What You Should Know About Public, Private, and Charter Schools

Education in this country is in crisis. For all of the patriotic rhetoric spewed during the last presidential election, in the “land of the free,” we have not yet made the connection that our children are the nation’s greatest resource and education deserves our greatest support. We do not take seriously the charge to educate all students. Some of our public schools are doing a great job, but in areas of the United States children are subjected to large classes, unskilled teachers, and unsafe school environments. Though for many school is a respite from troubled lives and overwhelmed parents, often schools are ill-prepared to give the children who most need a caring and safe environment and the confidence in themselves as capable learners needed in order to become healthy, prepared citizens.

Worse still, research reveals an alarming correspondence between poverty and school failure. With few exceptions, income level predicts academic levels in America’s schools. Data, such as test scores, can provide information that allows us to act in ways that serve change; or data can become a justification for doing nothing, blaming poor performance on “non-school” factors that we can’t change.

Data is used in public schools, organized on a top-down model. School boards make decisions that serve multiple schools, rarely able to be sensitive to the needs at each school. Well-meaning, high-level administrators and boards create policies that address the needs of the masses. Sometimes those policies support the schools in their districts; most of the time they do not. Federal attempts to create “one size fits all” policies are even more misguided. Current federal policies based on “research” overlook the fact that much of the research in education is based on assumptions that do not apply to all schools and all children. Statistics can lie; (consider the average of one’s feet in the freezer and one’s head in the oven—on average, just right) for children are individuals, not numbers.

Ronald , Nathan, and Hugo are three fictional boys who live in Los Angeles. Ronald, attends a public school downtown.  As an African-American child, born of a mother who struggles to support him and his three brothers, his chances of succeeding toward high school graduation are slim and toward college, slimmer. If by some chance he does make it to college, benefiting from one of the few non-profit,  innovative support systems , his chances of completing college are minimal, according to latest research.

Nathan’s future is rosy. Growing up in a suburb of Los Angeles, Nathan attends public school as well. His school boasts a “booster club” in which members of the school community raise $300,000 a year, allowing the school to hire extra teachers to supplement programs like art and music and to reduce class size.

Hugo is the luckiest of the three; he attends one of the city’s many private, independent schools. Although a student whose tuition is supported by partial scholarship, Hugo’s education is rich in scope, and his peers support his learning.  In all likelihood, he, like Nathan will attend college, graduate, and find a wonderful job.

Ronald, Nathan, and Hugo represent aspects of what has become known as “the achievement gap.” Ronald’s and Nathan’s achievement are measured by state testing that depicts individual and school success levels. In fact, the quality of the school is measured by the score.

Curriculum at Ronald and Nathan’s schools correspond directly to what is tested on the state tests, with math and language arts occupying the majority of time. Subjects such as social studies and science are evaluated sporadically during a child’s progression through grades K-12, and tests in those subjects focus on multiple choice responses about content.

In current discussion of the “achievement gap,” conversations focus on students such as Ronald and Nathan, and school programs are aimed at and judged by API scores, the aggregate of student scores at a school. No one would argue that a gap exists and must be closed. All students deserve good education. But do we all have the same definition of a “good” education? And why have test scores on one kind of test become the measure of what is “good” in education?

Viewing Hugo’s school expands the perspective of the discussion of the gap. Those students who attend independent schools are receiving an education that eclipses both Ronald’s and Nathan’s school experiences. Parents of public school students visiting good independent schools are often shocked at the difference between what is considered a good public school (one that boasts high test scores) and an independent school. I know I was.

March, 1989, Westlake School for Girls

As a young mother, I loved the idea of public schools and free education, and I hold that perspective today as well. Although my husband taught at a private school, I fought the very idea of any child of mine attending a private school. My own three years as a public school teacher, prior to becoming an “at home” mom, solidified my belief in neighborhood public schools as anchors of community and democracy. I saw public schools as a great leveler, providing my children with the opportunity to expand their world view of cultures and races, as I eschewed my own  segregated education of  in an isolated bastion of whiteness. I sent my oldest child to Westlake School for  Girls.  It was a “no-brainer:”  I saw what the school offered and compared it to her public magnet school.  Huge step for a person committed to public school.

