Mendolonium

Three year olds are naturally self-centered creatures.  They take offense at the denial of another graham cracker like North Korea is offended by the denial of aid from the United States.  They think that a dearth of new toys is the worst poverty that a human being could suffer through.  Some of this is natural to the age and some of this attitude is innocence.  Hopefully, a three-year-old has never been exposed to true injustice and scarcity.  Yet as a parent, part of my job is to teach my children to show empathy and generosity.  Part of that teaching is to elucidate the concept of necessities – the things that every human must have in order to live the minimum of a humane life.  We’ve been talking about the concept of needs versus wants a lot lately in our house; debating what is truly necessary. Unexpectedly my debates with a three year old have fostered a great deal of thought in me and refinement in my definition of necessity.  I can really only think of three items that are absolute in their need:

• A community; perhaps, but not necessarily, encompassing family and friends.
• A clean, secure environment including shelter, clean water, clean air, clean soil and freedom from conflict, persecution, or abuse.
• Healthy, nourishing food.

Written out in three short bullet points these requirements seem so simple, so basic.  Of course, that is the point – that they are the bare basics and yet it is deeply disturbing how few people in the world truly have them.  Even those of us affluent in the United States may not truly have our needs met for clean air, water, and food.  When listed one after the other it is also obvious that needs are inseparable.  For example, one cannot grow healthy food without a healthy environment and it is the good stewardship of communities that keep environments safe.  No one need is more important than the other, but it is the last item, food, that occupies my thoughts.  I see injustice in food everywhere I go:  on school tours where students have no access to water during meals and instead must drink milk from a big industrial dairy if they are thirsty, in the perfectly edible and delicious half a pizza that lies uneaten at the restaurant table next to us that will be simply thrown away, at the total absence of places to purchase fresh food when I drive through the poor urban core of Los Angeles, to the hungry children on TV and in our own towns who live in a world with plenty of food to eat and yet they do not get enough.  More than any other issue,  the pursuit of healthy, nourishing food for everyone on the planet feeds (pun intended) my soul in a way that almost nothing else does.

Today I had the privilege of attending a symposium, “Bringing Home the Ranch”, at the Huntington Library and Gardens to mark the opening of a new urban agriculture research and eduction station, Huntington Ranch.  The symposium focused on the revival of sustainable urban agriculture and it was wonderful simply to be in the same room amongst so many people who were working towards that future.  Rose Hayden Smith gave a talk which provided an inspiring overview of “Victory” gardens over time.  She stressed that urban agriculture is not a new or odd idea; growing significant amounts of food within city limits has actually been the norm for most of history.  In particular, there were two items in her talk which were particularly memorable.  First, that the concept of eating locally originatied during World War I – a government publication actually encouraged citizens to embrace “local production and reduce the food mile”.  Sound familiar?  From the World War II era she presented a gem of a poster, “The Food Commandments”:

1. Buy it with thought
2. Cook it with care
3. Use less wheat and meat
4. Buy local foods
5. Serve just enough
6. Use what is left

Those commandments are just as relevant today as when they were first published 65 years ago.  In addition to others, Gary Nabhan also gave an excellent talk in which he encouraged us all to think of ourselves as “designers” of the food system.  Dr. Nabhan quoted the words of a friend, Fred Kirschenmann, “Change in our food system is coming whether we want it or not so the question is whether we want to be passive victims or plan to creatively act as players” Every time we choose what to eat, what to purchase, what to plant, and what seeds to save we are shaping the food system.

I have been searching for a long time, perhaps since I first became aware of the concept that people “did something” when they grew up, for focus in my life.  I don’t know how just yet, perhaps as a writer, a chef, a doctor, a farmer, or a policy maker, but the excitement and ease that I felt at the symposium cemented for me that food is what I should be focusing on.  Touring schools recently brought the Pledge of Allegiance into my thoughts again for the first time in years.  I mentally recited the Pledge and as the last line rang out, “…with liberty and justice for all”, I questioned, how can one have liberty if one is hungry?  We, as a society, should pledge more than just liberty, there must also be, “…with food and justice for all”.

