Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Modern Racism (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Modern Racism
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
In another thread, the question was asked, "Do you think she'd agree with you that racism is no longer a problem in America?" The answer is that it is still a problem. We don't have much of the burning cross, sit in the back of the bus racism any more. Sure, you might find it occasionally but it stands out because of its rarity but it's typically confined to fringe groups that are pretty universally despised. What we do have is the soft racism of lowered expectations. We have racism now because of things like this:
quote:
Beginning this fall, Alabama public schools will be under a new state-created academic accountability system that sets different goals for students in math and reading based on their race, economic status, ability to speak English and disabilities.” Alabama’s Plan 2020 “sets a different standard for students in each of several subgroups — American Indian, Asian/Pacific islander, black, English language learners, Hispanic, multirace, poverty, special education and white.
They are setting up a system in which success will be claimed as long as the black kids in a class reach a certain low level of proficiency. Other states have followed similar paths as 27 of the 33 states granted a waiver from NCLB requirements last year now have different achievement goals for different groups of students.

The end result is a community culturally isolated from its larger society completely unsuited for life outside their local community because they lack the education to fit in anywhere else. The dream of white segregationists essentially fulfilled. Their poor education marks them as second class citizens. That second class status insures they will remain on government assistance, dependent on a new class of masters for their lives and livelihood.

Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Context, G, context.

The wildly differing goals are a starting point; a reflection of the current situation.
quote:
Black third-graders are expected to go from 79 percent passing in math in 2013 to 88.5 percent in 2018, while whites are expected to go from 91.5 percent in 2013 to 95.4 percent in 2018.

Shanthia Washington, education administrator for the Alabama Department of Education, said the reason they set lower goals for some student subgroups is because they weren't performing as well as others based on 2012's standardized test data.

ETA:http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20130630/NEWS/130629743?p=1&tc=pg

While this plan doesn't seem to include reaching parity, the intent is clearly there.

I'm not sure that having 9 separate groups is ideal. And I'm pretty sure that it would have been better to focus on socio-economic/language status rather than race, but this policy isn't declaring that Black are Deltas to the Asian Alphas and White Betas. [I'm awfully glad I'm not an Alpha, they work so hard. It's much better to be a Beta [Razz] ] It's about recognizing that black students currently fare worse and establishing a timetable with achievable goals to improve things.

Whether or not it will improve things is a different question.

[ July 12, 2013, 11:20 AM: Message edited by: NobleHunter ]

Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
We have racism now because of things like this
I would say that we have racism now for a lot of reasons, and "lowered expectations" isn't a major one. Very few of the racists I know are that way because they've been trained to expect less.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And that's not the point is it? [DOH]
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The end result is a community culturally isolated from its larger society completely unsuited for life outside their local community because they lack the education to fit in anywhere else. The dream of white segregationists essentially fulfilled. Their poor education marks them as second class citizens. That second class status insures they will remain on government assistance, dependent on a new class of masters for their lives and livelihood.
Just the opposite- what you're describing is the _current_ state of affairs caused by trying to impose uniform expectations despite a wide variety of different barriers and starting points.

Setting realistic goals based on an active acknowledgement and understanding of the group that the goals are being set for helps to keep members of that group progressing instead of dropping out and further isolating itself from a system that shows itself to be actively hostile to its needs.

Any sensible physical training program starts by setting goals based on the current capabilities of the person in training and then incrementally raising them toward the ultimately desired goal. If it started out by requiring people be able to achieve the final goal right out of the gate, then very few people would be able to use it, nevermind even bother trying.

