Today, we have another column (I refer here to the Your-Turn article by CAIR in today's Times) which tries to prove who is  at fault for the District's alleged failures to resolve harassment and  bullying that undeniably exists in schools.    What is singular about  this column is that it uses precious print space seeking to justify a  complaint to the Department of Education, as if this is the central  issue of importance to our community and to our schools.    The  complaint has been filed; trying to justify the filing of the complaint  may make the people who  filed it feel better, but it will accomplish  little else.
To my brother and sister lawyers at CAIR, let me  say this.  Our school district has adopted a "continuous progress" model  of reform fostered by the National School Boards Association.   The  idea behind continuous progress is that progress comes from  acknowledging problems and focusing on the change that is needed, rather  than focusing on who is to blame for the problem.   This is hard for  lawyers to do, because we lawyers are so used to winning cases by  proving who is at fault.  A lawsuit is about proving who ran a red  light, not about how to make sure people don't run red lights in the  future.
One of the problems with focusing on fault, is that it  causes people to be defensive and resistant to change.   Listen.  We  have fantastic dedicated teachers.    They want students to be welcomed.   They are doing everything they can think of to do to create an  environment that assures every student an orderly safe positive school  environment.   I believe in our teachers and I believe in our schools.   Trying to convince them that they are the problem is going down the  wrong road.  Frankly, the vast majority of our teachers are saying, if  there is something more I can do to contribute to creating a welcoming  environment for all children, let me know.   This idea of trying to  prove that our teachers and administrators are at fault is a losing  strategy, because its not going to bring about change, and its going to  send us down the road of recrimination and division.
So when we  focus on proving who is wrong--on who caused the problem--instead of  what we want to improve, we create a defensive atmosphere that paralyzes  the organization and forces it to justify the past.  The District  adopted a continuous progress model because, at the leadership level, we  know that public education needs to make change.   This focus on who is  at fault is going to lead to nothing positive.  I am constantly hearing  from a small segment of the parents of white students that they believe  that Somali students have special privileges.  They complain about the  attitude of some Somali boys towards women.  Some believe that there is a  dual system of justice that treats minority students better than  majority students.  I hear as well from some parents of minority  students that they believe exactly the opposite.  That there is a dual  system of justice that treats majority students better.  Focusing on  blame encourages this debate and causes people to resist change, because  they see change as involving a confession of error.
The  continuous progress model says, look, our district is run by humans.   Humans are not perfect.  We make mistakes.  We learn from our mistakes.   We can always do better.  You don't have to prove that we are  incompetent to convince us to make change.  Let's talk about what needs  to be done in the future, not who is to blame for the past.    Let's  spend our time trying to make the future better than focusing on who is  at fault for the past.   The Irish Catholics and Protestants spent  centuries in a cycle of recrimination about who was more at fault for  the atrocities committed by Protestant and Catholic extremists.  They  overcame these divisions when they cancelled the debate about the past  and began to work together to make a better future.
Anybody who  lives here in St. Cloud, knows that we have a lot of work to do in  building understanding between our new Somali neighbors and those of us  who immigrated here a few decades earlier.  We know that there is a vast  gap in understanding about our respective beliefs and practices. We  have not integrated as a community in the sense of having the broad  universal mutual respect and understanding that we need.  To get there,  it is going to take lots of work on the part of Somali leadership and  non-Somali leadership.   If there are things we can do better in  schools, we need to do them.
This community does need to  acknowledge that it is all too  frequent for people who seem different from the  majority to be taunted, humiliated, or shunned.  Many who live in the  so-called majority community have no idea, and indeed would be appalled  to learn, that such humiliations are a frequent occurrence for minority  families.   These acts are not committed by the vast majority of  citizens, but by too many.  Too many folks in St. Cloud begin a dialog  about immigrants in ways that don't lead to understanding and respect.   More of us need to recognize that the vast majority of Somalis came to  this community to realize the American dream--to get a good job, to work  hard to earn a living, to see their kids succeed through education.    We need to see Somalis as an asset to this community, families who  believe in hard work and education as the road to success.  We're not  going to get there, however, by trying to prove who is at fault for the  failure to understand each other.  Change comes from focusing on the  future, not the past.
There are things that we can do in the  schools to create a more positive environment.  But the idea that  we  have just begun, is well, frankly, blarney. These issues are not new to  St. Cloud, and the efforts to address them are not new either. The work  to promote understanding and tolerance, and a welcoming environment,  long predates the letters sent by CAIR.
Time for a Public Discussion on Delivering a Constitutionally Adequate education to Minnesota
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Fundamental Right to an Adequately Funded Education: The Role of State Standards (Part 2)
This is the second in a series on the Fundamental Right to an Adequately Funded Education in Minnesota as contemplated by the Skeen decision...
- 
Jvonkorff on Education has been discussing Minnesota's statutory definition of educational adequacy, because adequacy plays an important...
- 
This begins a series of posts on why it is critical for Minnesota's three branches of government to study and determine what it woul...
- 
On December 13, the Supreme Court delivered its second decision in the years-long Cruz-Guzman case. In the seminal 1993 Skeen v State case...
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment
comments welcome