Jeffrey Turner <jturner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>Jeffrey Scott Linder wrote:
>> Jeffrey Turner <jturner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>Jeffrey Scott Linder wrote:
>>>>Jeffrey Turner <jturner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>Jeffrey Scott Linder wrote:
>>>>>>Jeffrey Turner <jturner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>Jeffrey Scott Linder wrote:
>>>>>>>>mariposas rand mair fheal <mair_fheal@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>Stevie Nichts <nix2nichts@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>On Jun 30, 8:10 pm, mariposas rand mair fheal
<mair_fh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>com>
>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>Stevie Nichts <nix2nic...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>On Jun 30, 11:19 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wro=
>te:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ernst Blofeld wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Jun 29, 8:44 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wr=
>ote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Because, you know, anyone against affirmative action and
q=
>uota=20
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>hiring
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>is also a racist and against civil rights.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And thus you quickly prove the point I was making.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What is the conservative approach, other than to say, "Tut
=
>tut, that=20
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>a problem"?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Um, not discriminating on the basis of race?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Oh right, pretending there is no problem. Gotcha.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>I thought the standard was judging a person by the content
>>>>>>>>>>>>of his character, and not by the color of his skin. Has that
>>>>>>>>>>>>notion been wholly abandoned by the left?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>so if we compare the color of skin in a large enough company
>>>>>>>>>>>should or should it not match the population as a whole?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Ah, yes: the canard that equality of results trumps
>>>>>>>>>>equality of op****tunity. What did MLK think of that, anyway?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>how do you demonstrate equality of op****tunity
>>>>>>>>>if the results are not
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>You can't demonstrate equality of op****tunity by judging results.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>With a large enough sample size you can. =20
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Give me an example.
>>>>
>>>>You don't have an example to give?
>>>
>>>I already gave the example: medical testing.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>Unless you believe there are
>>>>>>>inherent differences that preclude some people from achieving
resul=
>ts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No, just choices.
>>>>>
>>>>>Lawd yes. Dem [black folks] is lazy, ****f'less good-fer-nuthin's.
Y=
>a
>>>>>can't expect them to make good, responsible choices lik'n us white
>>>>>folks.
>>>>
>>>>I would suggest you look at the dropout rate, teen pregnancy rate,
and=
>
>>>>single motherhood rate.
>>>>
>>>>Here are some useful links:
>>>>http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0779196.html
>>>>http://www.childtrendsdatabank.org/tables/1_Table_1.htm
>>>
>>>We know that majority minority schools are lower funded and in worse
>>>condition than mostly white schools -
>>=20
>> No they aren't.
>
>Yes, they are.
>
><quote>
>In light of this inspiring language, one might be surprised to learn
>that high-minority school districts in Kansas receive substantially less
>state and local educational funding than high-majority school districts.
>The Education Trust observed that in 2001 the per-pupil funding gap
>between high-minority and low-minority districts in the state was $1,812
>($6,033 =96 $7,845), ranking the state second only to New York in racial
>funding gap.3
>
>3 Kevin Carey, The Funding Gap: Minority and Low-Income Students Still
>Receive Fewer Dollars in Many States, at
>http://www2.edtrust.org/NR/rdonlyres/EE004C0A-D7B8-40A6-8A03-1F26B8228502=
>/0/funding2003.pdf
>(visited Oct. 2, 2004).
>
>http://web.ku.edu/~bdbaker/WestsLaw05.pdf
>
>Similarly, in 28 states the school districts with the highest percentage
>of minority children receive less funding than districts with the fewest
>minority children. And again, this is true of the nation as a whole.
>
>http://www2.edtrust.org/NR/rdonlyres/EE004C0A-D7B8-40A6-8A03-1F26B8228502=
>/0/funding2003.pdf
>
>>>and that schools are more
>>>segregated than they were in 1968.=20
>>=20
>> Are you saying that blacks can't learn without whitey around to show
>> them how?
>
>I'm saying that "separate but equal" still isn't.
>
><quote>
>"I don't think that the education that you get hinges on the color of
>the person sitting next to you in the classroom," Clegg says. "What
>educators should focus on is improving schools."
>
>That sounds great in theory, say some experts, but the fact is that
>segregated schools tend to be highly correlated with such things as
>school performance and the ability to attract teachers.
But later you quote someone who says that blacks learn best from other
blacks. Which is it?
>
>"Once you separate kids spacially from more privileged kids, they tend
>to not get the same things," says Amy Stuart Wells, an education
>professor at Columbia University's Teachers College in New York. "And we
>need to start thinking about how a school that's racially isolated can
>be preparing students for this global society we live in."