Such educational policy is no different- start with goals that are reasonable based on the current state and incrementally increase them over time as the current standards are met. Trying to pretend that we can simply jump straight to the ideal standards without a focus on incremental increases based on real community needs only serves to make the problems worse, not better.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Aris Katsaris
Member
Member # 888

 - posted      Profile for Aris Katsaris   Email Aris Katsaris   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
[Believing] that we can simply jump straight to the ideal standards without a focus on incremental increases based on real community needs only serves to make the problems worse, not better.
Do you have evidence that "incremental increases" produces better results compared to jumping straight to the "ideal standards"?
Posts: 3318 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm sorry, but I'm with G3 on this one. All kids are still entering school in kindergarten or the first grade, right? It's not a burning cross, but saying that you just can't expect the black kids to be as good as math is pretty racist.

If different expectations were set on different schools and neighborhoods based upon socioeconomic status, I'd still be skeptical, but you at least couldn't call it racial. But, much like affirmative action programs, they've decided to single out certain races instead. Either poor white kids from broken homes (which I suspect a state like Alabama might have one or two of) are too smart to need this "stupid scale" of teaching, or they're just not worthy of the "extra help." Which one is it?

Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You do NOT correct past racism by swinging the pendulum in the "other direction." You stop it by stopping the pendulum and letting time erase relics or holdovers.

Are there racist people in America? Yes, but they will not live forever. They are dying out. But you cannot force people to change their thinking. What you can do is ensure no public institutions have overtly racist procedures, that's it. I think by and large we've done that.

Having "protected classes" after racist methodology and institutions have been removed defeats the purpose and is creating New Racism for the future which we will have to address 20-50 years from now when whites will be a numeric minority and then THEY will be asking for special privileges and advantages.

Do you see the problem here?

[ July 12, 2013, 01:30 PM: Message edited by: Seneca ]

Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't suppose people will bother reading [and understanding] the link I posted? I know it's 5 pages, but it shows that the standards are about improving performance. It's not, as G3 implied, about giving black kids a free pass to fail so they're trapped on government assistance.

Is race the best way to categorize students? Again, probably not. But I think it is important to idenfity if specific groups have more trouble than others in school so that changes can be made to allievate those troubles.

Also, if group A starts at 60% and group B starts at 80% do you see how insisting that they both get to 90% in the same time might be setting up one group for failure? Or setting the target too low for the other group?

The policy is not at all affirmative action, but recognition that groups starting at different places require different targets. It's basic process improvent: you don't tell people to go for gold if they don't even have the skills to get bronze.

Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I guess I just fail to understand how white kids at age five are going to be so very far ahead of black kids at age five. I missed kindergarten due to health issues and I was damn near retarded compared to my classmates when I entered first grade. My whiteness didn't give me a pass.

But, again, this is ignoring the fact that America's (and Alabama's) poor white trash population isn't exactly nonexistant. The same problems exist in that demographic as exists in poor black communities, at least when it comes to teaching their kids ways to be successful in life. Setting up a system like this is saying that those poor white kids just don't deserve the help.

[ July 12, 2013, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: djquag1 ]

Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by djquag1:
I guess I just fail to understand how white kids at age five are going to be so very far ahead of black kids at age five.

Five years of being raised and educated by parents with different average levels of education and by different economic and social environments. There are generations worth of inherited lag that need to be corrected for.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Okay then, Pyrtolin. But why does it have to be about race?

Why are Michael Jordan's children expected to be stupider then the children of some fifth generation alcoholic white trash figure? Why are his children worthy of more help?

Set it up socioeconomically, and like I said, I'd be skeptical but uncriticizing. This way, in my humble opinion, it's racism.

And I know someone's going to come around here and make mockery of poor whitey crying about how bad whites have it. But generational poor white people really do exist. It may or may not be easier for their kids to break the mold, but they learn the same bad lessons on wealth management, the value of education, substance abuse, etc, as the children of poor blacks do. I know because I'm one of them, and I'm still overcoming the damage those bad lessons did. Myself and others like me were no less deserving of a helping hand then the poor black kids. And Alabama has a LOT of poor white kids.

[ July 12, 2013, 02:11 PM: Message edited by: djquag1 ]

Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
Originally posted by djquag1:
I guess I just fail to understand how white kids at age five are going to be so very far ahead of black kids at age five.