Neighborhood Public School Districts

I began my teaching career at a well-funded school in a tiny beach district, and although my 28 kindergarten children had a slim slice of my attention within a three hour school day, the day was filled with enriching experiences for them. The school board decided to change the class size for all elementary grades. My kindergarten roster grew from 28 to 33 children reflecting increased class size across the district, designed to meet the challenges of shrinking enrollment resulting from skyrocketing property values that changed district demographics and new laws that limited spending in affluent school districts. A member of the school board supported the increase of class sizes as a solution to the districts shrinking enrollment, based on research of the day that substantiated the idea that class size did not matter; a “good” teacher could “disseminate instruction” (to quote the board member) to 40 students.

In 2012, the Assistant Superintendent of public instruction in Texas echoed the board member’s sentiment, wondering what connection ipads and smaller class sizes might have on the “dissemination of academic instruction.” Misapplication of research findings holds true today. Students in Texas may be in for a long, disappointing ride, as their districts attempt to meet student needs while placating the views of politicians whose narrow perspective on education stilt student experiences and derail their futures.

Out of what became a sad mess of public educational reality, developed a menu of educational choices, designed to provide parents who could afford options, alternatives for educating their children. Religious education, secular independent schools and later, the home school movement provided parents more “hands-on” input in their children’s lives. Seeking a way to better educate their children, parents attempted to create private educational opportunities for their children in spite of the taxes they already paid to the public system.

Each of these solutions provided an advantage over public education while at the same time requiring a commitment of time and money. Religious schools provided focus on character development and spiritual affiliation; independent schools with additional accreditation and oversight implemented standard practices for board governance and administrative practices.  Some parents began to  keep their children at home for schooling so they could control the content and environment of instruction.

To evaluate the effectiveness of instructional programs, school districts and state board use standardized tests to establish a uniformly applicable set of criteria. Unfortunately, many of the goals of education (student confidence, character, creativity, flexibility, and resilience, safety, and “belonging” to name a few) do not conform to methods of evaluation that can be applied on a large scale. The standardized tests themselves, therefore, are establishing an extremely narrow band  with which to judge the success of a school’s program.

Charter Schools
What seemed like an ideal solution to the challenge of education in America began appearing across the country in the late 90’s: charter schools. Charter schools seemed to blend the best of both options of private and public education. Charter schools are public schools governed by a board, created by private citizens or business affiliations, and sanctioned and evaluated by a state, county or city school district. Just as there are many kinds of public and private schools, charter schools represent a range of philosophies, environments, and methods of implementation. Some charter schools, like the KIPP family of schools, have strict policies for the enrollment and participation of its students and teachers. Some, like KIPP, have evolved to be the size of  school districts. A key attribute of independent schools, local school autonomy, may or may not be an attribute of a charter school. Many charter school leaders believe that a business model is the “saving grace” of education and should dominate the charter school movement, or that staff who attended ivy league schools create the best pool of talent.

As a movement, charter schools are not yet 20 years old; an adolescent in the field of education. There is much to try, fail, and learn as the movement matures. If nothing else, charter schools represent, at best ,“American ingenuity”, a free market approach to education, and independent thinking. At worst, charter schools run the risk of repeating the errors that plague our current public school system or creating new errors as business-trained non-educators assume leadership roles. A recent report by Stanford University attempts to summarize the success of charter schools. The report points to specific benefits and challenges to the success of charter schools, as seen by test score data.

The problem with evaluating schools by test scores alone is that Ronald and Nathan are left out of the equation. Ronald and Nation are the point of education, as are their parents, and their needs should be front and center, not hidden within pages of state testing data.

Building Community in Education
When one creates a school, one must consider not only how children will learn but how to structure the community in a way that supports parents, honors their fears, and gives them appropriate outlets for their needs to be involved in their child’s education. The Harlem Children’s Zone schools, developed by Geoff Canada, are examples of combining educational reform within a community framework.

