Community Café – Equity in Education

"Trinity College’s Cities, Suburbs and Schools Project,
the Connecticut Data Collaborative and the University
of Connecticut’s Mapping and Geographic Information
Center (MAGIC) analyzed and visualized data to help
communities examine outcomes in the context of
neighborhoods, socioeconomic and community
resources." [1] - EDI Report

This session focused on Equity in Education. We focused on two sections of the EDI: Language & Cognition and Emotional Maturity.  Language and Cognition receiving the highest results
(66%) and Emotional Maturity receiving the lowest (45%). This means 66% of the students entering kindergarten had language and cognitive readiness, while only 45% were emotionally ready.

The first question asked was: 

What is equity in education / 

what do you think equity means? 

We had equity defined as “fairness
and justice in the way someone is
treated” The participants responses
to this question were as follows:

-          Allows fairness in the education system

-          Children having access to extra-curricular activities

-          “Our children’s lives matter”

-          Family centers offer programs that allow
       children to be on a level playing field

-          Children have better access due to their location 

A current high school student stated the following

“As a student at school you do not learn about 

programs /scholarships unless you are friends 

or have a good relationship with the guidance 

counselor.  Another high school student said 

“there is a lack of equity in education.  You have 

an advantage based on your name,where you live 

and your background”  This student also posed the 

question, “why are majority of teaches who teach in 

Hartford, not from Hartford? Also, speaking from 

experience, are black teachers non-existent

or just not getting hired?”

One group stated, “ In America, there is barely equity in anything.”  Another group
alluded to the fact that parents of students in urban areas tend to have multiple jobs
and as a result are unable to attend PTO meetings and other school activities.  They
want to be more proactive but there are many barriers which makes it difficult.
They are also unable to assist with homework and the task is left to older siblings.

Another group mentioned the Sheff vs O’neil case then mentioned the Open Choice and lottery systems. It was oftheir opinion that the systems are selective, has good intentions but multiple drawbacks and students are not prepared. It is a forced integration system.


This group expressed there is a positive
in these systems for SOME. 

At this point participants were told
that some of their responses were for
question #2, but they were shown
A youtube video on equity and
equality before tackling question #2.
This was useful to ensure they were
not confusing the two.

Dinner was served and as participants returned
to their groups, question number 2 was posed:
What factors contribute to the low scores?
 -  They were asked to record their responses on
newsprint. We started harvesting with group 3,
as group 1 began the initial discussion on what
is equity. 

Group 3 mentioned some of the responses from
question 1 were contributing factors. One of their Members shared the following: “After having this discussion, my impression changed a little.
The EDI Information is relevant when having
this conversation because it puts a lot into
perspective. ”The participants posed the question,
“if this is the teacher’s perspective then were they
more subjective?”

Group 3 added Asylum kids tend to be more
emotionally ready when they have to go to
school in other towns.  One thing to take into consideration is the educational level of the
parents in Asylum Hill. The quoted “Educated
parents = educated children”  They also
added people’s attitude is a contributing factor in addition to background and
culture and also their environment.

Groups 1 and 2 shared there are language barriers and
cultural differences which makea big difference They
stated  “Parents are the child’s first teachers”.  The
expressed some parents, although uneducated, will
fight and ensure that their children do their bestat school,
while some remain uninterested.  They expressed the
manner in which we speak to and interact with our
children determines their outcome; parents have to
find time for positive interaction with their kids. 

At this point participants were asked to engage in a
role play activity where each group had to select an
individual from their group to play the role of the
teacher, child or parent. The scenario was the child
under-performing in school, teacher suspects parent
is not doing as they should to encourage learning at
home, teacher confronts parent and parent reacts.
It was amazing to see participants in their respective
roles and when other participants were asked to chime in on ways the teacher and
parent could have responded differently, one participant mentioned using
“I” statements as they learned in their PEP classes; that was quite refreshing.

The final question was presented to the participants was:

What must we do together to combat these issues?

One person from each table was asked to give feedback
on this question.  First response was to share information
- we can feed off of each other’s strengths.  They also
shared the following responses:

-          We need to stop crying victim

-          Personal development sessions

-          Universal laws – taking action

-          Continuous development of leaders

***********************************************************************
Our fourth community Café was held June 15 th 2017 at 5:30 in the evening.
Food was provided for dinner where we hosted 17 participants 7 of which were
youth under the age of 21. The conversation was rich and robust although we
got off to a slow start. Once families began to speak there was no
stopping them. - MORE HERE