Five years of being raised and educated by parents with different average levels of education and by different economic and social environments. There are generations worth of inherited lag that need to be corrected for.
How do you correct for them? By giving special advantages to one group? Absurd. I can tell you, being part black myself, race is not a useful way to group people.

Test kids to see if they need help. DO NOT ALLOW RACE TO BE ANY DETERMINANT AT ALL.

[ July 12, 2013, 02:01 PM: Message edited by: Seneca ]

Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LetterRip
Member
Member # 310

 - posted      Profile for LetterRip   Email LetterRip   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes SES and parents highest educational attainment level would have been better choices for sorting, if nothing else to head off accusations of racism.
Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by djquag1:
Okay then, Pyrtolin. But why does it have to be about race?

Why are Michael Jordan's children expected to be stupider then the children of some fifth generation alcoholic white trash figure? Why are his children worthy of more help?

Set it up socioeconomically, and like I said, I'd be skeptical but uncriticizing. This way, in my humble opinion, it's racism.

And I know someone's going to come around here and make mockery of poor whitey crying about how bad whites have it. But generational poor white people really do exist. It may or may not be easier for their kids to break the mold, but they learn the same bad lessons on wealth management, the value of education, substance abuse, etc, as the children of poor blacks do. I know because I'm one of them, and I'm still overcoming the damage those bad lessons did. Myself and others like me were no less deserving of a helping hand then the poor black kids. And Alabama has a LOT of poor white kids.

Good questions. What are your theories about why so many here think Michael Jordan's children are expected to be stupider then the children of some fifth generation alcoholic white trash figure? Why is the system being rigged that way?
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think it's because blacks really are more likely to have parental figures who teach them the wrong methods to be successful in life, and they figure since they're worst of, we should be helping them. Which is a laudable goal. My objection comes along when they decide that white kids in a similar boat don't need the help, because rich successful whites rule the world.
Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm talking about the state education system being setup the way it's being setup. Why would the state want to have varying standards of proficiency based on race?
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm not sure on that, actually. Perhaps because it's easier and less expensive to classify people based upon the color of their skin, as opposed to socioeconomic status.
Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's because we need the Gammas, Deltas, and Epsilons. Instead of oxygen deprivation, we can do it with intellectual deprivation.

quote:
Education is the key to unlock the golden door of freedom.

George Washington Carver

Cut that education off, we keep a segment of society in a subservient state.

Some of you can argue that's not the goal but it is the result we're seeing and the state continues to expand the efforts that have created it. O brave new world that has such people in it.

[ July 12, 2013, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: G3 ]

Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I've been trying to come up with an argument along those lines, djquag, but can't; it's actually easier to do it the other way, generally. I'm not sure why Alabama thinks it'll be better off if it uses race-based standards; my gut feeling is that it's offensive and wrong-headed -- and wrong in general -- but I haven't seen what argument they've tried to advance.

Frankly, though, I don't think that lowering standards just so you can meet them makes as much sense as reducing the penalties levied against schools and individuals who do not meet those standards. I know why some disagree, but again I think those people are generally wrong.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If a child is operating at a level lower than other students you are not doing them any favors by sugar coating it and saying, "Well at least among your demographic you are a B student." Does the job market expect/accept differing levels of performance based upon race? Are we helping a student through these practices if they are?

If we make funding a contest, the students will lose.

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DarkJello
Member
Member # 6828

 - posted      Profile for DarkJello   Email DarkJello       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by djquag1:
I'm sorry, but I'm with G3 on this one. All kids are still entering school in kindergarten or the first grade, right? It's not a burning cross, but saying that you just can't expect the black kids to be as good as math is pretty racist.

If different expectations were set on different schools and neighborhoods based upon socioeconomic status, I'd still be skeptical, but you at least couldn't call it racial. But, much like affirmative action programs, they've decided to single out certain races instead. Either poor white kids from broken homes (which I suspect a state like Alabama might have one or two of) are too smart to need this "stupid scale" of teaching, or they're just not worthy of the "extra help." Which one is it?

