Are AP-type classes racist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think anyone who wants to take an AP course should be offered it. At least that's how it was when I was in school. You needed an A/B average/ 3.0 to be eligible to enroll in them. If only whites and Asian enroll, then so be it. At least someone has the option of taking it versus taking away the option for all.

You all talk about poverty, but I don't think a lack of money necessarily dooms these kids. I have a lot of friends and relatives who are objectively poor. They live off of one small income (a teacher's salary, an adjunct's salary or a non profit) and the other parent stays home. My best friend lives in a 2 bedroom with her husband and 3 children. I don't think they make more than 30k, but they're blissfully happy. Their kids are the brightest kids you've ever met. Both my friend and her husband have PhDs. They spend all of their freetime at the library, museums and free parks. Their 3 year old knew more about the solar system than I do. They don't want more money and I think it goes against their beliefs to have more money than they need. My dad was raised the exact same way. Some people set out to show the wonders of the world to their kids and others just plunk them in front of the TV and feed them junk food all day.

Poverty has nothing to do with it. But I do think that schools cannot fix the damage that is done from prenatal- Kindergarten.

I think people tend to conflate wealth and social class in ways that lead to incorrect conclusions. Poverty is correlated with low social class, but it's not necessarily the same thing. So, some of the dysfunctions that arise out of low social class are maybe misdiagnosed as arising out of poverty. In those situations, adding money to the situation won't fix the problem because lack of money isn't necessarily causing the problem. You speak of people without much money but who sound like they're educated (teachers, adjuncts, people involved with non-profits.) Their kids are more likely to have a relationship to education that will allow them to succeed in school than, say, someone who makes more money but isn't very educated themselves and doesn't place much value in education. (Here, I guess I'm doing the same thing - conflating social class with education, but I think there's a closer relationship between the two.)

[Anonymous]

AP classes are a great opportunity for poor students to earn college credit. Per credit costs are at least 7 times higher in the college setting. Colleges are starting to realize this and are pushing back on offering credit - which is hurting our minority students!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tutoring is good, but its impact will be lower than you think.

Mainly the kids with motivated parents will want to stay for extra tutoring/school. These are the kids that are likely to succeed anyway.

The kids that have the most trouble come from households that don’t have the time, energy, or inclination to care about school.

They won’t make their kids sign up for tutoring.

Some say the problem starts even earlier, with parents not reading or talking enough to their toddlers or even worse neglecting or abusing them.

It sets kids behind even in kindergarten.

I’d say universal pre-K is more helpful than tutoring, but even that’s not a silver bullet.

We really just need to fix poverty. There’s a strong correlation between family income and educational success.

This. Move to Russia if you want socialism.



Your don’t “fix” poverty- that’s cAlled socialism. USA is capitalist last I checked.

You won't ever get rid of poverty, but you can reduce it. Capitalist societies are capable of that last I checked.

Again, there is a strong correlation between family income and educational success. We should be working toward reducing poverty and that in turn will boost educational outcomes.

Some people say 2/3s of learning occurs at home. There's only so much that you can do through schools.

There is a CORRELATION between income and educational success. That does not imply causation. You can't give poor people money and expect their kids to suddenly start doing well in school. It doesn't work that way. My family was economically stable because of my dad's work ethic, and he instilled that trait in all of his children, which is why we were successful in education. You cannot make people succeed in school without motivation. And motivation comes from learning that hard work pays off. Giving people handouts teaches precisely the opposite. "Son, you don't need to work hard in school, because the government will take care of you."

I would argue most UMC and MC kids succeed in school not because the are particularly motivated, but because succeeding in school is just the norm. For them not succeeding would be the aberration- they do well in high school and then go to college- it’s just the expectation

This is very true. Peer group is incredibly important, which is why many people are willing to go into heavy debt to live in certain neighborhoods. Some people will call it racism, classism, or keeping up with the Joneses, but other people will realize that their child’s peer group/friends/other random students have a massive impact on their child’s behavior and achievements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tutoring is good, but its impact will be lower than you think.

