So I was re-reading part of Ruby Payne's work on poverty and was considering the backlash against her book in class.
We as a class dismissed the work pretty quickly and I think we have really been trained in our society that we're supposed to immediately reject any sort of categorizing of people by shreiking, "prejudice!!" and write it off.
I think her section on the Hidden Rules is actually extremely useful in starting to understand an economic group other than your own, especially if you haven't thought of it in those terms before. And yes, I know, there are some broad generalizations, but she does clearly say, "Please remember that these hidden rules are patterns that one sees in the collective group, however individuals within that group may or may not exhibit those patterns."
I also think there's an assumption that students of wealthy families have got it made, and yes they certainly aren't wondering if there will be enough food for the next meal, but there can be plenty of other massive issues related to the lifestyle. Considering my own extended family, the wealthiest people are the most miserable with their lives and situations. The main difference is that wealthy people have the resources to hide their problems better, and to buy lots of Xanax to help pretend that they're happy. Someone ought to do a study on how many upper-middle-class folks are on anti-depressant medications. But I digress...
Anyway, overall I thought the Payne article was very interesting and was surprised at how it was received.
I find it interesting to think about the flip side of poverty and how wealthy children suffer from many types of problems that effect their education. For example, I've recently be informed by several parents that have teenagers at La Cueva High School that their children are dealing with drug abuse problems. Some of these wealthy parents are so involved with their careers that they pass on their kids to other caregivers. Even worse, some parents give their children such a huge allowance it enables them to have the money purchase big ticket items. Or even have the funds to become involved in drugs. Having money to put food on the table does not make someone a better parent. There is no substitution for good parenting.
ReplyDeleteIt is true that it is "tough all over". Given that everyone has their problems, rich or poor, perhaps one thing that contributes to the disparity in proficiency levels in different economic classes is that people with higher income that may be successful or part of mainstream middle class or upper class have high expectations. Both students and parents have the expectation of a diploma or college.
ReplyDeleteAs for dismissing Payne as a class, I find it hard to consider someones opinion when half of what they say is baloney. Yeah someone might have good points here and there but one true and valid statement does not make all statements true or valid.
ReplyDelete