Amanda's discourse Analysis #1

“Changing the Odds for Children at Risk.” 17 February 2011. Youtube. 1 December 2008. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImzKoXGw3UM&feature=related

In this video Dr. Susan Neuman, a former assistant secretary of education, expresses her view on how to create a world where all children, especially those from poverty, can achieve. In the video Neuman states “The achievement gap can be narrowed by various government programs outside of the schools.” Here in Neuman’s claim the audience can identify how she alludes to other methods outside of public school education that can be implemented to enhance learning equality.

Neuman sets up her ground work to support her claim by describing the current social and economic scenerios. “Poverty trumps everything.” Compared to any other aspect, living in poverty is something an individual has to live and deal with every day. Striving to learn at school is not always the first priority when a child is hungry and in pain. A program that can target these aspects is needed.

The warrant expressed is that a new type of thinking must be adopted to provide a learning environment that can increase the odds of success for all children. An all around, three hundred and sixty degree, transformation must occur. The areas that need to be addressed include inducing family support, early education, after school programs, while also providing revitalized communities. In this way a child can gain knowledge in an encouraging learning environment, as well as being able to be prepared to learn.

There are many current programs that aim to increase education for all children. However, many of them do not have high success rates. That is why Neuman has evaluated the majority of these programs and has formed a new program that encompasses all the commonalities of the existing ones. There are seven bullet points.

1. Target towards children who need help the most. But must also focus on the FAMILY

2. Begin early. This is because it is easier to prevent problems than remediate problems. Ability is not missing; it’s the environment the children are missing.

3. Coordinate education with health services. Children in need of health services are hindered from proper learning because of their health distractions.

4. Structure compensatory classrooms. These are classrooms for children who need help the most. They would be small with daily activities operated differently by highly trained professionals who engage these children.

5. Utilize highly trained professionals. Teachers with the proper training behind them can really identify and work with the children to successfully help.

6. Encompass intensity in our programs. The programs we have are wishy-washy and diluted. Higher dosage of programs, more time at those programs, and more sustained activity in those programs is needed.

7. Possess accountability. This is like the “lynch-pin.” Programs need to monitor a child’s progress all along the way.

The reason backing the triumph of this program is that it attacks areas outside of the classroom that are causing the effects we do see in the classroom. In this way a child can be prepared to learn and can develop confidence. Confidence is a key to success and is created by forming social attachments. By this Neuman implies that by attaching to someone a child feels a part of something. They feel that they belong and know a lot of things. If a child doesn’t feel confident then they are prone to be “shut down” in the classroom. This lack of feeling successful is what drives many students to lose motivation and drop out of school. As Neuman states, “[students] come to school to learn and master their universe.” If a child cannot form a firm hold on their universe, they may decide to try and escape it.

Schools at this time receive a ton of attention, and reformation of their structure is not needed. What should be something worked toward is transforming the ‘school’ into a ‘community center’ structure. Lots of attention is focused on the current community trying to change the school. However, this should be the other way around in which the school reforms the community. In this way instead of the schools providing what the community needs, the community would provide what the school needs. This would allow the intensity of learning to be increased by making it the center of topic, as well as increase accountability with in a community insisting upon beneficial results. This supports Neuman’s proposed program that is based on changing the entire scene. And as she says, “we don’t need new programs, but new attitudes.”

In regards to the qualifiers, Neuman presents a piece of evidence that I feel really represents her argument. In a survey recently conducted, “giftedness was the same percent in head start as well as in a regular population.” By giftedness she means presenting notable accelerations in education. This survey provided the basis that proves children from low-income families, parents without education, or parents who are second language learners can be equally successful in the classroom if just given the right foundation. These children don’t need super intensive programs, just ones that can level the playing field and bring them up to speed. A proper foundation would encompass a prosperous, distraction free environment, the right tools to engage learning, and the right teachers provide assistance and make up for the learning gap.

A statistic Newman gave was “one in five children are poor.” This shows the great need for a program that can address the needs of this division of children. In doing this, the fundamental odds can be increased for each child’s success.

In an overall analysis of this video I feel that Neuman shows there are different programs that are needed to increase the achievement of children from a low-income family, parents without education and/or who know English as a second language. I feel that she proposes a program that is quite different from all others because it really focuses on amending the whole panorama of a child’s life. Being successful is not a single trait, it is a lifestyle. So when schools try to educate a child, they cannot succeed if that child is not wholly prepared to learn.