How is the Rugby Public School District doing with responding to the needs of its impoverished kids?
I think it is difficult to discern whether we do something for specific students or for all students. When our district chooses to enact a new policy or approach, we may have a target in mind, but I think our goal is to impact all students, not just a few. While some policies are designed with a specific subgroup in mind (e.g. attendance incentive policy), that decision still impacts more than just a few. It impacts all. Does it matter if our decisions affect a few or many? Of course it does. Our effectiveness is diminished if all we do is respond to the needs of a few.
But the other side of this begs us to examine what is being done for our most "at-risk" students--particularly those who are at significant risk of dropping out. And to this, I don't think we are doing enough; however, I think there are two ways of looking at the problem. First, are we merely admiring the problem without ever moving toward any solution? Second, do we have what we need to address the issues? The answers to these two questions are crucial because they really represent two completely different issues. Or do they?
If we merely admire the problem without really ever making any real headway into solving it, we could be stuck forever. At some point we have to move forward to something. Anything. No one solution will work for all kids, but we have to begin somewhere. If we try an idea and it doesn't work, it only fails if we learn nothing from it. So we make adjustments and move forward. Do something different. Think creatively.
But the real issue here is whether or not we have what we need to address the problem of poverty. If we speak in terms of community and school resources, I think we are lagging behind other schools in more populated areas. So instead, we have to find the creative solution. We need to try something--anything--then adjust as needed. (Sound familiar? Do you see how this is linked?) Our lack of resources is most noticeable when we consider Jensen's factor: support the whole child. Without adequate community resources and access to healthcare, both physical and emotional, we ignore a major issue associated with poverty. But I think the resources are there, we just need to make them more effective partners in the school system or the school system has to be more effective at partnering with the resources.
For example, public health departments can do a great deal to educate young people about birth control, communicable diseases, vaccines, and child health. But without a partnership between the two agencies, nothing will change. We need (actually the kids need) the bureaucracy to be diminished. This takes a concerted effort, a real change, and creativity. All the policies and programs in the world can't change anything if we are still willing to be dismissive. "I don't know what I can do to change this" has to be replaced with "We still haven't figured out the right cocktail of solutions, but we are learning."