Ideally, schools are a reflection of a triangle model, with a joint effort of staff, parents, and students. At the top, educators, whose job it is to stay current and informed, should be the leaders at a school. Parents, who have needed information about their children’s abilities, needs and skills and who have opinions worth hearing, not only contribute this information, but ideally contribute time and money to augment that which is provided by government or tuition. Students, who are the real consumers day to day, form the last third of the triangle. Their voices should be heard in concert with the adults who care for them.  The triangle model requires the participation of all three constituents, each with a particular role. In an ideal setting, there is mutual respect and understanding of the roles of each, as well as a clear understanding of the boundaries among constituents. Mutual respect and understanding requires commitment to processes that cultivate social norms and community expectations, often neglected in the focus on scores and day-to-day school issues.

Charter school developers are bravely experimenting with models. Some models exchange financial support for privilege, creating an opportunity to extend programs. Some charter models hold boldly to the belief in developing the leadership and participation of all community members. Teachers, principals and other staff give mightily of their time, energy, and creativity, often experiencing burnout as they attempt to create the learning environment enjoyed by Hugo–with meager resources.

There are no easy answers, and if we are to move forward we need to accept the current reality:
• Many of our public schools are held hostage by antiquated bureaucracies, and board/union political agendas.
• Some of our public schools are doing a great job despite limitations.
• Student in independent schools are getting an education that makes use of modern research and extended funding, and children who attend them are at an advantage.
• Charter schools are an option for some parents who feel their local schools do not serve their child’s needs.

Wisdom dictates that we consider a wide range of data to discuss and develop our public educational system. As a nation, we do not seem to do well with dissent, despite the examples of the founding fathers. We make quick judgments, discredit partial successes, and fight rather than listen. Our children deserve better. It’s time to bring all voices to the table to hear what is working and to move our schools forward in ways that provide commonly understood “good schools” for all.

What do you think? What are our next steps?  What are your and your child’s experiences?  Let’s start the discussion!

(photo courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/aoisakana/288099156/)

Slow Living in LA…continued

One of the blessings of living in LA is the access to so much popular diversity. I love working with and having friends of different cultural backgrounds. I feel expanded as I look at life from different vantage points.

I am reading a book, given to me by a dear colleague in education, about the Chabad movement. As I struggle with a commitment to lose 35 pounds to amend a genetically instigated cholesterol reality, I was struck by the author’s description about the food regulations about which she writes. She described the kashrut laws as enabling a person to slow down as they contemplate what they are choosing to eat. The idea resonated so strongly with me as I shift into new life patterns of eating guided by what foods will contribute to my health. Rather than feeling restricted, I feel liberated by giving myself the time and opportunity to consider my choices.

As a young, working mother in Los Angeles, my life was on super-drive. I lived in the San Fernando Valley and found a wonderful job in Santa Monica, so I commuted even though I had a job two blocks from my house. I gave a baby shower for my brother- and sister-in-law, and thought nothing of collecting kewpie dolls in all sizes from Pasadena to Torrance for the decorations (in pre-internet search times!). I was blessed with three amazing kids, and their activities kept me in my car. Perhaps that is a function of youth, to be fast, thorough, and cover lots of turf?

I am doing something that I wanted to do earlier in my life, building a career as a consultant. It’s brave to step out in a new phase, and financially tougher in some ways. But my choices allow me to shape my reality. I choose to cut costs rather than working hard to pay for things I don’t really need. I iron my clothes rather than sending everything to the cleaners. I eat less, eat out less, and clean my own house. I enjoy being home, really home, not just stopping for a short respite from my next activity. I notice that I spend more time connecting with friends, so I don’t feel the need to plan large, expensive parties each year at the holidays to “catch up,” which one can never do en masse anyway.

People ask me how I like LA, and I answer differently than I would have 20 years ago. I love life in LA. I have cut my life down to manageable bites, literally and figuratively. I spend most of my time within a small radius of my home, share a car with my husband so I walk for many of my errands, and keep trips to far corners of the city to a minimum.

