Hypocrisy about diverse schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look here is the truth

People want a school with that doesn't have a ton of problems and has a chunk of highly motivated educated kids

and like it or not SES is a shorthand proxy for that

even if you are at a diverse school stereotypically the advanced classes are going to be predominantly white, asian, and african and more affluent

are these stereotypes yes, are they a shorthand for analyzing schools yes, are they generally true yes

One third of the parent(s) in Mont County never graduated high school in this country or another, and are on one ore more forms of welfare. They are not sitting around harping about which school out of 200 in the county their kids should go to. Only educated white, multiracial, or int’l parents are. As usual, the people the county is least concerned about.

eh.. my nonwhite neighbors think about diversity as well as academics, so do we, a multiracial family.

I think the deciding factor above was if you and your neighbors were high school graduates or not. Not your race or income level.

So if y’all are HS graduates, you further prove PP’s claim that you are harping about what school to send your children to (for diversity sake or academics or whatever else).

So, unless people seeking diversity purposefully seek areas where there are a lot of parents that don't have a HS diploma, then we are being hypocrites?

Sorry. Don't buy it. People seeking true diversity look for schools that are racially diverse as well as not too rich and not too poor. Parents who care about their children's education, whether they have PhDs or only HS diplomas, or low income or high income or in between, think about the type of school they believe is best for their kids. I feel zero guilt for seeking a diverse school as well as one that has an academic peer cohort.

Don't buy what? Your reading comprehension is either really off or you have some different, personal narrative going on in your head.

The poor, uneducated ESOL and FARMs families are not school shopping like you are.

[Anonymous]

I think diversity per se is meaningless; also, segregation is bad mostly because it comes with differences in school quality.
If a school district/county/country as a whole decided to allocate major resources to title 1 and farms schools- 2 teachers per 10 students, free and various enrichment, volunteer mentors (since parents are not much help), counseling, all that jazz- no desegregation measures woujd be needed, the school would be in demand.
There could also be academically rigorous schools with minimal enrichment and social component- there would be takers!
Then there would be schools with exotic teaching philosophy, tons of sports and community building.
Each of the schools would draw their own kind of “customers”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's not "SES peer cohort".. it's "academic peer cohort" which doesn't mean that they are all not low income. Calm down. You're making a big stink out of nothing.

Yeah no, it has zero to do with academic cohort. Its about SES, making sure that their kids are around kids with educated parents, not food insecure, no drop out siblings, parents are employed/not in jail etc There was a thread a while back with someone asking about New Hampshire Estates and all the posters nearby made a huge deal that the school is too poor so the OP's kids would have a hard time finding friends.

It has everything to do with academic cohort. Not all low income kids have parents in jail or siblings who dropped out of school.

I grew up low income, and my parents weren't educated, barely spoke any English, one sibling almost dropped out, and I went to a "bad" HS, but took some AP classes. I have been making six figures now for the past 15 years.

It's about academics, not income level. Some of my DC's friends are not wealthy by any means; some are single parents. But most of them are good students.

I don't live in a W cluster.

+ a million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[quote=Anonymous

Compared to whom? The US has one of the highest maternal and infant death rates in the developed world, fueled mostly by catastrophically high rates among poor and working class women and babies. The US trails almost all other OECD countries in health, education, and food security, among other metrics.

DP. This is the argument that says that poor people in the US aren't really poor because most poor people have a refrigerator, and also they're not starving.

Please... and cell phones and cable TV and more housing square feet per person than most people in Europe and developed countries in Asia. Anyone with any knowledge of public health could quickly unpack your data on maternal and infant death rates, life expectancy, etc. Education is the real problem in America. But lots of the statistics are fueled by continuing immigration from very poor and uneducated parts of the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think diversity per se is meaningless; also, segregation is bad mostly because it comes with differences in school quality.
If a school district/county/country as a whole decided to allocate major resources to title 1 and farms schools- 2 teachers per 10 students, free and various enrichment, volunteer mentors (since parents are not much help), counseling, all that jazz- no desegregation measures woujd be needed, the school would be in demand.
There could also be academically rigorous schools with minimal enrichment and social component- there would be takers!
Then there would be schools with exotic teaching philosophy, tons of sports and community building.
Each of the schools would draw their own kind of “customers”.

Segregation is bad because separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.

-Earl Warren, 1954

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How does a society chose who gets on the lifeboats when there are more people than spots. You exspect rich people to jeopardize their children’s spot for other people kids? Tell you what, let me know how that works out for you. People get well off specifically to provide their children with “advantages”. Advantage means a leg up on someone else, that someone else has only a few options;
1:run faster to make up the ground
2:run the race and complain about how it wasn’t fair and ask for a medal anyway
3:stand there in and complain while everyone else is running

If you change the goal line to help the kids with less, I assure you the rich will change the game.

I can remember in the 1980s when people with R after their name were still talking about a rising tide lifting all life(boats) and "growing the pie" instead of fighting over who gets a bigger piece. I guess all rhetoric like that has been abandoned now, and it's all "I've got mine, you're on your own, Jack" all the time.

You have a good point but all that 80s stuff was bullshit. You know that right? Talking point should mirror policy not the other way around. Also to be fair American poor have a very high quality of life comparatively. It’s true that American also have a very high quality of life comparatively and the gap between the two side is huge.

