The Parent Trap
In Alex Kotlowitz's post on Monday, he gave what I thought was a particularly insightful summary of Geoffrey Canada's approach to Harlem's parents:
I often cringe at the notion of parenting classes - which are often paternalistic and diminishing. But Canada talks about it in a way that makes sense, and more importantly does it in the context of rearranging the dynamics of the local schools. It's as if he's saying to the parents, Come on now, we need you. Your kids need you. And in return for their engagement he promises schools that teach, that won't let kids fall through the cracks, that will begin teaching kids at an early age and not be constrained by the traditional limitations of school procedures and schedules. That seems a rather fair bargain.
I just went through another cycle of Baby College this summer (my second time, in addition to a few stray visits here and there) for a radio piece I'm working on for This American Life. I devote a whole chapter in the book to the program, and I think it's my favorite chapter: the parents I followed were going through so many interesting and intense changes during the nine weeks of Baby College, and they were so candid and thoughtful about what it was like.
But the human drama aside, I think Baby College is also important from a policy point of view. Alex is right: it's rare that a parenting class can communicate useful information to parents without seeming culturally insensitive or just downright dorky. But when it works, it can have a huge effect on how well they're able to prepare their kids to enter kindergarten. And I think Alex is also right that the key to the success of Baby College is the bargain that Geoff Canada makes with the parents: I'll help you do your part; you help me do mine. We're in this together.
It's somehow both unusual and obvious.
So why aren't more cities trying it? A lack of public interest? The expense? The dorkiness factor?
I disagree with Alex that parenting classes are paternalistic. As a parent of two little ones, there is so much I didn't know when I had kids--I wish these classes were available to everyone!
I think the problem may be that parenting classes are sometimes required of parents involved in abuse and neglect cases, and therefore develop a negative association. I volunteer as a Court Appointed Special Advocate, and parenting classes are sometimes required by the court as condition for parents to obtain full custody of their children.
I don't know much about Baby College, but it sounds great!
Thanks for having this dialogue--very exciting! I also recommend the series recap of The Wire (on the same DVD as the last episode) to get fired up about why we need to address urban issues NOW.
September 17, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I often hear from Republican friends that "opportunity for success" is equal is America, and that any kid, with passion and drive can reach the positions in life they hold (Business owners, Attorneys, CPA's etc.) Of course, I then give them Kozol's book "Amazing Grace", and ask them what they think. Of course, they don't read it, and continue their ignoramus talking points about the evils of "socialism", "redistribution of wealth", teacher's unions, etc.
How do we get through to a ruling class of successful people that often won't even engage facts in responding to an argument?
September 17, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Parent education is useful to even the most well educated and affluent. It needn't be paternalistic at all. I have often wondered what happened to a program called Parent Effectiveness Training that I attended in Palo Alto when I married a man who had two young children. I am still reading the book that came with the class, "P.E.T. The Tested New Way To Raise Responsible Children" by Dr. Thomas Gordon. I admit that it is very difficult to change established patterns of parent-child interaction developed in our childhood by our own upbringing, but I've found even being aware of these patterns, discussing them with my husband and the children and talking about the ideals of good parenting helps. Were P.E.T. or something similar to be offered, nay, required of all parents-to-be what a boon it would be to educators. My stepson is now a high school teacher in a city school. We talk about the need for parents to have access to this kind of thing all the time. If nothing else, the classes establish a support group for parents who can exchange ideas, commiserate and even become a taking off point for mobilizing for better education for their children. Well designed, researched-based parenting classes can be very empowering for parents.
September 18, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is a wonderful discussion. As a developmental psychologist who studies early cognitive development and language learning, I can tell you we know a lot but it plays almost no role. The culture wars, identity politics, the divisions in our country just do not allow us to have a nonjudgmental discussion for common good. We know (to the same degree we know smoking causes cancer):
Television watching --even happy prosocial shows --are bad for babies and children under 3, if more than just a bit of time.
A regular sleep cycle is incredibly important for neural development and learning (and for a good young immune system).
Physical punishment is strongly correlated with poor attentional control.
talking to and reading to babies (not just talking at them) is important
The best predictor of verbal sat skills, verbal competency and writing is READING outside of school in late elementary to early high school
and this isn't even the stuff about numbers, letters, etc etc. There is lots more; we should just be putting it out there like public health announcments
September 18, 2008 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink