“Fundamentally in Lawrence, we believe in this idea of mirroring the suburban experience, and we do that through high-quality academics; high-quality enrichment; the idea that hard work matters; teaching kids to be self advocates for their own learning; and then the last one is this idea of critical thinking, having kids, by the time they leave us, be able to encounter a novel situation [and] use their knowledge base to figure out how to deal with that situation.”
“It may not always show up on the test, but… it shows up in life.”
Jeff Riley, Superintendent/Receiver of the Lawrence Public Schools, speaking in a MassINC video, November, 2015
Eye on Early Education focuses on the twin goals of ensuring that Massachusetts children have access to high-quality early education and become proficient readers by the end of third grade.
I am curious what others think about whether urban schools should be letting students from low income groups know that they have a bigger challenge ahead of them, to try to make it into the middle class. Recent economic research underscored that in the U.S. the ability to move up is greatest in the middle income range. Those at the high end and the low end have a strong tendency to remain there; the reporter on the radio called it “stickiness” at the ends of the income distribution. The stickiness, according to the data, extends into the next generation. The children of those who are the richest and the poorest are also much more likely to earn the same as their parents. Only 7% have historically been able to make this upward move, in spite of the ongoing homage paid to the American dream and upward mobility. Other developed nations do better than the U.S. in terms of upward mobility. My question is: do we have a moral and pragmatic obligation to let students from low income levels, at least by the middle and high school levels, know that they need to work even harder to escapt their origins and move up?