Reply to The Evidence That White Children Benefit From Integrated Schools

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "The Evidence That White Children Benefit From Integrated Schools"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The other thread was about why white families avoid all-black schools. All-black schools are not "integrated." They lack diversity.[/quote]

1. Their test scores won't be any lower.

The federal government just released a report looking at the black-white achievement gap. It found something remarkable: "White student achievement in schools with the highest Black student density did not differ from White student achievement in schools with the lowest density."

Translation: After controlling for socioeconomic status, [b]white students essentially had the same test scores whether they went to a school that was overwhelmingly white or one that was overwhelmingly black.[/b]

You should actually read the article before commenting. [/quote]

They controlled for SES and "other school, teacher and student characteristics".  It's easy to put your thumb on the scale when doing this. [/quote]

Simply stated and to the point while being insightful, I believe they cherry picked their stats to come up with a preconceived conclusion.  How many schools are there really with large pockets of equivalent SES minorities? Our country simply isn't constructed like that. What this study glosses over is most schools with large black populations have large SES problems too and truth be told is that sending white kids to minority schools often means sending them to poor(er) schools and all the problems that it entails.

Also DC segregation is almost without exception SES inversely proportional where the all white schools are very rich and the all black schools are very poor which disqualifies the majority of the controls in this test.  The few exceptions people like to point out like Wilson and Blair are really the tale of two schools that use size and scale to mask their SES failings. Blair imports 15% of it's students by cherry picking mostly well off high performers masking the 85% and Wilson doesn't graduate almost 25% of its students.

I simply don't buy the premise that you can lesson plan to compensate for peer and environmental influences brought on by being surrounded by low achievers. Elites chose to surround themselves with other elites for a reason, to keep the power close hold. Pick a Supreme Court justice who didn't go to an Ivy league school, pick the last president who didn't. Walk in the halls of any government building and there is painting after painting of old elite white men. Do you think these movers and shakers developed their social network at Dunbar? Now is it fair that the elites for the most part haven't allowed women or minorities, of course not but that doesn't change the fact that there is a huge demographic SES gap and true apples to apples comparisons don't really exit often in the real world.

I will continue to surround my kids in the best private academies and neighborhoods I can afford and welcome all races, creeds and orientations that come or are present but deep down  I know there won't be many that it isn't a real representation of the world.  I just hope that the voids in perspective and tolerance will be offset by social status and the freedom that only resources can empower.  I honestly rather produce an asshole CEO than a balanced landscaper/ art teacher whatever.     [/quote]

Boy, this rankles me, but I appreciate your honesty, and, I have a feeling many people share your view (even if just a little bit), although I'll bet they'd never admit it.  I'm the Wilson PP, and I think my point still stands;  it's the overall blend that works.  Total success?  No, but I'm sure the Brooklyn school doesn't have it either.  But those 25% that don't graduate don't seem to affect the success of those that do and go on to do great things (Warren Buffett, CEO:  Wilson HS).

Incidentally, I do think you can find success in many environments, but it is a rare thing to find it in low achieving school.  I think what you are describing is basically a risk analysis, and you are not willing to bet on your kid coming out a well-connected Supreme Court justice out of Dunbar.

I'm going to take your words as meaning you are doing what every one of us is doing:  looking at all the factors and making your best judgment based on your experiences, concerns, and goals.  We don't have to all agree on which factors are more important than others.[/quote]

the PP here you responded to. I agree with just about everything you said although I weight peer pressure more then I suspect you do. That said my entire stance is based on trend analysis and probability. There will be great kids coming out of bad schools and bad kids coming out of great schools. The percentages and the ceilings and cellars for the corresponding aptitude being the difference.

A somewhat dimwit minimal effort kind of kid with low maturity at the Potomac school ends up partying out of state school and getting a job with their parents or connections basically by default. That same kid at Dunbar ends up in jail almost be default, it comes down to which you want your kid hanging out with considering most kids trend towards avg and like to hangout with similar kids. I would be terrifyied putting an avg kid in a bad school there is simply not enough other avg kids being pushed through for them to align with.[/quote]

Hmm.  No, I think we are probably more aligned (at least as far as peer pressure goes) than you think.  It just rankles me, that's all.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics