No matter how many times people say it, the phrase “good schools” will never not be racist/classist

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone has victim mentality.

Some people are conscious of people besides themselves.

You certainly need to be conscious of your children and what is good for them, so yeah. I can’t be a person that sacrifices my children to my whims and idealism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What bothers me is why are majority white failing schools never discussed? There are plenty of majority white schools that are failing. They exist all over the nation especially the south.

It’s odd that people think majority white schools is equivalent to a great school.

Also, many of the threads imply the average white family can afford to spend 30k+ a year on private school. The average American regardless of skin color cannot afford private school.

They are. Every time someone mentions a "failing school" or "high poverty" school, maybe you assume they mean a high minority school. That is on you. There are plenty of poor and failing school all over the US filled with white kids and no one has said otherwise. But same principles apply as to why anyone of any color would not what to send their child there.

It's not just on PP. I've seen people accused of being racist for talking about high poverty schools and failing schools; accused of using coded language and that they're really talking about minorities.

They usually are talking about minorities, though.

Unless they mention race, they aren't talking about race. Stop assuming.

They sure are. Don't be disingenuous.

And if they are? What?

I'm quite sure people of all races want their kids to go to good schools. I've heard this from black as much as from white people.

Black people can't be racist though, so it's fine.

Is that something that you've actually heard said by a critical mass of living, breathing black folks, beyond some talking head academic/activist types who are completely non-representative of black folks writ large?

Mainly people claiming to be black on Twitter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone has victim mentality.

Some people are conscious of people besides themselves.

You certainly need to be conscious of your children and what is good for them, so yeah. I can’t be a person that sacrifices my children to my whims and idealism.

Nobody is “sacrificing their child.” What a bizarre thing to say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone has victim mentality.

Some people are conscious of people besides themselves.

You certainly need to be conscious of your children and what is good for them, so yeah. I can’t be a person that sacrifices my children to my whims and idealism.

Nobody is “sacrificing their child.” What a bizarre thing to say.

Pot calling kettle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone has victim mentality.

Some people are conscious of people besides themselves.

You certainly need to be conscious of your children and what is good for them, so yeah. I can’t be a person that sacrifices my children to my whims and idealism.

Nobody is “sacrificing their child.” What a bizarre thing to say.

Pot calling kettle.

You’re telling me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone has victim mentality.

Some people are conscious of people besides themselves.

You certainly need to be conscious of your children and what is good for them, so yeah. I can’t be a person that sacrifices my children to my whims and idealism.

Nobody is “sacrificing their child.” What a bizarre thing to say.

Sacrificing their education. High poverty schools are not meeting grade level expectations, or even close- which is a pretty low bar. If a teacher has a class where 80% of the kids are testing below grade level, do you think she is able to teach a whole years worth of grade level material? She isn't. She has to move at a much slower pace and come down to where the majority of the kids are able to learn. If your child is at or above grade level knowledge, they will not be learning new academic material. You would have to do pretty much any academic advancement at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone has victim mentality.

Some people are conscious of people besides themselves.

You certainly need to be conscious of your children and what is good for them, so yeah. I can’t be a person that sacrifices my children to my whims and idealism.

No - that’s not the issue!

The issue is: do not engage in white-flight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone has victim mentality.

Some people are conscious of people besides themselves.

You certainly need to be conscious of your children and what is good for them, so yeah. I can’t be a person that sacrifices my children to my whims and idealism.

No - that’s not the issue!

The issue is: do not engage in white-flight.

I went to a terrible high school and it took years for me to catch up in college. I will not do that to my children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone has victim mentality.

Some people are conscious of people besides themselves.

You certainly need to be conscious of your children and what is good for them, so yeah. I can’t be a person that sacrifices my children to my whims and idealism.

No - that’s not the issue!

The issue is: do not engage in white-flight.

But do not be a gentrifier either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone has victim mentality.

Some people are conscious of people besides themselves.

You certainly need to be conscious of your children and what is good for them, so yeah. I can’t be a person that sacrifices my children to my whims and idealism.

No - that’s not the issue!

The issue is: do not engage in white-flight.

But do not be a gentrifier either.

Haha. Catch-22!

[Anonymous]

Depends on how you define good/bad schools right? Define them by test scores, parent involvement, teaching quality? Then that isn't racist.
Base it on the racial make up of the school?
That would racism.

Can we stop canceling words and phrases now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Depends on how you define good/bad schools right? Define them by test scores, parent involvement, teaching quality? Then that isn't racist.
Base it on the racial make up of the school?
That would racism.

Can we stop canceling words and phrases now?

And stop with judging people for being "classist." There is plenty of literature demonstrating the challenges faced by students and teachers at high-poverty schools. These challenges are reasons why people want to balance schools by SES to make sure that there aren't certain schools with highly concentrated poverty, which creates another obstacle to the success of economically disadvantaged students.

You can't argue for change by noting that schools with highly concentrated poverty tend to have characteristics that are less desirable for student success, including higher levels of student absenteeism, less experienced teachers, less stability, and less parental involvement, and then say that it's "classist" to worry about sending your child to a high-poverty school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone has victim mentality.

Some people are conscious of people besides themselves.

You certainly need to be conscious of your children and what is good for them, so yeah. I can’t be a person that sacrifices my children to my whims and idealism.

No - that’s not the issue!

The issue is: do not engage in white-flight.

I will move wherever I want to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Depends on how you define good/bad schools right? Define them by test scores, parent involvement, teaching quality? Then that isn't racist.
Base it on the racial make up of the school?
That would racism.

Can we stop canceling words and phrases now?

And stop with judging people for being "classist." There is plenty of literature demonstrating the challenges faced by students and teachers at high-poverty schools. These challenges are reasons why people want to balance schools by SES to make sure that there aren't certain schools with highly concentrated poverty, which creates another obstacle to the success of economically disadvantaged students.

You can't argue for change by noting that schools with highly concentrated poverty tend to have characteristics that are less desirable for student success, including higher levels of student absenteeism, less experienced teachers, less stability, and less parental involvement, and then say that it's "classist" to worry about sending your child to a high-poverty school.

Meh, but plenty of people will say a school that's 10-20% FARMS is "high poverty" as an excuse for why they don't want their kids to attend. The majority of research usually sets 30-40% as the threshold for where those problematic effects of concentrated poverty really take hold. If people were actually worrying about sending their kids to a true high-poverty school you'd have a point, but most of the time that's not the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Depends on how you define good/bad schools right? Define them by test scores, parent involvement, teaching quality? Then that isn't racist.
Base it on the racial make up of the school?
That would racism.

Can we stop canceling words and phrases now?

And stop with judging people for being "classist." There is plenty of literature demonstrating the challenges faced by students and teachers at high-poverty schools. These challenges are reasons why people want to balance schools by SES to make sure that there aren't certain schools with highly concentrated poverty, which creates another obstacle to the success of economically disadvantaged students.

You can't argue for change by noting that schools with highly concentrated poverty tend to have characteristics that are less desirable for student success, including higher levels of student absenteeism, less experienced teachers, less stability, and less parental involvement, and then say that it's "classist" to worry about sending your child to a high-poverty school.

Meh, but plenty of people will say a school that's 10-20% FARMS is "high poverty" as an excuse for why they don't want their kids to attend. The majority of research usually sets 30-40% as the threshold for where those problematic effects of concentrated poverty really take hold. If people were actually worrying about sending their kids to a true high-poverty school you'd have a point, but most of the time that's not the case.

No, thank you.