There is a discussion brewing in the comments of the last post on the topic of the sustainability of having children at at all.  It’s a topic that is on my mind a lot; with two children (and planning on more) I have obviously made peace with adding more people to the world, however, I do think every day how to mitigate their impact.  After breaking for summer, I resumed touring local schools last week.  Choosing a school outside of our neighborhood is inherently a less sustainable choice and that troubles me deeply.  It is yet one more flaw in the school choice system; how many gallons of gas are expended per year driving children around Pasadena (and many other cities) rather than walking or biking to a neighborhood school?  For both environmental and quality of life reasons, one of our top priorities is to find a school for our children that we can walk or bike to.   I liked a great deal of what I saw at the school I toured last week, Odyssey Charter School, but  there was one glaring negative, the school is 4.3 miles (uphill) from our house, and would require a 10.8 mile trip in the mornings to drop Thomas at school and then Theodore at his daycare (in the opposite direction).  The school is definitely on our short list but I don’t know how we are going to mitigate the distance issue.  It really is ridiculous to pack the kids up in the car and drive them to and from school five days a week.  Carpooling is unlikely to be a viable option; there is no guarantee there will be anyone in our neighborhood attending and carpooling would require that we purchase a larger (and less fuel efficient car).  If we choose Odyssey perhaps Jeff and I are just going to get in really good shape on our bikes…

As a charter school Odyssey employs a markedly different philosophy from the other public schools I have visited.  Odyssey is a small (320 students) K – 8 primary school.  Odyssey opened in 1999 and was the first school to be granted a charter by the Los Angeles County Board of Education.  Odyssey operates out of the former Audubon Elementary School owned by Pasadena Unified School District (PUSD).  The school leases the site from PUSD on a year-to-year basis.  Charter schools are a relatively new phenomenon in education.  In California charter schools follow the California State Standards for the core curriculum and participate in yearly standardized testing to yield an API score.   Unlike other public schools, charter schools do not generally employ unionized teachers and have much more freedom in how the curriculum is implemented.  There are now over 60 charter schools in Los Angeles County; some of which are excellent and many of which are mediocre or truly atrocious.  A parent considering a charter school must give even more due diligence to investigating the school.

As Odyssey is separate from PUSD it selects students under a completely separate system.  To enroll in Odyssey a parent simply enters the lottery in the late winter (for the 2011-2012 school year the drawing will be in early March 2011) and the students names are drawn out of a hat to fill the open spaces.  Names continue to be drawn to form a waitlist after all the spaces are filled.  Last year the director (principal) reported that she had approximately 25 kindergarten spots available and approximately 160 applicants.  While those sound like initally pretty poor odds, by the time school started she had gotten to near number 100 on the waitlist.  The number of parents on the tour I attended was incredible – about 60; in stark contrast to the  4 – 5 parents on the other tours I have attended.  I could understand why; the students and teachers at Odyssey all looked relaxed, happy, and engaged.  We viewed all of the classrooms and in every one students were surrounded by books and were actively reading.  I especially liked how comfortable the students looked; some reading at desks, others had chosen to sit on the floor, or tuck themselves in a corner.  The teachers were clearly accepting of a students’ need to move; something I think is very important for young children, especially boys.  The director explained that the focus on reading was part of a “workshop” approach to teaching.  The students are encouraged to focus on reading and telling stories.  In the early grades grammar, punctuation, spelling, and the like are not corrected for.   The school views developing a student’s ability to express their thoughts coherently as of the utmost importance.  Even kindergartners tell stories through pictures.  Math is taught as a hands-on concept thorough manipulation of physical objects.  History and science are integrated throughout the academic curriculum rather than taught as separate subjects.  There is a lot to tell about Odyssey so I’ll resort to bullet points for some of the particulars:

Important Facts:

• Like most public schools class sizes are increasing. Next year the director expected class size in K – 4 to be at 1:24.
• Unlike most public schools Odyssey will not have any furlough days this year.  Instead the teachers have agreed to a two year salary freeze.
• The school day runs from 8:15 am to 2:30 pm for K – 4 and from 8:15 am to 2:45 pm for grades 5 – 8.
• There are two Kindergarten classrooms. There are three to four combo classrooms at each of the grades above K.All classroom are multiage. There are grade 1 – 2 classrooms, grade 3 – 4, grade 5 – 6, and grade 7 – 8. Other than kindergarten there are no single age classrooms.
• There is homework beginning in K.  The homework is approximately 20 minutes at K working up to 45 minutes to an hour at grade 4 and increasing thereafter.  Reading time is included in those times.
• School lunches are provided by the San Marino Unified School District.  I did not have an opportunity to observe the lunches.

Pros:

• Overall has a developmental approach
• The director (principal) of the school has been with the school (first as a kindergarten teacher) since 1999.
• K – 4 classes have part-time (until 1:00 pm) paraprofessional aide. As we visited the classrooms I could see the aides all working directly with students.
• Does not emphasize testing. There is no to little testing in grades K – 4.  Standardized testing is required per state law, however, the school does only a minimal amount of test prep with the students and is not concerned with raising their API score.
• There are no grades given in grades K – 4.
• There are no almost textbooks used.
• The school has a clearly defined, teacher moderated, conflict resolution process (known as the peace path) to resolve disputes between students.
• Rewards/punishments (i.e., “cards”, “time-outs”/detention, candy, trinkets) are not used.
• No computer “learning” programs are used. I specifically asked about the accelerated reader program and the principal made a face of distaste and answered curtly “No.”
• The school has the beginnings of an edible garden.
• The outdoor space is expansive and well maintained.  In particular field was by far the nicest looking of any I have seen at a local public school.
• The after school program is provided by Tom Sawyer Camp.  Parents can choose to have their students attend 2, 3, 4, or 5 days per week.  The program actually looks interesting as opposed to simply babysitting.  I have actually seen the Tom Sawyer Camp counselors in action during the summer (in Hahamongna Watershed Park when I have been there with the boys) and I have always been impressed by them.
• The school is refreshingly diverse:  34% African American, 33% White, 25% Latino, 6% Asian, 1% Native American.  Approximately 12% of those student are identified as having “special needs”.  Interestingly, 65% of the students are boys.  The school does not select based on race, special needs, or gender – it is simply a blind lottery.  The director indicated that Odyssey has a reputation or being a “boy-friendly” school and thus gets more applications from boys.

Cons:

• The distance.  I sense a trial run on the bike in our future.
• I am suspicious about the strength of the math, history, and science curriculum at the elementary level.  It might be great – I just didn’t see evidence of it.  I am planning on emailing the director and attending another tour.
• The middle school, grades 7 – 8, math curriculum was clearly academically weak.  There is no algebra or geometry offered for 8th graders.  I would be quite concerned about this if I had a child closer to middle school age, however, at this point I am not going to worry about academics 7 – 8 years in the future.
• The formal art curriculum was very limited.  At the moment any specific art instruction is provided by parent volunteers.  There was, however, evidence of art integrated into the regular classroom work.
• The was no formal music education.
• The facility and furnishing are in relatively poor shape.  The multipurpose cafeteria/auditorium looked quite shabby.  The exterior of the buildings and portables were, in some cases, literally rotting.  Much of the furniture was old, decrepit, and mis-matched.  One shining exception was one of the grade 7 – 8 portables where a teacher had built beautiful recycled plywood furniture for the classroom.  I don’t think that the condition of the facilities are at all a reflection of the quality of education the school provides, but I do wonder what do deteriorating facilities say to our children about how we value them?  I remember walking into the high school in Ridgecrest, California where we moved to from a very affluent school district in Indiana when I was 14.  I was horrified at the state of the school:  water damage, broken light fixtures, missing ceiling tiles, etc.  I didn’t know anything about the academics of the school (which turned out to be in a similar state of rot), but physical condition of the school alone turned me away from enjoying school there.  The conditions at the school when I was 14 and the conditions at Odyssey have the same ultimate cause – lack of funding for public education.  It’s simple triage.  In a time of highly constrained budgets most schools will not sink large sums of money into a deteriorating building when that money would be better spent trying to maintain the curriculum and teachers.
• The location, as a year-to-year lease from PUSD, is a risk.  There is no guarantee of the school being able to continue using the facility.  Without a facility the existence of the entire school would be in jeopardy.

Despite my concerns and risks, I really enjoyed seeing what was happening at Odyssey.  Like so much of public education today it wasn’t dogmatic or rigid.   Like so much of public education today it is clearly underfunded and the quality of the school is a reflection of the director, the hardworking teachers, and involved parents.  Overall, I like it enough that I will be going back on a second tour, with Jeff (and perhaps even Thomas).  And we don’t have any time to waste because, although I haven’t mentioned it here yet, we have decided for various reasons I’ll detail later that Thomas is going to kindergarten next year!

I read a lot of blogs:  blogs focused on living sustainably, blogs relating parenting anecdotes, blogs written by doctors, blogs detailing finance and peak oil, and blogs written by urban homesteaders.  I gain a lot from blogs; from ideas on how to solve small farming dilemmas to the knowledge that my children are normal for not sleeping through the night to encouragement to lower my energy usage.  But I am troubled by something that is common across many of the non-parenting focused blogs that I read:  that those writing the blogs do not have children, in particular young children and/or a traditional work out of the home job.  This state of affairs is, naturally,  predictable; those of us with young children often find it a challenge to find time for a shower, much less to grow our own food and then write about it.  But  I have to admit that sometimes I find it frustrating when a I read a blog entry detailing someone’s 100% local diet and then realize that the author lives in a home without children and doesn’t have “regular” job.  I would probably be eating out of my garden for every meal and making my own soap too if I wasn’t also busy nursing a baby or working so that my family can have health insurance.  Where is the blog for the rest of us I wonder; the blog for those of us who live in the real world?  The majority of the world’s population will have young children at some point.  And whether or not we are parents, all of us will, at some point, almost certainly find ourselves caring for an ailing spouse, an elderly parent, or other friend or relative in need.  Most of us have jobs that take us outside of our home for hours a day on a regular basis.

