Customer Reviews

Tearing Down the Gates: Confronting the Class Divide in American Education

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I read a lot about social class, especially in higher education, and Sacks hits most of the high points about class accurately. He identifies the social mechanisms that are used to place students into groups and points out clearly the class bias in all of these practices. If you do or don't know much about social class in the US this is an important book.

His analysis of social mechanisms and testing is not too deep, but it is accurate. Readers wanting to know more about ability, aptitude, intelligence, and campus based testing should read some books on psychometrics, and Sacks references some good literature. There are some interesting and trivial errors and omissions that are probably the editor's fault and don't detract from his basic message about how class is perpetuated in the US school systems.

As we enter the new gilded age it is important to have our eyes opened to how class systematically helps some people and hinders others in schools.

It's sometimes easwier to talk about race rather than class--but this is a subject that's been unresolved since the very beginnings of American public education--and long before that. It's even part of the testing and NCLB debate. The author tackles it in ways that are original, personal and sociologically fascinating. A very good read.

Tearing Down the Gates is an informative view of the various institutionalized, structured barriers that make it difficult for lower income students to access the best of American higher education. Sacks relates the stories of many students who, based on their family income status, either work the system or get worked by the system. Sacks also interviews stakeholders and decision makers who work in high schools and universities to remove these barriers. He also gets higher education gatekeepers to speak about their perspective on access to education. This provides readers with multiple perspectives (slanted toward Sacks' progressive political stance) on the elitist processes involved in applying to and being accepted by America's best universities.

Sacks paints a very detailed picture of the ways privilege and entitlement (disguised as merit) work in secondary schools and higher education institutions to close doors on lower income students. But Sacks also lets readers in on stories of students and educators who have found ways to crash the gates of America's apartheid-like education system and open possible pathways for lower income students. This is an important read.

This was a compelling book. As a former educator, I honestly hadn't given much thought to some of the points that Sacks makes. Its hard to deny what he says. Sacks intertwines entertaining stories along the way making this a very readable book. My favorite part is when Sacks gets kicked off the Berkeley High campus during his research. This is a great read for anyone involved in education, any student getting ready to go to college, or anyone looking for an entertaining book on the state of our society. Good work Sacks.

This book along with a newer by Richard E. Nisbett Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count both are concerned with the social environs that develop intelligence and what special characteristics of that social environment are especially important for developing measurable increases in IQ and success. PS makes the point that social class, defined by educational level, is the dominant force behind children's educational success and attainment in social class. While some unique examples of educational techniques seem able to counter this for the most part public schools and higher education have developed sophisticated ways of enabling social class to persist. The worst effect of this regards the increase in poverty as the class divide is more radically a predictor of wealth than before. The hope is that attention to this development will enable schools to reform and break this cycle enabling more from the poor classes to become middle class. The most obvious critique of this would be arguing that class is ubiquitous for a reason and that reason is not couched solely on education. Nor is there a possible imaginary were all members of a society are upper or middle class. Other issues not addressed concern the mentally challenged who have inherited more than low social class but are physically damaged to the point where no magical educational process can help - and notice this is also a radically class based issue. There are some towns where a whole new subspecies is developing. Another issue not addressed is the relationship between class difference in different types of degrees and social class. I would be curious in what distinction there is between arts and engineering degrees for example. Part of the reason for that concerns the one teacher's explanation regarding students who self reflect and the impact that has on their critical thinking skills. One other interesting point was PS suggesting that Lawrence Summers snafu may eventually be shown based on a false assumption. Certainly more women are achieving great things in education for lots of reasons. But I wonder if there are not separate issues here since again Summers was commenting about a specific category - or skill set - by his comments and his suggestion that type of brain may play a role seems supported by much of neuroscience developments. In short, all higher education should not be lumped together as a social class concept. There are significant differences.

I normally don't read books about education. But if there's one non-fiction book a parent, teacher, or student ought to read to understand the American education system nowadays, this would be that book.

Peter Sacks does a great job of showing why we all should care about the growing educational inequalities regardless of where you might fall in the class divide. He does an especially good job of telling stories of students, parents, teachers and others while giving readers who want data and facts a lot to chew on as well.

This is an important book that should be required reading for politicians, educators and parents.

Sacks (2007) based his book around the inequalities of success and opportunities between social class and race within the American education system. Sacks begins with an in-depth look at two different girls who have two different educational opportunities and experiences, because of economic differences. While reading this section, it is truly heartbreaking to see the disparities of opportunities between the two girls. Overall, this explanation provides for information that proves that the students, who have parents that have a high education, wealth, and knowledge about the American educational system, are 10 times more likely to obtain a successful educational career. In addition, it is the schools that also provide for a greater amount of opportunities for students who come from a wealthier background. Thus, this book examines the unequal opportunities that the American educational system provides for all students.

A strength that is exemplified in Sacks writing is that the book illustrates the `hardcore' truth about the American educational system. Some students, parents, teachers, and administrators believe that it is up to the individual to fight hard and strong to gain a good education. Sacks, on the other hand, illustrates that this concept is not true. Many times, a student's familial background does not allow for them to gain the same opportunities as others. For instance, Sacks writes about students whose parents did not go to college or gain a higher education. He states: "It is not that they [parents] don't care about their kids' future--they just don't see the future (Sacks, 2007, 204)." Thus, parents can encourage and investigate their child's education, but if they don't have the experience, they might not know how to lead them to successful educational experiences. It is then, up to our educational system to give ALL of our students' opportunity to maximize the wealth of knowledge and training that our educational system has to offer.

This is an excellent book that should be read by all educators, administrators, political officials, future teachers and parents.

Peter Sacks is a talented writer. He proved his skill in his craft in chapters 11 and 12. However, the rest of this book is laced with political poison that is helpful to no one. Sacks is correct in his identification of the problem - poor people have less mobility economically and socially. "[The southern strategy] appealed to a festering white anger and racism in the wake of historic civil rights movement turned the South upside down (page 313)." Sacks does not try to make any effort to show that modern day Republicans rebuke racial inequalities. He also does not make any effort to show how Democrats made the same mistakes.
I wanted to read this book to gain insights on how to REPAIR a situation that is undeniably providing more opportunities to be more mobile socially and economically for middle and upper class students. Instead, I read 317 pages of excuses why there is a problem. On page 309, Sacks wrote, "I don't suggest that higher education should be a universal attainment. But it should be a universal opportunity." I could not agree more with Sacks on this point. As a matter of fact, I was geared up to read a book with this theme being reiterated throughout.
The insight Sacks provides about the students in chapters 11 and 12 was eye opening and very beneficial. The benefits are understanding the thinking of the poor, and why the decisions they make or don't make seem to allude the "common sense" of other socioeconomic classes. Instead of creating an air of collaboration, Sacks alienates a large section of the population by providing a very limited perspective. If students are respected, or even loved, by their teachers, the faculty will find a way to eliminate that "X-Factor" that keeps poverty students from performing as well as their potential. Those students have to be educated not only on content but also the rules and expectations of other classes than just the lower socioeconomic class.