Mainly the kids with motivated parents will want to stay for extra tutoring/school. These are the kids that are likely to succeed anyway.

The kids that have the most trouble come from households that don’t have the time, energy, or inclination to care about school.

They won’t make their kids sign up for tutoring.

Some say the problem starts even earlier, with parents not reading or talking enough to their toddlers or even worse neglecting or abusing them.

It sets kids behind even in kindergarten.

I’d say universal pre-K is more helpful than tutoring, but even that’s not a silver bullet.

We really just need to fix poverty. There’s a strong correlation between family income and educational success.

This. Move to Russia if you want socialism.



Your don’t “fix” poverty- that’s cAlled socialism. USA is capitalist last I checked.

You won't ever get rid of poverty, but you can reduce it. Capitalist societies are capable of that last I checked.

Again, there is a strong correlation between family income and educational success. We should be working toward reducing poverty and that in turn will boost educational outcomes.

Some people say 2/3s of learning occurs at home. There's only so much that you can do through schools.

There is a CORRELATION between income and educational success. That does not imply causation. You can't give poor people money and expect their kids to suddenly start doing well in school. It doesn't work that way. My family was economically stable because of my dad's work ethic, and he instilled that trait in all of his children, which is why we were successful in education. You cannot make people succeed in school without motivation. And motivation comes from learning that hard work pays off. Giving people handouts teaches precisely the opposite. "Son, you don't need to work hard in school, because the government will take care of you."

I would argue most UMC and MC kids succeed in school not because the are particularly motivated, but because succeeding in school is just the norm. For them not succeeding would be the aberration- they do well in high school and then go to college- it’s just the expectation

This is very true. Peer group is incredibly important, which is why many people are willing to go into heavy debt to live in certain neighborhoods. Some people will call it racism, classism, or keeping up with the Joneses, but other people will realize that their child’s peer group/friends/other random students have a massive impact on their child’s behavior and achievements.

Most any HS with 2k-3k students has a sufficiently large high-achieiving cohort so these people going into debt are misguided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tutoring is good, but its impact will be lower than you think.

Mainly the kids with motivated parents will want to stay for extra tutoring/school. These are the kids that are likely to succeed anyway.

The kids that have the most trouble come from households that don’t have the time, energy, or inclination to care about school.

They won’t make their kids sign up for tutoring.

Some say the problem starts even earlier, with parents not reading or talking enough to their toddlers or even worse neglecting or abusing them.

It sets kids behind even in kindergarten.

I’d say universal pre-K is more helpful than tutoring, but even that’s not a silver bullet.

We really just need to fix poverty. There’s a strong correlation between family income and educational success.

This. Move to Russia if you want socialism.



Your don’t “fix” poverty- that’s cAlled socialism. USA is capitalist last I checked.

You won't ever get rid of poverty, but you can reduce it. Capitalist societies are capable of that last I checked.

Again, there is a strong correlation between family income and educational success. We should be working toward reducing poverty and that in turn will boost educational outcomes.

Some people say 2/3s of learning occurs at home. There's only so much that you can do through schools.

There is a CORRELATION between income and educational success. That does not imply causation. You can't give poor people money and expect their kids to suddenly start doing well in school. It doesn't work that way. My family was economically stable because of my dad's work ethic, and he instilled that trait in all of his children, which is why we were successful in education. You cannot make people succeed in school without motivation. And motivation comes from learning that hard work pays off. Giving people handouts teaches precisely the opposite. "Son, you don't need to work hard in school, because the government will take care of you."

I would argue most UMC and MC kids succeed in school not because the are particularly motivated, but because succeeding in school is just the norm. For them not succeeding would be the aberration- they do well in high school and then go to college- it’s just the expectation

This is very true. Peer group is incredibly important, which is why many people are willing to go into heavy debt to live in certain neighborhoods. Some people will call it racism, classism, or keeping up with the Joneses, but other people will realize that their child’s peer group/friends/other random students have a massive impact on their child’s behavior and achievements.

