Learning from Dr. Seuss

I have been following the controversy over the removal of some books from the catalog of Dr. Seuss by his estate. Some tried to make this a political issue, blaming one party for “cancel culture” efforts. But the decision was made by the caretakers of Seuss’s legacy who determined that his outdated and insensitive depictions of racial, ethnic, and gender differences did not serve readers. Their choice is part of a larger movement to avoid harmful stereotypes and caricatures. “’These books portray people in ways that are hurtful and wrong,’ Dr. Seuss Enterprises said in the statement. The business said the decision came after working with a panel of experts, including educators, and reviewing its catalog of titles” [NYTimes].

This is not a new issue, and Dr. Seuss’s work is not alone in facing criticism.  “Children’s publishers and literary estates are trying to walk a delicate line by preserving an author’s legacy, while recognizing and rejecting aspects of a writer’s work that are out of step with current social and cultural values” [NYTimes]. Roald Dahl was criticized for racist and anti-Semitic portrayals. Richard Scarry’s illustrated books often promoted archaic gender roles and racial stereotypes [Ibid.], and many have since been revised. The Tintin and Babar serieshave been removed from many children’s sections in libraries for their colonialist and imperialist viewpoints. Such re-evaluations may become more common as we grow our own understanding of their potential negative impact of these portrayals and of the need for readers to see themselves reflected positively in what they read.

For me this controversy raises two key issues for Language Arts teachers in public schools. The first is whether we should ban books containing offensive material or choose to teach them in context, helping readers recognize their bias and its potential impact. While I think the latter approach is valuable for older high school students, its success depends on the ability and sensitivity of teachers to manage that, a tough call. When I taught The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, my students and I spent time exploring the accusations of racism against Mark Twain, the use of the N-word and how to navigate that in reading aloud and in writing, and the relative depiction of white and black characters in the novel. I’d like to think I did a good job of facilitating that exploration, but I occasionally had one or two students of color in my class, and I feared they were made uncomfortable. For younger students, however, I am convinced that the potential negative impact of unhelpful portrayals makes them unacceptable. For younger readers I would limit those books that promote stereotypes.

For me a second question comes up about the literary canon, the literature widely considered to be the best and most worth teaching and handing down from generation to generation. What books should be included? I confess I taught mostly dead white male authors far too much of the time. That’s what our textbooks contained, and the curriculum focused on these “classics.” I supplemented where I could, when I could, but it wasn’t until later in my career that I was able to include more female authors, more authors of color, and more contemporary authors.

Dead white male authors dominate the literary canon, even today. But it doesn’t have to be that way. Why not keep some of their works that offer an opportunity to explore the big questions: What does it mean to be a human being? To live a good life? What are our obligations to each other? And so on … But then why not give some of those books up and instead add works by women and BIPOC authors? Their perspectives can widen and enrich our world views and address those questions as well, and more of our readers may then see themselves in the works they read. That approach is long overdue.

First Things First

I just read a New York Times article about the state of U. S. schools today, based on the question, “‘Are American children getting adequate schooling in the pandemic?‘” [NYTimes 1.22.21]. It warns that inconsistency and disruption have been the only constants, that lack of guidance from the federal government has left districts to fend for themselves, that “there has been no official accounting of how many American students are attending school in person or virtually” [Ibid.]. This guarantees that we cannot know how many students have had face-to-face learning or what the educational outcomes might be, but the author argues that “some of the early data is deeply troubling” [Ibid.]

Given the variety of situations, the study chose to provide snapshots of seven districts that, together, provide a cross-section of America. While the snapshots offer interesting contrast, they also suggest confirmation that disadvantaged students suffer disproportionately. “‘Lower-income kids, kids of color, kids with unique needs like those who have a disability or other challenges — the numbers look very, very bad,’ said Robin Lake, the director of the Center on Reinventing Public Education, a research and policy organization based at the University of Washington Bothell” [Ibid.]. They also confirm that students are suffering not only academically but also in terms of their mental health.

