Free Lunches and English Educational Inequality

  "In life, there is no such thing as a free lunch."

     Last night, I attended a lecture hosted by Beyond Profit, a social entrepreneurship club. Beyond Profit works on business initiatives which combine social good and economic profit. This type of initiative is working to meet the disparate and often conflicting drive of individuals of this generation. The concept uses business principles for socially beneficial ends. As the Beyond Profit mantra goes: "There are people who want to save the world and there are people who want great personal success. Nowadays most of us want to try and do both. Beyond Profit is the place to find out how to achieve this." Because of my desire to make Bridges Through Education Corporation self-sustaining, I decided to become active within the club and to learn from those with more experience and knowledge.

   This night's event covered educational inequalities within Great Britain. The program was sponsored by Beyond Profit, yet it was presented by Alex Spiers of Teach First, the UK equivalent of Teach for America. Of note, the program does not receive the same philanthropic funding that its compatriot in the U.S. receives. Its funding comes from the state, donors (corporate/private), and schools. Money is exchanged for the service of providing high caliber teachers, but the business board receives only one pound per year. The program offers the opportunity to teach in comprehensive schools in which at least 50% of students fall into the low income range within the UK. Unlike the U.S. educational construct, all individuals who attain a bachelor’s degree may become teachers through hands-on student experience (the equivalent of student teaching in the U.S.). Education majors do not exist in the UK. Thus, a program like Teach First faces less institutional push-back as 50% of the individuals who work in the program continue teaching at the end of their one year commitment. No additional education is required. With the merits of the different methodologies and qualifications aside, the program targets the issue of educational inequality within the UK.

      Educational disadvantage is about more than someone being "lucky." In this era, it is despicable that family affluence remains a primary determinant of children’s educational and career outcomes. Education impacts the entire life span of an individual not just childhood, but as time progresses, the divergence between the well-education and the poorly educated is accentuated. 17% of UK individuals ages 16-24 years old are NEET (Not in education, employment, or training). From a fiscal standpoint, it costs the central government and more directly, the taxpayers, 35 billion pounds per annum ($55-$60 billion U.S. dollars). In addition to the financial burden, this issue creates long-term negative externalities: prolonged unemployment, lower income, depression, mental health issues, and alcoholism. These phenomena are the logical bedfellows of poor educational outcomes.

     In the UK, data collection and analysis is excellent. One study analyzed the differential in school readiness between the rich and poor. At the age of three years old, the rich already possess a one year advantage in terms of behavior. At the age of 5, the gap in vocabulary development between the rich and poor is 15 months, which continues to widen over time. In terms of socioeconomic differences, 27% of students receiving free lunches (need based food programs) achieve the required scores on the GSCE (Proficiency or Graduation Test Equivalent) to continue onto A-Level, which is the university preparatory curriculum. In comparison, 54% of students who do not receive free lunch achieve this standard. The disparity is even greater when one compares comprehensive schools (public schools) and independent schools (charter/private schools). At Age 11, 93% of UK students attend comprehensive state schools and only 7% attend independent schools. At Oxbridge (Oxford and Cambridge), 54% attended comprehensive state schools and 46% attended independent schools. Only 43 out of the 600,000 students per year on free school lunches in the United Kingdom are currently continuing their studies at Oxbridge. The statistics speak for themselves: affluence provides opportunities which are not otherwise enjoyed by the poor.

   Teach First works to counter this startling trend by turning exceptional graduates into inspirational educators and leaders who work to overcome educational disadvantage and educational inequality. The program targets schools with a large underprivileged population and schools with underperforming teachers. Interestingly, "performance" evaluation of teachers is on a value-added basis. Based upon post code and family income, models clearly predict academic performance on the GSCE. If the student performs better than their surroundings suggest and their predicted score indicates, the teacher has had some "value-added" and is considered proficient. The program works on the concept of "micro-change" where change/improvement occurs at the local level. Individual students and groups benefit. The culture and internalization of educational stereotypes is changed within schools. At the end of the teaching obligation, teachers become eligible to be Teach First Ambassadors, which affords them the resources and mentorship required to start their own social enterprise. Thus, the program retains a strong alumni group which benefits from business and non-profit support.

   To conclude, the United Kingdom and the United States face similar challenges of educational inequality. Social mobility via educational attainment appears stunted and dysfunctional. It is the youth who suffer, both affluent and poor. The affluent neither know nor understand the nuances of poverty and struggle. The poor neither know nor understand the institutional knowledge of education. If they do, they often do not have the means to achieve the desired end. Everyone loses without socioeconomic diversity within the educational framework. Some lose more than others.

Social Value

      Last night, I hosted the first social at my new home for all of the students who are studying Development Studies at Cambridge. To begin, the program is quite diverse. As an interdisciplinary program, students come from a variety of academic backgrounds. As one would expect, it is also multinational.  My purpose for hosting the social was for people to meet and socialize outside the parameters of academia. It was wholly successful with nearly 30 students from 16 different nationalities attending. The house proved quite welcoming and spacious and the requests for a repeat performance were many. The wine flowed and the conversation was lively. I hardly expected the group to stay past midnight, but they were up for the challenge. The experience was mutually beneficial. I shared about the U.S. Navy, the Rotary, and Bridges Through Education. I also learned from my peers as they shared their experiences growing up and studying within different societies and cultures. Alas, I can finally put names with the numerous faces that I see each day at lectures.
    Events such as this provide an opportunity to increase mutual understanding. They provide an opportunity to delve into the motivations and aspirations of others. Each individual is driven by a certain purpose and a certain interest, which I found is often country or even regionally specific. The common denominator is the general drive and motivation to facilitate change and to make an impact in the world. The University of Cambridge, and in particular, the Development Studies Committee, has provided a commonality amongst a disparate group of people. Given the opportunity, it is then our responsibility to grow and learn together. Last night provided the first real opportunity to develop synergy within the group. It was my intent to facilitate this development and it will be my goal to see it through to the end of our time together by the Cam. I look forward to hosting the next event and gaining new perspectives, new ideas, and new friends.