Life is simpler, more meaningful, now. Perhaps it is a function of growing older. If so, I embrace it. I have more energy and happiness than I had 20 years ago and I embrace that, too. I have time and space to ask myself: What do you want?

I am answering that question day by day, moment by moment.

Does school choice matter? Research says…NO.

Parents are  hungry for ways to give their children “edge” in the world of education, and with high hopes, the workforce.  As an educational consultant I advise parents about schools in Los Angeles, helping them to find the best match between their needs and the profile of their child.  Eager to leave no stone unturned in the search for the “perfect school,”  parents spend money on consultants, admission test preparation , tutoring, and eventually, most likely, private school tuition.  New research shared in Johns Hopkins University Department of Education’s Center for Research and Reform in Education newsletter, Best Evidence in Brief, indicates that more important than school profile in assuring student achievement is what the authors call “family capital.”

Best Evidence in Brief describes the research presented in Research in Social Stratification and Mobility describing the quality of interactions and values in the home which seem to be better indicators of high levels of student success than attributes of the school the child attends.  The skills that contribute to student academic achievement come from the home, say the researchers in the study, not the school.

What does this research mean for parents?  Does that mean that the kind of school your child attends does not matter? The good news, says the study, is that any family in any school can give a child a good foundation for academic achievement if the values and behaviors are supportive and nurturing.

However,  from my perspective, schools still matter.  Ideally, the relationship between a school and the families who comprise the school community is a mutually supportiv relationship.  Hopefully, the school is a repository of resources, both tangible and intangible, that assist parents in being and doing the best they can for their child.  Hopefully, there is quality communication between home and school, providing parents with the kinds of information that allow them to be actively involved in the rights kinds of ways, with their child’s education.  Good schools provide opportunites for parent education and for parents to interact with one another, develping supportive relationships with other parents that increase their skills as parents.

The study mentions that parents who talk to their children effectively, take an interest in their children’s schoolwork, and who create effective means of communication in the home lay the foundation for their children’s learning.  It’s highly possible for parents to develop effective family cultures on their own or with the help of friends, family, or other sources;  but a good school can be a huge support in helping parents develop effective family environments.

Ironically, many parents look to find a school with a good reputation of high levels of academic achievement or status, assuming that somehow the attributes of the school will inculcate their child against school failure or ensure copious amounts of school success.  What the study tells us is that unless the school’s academic success is as a result of its support of families, helping them to develop high quality environments for raising children, the reputation of a school is no insurance for student achievement.

Student achievement, like everything else in life, it seems, is an “inside job,”  in this case, predicted by qualities of life inside a family.

 

The school year has just started…time to look to next year?

If you or someone you know has children in the Los Angeles area, you know what a crazy scene the “where should my kid go to school?” is.  People around the nation generally consider the quality of public schools when they buy a home, and some parents are fortunate to be able to find public schools that match their family’s needs, knowing as our parents did, that their child will walk to school and matriculate from one public school to another.

In the Los Angeles area, we have a range of public school options:  magnet schools, charter schools, and a myriad of school districts of differing sizes and compositions.  If, as many are finding, their neighborhood school does NOT meet their family’s needs, they become entangled in the web of “finding a school for my child.”  In fact, many parents begin the school crazies when their child is a toddler, as they look for a preschool.  Montessori, Reggio, parent cooperative?  How in the world does anyone find the time to consider all the options, make all the applications, and make any choice, much less a GREAT choice for their child?

And what is a great choice for YOUR child?  How do you know what environment will best serve your child and your family?  What if your funds are limited but the choices you gravitate to are expensive?  What thoughts go through your head as you consider the options and the responsibility for carving a path for your child’s future?

If you are not an educator, or if you do not have experience with public and private options, the task of finding a school can be daunting.  Those of us who have navigated the waters as public, private, magnet, religious, and independent school parents and staff have much to offer parents as they dip their toe in the raging stream running between school years and decisions.

The good news and perhaps life’s great secret (or Los Angeles’s!) is that choosing a school is but one aspect of parenting.  Yes, there are better choices than others, and experts can be of great healp,  but in the end your child is most influenced by you, your home, your values, your loving guidance.  Of course, it’s a little more complicated than that, and peers do matter, but after raising three grownups I’m here to say that when they attended wonderful schools their lives were enriched and when they didn’t…their lives were enriched as well.

