The decision where to send one’s children to
school—whether to home-school, to enter a lottery for a charter or magnet
school, to seek out a scholarship to a private school, or to choose the
neighborhood school—is an intensely personal choice. Perhaps there is
nothing closer to a parent’s heart than the welfare and success of their
children. However, I have begun to come to a slow and grinding halt in my
way of thinking about where I want my White children to go to school.
In Holme’s (2002) study, most of the White participants
relied on the opinions and suggestions of high-status, White friends and
families to help decide where to move in order to have access to the best
schools. Although it was framed in terms of wanting the best for the
children, the parents’ discourse also revealed their underlying beliefs about
the superiority of high-status families and children. In essence, Holme
discovered that parents valued schools based on where other high-status parents
were sending their kids, not based on substantial factual
information. The perception of these schools was first socially
constructed, then as Holme concludes, “the facts that the parents did
obtain, which consisted primarily of test scores, confirmed what they had heard
about particular schools through their social networks—that schools serving
Whiter, wealthier students were, in fact, better” (p. 201).
It seems like this would be a natural response for any
parent. In fact, this kind of thinking is all I had been exposed to in my
White network of friends and family. A common conversation starter among
White people in the city might be, “Oh, you live here? So where are you going
to try to send your kids to school?” The expected answer is never “a
neighborhood school.”
The results of this kind of conversation are very
real. In the St. Louis Public School District (SLPS), only 13% of students
are white; 80% of the students are Black. Even further, most of those
White students are in magnet schools, schools that were opened with the purpose
of drawing White students into the city. This leaves neighborhood schools
with upwards of 90% Black students, racial segregation almost on par with the Jim
Crow era. This is "White flight" without even having to leave the neighborhood.
The situation is further compounded when one considers
the free/reduced lunch (FTE) percentage, a common way to determine poverty
levels. Over 80% of children in SLPS qualify for free/reduced lunch.
Just as a reference, to qualify for free lunch, a family of four has to earn
less than $30,000 per year. Currently, my family would qualify for
reduced lunch, but most of my friends and family are safely within the range of
middle class. This means that when we have hard times, we have resources
in terms of money, food, transportation, and childcare. Our family and
friends are priceless, but their support has very real monetary value.
In fact, social networking is a way that many schools make ends meet, as well.
Charter schools are not the only ones who survive on fundraisers, as Jonathan Kozol
(2005) discusses in his writings on inequalities in education. Districts
which already boast high property taxes to support the local schools also have
constituents who are able to raise large amounts of money, set up non-profits
and charities, volunteer at the school, do pro bono work, or donate new or used
materials, such as computers or photography equipment. All of this money contributes to schools with more resources, which then theoretically should
help children to learn, thereby improving test scores. Again, this
money is over and above what the school district already pays per
student. Kozol (2005) reported huge disparities between wealthy school
districts and segregated urban districts in terms of per-student funding.
It isn’t
natural to have racially segregated schools, but it is the byproduct of a long
history of systemic, institutionalized racism. All parents want what is
best for their children, and all children are equally deserving of a
well-funded school with good teachers. Additionally, Kozol (2005) points out that we don’t even call
our current state “segregation,” but instead use words like “diverse” or
“urban” to talk about schools populated by children of color.
The idea that Whiteness is privileged does not mean that
White people are more important or more deserving, but it does mean that
Whiteness carries with it prestige and power. When all the White people
or more generally, all middle-class people leave a school district, the children left in those
schools are left without powerful advocates and a network for obtaining
resources.
How do I disrupt the patterns of racial segregation, use my privilege to advantage others, but without coming in like a “White hero”? These thoughts are still formulating in my mind, but these articles are so appropriate for the decisions I need to make in the near future. Bottom line—I want to find a way to pursue education for my children in a way that does not socially reproduce racial segregation.
What are your thoughts on school and neighborhood choice? How do your choices impact your neighborhood?
How do I disrupt the patterns of racial segregation, use my privilege to advantage others, but without coming in like a “White hero”? These thoughts are still formulating in my mind, but these articles are so appropriate for the decisions I need to make in the near future. Bottom line—I want to find a way to pursue education for my children in a way that does not socially reproduce racial segregation.
References
- Holme, J. (2002). Buying homes, buying schools: School choice and the social construction of school quality. HARVARD EDUCATIONAL REVIEW, 72(2), 177–205.
- Kozol, J. (2006). The Shame of the Nation: The Restoration of Apartheid Schooling in America (Reprint.). Broadway.
What are your thoughts on school and neighborhood choice? How do your choices impact your neighborhood?