Story Time………
Last week I had the opportunity to participate in the US Department of Education’s YOU Belong in Stem Webinar and I must say that it was amazing! While all the sessions were equally outstanding, the session that resonated with me the most was How Educators Foster Belonging in STEM. This session reminded me of the importance of building relationships with students. When I talk about building relationships, I am not necessarily talking about activities outside of the instructional day, but I am talking about getting to know who our students are, finding out what they dream of becoming, how they currently view the world that they live, and how do they want to bring about changes to this world? A huge take away for me during the sessions was that some students felt as if they didn’t belong in STEM programs. This concept emerged from the restrictive beliefs, constraints, and diminished expectations that adults have held or projected onto them.
I worked at a state department of education as a Director of Alternative Education and Magnet Schools, and when people hear the term alternative education, they immediately think punitive. However, in this state, alternative education could mean punitive, or it could mean a school or program that was innovative with instructional practices (ex., early college). I once visited a rural school district that had both. After reviewing the district’s data on both programs, I was deeply concerned to discover that a significant proportion of black male students in special education were enrolled in the punitive alternative setting. However, the number of black male students enrolled in the STEM program was less than 10 percent. The number of black females and overall Hispanic population that was eligible for the program was also less than 10 percent. This district had one high school and one middle school, and both schools had a Title I designation. So, why were these subgroups not equally represented in this innovative program? The demographic data revealed that black students made up 35 percent of the overall student population, and Hispanic students made up 25 percent of the overall student population. Inequitable instructional practices were at the heart of this problem.
After interviewing students, teachers, and leadership, I found out that the criteria for selection was flawed. The district of course looked at student grades when making a decision to place students in the STEM program. The district also looked at teacher recommendations, and the recommendations were weighted more than student grades. For instance, a student could have the academic standing to attend the program, but if the teacher felt that the student would not be interested, they were not recommended. Additional excuses contributing to students not being referred included teachers’ perceptions that the workload would be too challenging, regardless of the student’s strong academic performance or that a student lacked the maturity to participate in the program. These were just some of the explanations behind students not receiving recommendations, all rooted in subjective feelings, assumptions, and outright biases. I interviewed students that day and I just remember students crying and questioning why things were different for them. I’ve held many roles in education, and have seen education malpractice and malfeasance, but this day was one that left my heart heavy. I was angry and for the first time (not my last), I realized that education does not always level the playing field for all students.
Unfortunately, this district felt that they were justified in these practices. I assure you that they were not! This was the first district that I ever chastised and completed an investigation on the use of state and federal funds. This action stemmed from the district’s unwillingness to alter the criteria for the STEM program to reflect enrollment for all students who were equally eligible. It’s been over a decade, and I recall hearing about ongoing inequitable practices in this district long after I relocated from the state. When educators believe that only certain students deserve an education that prepares them to be contributors to society and their communities, we inadvertently create barriers and impediments. In doing so, we deprive the world of their unique talents, gifts, and potential. For me, the solution to this issue has always been to approach students from an asset-based perspective. Every student arrives at school with skills, experiences, and talents; our role is to recognize and build upon those assets. However, this becomes impossible when we view students through a lens that lacks equity, relationships, and a heavy focus on discriminatory practices. One of the most impactful statements I’ve heard regarding equity came from a former colleague who reminded that “Title I determines how students eat, not who they are!”
Let’s continue to educate all students!
Sincerely,
Lead Learner
Comments