Parenting is tough.  It’s the toughest job on the planet and there is no training required.  We just take the plunge!  Those of us who consult for a living seek to make the trip a little easier for those of you out there, but remember: every day on the planet is a life class.  In the end, we are all still in school, one decision at a time.

Life is Grand!

If you don’t recognize the photo, it’s a sunrise on Lake Michigan taken from a hotel in Chicago.  Chicago, it seems, is a part of my heart, as someone dear to me lives there.  I’m not in Chicago and did not take the photo; my husband did, and emailed it to me in DC.  He went there when I left for a long-needed vacation with a dear friend.  It seems a part of my heart lives in DC as well.  And in Oregon, and in Las Vegas.  In fact, if I tally it all  up, parts of my heart are in Alaska, Texas, Canada, San Francisco, St. Louis, San Luis Obispo, Ukraine, Minnesota, North County San Diego, Mexico, and all over nooks and crannies of the Los Angeles area.

Our hearts are amazingly expandable.  I can sit here looking out into the forest and feel my heart in all those places, seeing the faces of loved ones and friends and flashes of memories.  When I choose to spend time and money to see them, I’m recharged; but when I’m focused on other things, I can tune into my love-line, visualizing the beautiful faces and locales. Like pearls on a necklace, they shine brightly.

Vacations give us a change of perspective if we are willing to move with the energy of newness. The energy of newness is slow energy. Being here in DC, along with the reddening trees, my pace is slow, even slower  than my newly crafted, self-employed life has offered me the chance to be.  Slow energy is something I experienced as a dancer. Slow energy is not lazy energy;  as a dancer I moved all day, first in modern, then in folk, then swimming for a change of pace, and lastly in the studio for choreography or a master class.  Slow energy is being fully alive and at the same time present to mind, body, and spirit. Slow energy crawls up our bodies from the center of the earth, grounding us with intention.   Slow energy is different from LA, fast-paced energy, the kind that makes us believe that we must get so many things done in a day.  On vacation I set aside more of my “shoulds” and move more akin  with my dancing self, with more intention and less restriction.  Although my home provides me with the beach and beautiful weather,  I seem to allow daily life to  intrude on my real appreciation of the kind of presence provided by slow energy.

Today is day six of my vacation.  It’s been a long time since I have been away from home without a work agenda for an extended length of time, and three more days are to come!  I’m able to make this time available to myself firstly because I ask for it, secondly because I have a wonderfully understanding husband, and thirdly because I have a kind and generous friend who shares her home with me for as long as I like.  It’s easy to step into slow energy surrounded by the greenery, the freedom to plan my days minute by minute, and the patience and ease of a truly open hostess.

As I sit here, my fantasy becomes one in which all of my special people, all over the world, can know one another and see each other as I see them.  Next, the locus of the fantasy as me, becomes a many faceted matrix composed of each of them as the center of their own wonderful, heart-opening lives.  I imagine the world, criss-crossed by the fabric of human compassion, lit by one face and one snapshot at a time the movement of loving energy all over the planet.   I wonder if I can bring home awareness of the peace and love I feel as I sit here alone, filled with the slow, purposeful, and intentional energy that follows us everywhere we go!

Something New in Los Angeles-ME!

Los Angeles.  What do you think of when you think of when you think of LA?  Carmageddon, smog, driving around to find a parking place?  I think of my home near the La Ballona Wetlands after living in San Francisco for two years.  Viewing LA as a quiet and peaceful place is new for me.  Instead of seeing a many-tentacled metropolis, I see a peaceful place, filled with people who walk, people who take yoga and meditate, and who talk about mindfulness. How did the city transform?  It’s taken me many years to come to this side of Los Angeles.

