Sometimes, as I walk around campus, I see groups of young
children laughing, talking, joking around and running about …
after all, this is a school trip, meaning no schoolwork for that
day. Within these groups are eyes filled with wonder and awe as
they see the buildings, the open spaces and the people that make up
UCLA. Although they may not fully appreciate the importance of this
and other college campuses, they do know they’re in a place
that they may not see again for a very long time.
When these students leave this campus (the same scene is
probably repeated many times in schools across the country), many
go back to squalor, hopelessness and dread. Gradually, the cares
and concerns of their reality blot out their dreams of attending
college. The eyes of these students sparkle ever so brightly as
they flit and dart from landmark to landmark, from the grassy areas
of Dickson quad to the historical, majestic buildings of Royce Hall
and the College Library. But sooner or later, these same eyes must
go back home to smog-choked, crime-ridden, pest-infested domains.
Whether the location is Watts, Compton, East Los Angeles, Pacoima,
Mid-Town L.A., Wilmington, Santa Ana, Boyle Heights, Pomona or
downtown San Bernardino, the prospects are the same: bleak.
Each inquisitive youngster may have what it takes to become a
world-renowned doctor, a conscientious lawyer, a bright engineer,
an Internet expert or an acclaimed poet, author or playwright. But
when schools are ill-equipped to pique the interest of the
motivated and to provide the tools needed to encourage the
disadvantaged, the qualities of success are squelched by
life’s realities.
How can a student be expected to concentrate when basic needs
(food, shelter, protection) are not met? Why should a boy or girl
ask a teacher for help when the teacher constantly gives signals
that they are either unable or unwilling to assist? Why should a
school be considered a safe haven when gangs roam the playground
perimeters? And why should a student dream of future comforts when
fast money and status can be had now for a few minutes of being a
drug carrier or operator?
Politicians come up with various methods of trying to deal with
the problems of unequal and inadequate education. Among the ideas
presented are voucher programs, outreach, voluntary busing, charter
schools and magnet programs. Each of these present positives that
may indeed give students a chance they might not otherwise receive.
But the drawbacks of each must also be studied, and the bottom line
is that the basic problems have not been resolved. The average
student from disadvantaged areas will still receive substandard
teaching, inferior educational facilities and an inadequately
funded or poorly planned curriculum, which persists no matter which
political party is in power.
Both the inner-city and the rural schools in places such as
Gonzalez, McFarland, Solano, King City and Hanford, Calif., need
funding to resurrect dilapidated playgrounds, deteriorating
buildings and systems inadequate to handle today’s Internet
needs. It is also obvious that funding is not readily available; to
assume that the parents should help with fund-raisers dismisses the
fact that most families can barely afford to feed themselves and
keep a roof over their heads. So how can they begin to raise money
to better their children’s education?
At the same time, we have become painfully aware that both
federal and state funding for educational improvements is applied
with virtually no forethought or planning.
The Belmont Learning Complex disaster is just one example of
this. And while school districts fight over the merits of splitting
(in Los Angeles) or the benefits of Ebonics (in Oakland), our
children must still attend schools that don’t prepare them
for anything other than positions as french fry chefs and baggage
handlers.
Who do we blame? The system? The parents? The leaders of our
society? The bastions of higher education? The environment? Maybe
it’s all of these factors and more … and maybe it’s
us. Maybe we must look at ourselves and ask if we have done all we
can to help our children, our younger brothers and sisters, our
nephews and nieces.
Society has done much to perpetuate the separate-but-unequal
system that rewards those who are fortunate enough to live in areas
where the schools are nicer, but we can’t lay the entire
blame there. Nor can we hold the parents who work 12, 14 or more
hours a day just to provide substandard shelter and nourishment
totally responsible ““ although they should show interest in
their child’s progress. Political leaders in many cases do
only what is expected of them in order to garner enough support for
reelection, so can we expect long-range solutions from them?
Institutions such as UCLA try, through programs such as
Community-Based Learning, to reach the unreachable. But few people
are available to help the dedicated, due to fear and distrust. And
how can we concentrate on schools when the surrounding neighborhood
screams for help with basic protection and infrastructure
needs?
Like it or not, each student, each staff member, each professor,
each administrator, must take it upon themselves to provide a
viable example for these students. Through institutions such as
churches, synagogues, temples and other charitable organizations,
we can begin to present our lives in ways that allow children who
visit our campuses to see that they need not be Kobe Bryant to
become successful.
Even more important, we must constantly encourage our relatives,
our friends’ children and those with whom we merely come into
contact to strive for excellence in their schoolwork, their work
habits and their dealings with others. We should let them know how
proud we are, not only of their accomplishments, but also of their
struggles ““ and at the same time let them know that poor
effort is unacceptable. We do not praise them for horrible
spelling, incorrect math techniques or lazy reading, but we do
encourage them to improve and provide incentives for work well
done.
Is this a cure-all? Not at all, but it is a start. The rest will
have to come through the hiring of well-compensated,
fully-motivated teachers and the reemphasis on K-12 education
rather than “correctional” facilities that have nothing
to do with “correcting” anyone and everything to do
with punishing. Since affirmative action has gone the way of the
passenger pigeon, there should be no more excuses by liberals or
conservatives to design programs that will upgrade schools and
curriculum in urban areas such as Florence-Firestone or Pico-Union
or rural areas in California’s Central Valley. The question
we must ask ourselves is: do we have the initiative, the drive and
the stamina to help our students, or are we merely content to blame
others or categorize it as “not my problem?”
For in the final analysis, education is everyone’s
problem, from the cash-strapped district in Irvine to the
perennially underfunded areas in Inglewood. We either pay for it
with our time, effort and resources now, or we will pay for it
later in persistent crime, an increasingly stratified society and a
generation of lost souls. Which path will we take? The eyes of
those youngsters at play on Dickson quad await our decision.