What do we expect? Stop giving kids an out.

How many of us would quit if we thought we had the option?

So often in the world of education we hear the phrase “high expectations.” Teachers are meant to have high expectations in their classroom–  rigorous, challenging assignments to keep kids engaged and progressing. High expectations in the realm of the classroom are very important, for sure, but what about high expectations outside of the classroom? What about high expectations for life?

My first year teaching, I worked at an Innovation school that was meant to turn around the results of one of the city’s worst performing schools. During the opening assembly and, really, every assembly, the principal would stand up in front of our students and immediately point out how many of them would be dropouts if we kept going on the same trajectory as other schools in the building. Though these speeches were meant to convince the kids that their path could be different, this method shocked me every time. Without fail, we’d get back to the classroom afterward and I’d have a couple of kids go, “That’s gonna be me, miss!”

When a kid commits suicide, a school community is really not supposed to commemorate them in any way. No statues, no planting of trees, no assemblies. The point is that if you give that student extra attention then more students will think about suicide as a viable option for them. Why isn’t the same idea practiced when it comes to dropouts?

Attending these assemblies always made me think back to my own experience in high school. I don’t think we were EVER told en masse about dropout statistics. Dropping out was never even given to us as an option. I knew a couple of kids who dropped out, sure, but they were the overwhelming minority. We were expected to finish high school. Hell, we were expected to finish college, too.

I just recently proctored PSATs at the school where I currently work. Leading up to the test, the students who had signed up to take it were described as the “high achievers” and the “best and brightest.” This stood out to me because I seem to recall that taking the PSATs was an expectation. It was not some external thing to sign up for, it was something that every junior was expected to take (if you took it as a sophomore, you were just being proactive). I never questioned it. In fact, I would have questioned the decision not to take them a lot more.

I’ll admit that I went to high school in a pretty affluent community, but that should not make a difference on this issue. I knew many people, myself included, who did not come from wealthy families and were, in fact, first generation college students. A few of the charter school systems around my city are already pushing this expectation. Kids are not expected to just graduate high school, they are expected to graduate college. College banners hang on the walls, and college is a part of the daily conversation. Most of the kids they serve qualify as “underserved,” “at-risk,” “inner city youth,” whatever the current correct term is. The vast majority qualify for free and reduced lunch. What do you know? Their numbers for college acceptance and matriculation are staggering.

There is an old motivational quote from Les Brown, “Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you’ll land among the stars.” We’ll ignore, for a moment, that the moon is actually much easier to reach than the stars, and instead focus on the intended meaning. I ended up at a four-year private university, but due to the expectations set upon me by my high school, I still feel a little embarrassed that I didn’t attend somewhere more prestigious. I’m not saying this is the right way to feel necessarily, but I am saying that if kids are reaching for college graduation, even if they don’t end up making it, they will probably get a little farther than if the extent of what they were expected to do was graduate high school. Maybe kids will attend community college, maybe they will go to trade school, perhaps they will join the army, but the idea is that their development does not stop at their high school diploma, and they know that.

Now is time for my disclaimer. I know that college is not the right path for everyone. I know there are people who will pursue other careers and avenues and be fully successful adults. There are also plenty of people that I knew in high school who still haven't pursued much of anything despite the expectations set for them. The high school where I currently work has an excellent welding program, and for some kids that path is a killer option. Every kid is good at different things, and that should be celebrated. I’m not saying the paths that don’t end in college should be considered shameful at all, but I don’t think it hurts anyone to be told that the expectations of them go far beyond high school.

Delivering the message to large groups of teenagers (who biologically are not the best at recognizing consequences anyway) that dropping out is even an option does not set them up for success. High expectations should not stop at the classroom door (or in some cases, the doors of teacher education programs), high expectations should be upheld throughout. If we stop buzzing in their ear about the kids that have dropped out before them, maybe students will stop even thinking of it as an option and more will choose perseverance over surrender.

Child-free? Child-less? Child-full? What's the problem?

Not that I keep current on this blog at all, but anyone who reads it regularly will notice that I often only write when I read something that bugs me or ticks me off. It is probably true that I do not write well unless I am fired up, which is why I fail at blogging regularly. I read another one of those articles today, and the issue involved (much like the issue of whether or not a woman should change her name or not when she gets married), got me a little salty. It is one of those things that the fact that we are even debating it, that it has even been given media attention, just blows my mind. I know often there are cultural or familial reasons why people feel pressured into living their lives a certain way, and that is up to them and the way they navigate those relationships. On a societal level, however, these kinds of choices should not make a difference to anybody not involved, and furthermore, the people in question should not have to feel self conscious about those choices.