An earlier article in The Washington Post supports these findings. In December “A flood of new data — on the national, state and district levels — finds students began this academic year behind. Most of the research concludes students of color and those in high-poverty communities fell further behind their peers, exacerbating long-standing gaps in American education” [Washington Post, 12.6.20]

As a teacher, I’ve always cared about my students’ academic progress. As an activist, I’m working to impact the educational inequities that plague our less advantaged children. Yet I think we’re missing the boat here. Certainly, we need to improve online learning and work for more equity in educational opportunities to limit further harm that the pandemic may inflict on our students. Even more urgent, however, must be our efforts to address the mental and emotional consequences of the pandemic and the strain our students are under. If we ignore the trauma many students – and many families – are enduring for the sake of academic progress, we will ensure that neither improves adequately. Too many of our students will not succeed without more emotional and psychological support.

Last December the Superintendents of the nation’s three largest school districts, New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, called for an immediate Marshall plan for education, a national commitment to address the national emergency in education [Washington Post 12.12.20]. I agree that such a plan is overdue, but it cannot focus on achievement without addressing mental and emotional health first. Our students are struggling. We’re all struggling. Those who feel helpless and overwhelmed will not achieve academically until they feel more hope. Let’s get our priorities straight here and serve our learners by meeting these needs.

Where Do We Go from Here?

Our grandson, who runs a creative learning pod for a group of Chicago sixth-graders with his sister, encouraged me to read Diane Ravitch’s 2010 book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System. A well-respected educational historian and former assistant secretary of education, she once led the drive to create a national curriculum. For the last ten years, she has repudiated her earlier support of punitive accountability through programs like No Child Left Behind and of charter schools.

In this book Ravitch argues that the business model does not support meaningful school reform, that privatization and charter schools do more harm than good. She reminds us that “The best predictor of low academic performance is poverty—not bad teachers” [Wall Street Journal 2010] and warns us that the charter school and testing reform movement was started by billionaires and “right wing think tanks like the Heritage Foundation,” for the purpose of destroying public education and teachers’ unions” [newyorkbooks.com 2010]. Using specific examples from major cities to show the perilous state of education, she argues for major policy shifts. She points out that we lag behind other nations in both prenatal care and quality preschool educational opportunities even as we face serious inequities and child poverty. Social policies to address those issues should support educational reform.

Ravitch would shift charter schools to educate the learners most in need of help, rather than make them an escape from public schools for other students. She would encourage family involvement from an early age. She would treat educators with respect, paying a fair wage for work and acknowledging that we lack the tools for merit pay to be reasonable. Most of all, she would leave educational decisions to educators, not politicians or businessmen.

Three years later, Ravitch published Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and Its Danger to America’s Public Schools, arguing against privatization and for public education. Her chapters describe the steps toward better education for all students as she advocates for more rigorous preschools, smaller class sizes, better teacher training, and comprehensive social services. She would professionalize teaching and turn more of the decision-making over to teachers.

Ravitch’s vision gives me hope. I have long believed that American education was on the wrong track, that charters and vouchers hurt the students left behind, that micromanagement by non-educators hamstrung good teaching, that teachers long to be effective and need to be given the time, tools, and support to do their best work.

Does any of this matter right now? During remote and hybrid learning, aren’t students, teachers, and parents just struggling to stay afloat? No doubt that’s true, but when the stranglehold of the Covid-19 pandemic releases its grip, as it ultimately will do, education will be ripe for reform. We’d do well to follow Ravitch’s lead and revise our policies and approaches accordingly.

Books as a Window and a Mirror

On November 30, the New York Times published yet another article about the realities of teaching during the pandemic, claiming “This is not sustainable” and warning that “burnout could erode instructional quality, stymie working parents and hinder the reopening of the economy” [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/30/us/teachers-remote-learning-burnout.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20201201&instance_id=24598&nl=the-morning&regi_id=71948775&segment_id=45745&te=1&user_id=a2c5403f90bf9a526413b15a7b86a2e2]. Sadly, this is no longer news, nor do there seem to be good answers. As an educator, I feel stymied. I can’t fix this for anyone…

What I can do, though, is find another way to make a difference. This year, thanks to Young, Black, & Lit [youngblackandlit.org], I can do something useful. I was already contributing to this “nonprofit organization committed to increasing access to children’s books that center, reflect, and affirm Black children,” so I received their email about running book drives for schools with minority populations.

