Anonymous wrote:

But isn't it true that lighter-skinned Latinos are also the more wealthy ones in Latin America? So even though a class might have international kids they are possibly likely to still look "white." If you're trying to show diversity to an AA child but everyone still looks white it might not be the best experience for them. Now I also think it's possible that even having darker-skinned international people still might not help an AA child feel welcome, so maybe it doesn't make a difference either way....

Yes, see in Latin America they have a color scale, and if your skin falls below the au lait gradient you automatically have a 30% pay cut--I mean, wait--what? You really think this literally?

Diversity is more than skin color. This is a lesson I learned in a school that was 80% black, 8% white and 12% everyone else. In that school, almost every kid had a parent or a grandparent who was from another country. At least one other country. I learned many obvious things... like being from the Caribbean is really different than being from Ghana, or Georgia. And that being from Georgia the state is really different than being from Georgia the country.

The lesson you WANT your kids to learn is that skin color is absolutely insignificant in terms of grouping anyone. Ever. Completely pointless. The Indian (by descent) kid in your class whose parents are from Ohio will hang out with the Pakistani kid, whose parents are from Pakistan. The second thing you want them to learn is that it's pretty cool knowing people from so many places and cultures, and that international food day is the bomb. And black kids are just as diverse in this way as everyone else. Especially in a place like DC, where so many African immigrants have settled.

Anonymous wrote:The last couple of posts...are hilarious. Affluent AA and now light-skinned Latinos has it become that racially necessary.

I want to know why my school has so many poor white teachers employed at the school. It doesn't set a good example for the AA FARMS...when the poor is teaching the poor, what does one do to break the cycle?

See where I am going with this post [sarcasm]

Anonymous wrote:Individuals in Latin America with darker skin color are at higher risk for poor health and discrimination, according to a new study led by researchers from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Princeton University.

It is the first cross-national study to examine the association between skin color and health in Latin America.

“We also found strong skin color gradients in respect to other aspects of life,” said co-author Krista Perreira, a professor of public policy in the College of Arts and Sciences, a fellow of the Carolina Population Center and associate dean for undergraduate research. “Those with darker skin color tended to have fewer years of education, lower levels of wealth and to experience more discrimination on the basis of their skin color.”

- See more at: http://global.unc.edu/news/the-color-of-health-in-latin-america-individuals-with-darker-skin-color-at-higher-risk-for-poor-health/#sthash.rIdQ65nG.dpuf

But isn't it true that lighter-skinned Latinos are also the more wealthy ones in Latin America? So even though a class might have international kids they are possibly likely to still look "white." If you're trying to show diversity to an AA child but everyone still looks white it might not be the best experience for them. Now I also think it's possible that even having darker-skinned international people still might not help an AA child feel welcome, so maybe it doesn't make a difference either way....

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like you're going back to the days of racial classification. It's the equivalent of calling a black person (forgive me this is just used to explain) a "mullato" or "high yellow". It's just really really offensive. Here is an article explaining more.

http://www.zonalatina.com/Zldata55.htm

For those of you who believe diversity isn't important in schools (or who think that a few token white immigrants equals diversity) here is an example of why it is important- so you don't offend people and maybe learn about a culture different from you own.

http://www.zonalatina.com/Zldata55.htm

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Janney

I have 3 kids at Janney and last year each kid had ONE !blwck in their class. Janney's AA numbers are almost all in 5th grade when they can give empty spots to out of boundary kids. Prior to that, the school is very white because the neighborhood is very white. There's a lot of international
diversity.

Don't knock the international diversity. That's an important attribute to have in a school, particularly in a city like Washington.

Many of the upper NW schools have international diversity, what is interesting to analyze is where the kids are coming from. In the case of Janney it seems to be much more kids of European descent, directly from Europe, and a sprinkling of children of European descent from Latin America. Murch in particular has a large number of Asian and South Asian kids (particularly for DCPS) -- so the optics of the classroom are different. There may be three or four AA children in the class, however there are also at least four or five children of other races who have dark skin from South Asia or Central America. This makes a difference to us because our child sees children that look different. He is not the only darker skinned child in the room. When I see pictures from the school I am impressed that the kids seem a bit more reflective of the composition of the world.

I find it highly offensive that you are looking at skin color and analyzing Latinos of European descent etc.

Shut your dirty mouth. Latinos come in all colors.

This is yet another reason why I would also stay away from NW DC schools- parents who think it's okay to analyze skin color and ethnicity of the children.

You disgust me.

Whoa! The PP touched a nerve, but I can't figure out what your issue is with his/her post. Please explain (grabs popcorn).

+1. The post seemed innocent enough, talking about perceived benefits for her child of having others in the class who are also visible minorities. Not sure what's wrong with pointing out that people from different regions may tend to have different skin tones but be still all be Latino? I'm not Latino, but belong to another minority group--sincerely curious what the issue is here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Janney

I have 3 kids at Janney and last year each kid had ONE !blwck in their class. Janney's AA numbers are almost all in 5th grade when they can give empty spots to out of boundary kids. Prior to that, the school is very white because the neighborhood is very white. There's a lot of international
diversity.

Don't knock the international diversity. That's an important attribute to have in a school, particularly in a city like Washington.

Many of the upper NW schools have international diversity, what is interesting to analyze is where the kids are coming from. In the case of Janney it seems to be much more kids of European descent, directly from Europe, and a sprinkling of children of European descent from Latin America. Murch in particular has a large number of Asian and South Asian kids (particularly for DCPS) -- so the optics of the classroom are different. There may be three or four AA children in the class, however there are also at least four or five children of other races who have dark skin from South Asia or Central America. This makes a difference to us because our child sees children that look different. He is not the only darker skinned child in the room. When I see pictures from the school I am impressed that the kids seem a bit more reflective of the composition of the world.

I find it highly offensive that you are looking at skin color and analyzing Latinos of European descent etc.

Shut your dirty mouth. Latinos come in all colors.

This is yet another reason why I would also stay away from NW DC schools- parents who think it's okay to analyze skin color and ethnicity of the children.

You disgust me.

Whoa! The PP touched a nerve, but I can't figure out what your issue is with his/her post. Please explain (grabs popcorn).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Janney

I have 3 kids at Janney and last year each kid had ONE !blwck in their class. Janney's AA numbers are almost all in 5th grade when they can give empty spots to out of boundary kids. Prior to that, the school is very white because the neighborhood is very white. There's a lot of international
diversity.

Don't knock the international diversity. That's an important attribute to have in a school, particularly in a city like Washington.

Many of the upper NW schools have international diversity, what is interesting to analyze is where the kids are coming from. In the case of Janney it seems to be much more kids of European descent, directly from Europe, and a sprinkling of children of European descent from Latin America. Murch in particular has a large number of Asian and South Asian kids (particularly for DCPS) -- so the optics of the classroom are different. There may be three or four AA children in the class, however there are also at least four or five children of other races who have dark skin from South Asia or Central America. This makes a difference to us because our child sees children that look different. He is not the only darker skinned child in the room. When I see pictures from the school I am impressed that the kids seem a bit more reflective of the composition of the world.

I find it highly offensive that you are looking at skin color and analyzing Latinos of European descent etc.

Shut your dirty mouth. Latinos come in all colors.

This is yet another reason why I would also stay away from NW DC schools- parents who think it's okay to analyze skin color and ethnicity of the children.

You disgust me.