More school?

There are certain arenas that people seem to have an opinion on whether or not they are actually qualified to have an opinion. Things like the economy, government, sports, and even church fall into that category. For instance, you don't need to be an economist to have an opinion on the economy (while it certainly would help). You don't even need to have a job to be able to comment on how you feel about the current state of the economy (though that might help even more!). Public education falls into the category of getting to have an opinion even though you may not be qualified to have such an opinion. It is with that trepidation that I post these final thoughts on Outliers, the book I finished last week.

In short, Gladwell argues that for some students, they don't get enough access to school. Not access during the school day but access during the months of June, July, and August. He cites a study done by the City of Baltimore that gave its students a standardized test like most school districts. The district administered the test to its students twice a year: at the beginning of the school year and at the end of the school year. The district also divided its students into three groups: low income groups, middle income groups, and high income groups. When one studies the results of how the three groups did over the course of a school year, there was marked progress in each of the income groups. In fact, the low income students gained or progressed more than the high income students. This is essence testifies, that in Baltimore at least, public education works.

But a dramatic change happens when one compares the 4th grade’s September scores against the 3rd grade end of the year scores. Here, high income students score marked improvement while the low income student makes little marked progress. The hypothesis then isn’t that poor students aren’t as smart or as interested in learning, but that there isn’t enough access to learning for poorer students. During summer vacation, middle and high income families continue to surround their children with learning opportunities: reading books, summer book clubs, trips to the library, trips to art classes, etc. Poorer families either fail to take advantage of those opportunities or simply cannot because of financial limitations. Gladwell writes that “virtually all of the advantage that wealthy students have over poor students is the result of differences in the way privileged learn while they are not in school.” He continues: “an enormous amount of time is spent talking about reducing class size, rewriting curricula, buying every student a shiny new laptop, and increasing school funding, all of which assumes that something is fundamentally wrong with the jobs schools are doing. But what happens between September and June (is that) schools work. The only problem with the school, for the kids who aren’t achieving it, is that there isn’t enough of it."

Two thoughts: first, I love to read. I attribute that primarily to a mom and dad who also love to read. I grew up seeing them read, being encouraged to read, and even rewarded for reading during the educational lull of the summer months. It is no surprise that a love for reading has continued on to my adult life. The data from this one study (and I realize it is only one study) seem to confirm the idea that if parents or a home life value education, then that will carry over even when a child isn't at school.

Second, what role can (or ought) the church to play knowing these results? It may be far-fetched to envision a church petitioning for a longer school year, but at Hillcrest, we've had elementary teachers offer a 'free' week long 'kindercamp' in the summer for incoming first graders as a means of keeping some of those skills fresh before going back to school. We encourage our people to mentor a child or volunteer as a reading buddy so that under-resourced students are paired with an adult other than a parent or teacher who invests something in their education. While over the course of 13 years or so of formal education these are admittngly 'bit' roles, the church looks for ways to fill gaps and improve a child's quality of life. How else can we do that?