On December 16, 2014, a parent in Highland Park lodged a formal challenge to the book, “The Working Poor: Invisible in America,” by David K. Shipler. This challenge followed closely on the heels of an overwhelming (11-1) rejection by a review committee of a formal challenge to the book “The Art of Racing in the Rain,” by Garth Stein.
By objecting to highly acclaimed literature selected by Highland Park High School’s trained English department professionals, a few Highland Park parents are significantly undermining HPISD’s ability to fulfill their stated goal of creating students who fit the profile of the “Learner of the Future.” http://www.hpisd.org/About/LearnerfortheFuture.aspx. The district’s web site states:
In 2012, the district assembled a study team made up of parents, students, teachers, administrators and university professors to identify the knowledge, skills, attributes and dispositions the HPISD student would need to become an accomplished person and lifelong learner. After months of study, discussion and collaboration, the team produced what you see today: the profile of the learner for the future. This profile will serve as the guide for our work going forward.
Among many other things, the profile states that a learner should:
- Question assumptions & evaluate evidence;
- Have a diverse & knowledgeable world view;
- Be empathetic, compassionate & open-minded; and
- Exhibit cross-cultural sensitivity & adaptability.
Not only is the objection to “The Working Poor” unfounded, but this book is exactly the type literature that supports the goals of the district’s Learner of the Future profile. First, the book is resoundingly praised by experts. For example, the New York Times described this nonfiction work as follows:
In the tradition of Michael Harrington, Edward R. Murrow and more recently Barbara Ehrenreich as it seeks to alert a complacent nation about the misery and deprivation in its midst…. By exposing the wretched condition of these invisible Americans, he has performed a noble and badly needed service.
In addition, “The Working Poor” won the Myers Outstanding Book Award and was chosen by several publishers as Best Book of the Year.
Second, a review of documents explaining why the book was selected clearly shows how the work helps foster the development of learners of the future. In particular, the text rationale, a document prepared by the HPHS English department to support and explain its selection of the work, states:
Because Highland Park ISD prides itself in producing leaders for the future who are globally competent on a wide variety of controversial social issues, the general AP III curricula surrounds core problems facing humanity that require sophisticated and well-informed solutions. Our district hopes to produce students with a diverse and knowledgeable worldview outside of their own, and through it all, our students should leave district halls with cross-cultural sensitivity and adaptability.
The rationale goes on, “For those initial reasons, the AP III team chose The Working Poor as a text to inform students of a broad range of quantitative data by leading experts about the impoverished in America . . . .” As this text rationale plainly demonstrates, “The Working Poor” was selected because it falls squarely within the profile of the Learner of the Future.
Indeed, our English teachers did an admirable job of considering the district’s priorities when selecting “The Working Poor.” Pat Scales, a literature expert who recently spoke to our community, artfully described literature as having the potential to be both “a mirror and a window.” Clearly, a book about the struggles of those living in poverty would serve as a window for Highland Park students into a world quite foreign to them. What better way to expand students’ world view than through class discussions of a literary work about poverty moderated by a skilled English teacher?
Next, let’s consider the challenge to the work. First, the objector asks, “[a]re there not better books from which to teach our students how to write and communicate effectively in an English class?” Next, she argues with the objectives of the entire course, stating “I propose the course objective be rethought . . . .” Finally, the objector asserts, “Abortion, sexual orientation and rape have no place in the high school classroom . . . .”
To be clear, “The Working Poor” is a non-fiction book. The discussions of abortion, sexual orientation, and rape arise in the context of real events described to Mr. Shipler by the many people he followed in the course of his study. These are not fictional dramatizations. It’s real-life.
I appreciate that a parent might not want her child to be exposed to real-life issues, for whatever reason, even though I disagree. But when a parent signs her child up for an AP English class, she must accept that it is a college-level course that will (at least hopefully) involve conceptually difficult material about real-life problems. For any one parent to suggest that her opinions are superior to those of the High School English department, or that she ought to be able to deprive other parents of the authority to allow their children to read books selected by the professionals, is quite an assertion. Are the working poor to remain invisible in the minds of Highland Park High School students?
Will learners of the future be invisible in Highland Park?
Lynn Dickinson writes as a parent of an eighth grade student at Highland Park Middle School. The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of HP Kids Read, Corp.