I believe in their mission. Children need to see themselves represented in the books they read. In his blog, Athol Williams points out that when children see themselves represented in a positive context, it encourages positive perceptions about their place in the world and tells them “what’s important, and what matters. Seeing themselves in that world establishes them as people who matter and establishes their sense of place in society.” It may also inspire them to read more, which is key to literacy. [https://www.nalibali.org/it-is-important-for-children-to-see-themselves-in-books] If books are both a mirror and a window to the world, readers need to feel included in that world.

In 2012, the Cooperative Children’s Book Center reviewed 3,600 children’s books, finding only three percent featuring African-Americans,  two percent Asian and Pacific Americans, less than two percent Latinos, and less than one percent  American Indians [https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/08/characters-in-childrens-books-are-almost-always-white-and-its-a-big-problem/]. From The Atlantic: “Half of all five-year-olds in the country belong to a racial or ethnic minority, yet white kids continue to hold center stage in most children’s books and young-adult fiction. As a result, large numbers of kids don’t see themselves reflected in the books they read, and non-white, or non-heterosexual, or even non-male children end up learning that they are marginal, or secondary, in their society.”[https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/05/childrens-literature-needs-more-diversityeven-if-that-means-more-mediocrity/371639/]

The validation children get from seeing themselves on the page is only one reason to make books with varied characters available. Marianne Grasso offers four values to a multicultural library in schools:

  • Promotes empathy and unity
  • Promotes cross-cultural friendship
  • Helps students look critically at the world
  • Encourages identity formation

All students benefit from this exposure, which “helps to build a school community that is supportive, empathetic and accepting of others” [https://www.scisdata.com/connections/issue-96/the-importance-of-multicultural-literature/].

B. J .Epstein writes, “As someone who researches children’s literature, I think we’d have fewer conflicts in the world if we all read more diverse literature and lived more diverse lives” [https://www.newsweek.com/childrens-books-diversity-ethnicity-world-view-553654]. Our world is becoming more diverse, and the books children read need to reflect that diversity. Seeing diverse people get along can teach us all about getting along.

So I may not have a magic wand for the tribulations of remote learning and subsequent burnout for teachers, as well as students and parents/guardians… but I can organize a book drive. I identified a nearby school with a 92% BIPOC population, reached out to their administration, and bought the first several books myself. Now I’m posting on Facebook and working PR channels to find other supporters for this very good cause.

Will it fix education, even at a very local level? Of course not. Might it make a difference? I hope so. Margaret Mead once said, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” Words to live by.

Mind the Gap

Image courtesy of Stanford Social Innovation Review

Today I received an email from a good friend who is not an educator asking about the latest Deep Dive in Axios, “1 big thing: The failed promise of education.” This piece posits that the American dream is founded on falsehood, that the promise of education as the ticket to that dream simply doesn’t work. It goes on to explain that, “Family income is perhaps the strongest determinant of student success, and low income becomes an even higher barrier when it intersects with race” [https://www.axios.com/newsletters/axios-am-hard-truths].

Axios offers compelling support for this claim:

  • “Even when Black students from poor families start kindergarten with above-median test scores, 63% test below the median by the time they’re in the eighth grade, a recent Georgetown University study found.
  • Among kindergartners in the same high-achieving, but lower-income category, nearly 2 in 5 Latino students, nearly 2 in 5 white students and 1 in 5 Asian students also saw lower scores over time.
  • High-achieving students of color are too often overlooked by teachers and administrators: The odds of Black and Latino children being referred to gifted programs are 66% and 47% lower than white students, respectively, per the Fordham Institute.”

Further proof:

  • Black students represent a disproportionate number of students punished and expelled.
  • While affluent school districts offer significantly more resources, impoverished districts have a higher percentage of poor students and students of color who need more resources. And that funding gap continues to grow.
  • Implicit bias among educators hampers the growth of students of color.

