Skip to main content

America's Opportunity Narrative

On January 2, 2019 The Hill published an opinion article written by Ayele Shakur entitled “It Is time for a radical shift in our nation’s opportunity narrative.” In this piece, Shakur criticizes America’s opportunity narrative that implies “resources are limited” so only some students will receive the benefits of “good schools” while others are “trapped in distressed, underfunded, low performing schools.”

She argues that “opportunity is not a fixed resource,” despite what our current narrative reminds us. I have to agree with her. Many of America’s narratives are powerful and harmful to those with limited resources. I am using narrative to mean the representation of events. How many times do we hear a person say something along the lines of “I wouldn’t be where I am today without (fill in the blank with some great opportunity they received)”? Just look at the example Shakur used about Michelle Obama. Obama attests switching to a better school as a child led to her success as an adult.

Shakur is concerned about the students who cannot switch schools or find a better opportunity. Why should we allow this narrative of opportunity to harm our students? There is such a drastic difference in our “good” and “bad” schools, but if we divvy up the plethora of resources available we wouldn’t have such a divide in our school systems. And more students would be successful. Shakur suggests we “change funding formulas for schools serving low-income students, deconstruct siloes that separate low-and-high performing schools and radically shift our education system to give unfathomably more opportunities to our most disenfranchised children.” Basically, she wants to destroy the opportunity narrative because she recognizes how harmful it is to our students.

This article proves the power national narratives hold. It forces the audience to think about the events and stories that have grown so large that they affect our school systems and the success of students. Although this is a more liberal opinion piece, according to Ad Fontes Media’s 4th Media Bias Chart The Hill typically leans right. I’m hoping that conservatives who are reading this article will apply this idea to school choice, which our current Secretary of Education is pushing. School choice would encourage the opportunity narrative. Some students will get the opportunity to attend "better" schools, while the schools deemed "bad" will sink even lower and the students within those buildings will suffer from lack of resources even more than they do now.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Melanie and Melanie: Growing up with Separated Lesbian Moms in the South

I came from a sperm bank, well I came from a vagina, but first I came from a sperm bank. That’s not generally my opener, but we need to make it clear. My moms discovered their sexuality long before I came along in 1992. When I was three, they separated. Gay marriage had not been legalized up to this point, so there was no divorce process involved. However, my mama, Sharon, she gave birth to me, and she wanted full custody of me. My other mom, Sylvia, worked tirelessly to pay for my existence and Sharon’s pregnancy care; she loved me, and I was her child no matter what. They went to court, and Sylvia became one of the first lesbian parents in the state of Texas to receive shared custody of a child that was not biologically hers. In some cases, this still doesn’t always happen, particularly in cases with gay and lesbian parents, regardless of how involved the parent is in their child’s life. “Who do you want to live with?” Flash forward seven years or so, and I’m being given more...

Speech in its essence is not neutral.

“All fiction can be profitably regarded as argument” The OED Online defines “profitably” as: “with advantage or benefit; usefully” ("profitably, adv."). “Profitably” caught me off guard, but when I consider it in this junction, I’m inclined to agree. I found this quote in a work by Ronald Sukenick called Narralogues: Truth in Fiction . Sukenick makes this argument after establishing that he finds “significance” through the narrative as opposed to the plot. When I originally read the word “profitably” I felt myself wanting to be in disagreement with the claim because of the monetary implications of “profit.” Then again, I found it hard to make a case for a work of fiction that didn’t stand to gain from profit. We all have writings (and maybe even written narratives) that we don’t plan on showing to the world, but it’s hard to imagine not being willing to exchange those writings when offered money. That’s not an ideal way of thinking, but we don’t live in an ideal world. ...

All Pickles Were Once Cucumbers

I tried to take a more literary approach towards something that disrupts its canon, but I came up short. I thought about a lot of crossover episodes that seemed violating like when they did the whole Scandal/How to Get Away With Murder thing for the fans. Granted it worked, and now I’ve watched Scandal . Also, the “Uncle Grandpa” episode from Steven Universe was super annoying to me, but it is a children’s show and I probably shouldn’t complain about it. What I realized, instead, is that there are a lot of shows that break their canon of probability in ways that work- you may have already guessed which one I’m going with. The Living Handbook of Narratology explores the foundation of possible worlds: “The foundation of PW theory is the idea that reality—conceived as the sum of the imaginable rather than as the sum of what exists physically—is a universe composed of a plurality of distinct worlds. This universe is hierarchically structured by the opposition of one element, ...