Of Education, Money, and Political Correctness

Fixing education and student performance takes more than money.  It often requires crossing the minefield of political correctness.

My state, like many others, struggles with a less than stellar public-school system.  Educational problems, from failing students to drop outs to low graduation rates to low basic skills upon graduation are all among the issues that need to be dealt with.  So, our (mostly Democrat) legislators every year throw more and more money at the schools.  Yet, our school performance in nearly all categories is well below neighboring states that spend far less money per student.

After years of the same (more money, no better result) one would think that we might stop throwing our tax-payers' dollars down the drain and try to determine what we might actually do to improve students’ educational performance.  The problem is that would require us looking at issues that political correctness has taught us to ignore.

Without doubt, the performance of individual schools, even within the same district, varies depending on the ethnic and economic identity of its neighborhood.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that those factors must have something to do with performance.  And, any rocket scientist (or common citizen) who wanted to fix the education problem would likely want to consider what is it about these differing neighborhoods that makes the performance of their students so different.

A few things come to mind immediately.  Do the teachers’ abilities or qualification differ between schools depending on the sociological makeup of the school’s neighborhood?  Do certain types or quality of teachers prefer to work in one school or area over another and if so why?  Does this affect the performance outcome of the students?  Or is that performance outcome (as distinguished from the students’ actual ability) preordained by the fact that different cultures as well as different economic strata place different values on education?  Or are there other sociological or environmental factors associated with a particular school’s performance rates?

These are all interrelated questions, but their examination and answers likely require one to tread upon the land mine of political correctness.  Thus, the questions and their answers, along with the ultimate answer to the question of how to improve public school education, go unexamined and unanswered.

We have all heard that education begins at home.  This is true in many ways.  A child’s attitude toward learning begins before the child ever enters school.  The parents’ attitudes toward school’s importance and how one should approach learning will affect the students’ approach to their school experience.  Along with this mental preparation, the simple things like diet and basic living conditions will also affect how a student comes to school and how ready he or she is to learn.  All of this will affect the ultimate performance (as opposed to ability) of the student.  Money thrown at a school will not have any effect on what is going on at home.

If a child comes to school from an environment that puts little importance on education, then no matter how much money is given to the school and its programs, that child is not likely to give much meaning or effort toward getting an education or doing well in school.  Even teaching an ESL student in his or her native tongue is not going to precipitate better performance if performance is not valued by the student and the parents.

Note, this essay is about performance and not ability; it does not in any way intend to suggest that ability or intelligence are dependent on a particular cultural, ethnic, economic, or other identifiable background.  That is, while a student might very well have the ability for star academic performance, the student may not perform at that level due to a value system that does not reward or appreciate such performance.

 At the same time, one must acknowledge that it may not be appropriate to demand that a culture or other group place top priority on education when that group may have chosen to place some other value or activity above education.  Moreover, different groups may have different views of the amount or type of education generally needed and the relative benefits of post-high school academics vs. trade school vs. employment or military service.  Those who ask that we appreciate diversity must be willing to accept that among a wealth of diverse cultures some may choose to rank the importance of public-school education at a different level or with a different goal than we (or the government) might choose for ourselves.

These points are of course approaching someplace that the PC police do not want us to go because to discuss them might mean identifying/singling out certain cultures or sub-cultures that place a lower value on formal education.  While we are readily urged to identify victim groups, political correctness prohibits us from pointing out anything that might be a problem that the group itself could work to fix or that they have chosen not to change.  While we have little problem saying that some Asians or other identifiable groups highly value education and thus perform well, to say that, for example, some Hispanic cultures do not so highly value education is taboo.  And, to say that a child’s relatively poor educational performance might be in part due to the child’s cultural background and values would be considered an attack, probably a racist attack, on whatever identity group or sub group was being referenced. 

It is somewhat less dangerous to discuss economic factors affecting school performance.  In poorer economic areas the schools sometimes use the money gifted to them to take on the role of parent – feeding, reading to children, teaching them appropriate behaviors, caring for them as a babysitter when the parent works.  This, however, does not educate the child, which is the job of the schools that the school money should be funding.

We also demand very little accountability for our money from the administrators or the teachers or even the students.  Teachers are often afraid to discipline students so as to maintain a better and safer learning environment because to do so might be perceived as some sort of racist or other discriminatory act against the student or a group to which the student belongs.   Teachers may also avoid telling their students’ parents that their child is not perfect.  Administrators fail to hold teachers accountable for fear of unions or again for fear of allegations of some sort of discrimination.  And often the school administrative bureaucracy simply expands itself with the new money with little change to what is happening educationally.

If we really want schools to improve, let’s be honest about the students that are enrolled and about the effects that their backgrounds and living environments might have on their performance in school.  Let’s consider whether at least some of the money that we now uselessly send to the schools might be better spent interacting with the community within which the poorly performing school is located. 

We need to admit that there may be cultural and economic issues that money handed to a school will not and cannot fix.  The money might be more useful spent on more detailed information about diverse effects on educational performance, or to help us to understand why a particular group chooses to prioritize differently than we would like, or simply on developing programs that would reach out to various communities to inform them of the value of education to their children in our society.  But, we cannot do this if we cannot even state that culture might have a bearing on educational performance.

We won’t do any of these things, because to do so requires stating things that could be interpreted as less than flattering to one or another group of people and in all likelihood will be viewed by at least some as racist.  Rather than offend anyone’s sensibilities we will just keep throwing money at the problem without doing anything to fix it.  It may make us feel good, make us think we are doing something, but it won’t fix the problem.  

Yet isn’t ignoring these factors, even if for politically correct reasons, more racist than any inquiries or focus on one or another background factor might be?  For it is the children who ultimately suffer; and if we could improve education by focusing on one or another identifiable cultural or group identity trait, wouldn’t that be far less discriminatory than ignoring that factor and in so doing ignoring the potential capabilities of a child from what is now a poor performing group?  In essence, we are denying the children from that group the opportunity to reach their full and true potential, and what could be more racist or discriminatory than that?

If a student is a member of a group that for whatever reason (economics; cultural priorities; etc.) is not as well prepared for or appreciative of learning as other students, then putting money into the school will not fix the problem.  This is not a money to school issue.  It is a cultural, economic, and sociological issue.  That is something that ought to be faced.  To not do so, to not give every student the tools he or she needs to fully live up to his or her learning potential, is far more racist than is ignoring inquiries that might provide insights into how to better allow the student to succeed.  The answers often lie outside the walls of the schoolhouse, its purpose, and what those inside are trained for or capable or charged with doing.  And to simply keep throwing money there when it doesn’t help is an insult and injury to each and every student who attends.