And those same people will assume that affluent kids in predominantly white neighborhoods are the best peers for their children. See why they/you are considered racist and classist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tutoring is good, but its impact will be lower than you think.

Mainly the kids with motivated parents will want to stay for extra tutoring/school. These are the kids that are likely to succeed anyway.

The kids that have the most trouble come from households that don’t have the time, energy, or inclination to care about school.

They won’t make their kids sign up for tutoring.

Some say the problem starts even earlier, with parents not reading or talking enough to their toddlers or even worse neglecting or abusing them.

It sets kids behind even in kindergarten.

I’d say universal pre-K is more helpful than tutoring, but even that’s not a silver bullet.

We really just need to fix poverty. There’s a strong correlation between family income and educational success.

This. Move to Russia if you want socialism.



Your don’t “fix” poverty- that’s cAlled socialism. USA is capitalist last I checked.

You won't ever get rid of poverty, but you can reduce it. Capitalist societies are capable of that last I checked.

Again, there is a strong correlation between family income and educational success. We should be working toward reducing poverty and that in turn will boost educational outcomes.

Some people say 2/3s of learning occurs at home. There's only so much that you can do through schools.

There is a CORRELATION between income and educational success. That does not imply causation. You can't give poor people money and expect their kids to suddenly start doing well in school. It doesn't work that way. My family was economically stable because of my dad's work ethic, and he instilled that trait in all of his children, which is why we were successful in education. You cannot make people succeed in school without motivation. And motivation comes from learning that hard work pays off. Giving people handouts teaches precisely the opposite. "Son, you don't need to work hard in school, because the government will take care of you."

I would argue most UMC and MC kids succeed in school not because the are particularly motivated, but because succeeding in school is just the norm. For them not succeeding would be the aberration- they do well in high school and then go to college- it’s just the expectation

This is very true. Peer group is incredibly important, which is why many people are willing to go into heavy debt to live in certain neighborhoods. Some people will call it racism, classism, or keeping up with the Joneses, but other people will realize that their child’s peer group/friends/other random students have a massive impact on their child’s behavior and achievements.

And those same people will assume that affluent kids in predominantly white neighborhoods are the best peers for their children. See why they/you are considered racist and classist?

Avoiding problems in the hood makes you a racist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tutoring is good, but its impact will be lower than you think.

Mainly the kids with motivated parents will want to stay for extra tutoring/school. These are the kids that are likely to succeed anyway.

The kids that have the most trouble come from households that don’t have the time, energy, or inclination to care about school.

They won’t make their kids sign up for tutoring.

Some say the problem starts even earlier, with parents not reading or talking enough to their toddlers or even worse neglecting or abusing them.

It sets kids behind even in kindergarten.

I’d say universal pre-K is more helpful than tutoring, but even that’s not a silver bullet.

We really just need to fix poverty. There’s a strong correlation between family income and educational success.

This. Move to Russia if you want socialism.



Your don’t “fix” poverty- that’s cAlled socialism. USA is capitalist last I checked.

You won't ever get rid of poverty, but you can reduce it. Capitalist societies are capable of that last I checked.

Again, there is a strong correlation between family income and educational success. We should be working toward reducing poverty and that in turn will boost educational outcomes.

Some people say 2/3s of learning occurs at home. There's only so much that you can do through schools.

There is a CORRELATION between income and educational success. That does not imply causation. You can't give poor people money and expect their kids to suddenly start doing well in school. It doesn't work that way. My family was economically stable because of my dad's work ethic, and he instilled that trait in all of his children, which is why we were successful in education. You cannot make people succeed in school without motivation. And motivation comes from learning that hard work pays off. Giving people handouts teaches precisely the opposite. "Son, you don't need to work hard in school, because the government will take care of you."