My first glimpse of peace in LA was during my college years at UCLA.  I was a dance major and as I honed my body into an artistic instrument, my mind was the part of me that really took off.  Murray Louis, an iconic modern dancer, told us:  People walk every day.  Some people are walking; some are dancing.  The difference between walking and dancing is awareness:  are you aware of the energy of your body, the shape of your arms as they swing through the air, the negative space that surrounds you, and the intention you carry as you move toward your destination?  If you are aware and moving, you are dancing.”

It has taken me almost 30 years to catch up to the wisdom of Louis, as I step into a new phase of life as a consultant, but more importantly, as someone who is choosing to dance through my life.  I am fortunate: my kids are all grown and self-sustaining.  I am grateful for the jobs that have come to me  that allowed our wonderful life as a family of five,  and celebrated that time of life, working hard and supporting three growing beings.

I now reconnect with that young dancer at UCLA.  The body is no long the honed instrument, but I carry the same intention and awareness as I dance my way through this next phase of my life.  Intention and Awareness carry with them transformative powers, the kind that can morph a congested city into a space of hope and peace.

I think, as they say, “Peace is an inside job.”

Carsharing in LA: Month 7

It’s a life different from any we have known together.  The children are dispersed, and our wonderful little Mickey now runs on a heavenly  field.  The house is quiet, but not just in sound.  There is calm, around us and in us.  Each morning we wake, dress, and eat breakfast, touching base at each step, before we jointly pile our things into the car for the mutual drive to work.  After a furiously hectic life with two cars and 5 directions, the calm is palpable.  Riding together is but one hallmark of a life for two people who care deeply for each other.

What started as economics has become an enjoyable way of life.  Sharing a car requires flexibility; but what in life doesn’t?  Sharing a car means that we can carve out 20 minutes or more each morning to talk, share, have coffee, or on rare occasions, sit over a leisurely breakfast.  The end of the day is always different.  On some days I drive, leaving him off at work, and I freely arrange my afternoon until the end of his workday arrives.  Together we either find a restaurant or return home to dinner I have made (or ordered).

I notice that this life is made possible at this point in our lives when we are two, not five.  It would seem to be impossible to have one car with children.  And I notice that the small, daily pleasures we find together, are often a function of our seemingly strange decision to share a car.  I wonder what other kinds of decisions we might begin to question that could open our lives up to new, unexpected pleasures?

New Year’s Day 1-1-12, in Los Angeles

Today is the rare “frock day.”  When my husband and I were in college we would create our calendars together.  Beatles fan that he is, he wanted “Eight Days a Week” so he invented Frock Day, a day inserted into the week after Sunday and before Monday.  Rose Bowl game is tomorrow, parade is tomorrow…it really feels like an extra day!  January 1, 2012, is heralded by Frock Day, in Los Angeles a day of glorious weather and time to take a breath before heading back to work.

A long, leisurely walk through the wetlands and over to the beach brought us in touch with our blessings as residents of Los Angeles.  So strange, for the first 20 years of our marriage we fantasized leaving LA and all we felt it stood for: materialism, traffic, smog, stress.  Today we relish the weather and a life we have crafted within a small corner of LA, happy that freeways tie us to family and friends when we choose to visit, but hunkering down into our own small life.

2011 was a year of change.  We closed the year with the knowledge of a dear relative challenged with cancer and by putting our 17 year old dog, Mickey, to sleep.  We hold our nephew’s  health in love and light and expect good things in the new year, and see Mickey happily romping in dog heaven.  I moved back into Los Angeles after two years in San Francisco, dedicated to intentionally  bringing a walking and one-car  lifestyle to our lives in LA,  cultivated out of necessity in SF.  We have continued to share a car, enjoying breakfasts together on our way in the morning, and each week I find new ways to include walking as part of my day.  Best of all, we welcomed a new daughter into our family with my son’s wedding.

Sitting on a rock, perched high over the sparkling ocean, we count our blessings.  And like the kids sledding on sand dunes, we look forward to a year of finding joy wherever we are!!

