Skip to main content

In the spirit of his Education Week blog, Living in Dialogue, science educator and activist Anthony Cody entered into a five-part exchange with the Gates Foundation (GF) about education reform.

These point-counterpoint posts serve well to illustrate the essential difference between Social Context Reformers, represented by Cody, and "No Excuses" Reformers, represented by the GF:

“No Excuses” Reformers insist that the source of success and failure lies in each child and each teacher, requiring only the adequate level of effort to rise out of the circumstances not of her/his making. As well, “No Excuses” Reformers remain committed to addressing poverty solely or primarily through education, viewed as an opportunity offered each child and within which...effort will result in success.

Social Context Reformers have concluded that the source of success and failure lies primarily in the social and political forces that govern our lives. By acknowledging social privilege and inequity, Social Context Reformers are calling for education reform within a larger plan to reform social inequity—such as access to health care, food security, higher employment along with better wages and job security.

As well, the content and language in Cody's and the GF's blogs offer another layer for understanding the education reform debate—the tension between ideology and evidence.

The most distinct example of that tension came at the end of the five-part exchange when Irvin Scott included a preface to the final GF entry, making this charge against Cody, and indirectly all Social Context Reformers:

Simply, I believe all children can learn. I believe low-income children of color can learn when they have great teachers who believe in them, and treat them with the same passion, enthusiasm and intellectual rigor that they would treat their own children. And I believe in the skill and will of teachers, provided they are given the opportunity to teach, learn and lead as true professionals. I believe in John Dewey's insight that learning in the process of living is the deepest form of freedom. In a nation that aspires to democracy, that's what education is primarily for: the cultivation of freedom within society.

I want to believe that Mr. Cody believes this same truth about students, yet in each post he carefully marshals an assortment of facts and statistics which seems to suggest that he believes that children living in poverty cannot learn and that until the status quo changes we should lower our expectations for poor children.

Scott, on behalf of the GF and "No Excuses" Reformers, clearly outlines the ideological, and thus not evidence-based, positioning that is both at the heart of the "No Excuses" Reform movement and why that narrative is more effective than the evidence-based positions of Social Context Reformers: "No Excuses" Reformers champion an enduring slogan "Poverty is not destiny."

As the U.S. enters the second decade of the twenty-first century, then, is poverty destiny? It is the answer to that question that is central to which education reform agenda the U.S. should embrace.

"Is" versus "Should Not Be": Poverty Is Destiny

Nowhere is the contrast between ideology and evidence more distinct than what Americans believe about income equity and access to opportunity as that compares to the actual income distribution and access to opportunity found in the U.S.

First, let's consider an enduring American ideal—social mobility; thus, answering the question, Is poverty destiny in the U.S.?

Sawhill and Morton offer the data revealing that in the U.S. social mobility has stagnated, particularly when compared to countries that have far greater social mobility than the U.S. (Denmark, Norway, Finland, Canada, and Sweden, for example). The short answer, then, to whether or not poverty is destiny in the U.S. is yes; in fact, all categories of socioeconomic status in the U.S. are primarily static. In other words, the majority of people in the U.S. remain in the social class of their birth.

Poverty is destiny, and affluence is destiny in the U.S. And these facts have almost nothing to do with the effort of anyone in those categories.

The statistical norm in the U.S. is that each of us is destined to the class of our parents. Those who are socially mobile upward are outliers, and to promote social policy based on the claim that "poverty is not destiny" is to make an ideological claim that has no basis in evidence. And worse, it makes an unwarranted implication that normal outcomes are somehow the result of inherent flaws in the majority of people who live their lives in the class into which they were born.

Why, then, do the ideological claims of "No Excuses" Reformers resonate with the public against the weight of evidence?

Sawhill and Morton show that the American public holds unique beliefs about equity that contrast significantly with most other countries. Americans disproportionately believe that the U.S. is a meritocracy (people are rewarded for intelligence, skill, and effort), but reject that people need to start with privilege in order to succeed, that income inequity is too large in the U.S., and that government should help alleviate opportunity inequities.

