Traveling to other countries always expands my perspective and I return home more appreciative of the opportunities I enjoy in America. The possibilities in our country to determine one’s own destiny are a rare and precious gift. This was no less true as I recently returned from the Dominican Republic.
The DR is less than half the size of our state, with a few less in population. I visited several schools and discussed education issues with directors of the Districto Nacionale region, one of 17 districts in the country and containing the national capital of Santo Domingo.
Dominicans are warm and hospitable people. Like us, they enjoy a representative democracy. However, the country carries scars from years of military coups, dictators, mismanagement, and corruption. History of this sort results in economic problems and a deficient infrastructure. Even with these fractures and strains, regional officials seemed delighted I asked to visit schools and meet teachers.
They escorted me to a poor neighborhood with a “house-school.” The small building containing four classrooms was buried within a community without electricity and water. Both the principal and small staff seemed committed to the nearly 350 students attending half-day sessions.
The other schools were larger, but basic. I was impressed with teachers who work in the extreme conditions on the equivalent of $180 per month. It seemed DR also struggles with large bureaucracies and little resources getting to the classroom.
While the country claims a compulsory attendance law, it does not take long to see the lack of enforcement. Child labor laws do not exist, and many children are sent from home to shine shoes or wash car windows, earning a few pesos daily.
The majority of Dominican children attend independent schools, where families pay tuition. Only families that cannot afford tuition send their children to government schools. People readily acknowledge the two-tier education system. One free-market system was for the economically empowered and another was offered by the government.
Education receives only about 16 percent of the national budget. While it was never verbalized, the covert attitude seemed content that most families did not rely on government for education. Unless the family valued education, and forced children to attend school, the government seemed apathetic. I also wondered whether politicians thought it expedient to keep people ignorant. The teachers and directors were concerned and committed, but a tired and overwhelmed feeling seemed to fill the room as we discussed issues educators face.
Comparing cultures is like comparing fruits and vegetables. With so many different factors, you simply cannot compare. However, the monopolistic system of education for the poor was obvious, and suddenly I thought of my own country.
While the amount of money allocated to education by the two countries is incomparable, I was frightened by some comparable attitudes. America’s government schools in wealthier areas are usually of higher quality because empowered parents demand excellence and can afford education options if necessary. Rural and inner-city families have fewer options. Where fewer options exist with less empowered families, poorer quality schools within the monopoly system also exist.
I left the DR more committed than ever to civil rights and social justice for lower income students. We must continue to hold government schools to high standards, AND allow lower-income families to choose schools through financial assistance.
I am thankful the concept of school choice is taking root in America. No matter what perspective, there is one principal that remains true; education is the gatekeeper in a free country.