The Times They Are A-Changin': Civil-Society Organizations Today

Come gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone
If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin'.

     When Bob Dylan released these lyrics in 1964, he was speaking of the social transformation that was erupting. In essence, he was speaking of the rise of individuality and the dismantling of the post-WWII honeymoon. Today, as the baby boomers retire, the times are changing again. These individuals took over the civil-society organizations from their parents and preserved solidarity. These organizations give people and society a sense of community, the foundation of belonging. Unfortunately, these organizations are dying. They are dying because of inaction. Who is responsible? I argue that the fault lies not only with my generation, but also my parents’ generation, the generation of contemporary leadership. First, my generation is one of individuals. We would rather start an organization than take over the reins of an archaic body. We want it our way and we want it to benefit us. We want returns, personal not societal. We are dynamic. In contrast, the leading generation is stagnating. They steer inflexible and unwieldy organizations. They preserve the status quo within a confined box. As an enlightened generation who experienced societal unrest and civil-society movements, they don't innovate anymore or accept new ideas. The line of demarcation is clear.

    Of course, these are blatant stereotypes. They represent perception, and in some cases, reality. Perceptions matter. The demise of civil-society organizations is a consequence of asymmetric information, where one party has more or better information than the other. In this case, neither the leading generation nor this generation possesses adequate information. In fact, they possess misinformation, which distorts the commonality of purpose and value which civil-society organizations provide across generations. They are a mechanism for positive social activism and service. The organizations of today possess institutional legitimacy which allows them to function, to raise revenues, and to act as a force within society. Yet, we must remember that they are fungible. They can change and adapt to meet the needs of today's society. They are capable of innovation and of fighting the world's fights whether locally or internationally, now and in the future. They need both generations working together. This synergy is the intrinsic characteristic of such organizations. Diversity can be the strength of the new civil-society, ending generational frictions.  Without intervention by both generations and shared-compromise, our society (I use this term broadly to encompass many societies) will face a crisis of community. The bastions of community will die and we will be left with nothing but individuals, searching for community.

Welcome to Cambridge Rotary

Last night was my first opportunity to interact with the local Cambridge Rotary Club and District 1080. It just so happened that it was a combined meeting of all the clubs in East Anglia as the district welcomed a Group Study Exchange Group (GSE) from District 6510 in Southern Illinois. The meeting took place at the University Arms Hotel, one of the few hotels in the area, but a convenient stroll from the house on Grafton Street. I finally met my Rotary Counselor, Jenny Roux, in person, and it seemed as though we had already met. We enjoyed a nice cocktail hour and followed it with a wonderful dinner of pork chops, properly roasted potatoes, and cauliflower encapsulated in broiled cheese. I am certain and hopeful that this is not the regular meeting style or I will return to the U.S. 20-30 lbs. heavier. Like many of the clubs back home, the members in attendance were older, either retired, or nearing the end of their careers. The meeting was quite formal with the President presiding and orchestrating the meeting on a stringent timeline. The dress code was widely followed and I fit well with a suit and tie. It was quite the change from the Kinsman Area Club, but the coffee is still better at Time Square.

The discussions at my table were quite intrusive and we covered the full range of topics from my family, to the Navy, to the Rotary, to politics, to Ohio, and so on, but I do so love sharing and answering questions that it never grows old. The members seemed quite intent on gaining the U.S. perspective on defense spending, the War on Terror, social safety nets, educational reform, and the national debt. We truly share the same contentious issues, but the human interaction and perspective on these issues is missing on both ends. While I initially wondered whether I could be a Rotary Ambassador to a country so similar, I found my confirmation tonight. We share such common problems that we certainly should and ought to arrive at common solutions. We are divided by the separation of dialogue on all levels of state and society.

Due to the GSE presentation, I was not fully exposed to the range of activities (fundraising and service) that the clubs organize and execute, but I certainly have time in the coming weeks to integrate and involve myself in their functions. Of consequence, I met several of the other Rotary Ambassadorial Scholars for the year. Cambridge Rotary could not have landed a more homogeneous group of Virginia Military Institute, U.S. Military Academy, and U.S. Naval Academy graduates. In fact, we each were sporting our new beards and long hair to mask this distinction. More importantly, we share a commonality in terms of athletics: we are terrible at football (The English term for the game that we call soccer). Of note, I would also be poor at American Football. This lack of skill will be fully exposed at the Cambridge Rotary Homeless tournament where the District fields a team of Rotary Ambassadors and members. This project provides constructive activities for homeless shelters throughout the District and works to generate revenue for homeless programs and awareness of homelessness within the UK. I look forward to working with the District and the other Ambassadors on this an other meaningful projects in the Cambridge area as well as elsewhere around the globe. My mind is already at work.