In
my first post in this series on Jumpstart (jstart.org) a national organization
dedicated to developing literacy in underprivileged preschools, I raised the
following question: how much can and does Jumpstart really accomplish? As this
series has tracked social barriers to education and the political stakes of
providing quality education, it has become clear that the impact of Jumpstart
is tangled up in many different factors. No child is an island, separate from
the circumstances of his or her life; with barriers like school closings and
lack of resources affecting children’s educations, how can Jumpstart make a
difference through the albeit noble and important cause of developing language
and literacy skills? [...]
My last post focused on individual
impact—children have markedly improved their language skills over the course of
my last few months working for Jumpstart. Notably, however, the impact doesn’t
end there: Jumpstart has spurred my own individual involvement not only with
these children but with the educational system, with issues of inequality and
inadequate resources, and with other members of my own small community. Through
my work and training, I have entered into a larger network of people and
organizations passionate about children’s literacy education.
As I have been considering how Jumpstart
has an impact on the community where I currently live (Hyde Park), I was at
first dispirited: my limited interactions with parents and educators make it
hard to gauge the influence Jumpstart has on their lives, and although the
University of Chicago is involved with Jumpstart, its offices are still fairly
small, relatively unknown by other branches of the university.
Yet at the same time, I see a growing
concern for children’s education in my day-to-day interactions. Even as friends
share this blog, or begin conversations about the Chicago Public School system,
I realize that community is not necessarily about locality. This is not to say
that the necessity of spending time supporting the local community is not
important—in fact, support is of utmost importance, something that has only
recently begun to be recuperated between Woodlawn and the university, for
example—but the focus cannot stop there. In order to make the greatest
difference in children’s literacy, we need to utilize networks which extend
from next-door to across the country.
Although the proverbial village needed
to raise a child might not make sense in today’s globalized world, perhaps it
does take a network to raise a child.
This is already a prevalent idea at the
local level: parents rely on family members, teachers, school administrators, and
community programs (Jumpstart, for example) to instill values, knowledge, and
skills in their children. But it need not stop there: besides the obvious
politicians, policy-makers, and advocators who have an impact on children, even
simply other individuals can change the way we view education and the social
problems that surround it.
Take for example the recent case of the
Onion’s offensive tweet about Quvenzhane Wallis during the Oscars. While
admittedly most children do not receive as much attention as she does, what was
amazing about the incident was the immediate and massive response to the Onion.
Twitter, Facebook, and Buzzfeed were flush with angry posts on the subject,
causing the Onion to post an apology to Facebook shortly thereafter. What is
important is not necessarily the number of people upset, nor the discourses
which constituted the initial tweet (which some have argued was meant to
criticize the way society feels no qualms baselessly insulting celebrities) or
the apology; what is important is the way in which individual people and
organizations were able to impact the Onion’s response. If no one had reacted,
or even if only a few people had reacted, the Onion would not necessarily have
felt such an imperative to remove the tweet and
apologize.
But the voices of individuals matter—when
we are consciously taking part in a larger network, in which the ability to
sway a crowd has become the ability to be retweeted, liked, or shared—not only
information but views can be spread rapidly.
This
is exactly the impact Jumpstart has on the community: not only does Jumpstart
make a difference in local communities by supporting local literacy events and
working with individual children to develop language and literacy skills, but
Jumpstart also spreads the value of children’s literacy through its much larger networks.
To
say that it takes a network to raise a child isn’t limited simply to helping
the child grow up. It’s about raising the child in the sense of improving that
child’s life, helping that child to succeed, and according them the value they
deserve as a person, rather than as a statistic. In order to raise the children
of our local communities, of our cities, and of our nation, we need to support
and advocate for them in our own ever-expanding networks of friends, family,
community, followers, coworkers, and anyone who is making a difference in
childhood education.
No comments:
Post a Comment