>
>http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0125/p01s01-ussc.html?page=3D2
>
>>>It's also known that teachers and
>>>administrators are less sympathetic to minorities and don't work as
har=
>d
>>>to keep them from dropping out.
>>=20
>> Oh we do? Do you have any evidence of this?
>> I didn't think so.
>
>"There's an inequity in resources," says Pam Green, Garfield's Parent
>Teacher Student Association president and the black parent of a
>struggling Garfield 10th-grader. "The inequity starts in elementary
>schools, when teachers start labeling kids and putting them in
>groups.... To me, it's really two camps. It's very disturbing because
>the AP program is serving less than a third of the school." A study
>released in March by the Applied Research Center, a think tank in
>Oakland, California, bolsters Green's viewpoint. The study found that
>minority students in just about every state are doing worse than their
>white counterparts, and noted that school districts exacerbate the
>problem by trapping kids in largely segregated academic tracks that are
>almost impossible to escape. As Libero Della Piana, one author of the
>study, puts it, "Those cl***** are geared toward you never catching up.
>Maybe having more AP cl***** is not the best idea."
>[...]
>Jim Creighton, head of the history department, is the lead advocate for
>AP cl***** at Garfield, and embodies yet another barrier -- teacher
>attitudes. He refuses to discuss in any detail the lack of black
>students in his cl*****, and justifies the overrepresentation of white
>students by claiming that less is required of black students applying to
>colleges. The logic, apparently, is that blacks can be lazier because
>they've got it made. "There are two different sets of cir***stances," is
>all Creighton would say.
>[...]
>Nearly all of Garfield's 12 AP teachers are white, and none are black.
>(This reflects a trend in the school as a whole; only 13 of Garfield's
>79 teachers are black.) Yet, according to the 1998 book The Black-White
>Test Score Gap, a collection of research on racial disparity in
>test-score results, teachers make the biggest difference in raising test
>scores, and black students learn more effectively from black teachers on
>average. One Asian AP student, who asked to remain anonymous, speculates
>that "if there [were] more competent black teachers, the black students
>would be much more interested."
>
>http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=3D3774
>
>>>>http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr56/nvsr56_06.pdf
>>>
>>>When there isn't equal economic op****tunity people find other things
to=
>
>>>do with their time.
>>=20
>> Like I said...individuals make choices.
>
>Yeah, they choose not to put nearly as much money into training and
>hiring blacks and latinos as they do for whites.
I guess you didn't compare graduation rates.
>
>>>>>>>It's done all the time. If you're testing a new drug, and those
ta=
>king
>>>>>>>it live longer than the control group, then you conclude they had
a=
>
>>>>>>>better "op****tunity."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Different system....no self-selection is expressed.
>>>>>
>>>>>Black folks choose to be poor. Ever since the 1965 Civil Rights Act
=
>-
>>>>>and hardly a man is now alive who remembers that year - blacks have
h=
>ad
>>>>>full equal rights and just keep choosing to be poor. Of course, so
d=
>o
>>>>>poor whites every time they vote Republican. Uh huh.
>>>>
>>>>Go ahead and keep your head in the sand and point blame elsewhere.
>>>>
>>>>Individuals make choices that directly impact their quality of life.
>>>
>>>And individuals make choices that directly impact the quality of the
>>>lives of others. And in America there's a racial bias to those
>>>decisions overall.
>>=20
>> I see...when asked for specifics all you can do is point to the man
>> behind the curtain.
>
>And all you can do is pretend there isn't anybody in charge in America.
>
>--Jeff
>
>--=20
>The struggle with evil by means of violence
>is the same as an attempt to stop a cloud,
>in order that there may be no rain. -Leo Tolstoy
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/education/010125.html
"The nation’s public school districts spent an average of $8,701 per
student on elementary and secondary education in fiscal year 2005, up
5 percent from $8,287 the previous year, the U.S. Census Bureau
re****ted today.
Findings from Public Education Finances: 2005, show that New York
spent $14,119 per student — the highest amount among states and state
equivalents. Just behind was neighboring New Jersey at $13,800, the
District of Columbia at $12,979, Vermont ($11,835) and Connecticut
($11,572). Seven of the top 10 with the highest per pupil expenditures
were in the Northeast.
Utah spent the least per student ($5,257), followed by Arizona
($6,261), Idaho ($6,283), Mississippi ($6,575) and Oklahoma ($6,613).
All 10 of the states with the lowest spending per student were in the
West or South.
The re****t and associated data files contain information for all
local public school systems in the country. For example, in New York
City, the largest school district in the country, per pupil spending
was $13,755."
|
