A Different Lens: Generational Shifts and Social Justice

Blogs, Letters & Testimonials

August 9, 2007

The recent back-and-forth over whether or not public charter schools where teachers choose not to become unionized should be named after pro-labor civil rights figures like Cesar Chavez exposed one obvious reality that is just hanging over today’s school reform scene:

While plenty of younger (in a world run by washed up baby-boomers, young = under 45) people in the sphere have nothing at all against things like democratic teacher voice, solidarity, and the like, their core motivations seem completely different than the generation that was once forced to fight the good fight for respect, better wages, etc.

This largely generational split is most easily seen when people talk about “social justice” and how they define it. Ask the average TFA-er or NLNSer or KIPPster or (fill in the acronym for whatever group of youngish do-gooders you like) what gets them out of bed in the morning ready to fight for what is right, and you are likely to hear the phrase “achievement gap” somewhere in their answer.

The desire to make sure that our most vulnerable students and communites have access to a publicly guaranteed education, leveling the economic playing field by preparing young people for the world of work and civic life, etc. seems to trump many of the things that older generations of education activists hold dear. And again, it isn’t like either group is in disagreement, per se, it just comes down to priorities and the heirarchy that each uses to define activism, civil rights, and social justice.

And it isn’t just that they sound different. They look different too. A few years ago I attended a United Federation of Teachers Rally inside Madison Square Garden. The teachers were extremely fired up, well organized, dedicated to what brought them there (they wanted a contract, which was clear because they said it over and over) and, to be blunt, they were old. No wait, that’s not fair. They were more like aging hipsters. Heck, Richie Havens provided the entertainment. (Yes, he IS still alive, I learned.)

Many of the people there were the type of teachers who fought hard during the lean years for educators in NYC and who made collective sacrfices as a workforce in the 1970s which literally helped save New York City from bankruptcy. They spoke strongly about wanting to be at the table, demanding to be collaborative partners with management, etc. If you asked them about closing the achievement gap and the performance of their students, they’d say of course it drives them. Many would say that is INDEED why they needed a contract and better treatment from management, etc. so they could better concentrate on their students without all of the stress that not having a contract causes.

Compare and contrast that crowd, though, with the people that Jay Mathews met at the recent KIPP Summit in Scottsdale, Ariz. Mathews, who also noted how strikingly young  (and racially diverse) the teachers and principals looked at the summit, described the educators as being totally obsessed with continuous improvement and making sure their students were performing on par with the best private schools in their area. KIPP always gets knocked for requiring long hours and demanding a lot from the teaching staff. My hunch is that the people who choose to work at KIPP and similar ventures don’t do so simply because they are gluttons for punishment. Clearly, they see a connection between the model and the enormous task at hand. That is, the long day and other less-than-desirable working conditions are seen as part of the means to the end that really drives them.

And it isn’t like these people seem to think that teacher solidarity and the other ideals that teachers unions push are wrong, just that they are outdated. Or at least not as important given the enormous task at hand.

This generational split isn’t just among educators. Liberalism itself is starting to reflect more results-oriented thinking, despite the not-so-hidden disdain that comes from some quarters of the left toward high performing charter schools and other outlets where people can pursue their passion to try to make a difference in the world through education.

Look at Alexis Highsmith. According to this column from the Hartford Courant the other day, she’s got some solid lefty credentials. Her mom was a speech pathologist for the New Haven School District. Alexis is currently in her first year as an attorney with Hartford Legal Aid, a non-profit where she can “interact with a broad spectrum of people and make a difference.” She seems like a total young do-gooder.

What’s her latest cause? Helping to bring an Achievement First charter school to Hartford, a city where kids desperately need more high performing public school options.

I just mention all of this because sometimes it helps to remember that the times are changing when you read blog posts by more of the aging hipster crowd where they control the definition of social justice and civil rights.

Cesar Chavez and Al Shanker and Saul Alinsky were great men. They are also dead and the world above them has changed.