And then there are the parenting blog that I read.  One of the themes I often see from mothers is:  “Parenthood is hard, do what you need to do to survive.”  Commenters chime in that mothers shouldn’t feel guility about hiring a house keeper, “treating” oneself,  or obligated to nurse/use cloth diapers/make all their own baby food, etc.  And they are right, parenting is hard (and often thankless).  Formula/disposable diapers/store-bought baby food aren’t evil.  But children are not without environmental consequences.  The parenting choices we make do matter.  Much the same can be said by those of us who are busy with work.  “It’s ok to get takeout.”  “I deserve those new work clothes.”  “I have to commute.”  But our choices do matter.  We don’t get a free pass simply because we have children or we are busy.

Both camps are clearly well represented in the blogosphere, but I don’t see the challenge of real families working to live a sustainable life in the modern world represented well on the internet or in society.  I would like to document that challenge here.  I would like this blog to be real without being apologetic.  This blog isn’t a “mommy blog”.  It’s not a sustainability blog.  It’s the blog of someone with a real family and a real job working hard to turn a modern life into a sustainable life.  I made the acquaintance of someone recently and it came up that I have a blog.  When she asked what I write about I answered, “my family and our work at leading a sustainable life.”  “So you write about your children?” she responded with an obvious look of disdain.  I may write about my love for my children, but that doesn’t mean I am any less of a serious writer when I speak about issues of urban agriculture or natural resources.  If anything, I would like to think that what we’re doing here in our little house in Pasadena is of the utmost importance because we really aren’t that different from the millions of other families across the developed world that are going to have to reduce our usage of resource.  We can’t all quit our jobs, forgo children and start a farm.  Nor can we all pretend that there aren’t serious problems (global warming, peak oil, financial chaos) ahead and that our actions are not part of those problems.

We, as a society, need to find a way to integrate the normal challenges of life into a life that is sustainable.  So I’ll write about how it is possible to get by in Pasadena without a car.  I will share with you my strategies for gardening with kids.  I hope to hear your ideas as well.  So tell me, what are the challenges that you face in living a sustainable life and what are your ideas for real solutions?

First off, everybody hit “refresh”.  Now you see the work of my fabulous brother-in-law Gregg; he updated the photos on the top of the page to reflect that I have two children now, we put an “about” link at the top of the blog, and the entire blog is now situated in a background of dirt – compost actually.  Rather fitting giving all the talk of digging in the dirt and, on the last post, cleaning up the dirt.

Thank you all for your thoughts on hiring a housekeeper.  I gave a great deal of thought to Karen, Stephanie, and Linda’s comments that touched on the idea that we routinely pay others to perfrom a service for us.  I’ve taken my car to get washed, I ride the metro, I purchase clothes sewn by someone else, and we certainly go out to eat.  Why is hiring a housekeeper any different?  My mother, reminded me that the idea of hiring someone to perform undesirable tasks s not an artifact of our modern life; her grandmother, raising a solidly working/middle class family, sent out all of her laundry in the early 1900s.  As Karen stated, these sorts of relationships have been in place since time immemorial.  Jane brought up the key point that it is important that the relationship between anyone I might hire and myself be fair and equitable; that it would be wrong to hire anyone whom I felt was not in a fair position to negotiate.  She is of course correct; it this is one of the very reasons why I am careful where I purchase my clothes, why I get my produce locally and organically, and why my kids get a lot of homemade Christmas and birthday gifts.

One of the things that really struck me is that Tiffany, Jane, and Stephanie all commented that the lack of a clean house was a hindrance to their enjoyment of their house with friends.  I’ve talked with Jeff about this (and I am surmising from Tiffany’s comment that my brother Tony feels the same way) that this isn’t nearly as much of an issue for men.  The idea that we, as women, feel responsible for the cleanliness of our homes; regardless of whether or not we have children or work outside of the home is certainly worth dissecting.  By while we’re busy attacking the patriarchy I will admit that I feel the same way and that I enjoy my house more and am more likely to socialize when it’s all clean and shiny.

But the most convincing argument in favor of hiring a housekeeper is echoed by Jenna who writes:

It comes down to this for me: I could spend most of my “free” time cleaning (which I would prefer to use for reading/exercising/writing) and then hire someone to watch my girls while I get to read/exercise/write. Which didn’t make much sense to me, since I want to spend time with my girls and don’t really love cleaning.

I am fortunate enough that I have the disposable income to hire a housekeeper.  I have the morals to make sure I do it fairly and equitably.  My children are only going to be children for a few short years.  I love spending time with them and I certainly don’t love cleaning.  So does anybody have the name and number of good housekeeper?