I would argue most UMC and MC kids succeed in school not because the are particularly motivated, but because succeeding in school is just the norm. For them not succeeding would be the aberration- they do well in high school and then go to college- it’s just the expectation

This is very true. Peer group is incredibly important, which is why many people are willing to go into heavy debt to live in certain neighborhoods. Some people will call it racism, classism, or keeping up with the Joneses, but other people will realize that their child’s peer group/friends/other random students have a massive impact on their child’s behavior and achievements.

And those same people will assume that affluent kids in predominantly white neighborhoods are the best peers for their children. See why they/you are considered racist and classist?

you're the one correlating wealth with race.

[Anonymous]

Why no — I’m assuming you aren’t going into heavy debt to live in predominantly black neighborhoods. And that you assume people will see you as racist when all you care about is peer group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And those same people will assume that affluent kids in predominantly white neighborhoods are the best peers for their children. See why they/you are considered racist and classist?

Avoiding problems in the hood makes you a racist?

The Jeffersons weren't "moving on up." They were internalizing structural racism!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A recent study in Boston concluded they are. I have never seen statistics like this.


From the article: district analysis of the program found that more than 70 percent of students enrolled in the program were white and Asian, even though nearly 80 percent of all Boston public school students are Hispanic and Black. There's been a lot of inequities that have been brought to the light in the pandemic that we have to address," Cassellius told GBH News. "There's a lot of work we have to do in the district to be antiracist and have policies where all of our students have a fair shot at an equitable and excellent education

https://www.wgbh.org/news/education/2021/02/26/citing-racial-inequities-boston-public-schools-suspend-advanced-learning-classes

This is the link: https://www.wgbh.org/news/education/2021/02/26/citing-racial-inequities-boston-public-schools-suspend-advanced-learning-

Everything is racist.

Next question.

I agree with you. However, you forgot that besides being racist everything is also transphobic and lgtbiqxyz phobic and fascist too.

Wow, I think you’re lending credibility to the argument you’re trying to discredit.

Is the color/ethnic background of the children the only difference between who gets in and who doesn't, or are there other factors?

How many of these factors are within the control of the school system (school boards, central offices, principals, teachers, teacher's aides etc.) and how many are not?

How impactful are the factors that the school system controls vs. the ones that they don't?

Has the school system done it's best with what they control?

I was just remarking on how the PP, clearly aggrieved by any discussion of racism, took the opportunity to express his or her annoyance with LGBTQ advocacy as well. The only unifying logic was “I’m so tired of THOSE people making claims.”

Re your argument/questions. OTOH, they’re pretty much a recipe for avoiding public responsibility for social problems. Though in this particular case, they just seem kind of silly — AP is hardly crucial or the best we could do wrt HS education. And the school district itself seems to be acknowledging that.

The public has no responsibility for how individuals members in a society parent their children. We have agencies for the purpose of stepping in for severe neglect and abuse.
Government can put in laws/policies for clean water, proper policing, school facilities in good repair and a decent curriculum etc.

They can't and shouldn't decide who you have children with, if you should have children, if you have children at 25 or 30, what your prenatal diet is and how much you read to your children. The group of people called "government" should not decide what time you put your children to bed and if they get dessert once a week or every day.

Government/public can't and shouldn't micromanage lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tutoring is good, but its impact will be lower than you think.

Mainly the kids with motivated parents will want to stay for extra tutoring/school. These are the kids that are likely to succeed anyway.

The kids that have the most trouble come from households that don’t have the time, energy, or inclination to care about school.

They won’t make their kids sign up for tutoring.

Some say the problem starts even earlier, with parents not reading or talking enough to their toddlers or even worse neglecting or abusing them.

It sets kids behind even in kindergarten.

I’d say universal pre-K is more helpful than tutoring, but even that’s not a silver bullet.

We really just need to fix poverty. There’s a strong correlation between family income and educational success.

This. Move to Russia if you want socialism.



Your don’t “fix” poverty- that’s cAlled socialism. USA is capitalist last I checked.

You won't ever get rid of poverty, but you can reduce it. Capitalist societies are capable of that last I checked.

Again, there is a strong correlation between family income and educational success. We should be working toward reducing poverty and that in turn will boost educational outcomes.

Some people say 2/3s of learning occurs at home. There's only so much that you can do through schools.

There is a CORRELATION between income and educational success. That does not imply causation. You can't give poor people money and expect their kids to suddenly start doing well in school. It doesn't work that way. My family was economically stable because of my dad's work ethic, and he instilled that trait in all of his children, which is why we were successful in education. You cannot make people succeed in school without motivation. And motivation comes from learning that hard work pays off. Giving people handouts teaches precisely the opposite. "Son, you don't need to work hard in school, because the government will take care of you."

I would argue most UMC and MC kids succeed in school not because the are particularly motivated, but because succeeding in school is just the norm. For them not succeeding would be the aberration- they do well in high school and then go to college- it’s just the expectation

This is very true. Peer group is incredibly important, which is why many people are willing to go into heavy debt to live in certain neighborhoods. Some people will call it racism, classism, or keeping up with the Joneses, but other people will realize that their child’s peer group/friends/other random students have a massive impact on their child’s behavior and achievements.

And those same people will assume that affluent kids in predominantly white neighborhoods are the best peers for their children. See why they/you are considered racist and classist?

If they choose the wrong peer group for their kids that's on them.

Doesn't stop parents who know better from choosing better and getting better results for their own children.

[Anonymous]

So much talk about removing Advanced Academics because too few of the “right” colored people are not in. Okay so we remove it, now how do you get black kids to compete with whites and Asians in general Ed. Isn’t that still an issue? What’s next are we going to remove A’s from the report card because too few blacks are getting A’s and way too much whites and Asians are getting A’s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tutoring is good, but its impact will be lower than you think.

Mainly the kids with motivated parents will want to stay for extra tutoring/school. These are the kids that are likely to succeed anyway.

The kids that have the most trouble come from households that don’t have the time, energy, or inclination to care about school.

They won’t make their kids sign up for tutoring.

Some say the problem starts even earlier, with parents not reading or talking enough to their toddlers or even worse neglecting or abusing them.

It sets kids behind even in kindergarten.

I’d say universal pre-K is more helpful than tutoring, but even that’s not a silver bullet.

We really just need to fix poverty. There’s a strong correlation between family income and educational success.

This. Move to Russia if you want socialism.



Your don’t “fix” poverty- that’s cAlled socialism. USA is capitalist last I checked.

You won't ever get rid of poverty, but you can reduce it. Capitalist societies are capable of that last I checked.

Again, there is a strong correlation between family income and educational success. We should be working toward reducing poverty and that in turn will boost educational outcomes.

Some people say 2/3s of learning occurs at home. There's only so much that you can do through schools.

There is a CORRELATION between income and educational success. That does not imply causation. You can't give poor people money and expect their kids to suddenly start doing well in school. It doesn't work that way. My family was economically stable because of my dad's work ethic, and he instilled that trait in all of his children, which is why we were successful in education. You cannot make people succeed in school without motivation. And motivation comes from learning that hard work pays off. Giving people handouts teaches precisely the opposite. "Son, you don't need to work hard in school, because the government will take care of you."

I would argue most UMC and MC kids succeed in school not because the are particularly motivated, but because succeeding in school is just the norm. For them not succeeding would be the aberration- they do well in high school and then go to college- it’s just the expectation

It comes down to culture and family values. My parents are immigrants and didn’t go to college and had low paying retail jobs but they made sure their kids knew that education was the only way to a better life. We were told from a young age that we had to go to college so we did with student loans and turned out fine. We also saved every penny and didn’t eat out. Getting Chinese takeout or fast-food a few times a year was a treat. The school system is not racist, I am thankful for an American public school education. You don’t know how good it’s here until you lived in a 3rd world country which no handouts from the government.

[Anonymous]

Don’t waste time with AP classes. DE classes are a much better way to earn college credits while still in HS.

[Anonymous]

... and no Advanced Placement is not racist. Gimme a break.