Compared to whom? The US has one of the highest maternal and infant death rates in the developed world, fueled mostly by catastrophically high rates among poor and working class women and babies. The US trails almost all other OECD countries in health, education, and food security, among other metrics.

No. It’s due to AMA mothers, obese diabetic mothers, addict mothers. Not whatever you are pretending.

And our IMR includes early premies who we try to save with expensive and invasive medical care, while in European socialized healthcare systems, these babies are allowed to die after a few breaths and counted as stillbirths.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And our IMR includes early premies who we try to save with expensive and invasive medical care, while in European socialized healthcare systems, these babies are allowed to die after a few breaths and counted as stillbirths.

Some healthcare systems in Europe are "socialized" - the NHS in Britain, for example (which may soon not be in Europe, but that's another issue). Most aren't.

[Anonymous]

um let's get back to the topic at hand

Most people don't care about diversity they want the best school period which is why better schools have housing that is more expensive

All of you arguing otherwise would have bought in the best school district but you can't afford it

You can argue if the school is better or is it because the kids are better... I would argue schools don't do much good or bad, it's the raw material kids coming in that matter and again all else being equal people buy to get around the best raw material kids that they can afford

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look here is the truth

People want a school with that doesn't have a ton of problems and has a chunk of highly motivated educated kids

and like it or not SES is a shorthand proxy for that

even if you are at a diverse school stereotypically the advanced classes are going to be predominantly white, asian, and african and more affluent

are these stereotypes yes, are they a shorthand for analyzing schools yes, are they generally true yes

One third of the parent(s) in Mont County never graduated high school in this country or another, and are on one ore more forms of welfare. They are not sitting around harping about which school out of 200 in the county their kids should go to. Only educated white, multiracial, or int’l parents are. As usual, the people the county is least concerned about.

eh.. my nonwhite neighbors think about diversity as well as academics, so do we, a multiracial family.

I think the deciding factor above was if you and your neighbors were high school graduates or not. Not your race or income level.

So if y’all are HS graduates, you further prove PP’s claim that you are harping about what school to send your children to (for diversity sake or academics or whatever else).

So, unless people seeking diversity purposefully seek areas where there are a lot of parents that don't have a HS diploma, then we are being hypocrites?

Sorry. Don't buy it. People seeking true diversity look for schools that are racially diverse as well as not too rich and not too poor. Parents who care about their children's education, whether they have PhDs or only HS diplomas, or low income or high income or in between, think about the type of school they believe is best for their kids. I feel zero guilt for seeking a diverse school as well as one that has an academic peer cohort.

Don't buy what? Your reading comprehension is either really off or you have some different, personal narrative going on in your head.

The poor, uneducated ESOL and FARMs families are not school shopping like you are.

You have reading comprehension issues. I never said they are.

[Anonymous]

The true hypocrisy is everyone referring to the "theys." "They" in the poor schools want this "they" in the W's want that - stop speaking for others, and stop with the sweeping generalizations. It doesn't help anybody's cause. I would imagine every parent wants the best schools possible for their kids, and accusing others, "they," of not wanting this, is pathetic. You have no idea what "they" want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:um let's get back to the topic at hand

Most people don't care about diversity they want the best school period which is why better schools have housing that is more expensive

All of you arguing otherwise would have bought in the best school district but you can't afford it

You can argue if the school is better or is it because the kids are better... I would argue schools don't do much good or bad, it's the raw material kids coming in that matter and again all else being equal people buy to get around the best raw material kids that they can afford

...you're talking about wealthier children being better children than poorer children...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:um let's get back to the topic at hand

Most people don't care about diversity they want the best school period which is why better schools have housing that is more expensive

All of you arguing otherwise would have bought in the best school district but you can't afford it

You can argue if the school is better or is it because the kids are better... I would argue schools don't do much good or bad, it's the raw material kids coming in that matter and again all else being equal people buy to get around the best raw material kids that they can afford

...you're talking about wealthier children being better children than poorer children...

yeah if you have a choice of a class with high SES kids or low SES kids what would you do lol again this is born out by housing prices

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:um let's get back to the topic at hand

Most people don't care about diversity they want the best school period which is why better schools have housing that is more expensive

All of you arguing otherwise would have bought in the best school district but you can't afford it

You can argue if the school is better or is it because the kids are better... I would argue schools don't do much good or bad, it's the raw material kids coming in that matter and again all else being equal people buy to get around the best raw material kids that they can afford

...you're talking about wealthier children being better children than poorer children...

yeah if you have a choice of a class with high SES kids or low SES kids what would you do lol again this is born out by housing prices

Neither. I would pick the one in between, a class with some high, some low, and a lot in the middle. That's exactly what we did and we are perfectly happy. -Clarksburg parent

[Anonymous]

We too like being the smartest of the bunch. No need for pressure cooker all smart kids school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:um let's get back to the topic at hand

Most people don't care about diversity they want the best school period which is why better schools have housing that is more expensive

All of you arguing otherwise would have bought in the best school district but you can't afford it

You can argue if the school is better or is it because the kids are better... I would argue schools don't do much good or bad, it's the raw material kids coming in that matter and again all else being equal people buy to get around the best raw material kids that they can afford

...you're talking about wealthier children being better children than poorer children...

yeah if you have a choice of a class with high SES kids or low SES kids what would you do lol again this is born out by housing prices

I would choose an area where people don't think that people with more money are better people than people with less money.