“The idea that this is about who’s smart and who’s not is just not true,” says Anthony Carnevale, founder and director of Georgetown’s Center on Education and the Workforce. “In the end, the system pretty much places you where you were as a child. Education is the problem. It is not the solution.”

All the research I’ve read says that socioeconomic status is the number one predictor of school success. Other factors like race and implicit bias only increase the gap. Some schools are tackling it head on. The high school in Illinois where I spent most of my career has long had a support program for these students to help them catch up, but I don’t know how successful it is. And if you look at how we fund schools, that further exacerbates this problem: districts with more resources [because their homeowners pay more property taxes to generate those resources] increase that gap, and they are more likely to have fewer BIPOC [Black Indigenous People of Color] students. 

In the early 70s, when I was President of my chapter of the League of Women Voters in Connecticut, we looked at school funding and saw the inequities of funding and of educational outcomes. At that time the national LWV pushed for significant school funding reform. I remember my resistance, based on fear that we would reduce everyone to a lowest common denominator when I was willing to pay more in property taxes to ensure that my children could receive a good education in a public-school system. That concern, understandable though it may be, is part of the problem.

And those long-standing gaps have been exacerbated by the pandemic. According to the Economic Policy Institute, “The pandemic has exacerbated well-documented opportunity gaps that put low-income students at a disadvantage relative to their better-off peers. Opportunity gaps are gaps in access to the conditions and resources that enhance learning and development, and include access to food and nutrition, housing, health insurance and care, and financial relief measures” [https://www.epi.org/publication/the-consequences-of-the-covid-19-pandemic-for-education-performance-and-equity-in-the-united-states-what-can-we-learn-from-pre-pandemic-research-to-inform-relief-recovery-and-rebuilding/]. “Thirty percent of all K-12 public school students, about 15 million to 16 million children, live in homes that don’t have an internet connection or an adequate device for distant learning at home, a study by Common Sense Media and the Boston Consulting Group found. That lack of access, coupled with inadequate help at home and a quiet place to learn, means lower-income, Black and Hispanic children may struggle, a June report from McKinsey & Company found” [https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/12/impact-of-covid-19-on-schools-will-worsen-racial-inequity-experts-say.html]. Clearly, we need to commit resources to reduce these dangerous inequities.

There are programs that make a difference in normal times.  “The Posse” program [https://www.possefoundation.org/] identifies talented BIPOC students and provides scholarships and helps them get into the same college, where they remain connected with each other and a mentor. One of my most revered education professors/mentors is very involved in this. But we need that kind of support from the beginning. Recent studies of the long-term effect of Project Head Start, which provides support to these children and their families starting very early in life, suggests that that kind of intervention matters, which makes sense given that we know that the first five years or so of life are critical for brain development and learning.

We could do a lot more to close the gap if we cared to…

Teaching Now: Time for Change

My blog has been MIA for far too long while I dealt with some medical challenges, but I am back. Throughout this absence I’ve been pondering the future of education, convinced that teaching during the pandemic has created an opportunity for meaningful change yet concerned that we aren’t seeing that change come to fruition.  

In my optimistic naivete, I had envisioned a more student-centered approach with more time for collaboration and independent work. Zoom fatigue is real for both learners and teachers –surely we would see a shift like this.

Sadly, I don’t think we have seen that shift. Teachers are overwhelmed with hybrid learning, with the challenge of keeping students engaged in virtual platforms that don’t foster relationships, with student absenteeism and distraction… and the list goes on. Students and their families also seem overwhelmed by the challenges of hybrid and virtual learning.

Sal Kahn, founder of Khan Academy, confirms this: “These traditional lessons are also too long and not interactive enough to hold a student’s attention over a video conference. The traditional paper-based homework that’s being assigned does not provide students with enough feedback or teachers with enough information to understand what students are learning” [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/13/opinion/coronavirus-school-digital.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20200819&instance_id=21408&nl=the-morning&regi_id=71948775&section_index=3&section_name=idea_of_the_day_how_to_improve_remote_learning&segment_id=36497&te=1&user_id=a2c5403f90bf9a526413b15a7b86a2e2].

