher order thinking for fear they will lose their jobs as a result of "No Child Left Behind"?

...seniors who can't afford their medication and are confused by the new Medicare stuff?

...kids who are being recruited for the military to fight in a war that has no end in sight and no set plan for an eventual pull out?

...children without health care?

...large numbers of kids who aren't graduating from high school?

...CEO's who are getting rich while their workers are struggling in poverty?

Maybe Oran Hatch lives in a different world than I do. Maybe a lot of people in Congress live in a different world than I do. I'm guessing that their socioeconomic status--where they live, where they work, the people they hang around--isolates them from all of the other more pressing issues that are happening to the people that they "serve." I suppose the issues I've mentioned don't affect their world much so worrying about that handful of people who might burn a flag is a perfectly legitimate issue...right?

Inequity

I read an article in the New York Times about schools that are attempting to use race and socioeconomic level as a factor in student assignments to schools in order to ensure their schools maintain socioeconomic and ethnic diversity. Their goals are admirable. I would love to know that every school has an economically and ethnically diverse population.

However, because of this intentional practice, the Supreme Court is now looking into the legality of using race as a criteria in school assignments. For some reason, people think that the days of needing desegregation orders are over. I don't know if they noticed, but our schools are more segregated now than they have been since the 1970's! For more factual information on that, look up Jonathan Kozol's latest book, The Shame of the Nation: The Restoration of Apartheid Schooling in America or check out Gary Orfield, Professor of Education and Social Policy at Harvard and co-founder of the Civil Rights Project.

We no longer see desegregation as a priority, yet each time a law is passed saying desegregation is no longer needed, we segregate a little bit more. You can see it in the decrease in minority enrollments in colleges.

I have read that the Civil Rights Movement strove to be about equality, but ended up being about integration. There is a difference. Integration allowed middle class Blacks to move out. Equality would have produced schools and neighborhoods that made people wanted to move in.

We need equality, not integration! Schools still suffer from inequality. Though the schools mentioned above that are striving for a ethnic and economic balance should be praised for their intentionality, it is almost always the Black and Hispanic children who are bussed out. Why doesn't the effort go both ways? Why aren't White children bussed in?

For one, I know that White (and other ethnicities, for that matter) parents in the suburbs would fight that tooth and nail. I have read about it happening. They don't think it's fair that their children have to be bussed. Besides, they don't want their children going to inadequate schools.

Why do we think it is any different for kids and parents in the inner cities? Do we think that parents in the inner city want their kids to take a long bus ride every day to school? Do the kids or the parents want to attend schools outside of their neighborhood? Do they want their children attending inadquate schools? I would guess I could survey 100 parents in the inner city and all of them would say NO! So why do we make the rules different for them?

Knowing our Past, Changing our Future

I came across some information several years ago that really stunned me. Allow me to quote:

"In Oregon, in 1922, the Ku Klux Klan, which had made the little red schoolhouse
a symbol of Americanism, lobbied successfully for a law mandating that all
children attend public schools" (p. 14). (Tyack, D. B. (1993). Constructing difference: Historical reflections on schooling and social diversity. Teachers College Record, 95(1), 8-34.)

In the article it explains how immigrants who came to this country were forced (against their will) into public schools. A series of Americanization laws (the Bennett Law in Wisconsin was one) were created so that all children would attend public schools, despite the fact that many immigrant groups simply wanted to continue educating their own children and retaining their own culture. The goal of the public schools was to "Americanize" and assimilate immigrants. As a part of that, in the 1890's the Pledge of Allegiance was instituted in the schools in order to "inculcate a common loyalty" (p. 13).

As I read about the origins of our current education system, I began to have a much different outlook on our current practices. The Little Red Schoolhouse icon was a symbol of patriotism that the Klan supported??? The Pledge of Allegiance was a way to force people into allegiance??? There were actually laws that demanded patriotism??? (that actually sounds eerily like today's laws!)

I'm afraid most of us are ignorant to the past. Information like this is not presented in history textbooks. We have to search for it. But I would like to believe if we knew more about our past and knew what we were actually founded on, we might begin to understand our current system and we might begin to recognize how the system has always set certain groups of people at a disadvantage. I would like to think our awareness and knowledge would lead us to change the way we individually and collectively approach our present and future.

As I look into our history from a multicultural perspective, I have found numerous events and happenings that disturb me. I think it is important for all of us to be aware of our past--even the parts of our past that make us uncomfortable. There are truths that have conveniently been left out of our education. If they are not presented to us, we need to seek them out.

I have heard the quote: "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." ~George Santayana. I am afraid we are already going down that path. However, by educating ourselves and passing along our new information, I believe we can begin to turn the tide.

School Finance

I have to admit I am not educated enough about the politics of the school finance law that keeps coming up here in Texas. I do know that our state legislature is taxed with coming up with a solution by June. I seriously wonder if that will happen.

Basically, what I know (someone correct me if I'm wrong) is that wealthy districts had something like a cap on the amount of money they could keep for their local school out of their taxes. Any money above that amount went into a fund that then was distributed to poor schools who had a much lower tax base. Thus, the bill was appropriately called "Robin Hood."

I know no one wants to have money taken away from their schools or their children. I know that parents want the best for their children. But what about those families who do work hard and pay their taxes, yet because their job doesn't pay as well as someone else's, their child's school gets less funding? Or, here's another reality, what about the families that don't work or maybe those who are addicts and they don't put money into the system, should their child be doomed to the same type of lifestyle because his/her parent made some bad choices in life?

I am very much against charity. Probably to a fault, in some instances. However, I see education as the great equalizer...well, at least it has the potential to be. In order to be that great equalizer, we must have an equitable system. Equitable doesn't always mean the same for everybody. Many of our low-income schools and children need more just to get caught up (see tomorrow's post for a discussion on how far behind some of our children are).

Many people will say, "It's not about money." If it's not, then why are the wealthy fighting so hard to make sure that they keep all of their money?? A quote from an article by Laurie Fox in the Dallas Morning News on Sunday caught my eye:

"School districts now are more alike than different," said Cathy Bryce, the Highland Park superintendent. "But we're all in the same inadequate circumstances. Equity and adequacy has not served our children well."

I think anyone in my neighborhood would be happy if they had Highland Park's "inadequate circumstances." If "equity and adequacy" hasn't served their children well, then how are their kids still scoring at the top on tests and getting into selective schools? And what could their same "inadequate circumstances" do for those in lower-income neighborhoods who are dealing with much more inequitable and inadequate circumstances than Highland Park?

I'm sure if I were a parent in a wealthier neighborhood, I would want my child to have what I had the opportunity to give them. But, if "adequate" funding is only given to those who have money, then what happens to the districts that don't have the high tax base? Do we just have to face the fact that wealthier schools and neighborhoods get what they need and want while poorer schools just don't?? Do people in low-income neighborhoods have to keep dreaming that one of these days they'll somehow be able to afford to move out to some suburb where their children can get a better education? There's got to be a better solution.

It does amaze me that despite paying all of their taxes that ended up sending millions of dollars to lower income districts, the parents in Highland Park were still able to raise $2.5 million to pay for things like computers and teacher salaries and such. In my experience, fundraisers in my neighborhood, have brought in maybe $150-$300.

I'm not trying to put down Highland Park. Those are just figures that stood out to me in the article. Click the heading of this blog for the full article.

I don't know of a solution myself. I wish I did. I just hope as people make these decisions, they realize that kids of all economic levels have potential and deserve the opportunity of the best education possible.