Kozol Reading

5-31-09

While reading Kozol, “Still separate, still unequal” I found Delpit's argument resonating within me. I was glad we read Delpit first, because Kozol's quotes and comments really clarified Delpit's argument for me. In particular was Kozol's dinner story on page 6 where he told of having dinner with wealthy parents who send their children to private school at the tune of $20,000 a year rather than to an inner-city school. According to Kozol, these are the same affluent people of power who ask questions like, “Can you really buy your way to better education for these children?” “Do we know enough to be quite sure that we will see an actual return on the investment that we make?” “Is it even clear that this is the right starting point to get to where we'd like to go” Yet these same affluent parents spare no expense to send their children to private schools at a cost that most young adults spend a for a year of a college education. Delpit quoted statements by middle-class educators, who said, “I want the same thing for everyone else's children as I want for mine.” This is very hard to swallow as I make connections to Kozol's reminder that so much money by so few is lavished on their own as they, the people with the power, consistently and strategically cut funding for inner-city schools programs, maintenance, professional support and salaries to draw the brightest new teachers to the ranks of education. “Tea Parties” and propositions around the country have cut funding for public schools, given education credits to parents who want to put their children in private school and continue to undermine the institution that gave the ancestors of this country a chance to better themselves, the public school system. Now that they are the ones in power, they are manipulating the rules to keep the wealth for themselves.

Delpit also said, “If you are not a participant in the culture of power, being told explicitly the rules of that culture makes acquiring power easier” (pg. 25). Kozol reminds us of the importance of teachers in that role when he described the letters from third graders from the Bronx, New York (pg 4). 27 students sent Kozol letters asking for his help in making their school better. I was struck by the double negatives and word choice in the letters. As little Elizabeth wrote “It is not fair that other kids have a garden and new things. But we don't have that. I wish that this school was the most beautiful school in the whole why world.” As I read their letters, I was shocked that the teacher sent Mr. Kozol unedited letters that represented what he/she was supposed to be teaching in the classroom. Even Kozol planned to help the students edit their letters, but was swept away by their interest in him, his lifestyle and his dogs. Letter writing is, as is all writing, an opportunity for students to learn grammar, spelling and vocabulary, as well as appropriate social expectations in American society. Reading between the lines, I don't know if Kozol realized that he was sharing more than a touching letter from an inner-city school student. What I saw was one of Delpit's key points, that if teachers don't teach the code of power, where will students learn it. I was disappointed with the teacher in the Bronx school for failing to teach students the importance of speaking and writing with the accepted format in this country. Without knowing the grammatical expectation, inner-city students will continue to be shut out of the highest positions in the board rooms, court rooms and classrooms in this country. If that is their aspiration, children from the inner-city will be unfulfilled in their dream.

Finally, Delpit said that “Teachers are in an ideal position to play this role, to attempt to get all of the issues on the table in order to initiate true dialogue”(pg 47). However, Kozol notes that teachers are currently mandated through a “pedagogy of direct command and absolute control” (pg. 7), the inspiration of Skinner, creating robots, not the critical thinkers who could use their own voices to create understanding and make an important contribution to not only America, but the world. Unfortunately, this idea is all too close to the environment in which I work. Teachers in my district do not have the freedom to create student centered learning in the classroom. We are programmed, scripted and turned into the same robots that the “Big Thinkers”, the administrators and curriculum planners who hold the power, would have us turn our students into. When Delpit said that change must come from the top down rather than the bottom up, she included teachers in that order of power. Teachers no longer control the classroom curriculum and daily learning plan. Our teaching day is predetermined, minute by minute, teaching a schedule decided by politicians and administrators, neither of whom understand the unique makeup of my classroom.