Torrey Trust offers a clear vision for a better of way of doing things. A University of Massachusetts – Amherst professor of Educational Technology, she shares graphics that demonstrate alternative approaches to serve educators and their learners. The one I chose to include above offers concrete options to improve teaching and learning. Each link provides specific approaches and activities. For example, her “Connected Learning” link suggests multiple team-based activities, including team challenges, virtual board designs, and community quilts. Each strategy provides another way for students to actively learn together if the teacher provides a framework related to content. The National Writing Project supports this kind of connected Learning: “Young people learn best when actively engaged, creating, and solving problems they care about, and supported by peers who appreciate and recognize their accomplishments” [https://lead.nwp.org/knowledgebase/what-is-connected-learning/]. Her link to Universal Design for Learning strategies offers ways optimize individual choice and autonomy, customize the display of information, and vary methods for response [https://goalbookapp.com/toolkit/v/strategies].

Classrooms that use strategies like these employ active learning. The Harvard Gazette reminds us, “Study shows students in ‘active learning’ classrooms learn more than they think” [https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/09/study-shows-that-students-learn-more-when-taking-part-in-classrooms-that-employ-active-learning-strategies/]. The authors describe classes in which they “start each topic by asking students to gather in small groups to solve some problems. While they work, we walk around the room to observe them and answer questions. Then we come together and give a short lecture targeted specifically at the misconceptions and struggles we saw during the problem-solving activity. So far we’ve transformed over a dozen classes to use this kind of active-learning approach. It’s extremely efficient — we can cover just as much material as we would using lectures” [Ibid.] Compared with a control group that experienced only lectures, the active learners scored far higher on tests on the material.

During my own teacher training, one of my supervisors told me I was too focused on content, that I should consider teaching college because of that focus. By the time I was teaching my Problem-Based Learning class in the late 1990s, my focus had shifted to process so dramatically that even my traditional curriculum classes grew more student-centered. Over time, my students clearly showed more engagement and satisfaction.

My naïve hope that this kind of shift would be forced by our emphasis on online and hybrid learning may have been foolish, but it’s not too late to move toward this kind of teaching. We need a better way. Our teachers would be more fulfilled, and our students deserve it.

Returning to Remote Learning

Parents, teachers, and administrators all reeled from the frustrations and challenges of the sudden shift to remote learning last Spring, so it’s no surprise that everyone needed a break. But it appears that remote learning cannot go away, and we have squandered a summer in which all those stakeholders might have prepared for the new reality.

School districts are struggling to determine what’s best for learners even as they acknowledge that 25% of teachers are high-risk and that support staff [nurses, secretaries, bus drivers] are essential to re-opening. Some have pushed back their opening date even for hybrid learning that combines in-person with remote; others have opted to go all remote from the beginning. Given the current stats for the pandemic, I suspect that most hybrid programs will find themselves having to close at some point in the Fall. Clearly, learning will be remote for a vast number.

How do we make it work better? How do we use this opportunity to improve teaching and learning? Surely it’s not enough to make do when this is our new normal.  Just a few options:

  1. Reconsider educational roles. The Council of Chief State School Officers, which represents state superintendents, outlined some roles schools might consider to focus attention in key areas: academics, technology, emotional support, and family outreach. Specialist leaders can help their colleagues succeed. For example, schools might consider having the teachers who were most successful with remote learning last Spring become School Remote Learning Leads with release time to support their colleagues. Academic Content Leads can be teachers with deep knowledge of standards, principals, and assistant principals. The principal, assistant principal, counselor, or social worker might become the Care Team Lead. This approach supports all faculty and staff in adjusting to the challenges of remote. If teacher contracts prove an obstacle, perhaps teacher’s associations will grant a temporary waiver.
  2. Do the work to establish classroom norms and build community that you’d normally do in person before you move to academic work.
  3. Recognize the inherent inequities in remote learning: internet access, access to devices, parental support, speed of internet, etc. Record Zoom sessions for later access for students who were unable to participate; seek ways to provide paper tools where internet is not available.
  4. Don’t depend on Zoom alone. Jennifer Casa-Todd writes, “We should be asking, is it more effective to have my students watch a video I created to learn a concept and then meet in real time to go over any issues or is it more effective to teach an interactive lesson in real time?” (https://jcasatodd.com/synchronous-vs-asynchronous learning/?fbclid=IwAR0sYP0Pf6FjuqJ0)
  5. Embrace technology, since we’re stuck with it, and seek out more digital tools like Screencastify and Padlet. Let students offer you ways they might want to share their learning.
  6. Rethink the purpose of learning. Never has it made more sense to move to a constructivist approach, to address real-world problems. Consider using problem-based learning for small groups.  Real world topics promote engagement and make the relevance of the work obvious.
  7. “Pandemic pods,” groups of families organizing remote home schooling groups, perhaps even with hired support, offer a model for those who choose remote learning in publice schools – why not partner up with one or more families to provide additional support and share efforts?
  8. Make online learning as interactive as possible. Use breakout rooms in Zoom for small group work. Use Zoom surveys to create “quizzes.” Create an open forum or discussion board so that students can support and mentor each other.
  9. Provide ongoing feedback, not only in Zoom sessions. Consider emailing embedded comments on student writing sent to the teacher.
  10. Recognize that social/emotional learning and mental health have taken a hit with schools moving to online instruction. Work on ways to build in community-building. Reach out individually to students who seem to be disengaged or struggling.

These ideas provide a mere beginning. Remote learning remains essential. It’s up to us to make it worthwhile.

Reopening Schools

Students at a primary school in Bangkok returned on July 1, a delayed start to their academic year. Credit…Adam Dean for The New York Times

I have been struggling to write this blog entry for weeks. Each time I think I have a handle on what I believe makes sense, more news and differing advisories and opinion columns give me mental whiplash. I am now convinced that I don’t know the answer. I am convinced that there is no one right answer or one-size-fits-all. And I am convinced that local school districts absolutely need to figure out their best answers both for the children, parents, and communities they serve, and for the nation.

Schools remain critical for the well-being of all of those stakeholders and for the nation as a whole.  Advancing academic learning remains a primary goal, but schools serve many functions: development of social and emotional learning, mental health services, providing food as needed, development of compensatory skills for special needs, and learning about citizenship. And the pandemic has clearly demonstrated the role of schools in enabling parents to work outside the home. Students already have lost ground academically and are dealing with the emotional aftermath of the Spring’s unexpected shutdown and an atmosphere of fear. The pandemic has revealed gross inequities about access to remote learning that remain unresolved, and we have yet to educate teachers on effective remote learning strategies.

The arguments to reopen schools as quickly as is safely possible continue to be compelling.

But it is that qualifier, “as is safely possible,” that stumps educational leaders. Although children under 10 seem to spread the virus less, according to a new study from South Korea, children 10-19 are as contagious as adults[1]. The National Center for Education Statistics identifies almost 30% of teachers as high risk[2], and schools tend to be enclosed spaces where people spend hours in close proximity, increasing the likelihood of spreading the disease. Children may also take it home to older adults who remain vulnerable. Transporting students to and from school and feeding them lunch prove problematical.

The University of Washington’s study about school reopenings around the world lists several key factors to help reduce risks:

  • Reductions of class size
  • Increasing physical distance between students
  • Keeping students in defined groups with limited interaction between groups
  • Some degree of staggering the start, stop, and break times within the school
  • Alternate shifts (morning, afternoon) or alternate days
  • Opening schools only for younger or older students in order to accommodate the increase in resources (classroom space, teachers, etc.) required for smaller class sizes.
  • Requiring face masks for students and/or staff in schools
  • Systematic school-based testing for SARS-CoV-2 virus or antibodies [3]

School systems, already facing a loss of income from reduced tax receipts, will be hard pressed to bear the expense of such safety measures. The need for such protections also varies among communities based on their rate of Covid infections. Given the local control of schools, the variety of responses seems inevitable and appropriate. New York plans on a hybrid approach of in-person learning, while Los Angeles and San Diego plan online instruction only. The local school districts where we live, an hour west of Chicago, offer a variety of options. Every family must make a decision based on the options available, weighing a myriad of factors and accepting how much is unknown.