Compassion for the world: Sharing a Car in LA

After my two-year sojourn in San Francisco, I developed some habits I’d like to maintain as I re-enter life in Los Angeles:  recycling everything possible, always carrying my own bag, and walking in place of driving.  LA does not make it easy for me to retrain myself!  In San Francisco, everyone walks out of a movie to find a choice of where to drop one’s trash:  recycle, compost, or trash. In LA I’m hard pressed to find a trash can, much less a recycling or ,Heaven forbid,  compost container!  In SF store owners comment if one requests a bag, and Whole Foods contributes money to feeding the homeless for every bag brought in.  BART and other public transportation ease life for those who do not have cars, and parking in San Francisco is as challenging as the weather up there, providing yet another impetus to walking. In LA we are always in a hurry to do everything we can on the way to where we are going.

My health improved as I adjusted to life without a car.  I lost weight from walking everywhere. I challenged myself to create interesting explorations, often walking more than two hours toward a destination, increasing my stamina both for climbing hills and long walks.   My knee and hip joints loosened.  The pain of walking stairs disappeared and yoga became enjoyable rather than painful.  I felt 10 years younger.

We  sold two of our three cars when I moved to San Francisco and our youngest moved to Chicago.  My husband was left with a single car in LA.  When I returned, I saw in full-blown detail the non-homeless version of living in one’s car. Both my husband and I shifted when we entered the car, and I don’t mean the transmission.  He pushed the seat back;  I pushed the seat up.  He changed the channel from music to sports and I changed it back.  When he drove, his workout clothes and backpack were where he wanted them, and the dry cleaning both dirty and clean had their respective places as he drove each morning both to a coffee store and the cleaners.  I anticipated removing his things and placing my cell phone in the median, my water in the cupholder, and my things on the back seat as I moved his things into the trunk.   I dearly hoped that I could create a life without dependence on freeways and car-based errands and that both of us could be flexible enough to find other ways to organize our days.   I challenged my husband to entertain the notion of being a one-car family, at least as a trial.

Summer vacation days (we are both on school calendars for our jobs) were a snap.  Walking become part of our daily routine.  We aimed at doing at least one walk a day, sometimes more than one as walking errands and finding resources in our home neighborhood become a high priority.  When our work began, we hit our first snag.  Each of us had histories of organizing our lives around our cars, and as we fell into the new school year, old habits emerged.  The conflicts that ensued presented the first blessing of the one car family:  focusing on communication.  Not only was it possible to shift from our habits, it was also possible to discuss the logistics of each day without rancor or anxiety.  Our focus became each other rather than the list of necessities in our head.  We aimed at collaboration rather than satisfying personally-oriented agendas.

The second blessing was the need to shift perspectives as we collaborated.  We began to see that our necessities were not as fixed as we thought they were.  We were used to operating alone, in different cities, and conjectured that we had operated that way even before I went to SF.  As we worked together to share the car, we worked together to see the day from each other’s point of view and through the lens of new possibilities. The third blessing:  we found we did not really need to accomplish everything we originally planned to accomplish.  We made more time to be with each other. We now enjoy walking together.  Our errands are often wrapped around a walk. Perhaps living 1000 miles away from each other set the groundwork for wanting to spend more time together, but sharing a car provided the need.

While my motivation for being a one-car family was somewhat financially motivated and at the same time motivated by wanting to maintain my healthier life  San Fran life style, the “aha” came when I read an article in the  Winter, 2009 magazine,  Greater Good, documenting a discussion between the Dalai Lama and Paul Ekman.  Americans are attached to materialistic ways of life;  releasing the attachment becomes a compassionate practice.  Choosing freely to forego our American desire to “have it all” one comes in contact with one’s heart.  We see that we are contributing to the future, a world in which our resources support everyone on the planet.  We cannot cure all of Earth’s problems, but we can start with committing to one act of releasing attachment.  The act brings us in touch with our compassion for those outside of ourselves, and brings compassion close to us as well.

I do not know how long this experiment will last.  Our daughter will visit in a few weeks and she will put a third person into the equation as we plan for use of the car.  I can tell you that so far, I have found Ekman and His Holiness to be right:  as my husband and I  exert effort to reduce our ecological carbon footprint in Los Angeles, we gained access to compassion for each other. What could be a better outcome than creating a better world for future generations while we create more peace in our present world?