Further, Norton and Ariely explain about the contrast between American ideology and the evidence:

Most scholars agree that wealth inequality in the United States is at historic highs, with some estimates suggesting that the top 1% of Americans hold nearly 50% of the wealth, topping even the levels seen just before the Great Depression in the 1920s (Davies, Sandstrom, Shorrocks, & Wolff, 2009; Keister, 2000; Wolff, 2002)....First, our results demonstrate that Americans appear to drastically underestimate the current level of wealth inequality, suggesting they may simply be unaware of the gap. Second, just as people have erroneous beliefs about the actual level of wealth inequality, they may also hold overly optimistic beliefs about opportunities for social mobility in the United States (Benabou & Ok, 2001; Charles & Hurst, 2003; Keister, 2005), beliefs which in turn may drive support for unequal distributions of wealth. Third, despite the fact that conservatives and liberals in our sample agree that the current level of inequality is far from ideal, public disagreements about the causes of that inequality may drown out this consensus (Alesina & Angeletos, 2005; Piketty, 1995). Finally, and more broadly, Americans exhibit a general disconnect between their attitudes toward economic inequality and their self-interest and public policy preferences (Bartels, 2005; Fong, 2001), suggesting that even given increased awareness of the gap between ideal and
actual wealth distributions, Americans may remain unlikely to advocate for policies that would narrow this gap.
For the narrow purposes, then, of the education reform debate, poverty (and affluence) is destiny in the U.S. To state otherwise is to refuse to acknowledge the weight of evidence.

And here is the reason that Social Context Reformers are demonstrably evidence-based and, disturbingly, unable to have their message resonate with the public: An evidence-based message challenges long-held social beliefs and it is far more complicated than bumper-sticker slogans.

Scott's charge against Cody and Social Context Reformers is unwarranted since no educators or scholars are fatalistic about the potential for all children to learn. But Social Context Reformers are sending a nuanced and ideologically uncomfortable message: Poverty is destiny in the U.S., but poverty should not be destiny in the U.S.

Further, not only are the lives of children trapped in these inequities, as the evidence above clearly details, but our schools, burdened for three decades by "No Excuses" Reform, reflect and perpetuate that inequity.

Teachers as Scapegoats: The Bi-partisan Distraction

On the heels of Cody's five-part series with the GF, the U.S. witnessed a strike by Chicago teachers. Across the U.S., key narratives and policy patterns have included eradicating teacher evaluation and pay based on experience and levels of education in order to implement evaluation and pay systems weighted heavily toward test-based data (often test scores of students not taught by those teachers, such as the value-added gains or losses for the entire school population).

The weight of evidence about the impact of teacher quality on measurable student outcomes shows that teacher quality is dwarfed by out-of-school factors, and the evidence on value-added methods of determining teacher quality is not valid.

Yet, "No Excuses" Reformers identify erroneously the need to increase teacher quality (yes, teacher quality matters, but teacher quality is not the or even one of the most urgent areas needing reform in order to improve student learning) through policies that are ideologically appealing to the public but refuted by evidence.

In the heat of the Chicago teachers' strike, Kotlowitz posed a rare, evidence-based argument:

"In Chicago, 87 percent of public school students come from low-income families — and as if to underscore the precarious nature of their lives, on the first day of the strike, the city announced locations where students could continue to receive free breakfast and lunch. We need to demand the highest performances from our teachers while we also grapple with the forces that bear down on the lives of their students, from families that have collapsed under the stress of unemployment to neighborhoods that have deteriorated because of violence and disinvestment. And we can do that both inside and outside the schools — but teachers can’t do it alone."
But, again, his recognition about the weight of poverty (it is destiny) and that education is not powerful enough to overcome that burden (poverty should not be destiny) requires the public to reject not only the narratives of political leaders and "No Excuses" Reformers, but also entrenched cultural ideals about American exceptionalism (admitting instead that the U.S. is less equitable and has less social mobility than many other countries) and the American meritocracy.

"No Excuses" Reformers are trapped within and depend on American ideology that is contradicted by the weight of evidence about socioeconomic equity, the American meritocracy, social mobility, and the ability of schools and teachers to raise children in poverty out of that destiny.

In the U.S., poverty is destiny because our social policy ignores at best and perpetuates at worst socioeconomic inequity and because our essential public institutions such as our schools reflect and perpetuate those inequities. Children in the U.S. are more likely to remain in the social class of their births because our public policy and education systems refuse to admit the "is" and then move toward the radical and painful actions that could achieve "should not be."