The American Academy of Pediatrics said last week: “The pandemic has reminded so many … that educators are invaluable in children’s lives and that attending school in person offers children a wide array of health and educational benefits. For our country to truly value children, elected leaders must come together to appropriately support schools in safely returning students to the classroom and reopening schools.”[4]  We need to reopen our schools. Can we do it safely?

I have missed classroom engagement since I retired. Now, for the first time, I am relieved to be retired. My heart aches for those who must make tough decisions when no clear answers emerge, at least for me.


[1]  https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/18/health/coronavirus-children-schools.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20200719&instance_id=20443&nl=the-morning&regi_id=71948775&segment_id=33788&te=1&user_id=a2c5403f90bf9a526413b15a7b86a2e2

[2] https://www.childtrends.org/nearly-one-third-of-u-s-teachers-are-at-higher-risk-of-severe-illness-from-covid-19-due-to-age

[3] https://globalhealth.washington.edu/sites/default/files/COVID-19%20Schools%20Summary%20%282%29.pdf?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTkRreE5XWXlORFF3TXpNeCIsInQiOiJIbVNQTTVySEo0Vzk1cHVBZVVqWnFGVmR1UEJxRGdpd01mTXg4OGw3Mk5nTnpmaUoyMGt2UXIwWVZBOE5GVjIybHA5aStrbzJ3MUxsanoxamZibmlocmpSbXZyVFVoV0VHYU1aTGx0RnpsMXlmOEtXSVJqaDJsZ0RJU1BQcVZjZSJ9

[4] https://services.aap.org/en/news-room/news-releases/aap/2020/pediatricians-educators-and-superintendents-urge-a-safe-return-to-school-this-fall/

The Youth Are Our Teachers

Yesterday two fierce, intelligent, courageous young women reinforced my belief that we adults can learn from youth. My teaching memoir, Tales Told out of School: Lessons Learned by the Teacher (due out next year), tells the stories of my learning from my students. Yesterday two 2020 graduates of a nearby high school in a very white community organized a Black Lives Matter rally. They faced opposition; indeed, the original site was changed after the homeowners of the subdivision where the public park is located lodged such vigorous protest.

Bethany Duffey and Izzy Mohatt brought together a diverse group of people and wonderful speakers to help us all learn. My heart broke listening to Marcia Lane-McGee’s description of her experiences as a black student in a white Catholic school. She resurrected painful memories for me. My first teaching job was in a white, working-class Catholic school in Madison, WI, which took in expelled students from the public schools. One of my students was a year older, two heads taller, and infinitely blacker than her classmates. Though she responded well to my encouragement and pulled her grade up to a C, the principal lowered it to a D because, in her eyes, my student couldn’t possibly have done that well. Impotent to change her mind or protect my student, I was grateful to be leaving the school. I knew her action was wrong. Listeners yesterday knew that Lane-McGee’s being ostracized for the color of her skin was wrong.

18-year old Isabella Irish, whose organization of a Black Lives Matter rally in nearby Batavia inspired the Elburn organizers, said “Black power is giving power to people who have not had power to determine their destiny. In today’s America, African-Americans don’t need to be accused of a capital offense to be discriminated against and murdered.”

I have been aware of my white privilege for decades. Doing my high school research paper on James Baldwin’s writing fifty-five years ago first opened my eyes to the world beyond my white suburban community.  Reading Robin D’Angelo’s White Fragility last year with a group of fellow activists had pushed me to want to do more. But I still hadn’t found my voice until the murder of George Floyd. I wrote a letter to the editor of our local and regional papers. Our group met last Saturday to develop an action plan, and each of us is taking ownership of specific steps.

But these young people didn’t wait on us. They saw injustice and stepped up. I am humbled and inspired. And I am grateful to them, not just because they generated a rally with enough space and social distance for us to feel safe to go despite the pandemic. I am grateful because they remind me, at a time when our country feels torn asunder, that young people like them can lead us from darkness into real, systemic change.