You pretty much nailed all my first impressions too.

Maybe girls should get a special subgroup in math as well? That used to be a thing, so I am just saying.

I am worn out with all the folks that want special status. Even many "special ed" students are being totally coddled. Too many parents and teachers are lowering expectations WAY more than needed. Then, if the kid does average, they act like a MAJOR success has occurred. I see this type of thinking frequently.

One of my patients was totally out of control, and the school officials insisted that there was NOTHING more they could do. They HAD to allow the student to enter the school each and every day. He has ADHD--a special group--but regressed starting a few years after the initial diagnosis. Hopefully the plethora of visits with counselors and specialists during this Summer will be effective.

Here we go with some details: He spent the last few months of school being sent home early several days minimum each and every week. He always returned the following morning. He routinely hit other students, spit on them, clawed arms, threw pencils and pens, swore profusely, and sometimes even threatened to "kill" teachers. This elementary student spent a lot of time restrained, or even in a padded room to cool down. They once brought me audio of him swearing and threatening teachers and students. Imagine a wide range of absolutely vulgar statements, and he said many of them in a calm and clear voice. After these sessions he would calm down, but that lasted for one hour maximum before he started verbally and physically assaulting peers and staff. Several teachers, one school nurse, and an administrator told me that the rules prevented them from disciplining this student further. Because he is "special", they were forced to allow him back each day. Imagine the negative impact on all the other students. Constant disruptions in class, not to mention the very real threat of harm to their bodies and minds on a daily basis. And this is presuming every other kid in the class was a model student. What a disservice to those students that are trying to learn and keep having the process derailed.

Newsflash: we are all unique and special. Somewhere along the way we went from being caring to being naive doormats. You CANNOT save everyone. The state should reward success, instead of holding the entire herd back out of some antiquated sense of fairness.

[ July 12, 2013, 04:38 PM: Message edited by: DarkJello ]

Posts: 520 | Registered: Jun 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
PSRT
Member
Member # 6454

 - posted      Profile for PSRT   Email PSRT   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Do you have evidence that "incremental increases" produces better results compared to jumping straight to the "ideal standards"
Its certainly true in the case of individuals. You can get individuals from point A to point B best by going through intermediary steps, and there is a lot of evidence of this from behavioral research.

Whether it scales to groups or not, I don't know, but I suspect it probably does, as a major reason that going through steps works is so that individuals do not just give up in the face of a large task with no step stones.

Posts: 2152 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't have a problem with teaching at a level appropriate to your students. That is perfectly sensible. Grading on a scale (particularly a racial one) is what I feel is harmful to the students.

[ July 12, 2013, 04:59 PM: Message edited by: D.W. ]

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by DarkJello:

Here we go with some details: He spent the last few months of school being sent home early several days minimum each and every week. He always returned the following morning. He routinely hit other students, spit on them, clawed arms, threw pencils and pens, swore profusely, and sometimes even threatened to "kill" teachers. This elementary student spent a lot of time restrained, or even in a padded room to cool down. They once brought me audio of him swearing and threatening teachers and students. Imagine a wide range of absolutely vulgar statements, and he said many of them in a calm and clear voice. After these sessions he would calm down, but that lasted for one hour maximum before he started verbally and physically assaulting peers and staff. Several teachers, one school nurse, and an administrator told me that the rules prevented them from disciplining this student further. Because he is "special", they were forced to allow him back each day. Imagine the negative impact on all the other students. Constant disruptions in class, not to mention the very real threat of harm to their bodies and minds on a daily basis. And this is presuming every other kid in the class was a model student. What a disservice to those students that are trying to learn and keep having the process derailed.

Sounds like a typical teen male. Oh wait, before we can determine that we need to know if he's black or white. [Exploding]

quote:
Originally posted by DarkJello:
Newsflash: we are all unique and special.

Yeah! Listen up, maggots. You are not special. You are not a beautiful or unique snowflake. You're the same decaying organic matter as everything else. Worked in a "Fight Club" quote! [LOL]
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by djquag1:
Okay then, Pyrtolin. But why does it have to be about race?


Because the most significant inequities exist across racial lines. Ignoring them and pretending that they don't exist doesn't make them disappear, it makes them fester. Turning a blind eye to existing divisions reinforces those divisions; they don't go away without direct attention.

quote:
Why are Michael Jordan's children expected to be stupider then the children of some fifth generation alcoholic white trash figure? Why are his children worthy of more help?

How is that relevant to metrics based on aggregates? His kids help to contribute to the overall progress measurements.

Race is just an easily traced demographic that, in any given area correlates very strongly to all other relevant factors.

You seem to be confusing metrics that are being set to help gauge relative progress with actual resources being made available. Race provides a good basis for taking social cross sections that better show improvements socioeconomic mobility along with general progress.

Sure generational poor exist across all races, but that's not relevant here at all given that the push for higher standards still exists across the board. There are still higher standard goals for white students as well, which takes addressing issues with poor whites to meet. Those standards can be higher, though because there are proportionally many, many more white students bringing the overall average up to a higher baseline.

If you ignore the existing racial inequities, rather than getting overall improvement, your end up reinforcing the existing relative baselines- groups with a current advantage rise faster as those with a disadvantage sink because the actual difference in overall difference access to resources for improvement isn't changed. Sure, in the short term, Jordan's kids are well placed, but that's only a temporary edge they have as long as they're surrounded by a society that quietly send them social messages of distrust and deviation for the current norms (after all, they're not average kids, they only get the benefit of high expectations because they've got a rich celebrity for a parent; perceiving that kind of skew in and of itself has a negative effect over time) that create pressure back toward the current baselines.

[ July 12, 2013, 05:24 PM: Message edited by: Pyrtolin ]

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by D.W.:
I don't have a problem with teaching at a level appropriate to your students. That is perfectly sensible. Grading on a scale (particularly a racial one) is what I feel is harmful to the students.

The students aren't being graded on a racial scale. The performance metrics for the schools are being broken down on racial lines so that they have to show a certain amount of progress for each group, rather than just a general aggregate level of improvement that's not tuned to the existing baselines, to be considered to be performing up to snuff.

If anything, allowing such granularity helps prevent schools from grading students differently along racial lines because there's less motivation to fudge the numbers to compensate for existing differentials.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grant
Member
Member # 1925

 - posted      Profile for Grant   Email Grant       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't think it is sexist to say that, on average, a man can do more pushups then a woman. Similiarly I don't think it's racist to say that 18 year old african american children are less educated then 18 year old asian american children. The reason why is that it is based on facts.

I do know that is IS racist to treat an African American like they are not as smart as an Asian American, just because they are black, and it is sexist to think that a woman can't do 40 pushups in 2 minutes just because she is a woman.

I don't think that holding a woman to a different physical standard, based on their gender's physical abilities, is not sexist, depending on what the standard is meant to measure. Similarly I don't think that it is racist to hold African American children to a different standard if we have decided that African American kids are not as smart as x-american kids, because they are black, depending on what we are measuring.

If we are saying that both Fred and Andy receive a similar grade after taking a mathematics course, dispite the fact that Fred answered less questions correctly, it is not racist if the grade was meant to measure the ability to reach potential, since Fred's race on average is not as good at math as Andy's. If the grade is actually attempting to measure knowlege of mathematics, then I'm still not sure if the grading method is actually racist, but it is unaccurate, because Andy knows math better then Fred.

If we are talking about some sort of internal performance metric being used within a school system, I don't see how it could be construed as racist.

I want to add however that my definition of what is racism and sexism is a bit different then the some of the other members of the forum.

