The
study of gentrification has typically focused on the displacement of existing
populations through rising housing cost.
However, based upon which end of the economic paradigm you are on
gentrification can now be considered “urban renaissance.” That withstanding the social profile of
most gentrifiers is usually white, middle class to affluent married couples
with either no families or very young children (DeSena & Ansalone,
2009). Although, the social
justification is often times the disruption of the concentration of poverty
those that are typically impacted are mainly African-American and Latino
families (Lipman, 2009). Furthermore, according to Katz (2000) it is this
ethnic group that is typically identified with having the least political influence.
An ecological examination of the
communities that are typically targeted for gentrification or this new “urban renaissance” would suggest a lack
of infrastructure, high concentrations of poverty and a social pathology that
reflects a lack of focus on education as a means of social mobility. Therefore, it would stand to reason
that a process in which a sense of social leveling would be welcomed. Lipman (2009) classified the ideology
of gentrification as one where middle class families would replace significant
portions of low-income families thus exposing those that remain behind to
better values and an achievement ethic as well as better schools, teachers and
resources. James Ryan (2010)
went further in his book Five-Miles Away,
A World Apart to suggest that the key to closing the achievement gap lie
within the influence of order, rigor and achievement found in the middle class.
Proponents of gentrificaction or “urban
renaissance” tout the socially and economically diverse communities and schools
that come about as neighborhoods begin to revitalize. They also tout a more positive attitude toward education and
educational outcomes as the middle class influence starts to set in. Proponents also suggest parents who
typically did not have any leverage develop a sense of power to advocate for
themselves and their children and subsequently academic achievement becomes the
norm. Finally, as achievement
becomes common the preverbal achievement gap disappears within the neighboring
schools (Wax, 2011).
Opponents on the other had suggested the idea of mixed income
neighborhoods is the catalyst for gentrification, further disenfranchising an
already isolated social group. Opponents also suggest that urban minorities who
are lucky enough to find themselves in the “rebranded” schools face social
isolation based upon their economic status (Wax, 2011). However, very little attention is paid
to the students who are displaced based upon the changing dynamics of the new
“neighborhood” school. Another
point opponents of gentrification or “urban renaissance” raise is that urban
schools in African-American and Latino neighborhoods represent a complicated
social dynamic where community and caring often prevail even in the face of
uncaring teachers and inadequate resources (Lipman, 2009). Thus giving further credence to the
African proverb that “It takes a village
to raise a child.”
Finally, and the most obvious and least discussed is that
gentrification or “urban renaissance” overlooks the history of neglect on core city neighborhoods that
created the negative circumstances by which the children of poor and low-income
families find themselves in.
Gentrification further highlights the spatial inequality, displacement,
hopelessness and racial containment that often beget many of the families and
children that live in inner cities throughout the country (Lipman, 2009). However, for the middle class and
affluent benefactor gentrification represents a windfall opportunity not only
from a financial standpoint, but it also represents significant educational
opportunities for the children of those that have the financial
wherewithal. DeSena and Ansalone
(2009) concluded the aforementioned through their informal strategies of
negotiating and navigating as well as their political influence have managed to
secure urban schools as agents of neighborhood transformation by attracting
likeminded residents. However, very
little attention is paid to those that are displaced and where they go from
here.
That’s my Truth and I AM sticking to it.
I AM
Dr. Irvin PeDro Cohen
References
DeSena, J.N. & Ansalone, G. (2009). Gentrification, Schooling and Social Inequality, Educational Research Quarterly, Vol. 33,
No. 1, pp 60 – 74.
Katz, B. (2000).
Enough of the Small Stuff Toward a New Urban Agenda, The Brookings Review, Spring, pp 6-11.
Lipman, P. (2009).
The Cultural Politics of Mixed-Income Schools and Housing: A Racialized
Discourse of Displacement, Exclusion and Control, Anthropology and Educational Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp 215 –
236.
Wax, A. L. (2011).
Income Integration at School, Policy
Review, pp. 49 – 62.