The issue at hand today is whether or not a grown-ass person decides to have children. The article allegedly is talking about humans, but shockingly just focuses on women.

The article in question : Having it all Without Having Children - Lauren Sandler (Time Magazine)

           The question that always comes to my mind when I read something like this is: Why does everything have to be a THING? Everyone is on the defensive, all the time, and every aspect of life becomes this THING to ruminate on, and hate humankind about because “how dare they assume such things?” or “how dare they be so judgy of such and such type of people?” I feel like so often it’s pretty much just a case of middle school blues. This group of people, some subset of society, feels this overwhelming self-consciousness that people are judging and whispering and hating, when in reality, everyone is too busy dealing with their own garbage. The beauty of where and when we live is that by and large, we can be whomever we want to be, and do whatever we’d like to do (within moral limits and legality, of course). I don’t think there is anything wrong with not having children, nor is there anything wrong with changing your name when married (or not!). We fight for this equality, but then instead of standing tall, pursuing it, and looking it in the eye, we are constantly coming out with articles that essentially say, “It’s okay that we do this, isn’t it? You should really think it’s okay… Please think it’s okay.” Just do it. Own it. Live your excellent life and prove yourself by doing, not by saying.

The title of this article would make you think it is talking about childless humans, but clearly it cuts right to the point of childless women. "Why are they so judged?" the article wonders. These women have so many more options based on fertility and adoption, so maybe they are scorned more due to these opportunities. A spotlight is put upon those that are childless (or childfree), whether they have chosen it or not. It’s all very powerful, stating that we can do whatever the hell we want, and why are we expected, as women, to bear children? Funny thing is, no one is forcing ladies to be mothers, at least not yet (though, to be fair, if I ever decided to not have kids, I would hear it from my mother). Women are expected to bear children from an evolutionary point of view. Perhaps that is where these poor sods come from when they ask insensitive questions. Most of the time, it doesn’t make them assholes, it just makes them people who haven’t been touched by the various emotions connected to the commitment of a childfree life.  

Of course, the article comes down to talking about men vs. women, and how women have a smaller amount of childbearing years than men. The article basically mentions how during those years, childless women might as well be wearing a scarlet A since they are such aberrations. Men can sire children into their senior years, so no one pressures them.  The article then brings up lesbian couples who are under “equal pressure” to have kids based on the fact that they are both women in the childbearing age range. Naturally, they don’t mention gay males (penises don’t make parents, after all!).  This I found a little insulting, as I am pretty sure I ask myself similar questions regarding my committed gay male friends as I do about friends who have one or more woman in their relationship. “Are they planning on having kids?” I wonder. Of course, you can’t ask anyone that these days, but I wonder it equally.

I think the basic point of the article was to point out humanity’s flaw in simply expecting people to have children. What the article did instead was shine a spotlight on the poor kid in middle school with the glasses who wanted nothing else but to remain in the dark. The kid who didn't know that there’s nothing wrong with glasses and that one day they’d even be considered sexy. Though this article comes from a place of support, I think it first has to imply there’s something wrong with not having kids before saying there is something wrong with those who expect it.  I don’t think the assumptions society makes about whether or not someone is going to have children come from a bad place; after all, it is a primal instinct to want to propagate the species. So maybe instead of making those assumers out to be villainous, we just show them how to be sensitive. It is true that we do not know people’s circumstances and there can be a lot of pain behind someone’s child-full or child-less status. Sometimes people aren’t aware of this, however, until they or someone they love has been touched by it. So, let’s be sensitive in our assumptions people, and help those who aren't sensitive to understand why they need to be. Though one thing that is clear is that whether you choose to have children, or not; whether you choose to adopt, or not, none of these things make you any less human. There are so many children (and teenagers, and adults, and seniors) that need love on this earth already, each of us can find our contributing place in the world without creating a new one. Admittedly, I personally feel the need to breed one day, but some of the most influential adults in my life were and still are childless, and my life would have been VERY different (read: lacking) without them.