[ July 12, 2013, 09:19 PM: Message edited by: Grant ]

Posts: 3264 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Why wouldn't a similar system work based upon socioeconomic status, Pyrtolin? Why is it better to just assume black kids are stupid so we should go easier on them, then to say poor kids are stupid so we should go easier on them?

And DW raises a very good point. If I knew that a black man came out of a system that gave his race an A for demonstrating the same ability that an asian or white would get a B or a C for, then I'd flat out be less likely to hire a black man. His very best grade wouldn't match up to the very best grade of the other two races, even if he was actually capable of it.

[ July 12, 2013, 09:30 PM: Message edited by: djquag1 ]

Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Jordan's kids matter because they have wealth and privilege. They are not at all in the same boat as the black kids who actually are suffering from generational poverty and racism. And yet here they are, facing easier standards because of the color of their skin. Much the same way the poor white kids are going to face higher standards because of this meme in racial politics that all white people have it easy. All white people rule the world. Well, sorry, but the 1% is still 1%.

Poor white children in bad homes have a lot more in common with poor black children in bad homes then they do with Mitt Romney's trustfund babies.

[ July 12, 2013, 09:38 PM: Message edited by: djquag1 ]

Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grant
Member
Member # 1925

 - posted      Profile for Grant   Email Grant       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think there is something to be said that perhaps these performance measures should be based upon socio-economics, unless the studies support that african americans are not as smart as other americans, simply because they are black, rather then because of their socio-economic status.
Posts: 3264 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DarkJello
Member
Member # 6828

 - posted      Profile for DarkJello   Email DarkJello       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by djquag1:
Jordan's kids matter because they have wealth and privilege. They are not at all in the same boat as the black kids who actually are suffering from generational poverty and racism. And yet here they are, facing easier standards because of the color of their skin. Much the same way the poor white kids are going to face higher standards because of this meme in racial politics that all white people have it easy. All white people rule the world. Well, sorry, but the 1% is still 1%.

Poor white children in bad homes have a lot more in common with poor black children in bad homes then they do with Mitt Romney's trustfund babies.

To me, you just aced it. And not aced it for this race or that race, but full out aced the topic no matter your color or creed.

Socioeconomic status should trump race every day of the week, and twice on Sunday.

I like the following quote attributed to Albert Einstein:

"Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid."

[ July 12, 2013, 11:50 PM: Message edited by: DarkJello ]

Posts: 520 | Registered: Jun 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
If we are talking about some sort of internal performance metric being used within a school system, I don't see how it could be construed as racist.
Perhaps I misunderstood. Are we talking about a metric used internally by a school to measure improvement or are we talking about a grade the child sees on report cards or pass/fail for graduation?

One is useful, one is harmful. A student has the right to know how they stack up compared to their "peers" when they go to join wider society. If you want to tell them, you are in the X percentile for your community, Y percentile for your state and Z percentile for the nation... That would be fantastically useful knowledge for the student and not racist in the least. Let them judge for themselves how big a pool constitutes their "peers" and more importantly, their competition.

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by djquag1:
Why wouldn't a similar system work based upon socioeconomic status, Pyrtolin?


No, because it wouldn't address the root of why there's a disparity in socioeconomic status distribution between races. Though if you'll actually read the initial description, you'll note that SES is, in and of itself an independent consideration.
quote:
Why is it better to just assume black kids are stupid so we should go easier on them, then to say poor kids are stupid so we should go easier on them?
That's not what's being done, and, in fact is the active lie that's being spun to trick people into opposing what is otherwise a noncontraversial measure.

quote:
And DW raises a very good point. If I knew that a black man came out of a system that gave his race an A for demonstrating the same ability that an asian or white would get a B or a C for, then I'd flat out be less likely to hire a black man. His very best grade wouldn't match up to the very best grade of the other two races, even if he was actually capable of it.
Which is why no one is proposing doing that. You're arguing against a baldfaced lie about the nature of what's being done.

Rather, what's being done is, instead of saying that a school only gets full funding if 90% of its students are getting A's within 5 years regardless of race and background, and is considered failing if it doesn't meet that benchmark, it's given a number of metrics targeted in on racial, economic, native language, disability, etc.. divisions. So in 5 years it needs to get from 85% to 90% of rich, white, native English speakers getting A's and from 50% to 60% of poor, black, native English speakers getting, say, at least C's. (And then the secondary lie presented above is that that standard is permanent, rather than just a waypoint; once it's achieved, then it'll get pushed up to the next incremental achievement milestone)

There's absolutely nothing to suggest grading the students differently, except in the smoke that's being blown around the matter. The specific purpose of the policy is to not penalize schools that aren't able to magically overcome the existing disparities between the various groups overnight and rather evaluate their ability to make real progress from the current baselines for each distinctly identifiable group.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Think about it this way- if you have two schools that have a student population that is otherwise equivalent except that one has a 5% special education population and the other has a 25% special education population, does it make sense to apply a blind policy that requires both schools to have 95% of all students achieve an A average in a given year or be considered a failure? Wouldn't that policy be more likely to result in the second school being more lenient on grades than one that evaluated special education progress separately from non-special education progress and set realistic incremental expectations for each?

The same goes along racial lines, because real disparities currently exist along them that can only fractionally be attributed to SES. Trying to apply a race-blind standard would similarly only serve to encourage either fudging the grades up on the disadvantaged side or simply edging them out of the system, while clear-eyed standards that acknowledge those disparities and instead reward schools incremental progress in each individual category will both produce better real progress and reduce the motivation to fudge the grading.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think we are all in agreement that basing expectations on race is wrong, and that socio economic status is a much better indicator.

I am not sure that we have a common definition of racism (not examples, but a definition that covers all cases that are racism).

Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The only metrics should be those that chart improvement. X% at A level is a disservice to all students IMO. You also have to have a target to shoot for or else "improvement" being required once you reach "successful" is again harming students.

If the requirement is a grade level then teachers showing up at a low preforming school will fudge grades to meet whatever the requirement is for funding. To NOT do so would be a disservice to their students as well.

I'm glad I misinterpreted the original point. I didn't shave today so my "lie" was not baldfaced at all. [Razz]

[ July 13, 2013, 01:21 AM: Message edited by: D.W. ]

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thank you for clearing up my misconceptions, Pyrtolin.

I do have one question, though.

Given that a black child and a white child are in similar crappy situations - missing/abusive/substance abusing parents, parents who do not themselves have the skills to be successful to pass on to their children, low income, bad neighborhood, etc. Given that, which do you think is more deserving of getting special attention, aid, or resources from the government.

If you base programs like that on race instead of SES, then you're basically telling those white children to suck it up and do their best on their own, (with no good examples to teach them how, mind you) because hey, look at all of the successful white people in the country. I can't agree with that.

Black people have a higher ratio of poor people then whites. That's a given. Switching over to an SES judged system, instead of a racial system, will still benefit blacks more then whites just by virtue of more of them being in a bad situation. You also get the added benefit of not ignoring the white children caught in a poverty cycle.

Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grant
Member
Member # 1925

 - posted      Profile for Grant   Email Grant       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by djquag1:


If you base programs like that on race instead of SES, then you're basically telling those white children to suck it up and do their best on their own, (with no good examples to teach them how, mind you) because hey, look at all of the successful white people in the country. I can't agree with that.

Well, you're forgetting the concepts that surround systemic/organizational/historical racism. I think the answer might be that the black kid may in fact be from a poor family partly due to the fact that african americans were at one time enslaved and then not given the same economic opportunities as other races for the past umpteen hundred years. The white people are poor cause they're just, I dunno, but they did not suffer the disadvantages that the blacks had to suffer just for being black.
Posts: 3264 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I see. So the white children should just be told to go hunting for some bootstraps to grab hold of, because their generational poverty is their own fault? Talk about your original sin
Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1