The American meritocracy remains an ideal worth believing in and working for, and Social Context Reformers embrace that goal while also holding fast to the faith that public education can be a powerful mechanism for achieving equity among all humans regardless of race, class, gender, or sexual orientation.

And the role of universal public education in the pursuit of an American meritocracy reaches back to Thomas Jefferson's argument for a democracy embracing education:

The object [of my education bill was] to bring into action that mass of talents which lies buried in poverty in every country for want of the means of development, and thus give activity to a mass of mind which in proportion to our population shall be the double or treble of what it is in most countries. ([1817], pp. 275-276)

The less wealthy people, . .by the bill for a general education, would be qualified to understand their rights, to maintain them, and to exercise with intelligence their parts in self-government; and all this would be effected without the violation of a single natural right of any one individual citizen. (p. 50)

To all of which is added a selection from the elementary schools of subjects of the most promising genius, whose parents are too poor to give them further education, to be carried at the public expense through the colleges and university.  (p. 275)

By that part of our plan which prescribes the selection of the youths of genius from among the classes of the Poor, we hope to avail the State of those talents which nature has sown as liberally among the poor as the rich, but which perish without use, if not sought for and cultivated. But of all the views of this law none is more important none more legitimate, than that of rendering the people the safe, as they are the ultimate, guardians of their own liberty. (p. 276)

The tax which will be paid for this purpose is not more than the thousandth part of what will be paid to kings, priests and nobles who will rise up among us if we leave the people in ignorance. (p. 278)

Ideology and evidence remain issues of "is" versus "should not be." America has yet to achieve "is," but Americans could seek "should not be"—but only if we choose evidence over ideology.

The ideological arguments of the "No Excuses" Reformers, however, are perpetuating inequity by ignoring the evidence and creating policy that scapegoats teachers and schools while insuring that schools entrench that poverty is destiny instead of realizing the education that could change the lives of children and the society in which they live.

Originally posted to plthomasEdD on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 07:32 AM PDT.

Also republished by Education Alternatives.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Would you be willing to crosspost this -- (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gooderservice, poligirl, Stwriley

    "Once the Lords of Capital are no longer the lords of anything, humanity gets another shot at rational development of the species and the planet." - Glen Ford

    by Cassiodorus on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 07:43:46 AM PDT

  •  Ultimately it's easier to repeat (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slatsg, Burned, ThatBritGuy

    ...the mantra "poverty isn't destiny," because to acknowledge otherwise would mean they would need to admit to the systemic problems with class society. Underlying the whole TFA/Billionaire evidence-free ideology are putrid concepts like meritocracy and even eugenics.

    "Problem posing education does not and cannot serve the interests of the oppressor" -- Paulo Freire

    by rdsathene on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 08:29:03 AM PDT

  •  Disgusting comment by Irvin Scott (7+ / 0-)
    I believe low-income children of color can learn when they have great teachers who believe in them, and treat them with the same passion, enthusiasm and intellectual rigor that they would treat their own children.
    The implication is that those of us who work in impoverished communities do not believe in our students. The teachers in our school are deeply committed to our students, and are intensely passionate about their calling.

    That statement alone should disqualify Scott from any serious discussion on education becuase it is a clear indication that he doesn't know what he is talking about and is merely mouthing meaningless talking points.

    A proud member of the Professional Left since 1967.

    by slatsg on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 08:46:14 AM PDT

  •  It seems odd that . . . (7+ / 0-)

    . . . one of the richest men in the world has completely forgotten his beginnings as an upper middle class college drop out. He behaved exactly as the low performing students GF warns us about behave, but because he made one fortuitous "right place, right time" decision in his life, he ended up as a notable exception to the class mobility rule supported by the evidence.

    Then, he deluded himself, using that uniquely American "rags to riches" mass hysteria, into thinking that the sole factor in his success was his hard work. Yes, the work he did was hard. No, he would not have been as successful if his father was a day laborer and not a GI Bill trained lawyer. The majority of day laborer's kids can't even imagine attending community college, let alone dropping out of Harvard and starting a company.

    Bill Gates is a product of Social Context Reform, whether he wants to be or not. If he denies it he's just succumbing to our collective insanity that in America you can be anything you want and we're all going to be rich someday.

    We need Social Context Reform because without it poor children will never be able to imagine anything more than being poor. It's all they know. Poverty is destiny and no amount of idealogical wishing or objective measurement of education will change the fact.

    - The most perfect political community is one in which the middle class is in control, and outnumbers both of the other classes.
    - Aristotle

    by rudyblues on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 08:47:54 AM PDT

    •  The second generation... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rudyblues, Azazello

      in his case. His father was the original product of that reform (the GI Bill; just as my own father was, going from poor farmboy to college professor as a result) and Bill was the successful product: a child raised in the enriching environment of upper-middle class circumstances who could go on to take advantage of ability, chance and opportunity. It's the same as the classic immigrant experience in many ways, with some in the second generation forgetting the struggles or supports that accompanied their parents' climb up the socio-economic ladder.

      That's Bill and his education reform ideology in a nutshell. He had the advantages but fails to recognize that these were the critical factor that he could not have succeeded without. He has no sense of "there but for the grace of God go I", no gauge to measure what those born in poverty must face, having no personal experience with it himself. It's a kind of lack of imaginative empathy that some otherwise very smart people can exhibit. But in Bill's case, he can inflict this pathology on the rest of us.

      Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory, tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat. Sun Tzu The Art of War

      by Stwriley on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 09:28:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  This is what I think . . . (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        . . . is a common denominator with many of the crop of Republican politicians these days:

        . . . no sense of "there but for the grace of God go I", no gauge to measure what those born in poverty must face, having no personal experience with it himself.
        When you're climbing a ladder you rarely look down. Since we're all looking "up" the socio-economic ladder we can exhibit a sort of economic ethnocentrism. "I have this, all the others surely have the same." We have no idea how many are below us on the ladder and what their lives are like.

        Paul Ryan, Joe Walsh, Mitt Romney, they all strike me that way. They see Murika as if it were a car company commercial. All shiny new SUVs outside of McMansions with rolling, perfectly landscaped yards. No room in that view for a kid with no boots to succeed.

        - The most perfect political community is one in which the middle class is in control, and outnumbers both of the other classes.
        - Aristotle

        by rudyblues on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 09:48:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Gates' story is told in (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      passionateprotagonist, elfling

      Billionarie's Ball by McQuaig and Brooks. His upper-class suburban high school was one only a very few high schools that had a mainframe computer for the little snots kids to play with. When IBM was getting into PCs and looking for software Gate's mom just happened to have a friend at the company who set up an interview. They had been considering software from a different source.

      The GOP ... Government of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

      by Azazello on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 10:13:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Gates Graduated From an Exclusive Prep School (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rudyblues, Cassiodorus

      where he and friends had hacked a computer terminal, scored 1590 on the SAT, did some computer pioneering at Harvard before dropping out to start a company.

      He was nothing resembling a middle class college drop out.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 10:14:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, I'll have to agree . . . (0+ / 0-)

        . . . he was even more privileged than I remembered. Highly intelligent, yes, but also highly privileged.

        Would the odds of his success have been different if his circumstances had been different, if he had been underprivileged? The evidence says yes. Just sayin'.

        - The most perfect political community is one in which the middle class is in control, and outnumbers both of the other classes.
        - Aristotle

        by rudyblues on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 12:02:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Fill the belly and soul and the mind will open. (4+ / 0-)

    There are kids in my school that come in and fall asleep almost immediately. And when they wake up all they want is food.

    I have this same discussion with local administrators that spout the same victory in every classroom crap which is abusive in the way that it ignores these kids' reality.

  •  You Might Review This Week's "This American Life" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    passionateprotagonist, elfling

    which addresses this problem via research into stress in poor kids' lives and its effects on the types of nonintellectual learning & development that aren't measured by standardized tests.

    It appears to offer a path forward for at least some in lower incomes that doesn't depend on replacing or changing teaching of intellectual skills, so long as some extra continuing attention is paid to remedying some of the injuries inflicted by poverty.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 10:10:39 AM PDT

  •  We are paying these taxes: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The tax which will be paid for this purpose is not more than the thousandth part of what will be paid to kings, priests and nobles who will rise up among us if we leave the people in ignorance. (p. 278)
    to the meritocracy that is leading this assault on public education. And it is too high. Their forebears in the conservative think tanks got us nice and ignorant and they took the money. Now they're taking the freedoms.

    "If I pay a man enough money to buy my car, he'll buy my car." Henry Ford

    by johnmorris on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 03:04:35 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site