Submitted by Patricia A. Smith (not verified) on June 10, 2006 - 18:56.
Everyone here has spoken solidly from his or her own experience. Everyone has stated his or her own opinion in a highly professional manner. One piece of the issue I have not seen addressed concerns the right of a community, or, in the case of Omaha, NE, a large city's three constituent communities, each smaller community's right to self determination in the area of determining how their children will be educated, how it will be financed, who will pay for it, and, of course, who will attend school in which constituent community.
The city Omaha went to court to request permission to break up into three consituent smaller communities for educational purposes because breaking up along community lines would CREATE a situation in which segregated schools would be created. Why would segregated schools be created where they did not exist before? The answer lies in the fact that people have already chosen, more or less, to live where they do.
Should we ask people to move, so that ALL THREE communities are forced to be more diverse? I am not, by any means saying we should not educate our students to be world citizens. I am very fortunate to live in a very diverse community, and teach in a school which is approximately close to being half black, between a third and a half white, with the rest Hispanic, with the Hispanic population growing yearly. It is a student population teeming with creativity and brilliance that is truly wonderful to nurture and watch grow, as a teacher. However, these folks live together here, because they WANT TO, not because anyone forces them to.
To force the city of Omaha to continue as a unified school district, when it would be better served, in the minds of those selected to serve as guardians of the school system, by breaking up into three smaller school systems, is, to my mind, wrong. Much has been written elsewhere concerning a need for smaller communities within large high schools, as well as project based learning, and safer environments for students. Perhaps the caretakers of the Omaha system truly believe their population is better served in this way, REGARDLESS of the racial makeup of the three constituent communities.
It is my opinion that, many times, many of us see racial motivations or racism, when there are simply other issues we either would rather not address, or feel overwhelmed by. It does not make us racist to address those issues, or to feel that we need to put race on the back burner and address a myriad of other problems first. Teenage pregnancy, high school dropout rates, a need for young people to have more realistic preparation for life in the work communities they face after high school: these issues, to my mind, are more important than race, and if we are wasting time and taxpayers' money with court cases, the children are going to be the losers.
I believe that the three new constituencies need to keep in mind that educating for cultural literacy is an important part of ALL childrens' educations and that they cannot leave their children behind when it comes to learning how people around the world live, think and create. It is more difficult to do this in an environment where most people are homogenously grouped, whether it is by race, or by another factor, such as socioeconomic level, or cultural group. But, it can be done. As a music teacher, I will never forget teaching my youngest students how to sing in Japanese, or teaching fourth graders Australia's "unofficial" national anthem, Waltzing Matilda, this past year. Will any of these children ever visit those places? More than likely, no; however, they are beginning to gain an awareness of a wider world away from here, where people act and think, and communicate very differently than any of the cultural groups in our school.
However the Omaha situation turns out, I wish all the people the best of luck in restructuring their educational system in order to better serve those who we must always keep in mind: the children.
Everyone here has spoken
Submitted by Patricia A. Smith (not verified) on June 10, 2006 - 18:56.
Everyone here has spoken solidly from his or her own experience. Everyone has stated his or her own opinion in a highly professional manner. One piece of the issue I have not seen addressed concerns the right of a community, or, in the case of Omaha, NE, a large city's three constituent communities, each smaller community's right to self determination in the area of determining how their children will be educated, how it will be financed, who will pay for it, and, of course, who will attend school in which constituent community.
The city Omaha went to court to request permission to break up into three consituent smaller communities for educational purposes because breaking up along community lines would CREATE a situation in which segregated schools would be created. Why would segregated schools be created where they did not exist before? The answer lies in the fact that people have already chosen, more or less, to live where they do.
Should we ask people to move, so that ALL THREE communities are forced to be more diverse? I am not, by any means saying we should not educate our students to be world citizens. I am very fortunate to live in a very diverse community, and teach in a school which is approximately close to being half black, between a third and a half white, with the rest Hispanic, with the Hispanic population growing yearly. It is a student population teeming with creativity and brilliance that is truly wonderful to nurture and watch grow, as a teacher. However, these folks live together here, because they WANT TO, not because anyone forces them to.
To force the city of Omaha to continue as a unified school district, when it would be better served, in the minds of those selected to serve as guardians of the school system, by breaking up into three smaller school systems, is, to my mind, wrong. Much has been written elsewhere concerning a need for smaller communities within large high schools, as well as project based learning, and safer environments for students. Perhaps the caretakers of the Omaha system truly believe their population is better served in this way, REGARDLESS of the racial makeup of the three constituent communities.
It is my opinion that, many times, many of us see racial motivations or racism, when there are simply other issues we either would rather not address, or feel overwhelmed by. It does not make us racist to address those issues, or to feel that we need to put race on the back burner and address a myriad of other problems first. Teenage pregnancy, high school dropout rates, a need for young people to have more realistic preparation for life in the work communities they face after high school: these issues, to my mind, are more important than race, and if we are wasting time and taxpayers' money with court cases, the children are going to be the losers.
I believe that the three new constituencies need to keep in mind that educating for cultural literacy is an important part of ALL childrens' educations and that they cannot leave their children behind when it comes to learning how people around the world live, think and create. It is more difficult to do this in an environment where most people are homogenously grouped, whether it is by race, or by another factor, such as socioeconomic level, or cultural group. But, it can be done. As a music teacher, I will never forget teaching my youngest students how to sing in Japanese, or teaching fourth graders Australia's "unofficial" national anthem, Waltzing Matilda, this past year. Will any of these children ever visit those places? More than likely, no; however, they are beginning to gain an awareness of a wider world away from here, where people act and think, and communicate very differently than any of the cultural groups in our school.
However the Omaha situation turns out, I wish all the people the best of luck in restructuring their educational system in order to better serve those who we must always keep in mind: the children.