Anonymous wrote:

Then I guess you will send your kid to a SES and racially diverse college right. Are you really this stupid and moronic.

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/campus-ethnic-diversity

Coming in late to the discussion and I'm not sure I want to read all this weirdness. I don't understand. What is so terrible about diverse colleges? I went to one of these diverse colleges! I thought it was great. But then again, I am an ethnic minority from an economically challenged family who got a scholarship. Maybe you would be terrified send your kid to study among my kind?

That's INSANE!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Or perhaps, since research tells us that racially and socioeconomically diverse environments promote creativity, motivation, deeper learning, critical thinking, problem-solving skills, empathy and greater tolerance, the most responsible parents are those who buy a house in racially and socioeconomically diverse areas.

Sacrificing your own offspring's education in the name of homogeneity?!?!?!?!? INSANE

Then I guess you will send your kid to a SES and racially diverse college right. Are you really this stupid and moronic.

Even worse! PP will send their kid to a SES and racially diverse WORLD!

Exactly!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think to some degree this is an issue of framing and language.

People complain if a school is "too white" that it's not "diverse." But you never hear that complaint trotted out if a school is majority black or Hispanic. You hear a different sort of complaint, but there are some schools in DC that are close to 100% black and no one wrings their hands about "diversity."

So one reason people get their noses bent out of shape in these discussions is they feel attacked, as if having a child in a white-majority school is somehow an affront.

In any case, all of this has more to do with housing policy than educational policy.

No, people wring their hands about segregation. Because it is segregation.

It's bad for kids to be in high-poverty, segregated schools. Just ask the "you're sacrificing your child's education for PC 'diversity'" poster(s) on this thread.

You just made my point about language and framing.

If it's an all-white school it's bad because lack of diversity, even though the school itself may perform very well.

If it's an all-black school it's bad because segregation and it's an excuse for a poorly performing school.

Note that I'm talking strictly about our area. There are plenty of schools in America that are majority white and perform poorly.

If it's an all-white school, it's also bad because of segregation. Specifically, segregation is why there's an all-white school.

I'm impressed, though, that you consider poverty and segregation merely an "excuse" for a school with low test scores.

What do you call it? An explanation?

I haven't read these comments -- and something tells me I may not want to -- but yes, I factor diversity in alongside school ratings and perceived academic rigor, etc. My kids are white. They are not growing up into an all white world and will need to get along, compete, and bridge differences as they become successful adults. Even if there was no question of social justice (obviously not the case), I think it does children a disservice to not have a scholastic experience that prepares them to be citizens in a diverse country and world.

typo 1835

Adding, only selfish people think this way.

"Many complain of the school tax, not so much on account of its amount, as because it is for the benefit of others and not themselves. ... Why do they not urge the same objection against all other taxes? The industrious, thrifty, rich farmer pays a heavy county tax to support criminal courts, build jails, and pay the sheriffs and jailkeepers, and yet probably he never has had any direct personal use for either. ... He cheerfully pays the tax which is necessary to support and punish convicts, but loudly complains of that which goes to prevent his fellow being from becoming a criminal, and to obviate the necessity of those humiliating institutions. ..."

Thaddeus Stevens (R-PA), Free Schools Act Speech, April 11, 1935

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If everyone could rise above this liberal entitlement mentality everything could be better. Why don't colleges accept other way of thinking?

I am sorry, but it is not liberal entitlement to require that every child be give a quality public education at taxpayer expense.

You're sorry? I'm not sorry!

Anonymous wrote:If everyone could rise above this liberal entitlement mentality everything could be better. Why don't colleges accept other way of thinking?

I am sorry, but it is not liberal entitlement to require that every child be give a quality public education at taxpayer expense.

The definition of "fine" is?

Anonymous wrote:If everyone could rise above this liberal entitlement mentality everything could be better. Why don't colleges accept other way of thinking?

Which "liberal entitlement mentality" are you referring to, specifically, and how should "everyone" (everyone who?) "rise above" it?

If everyone could rise above this liberal entitlement mentality everything could be better. Why don't colleges accept other way of thinking?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think to some degree this is an issue of framing and language.

People complain if a school is "too white" that it's not "diverse." But you never hear that complaint trotted out if a school is majority black or Hispanic. You hear a different sort of complaint, but there are some schools in DC that are close to 100% black and no one wrings their hands about "diversity."

So one reason people get their noses bent out of shape in these discussions is they feel attacked, as if having a child in a white-majority school is somehow an affront.

In any case, all of this has more to do with housing policy than educational policy.

No, people wring their hands about segregation. Because it is segregation.

It's bad for kids to be in high-poverty, segregated schools. Just ask the "you're sacrificing your child's education for PC 'diversity'" poster(s) on this thread.

You just made my point about language and framing.

If it's an all-white school it's bad because lack of diversity, even though the school itself may perform very well.

If it's an all-black school it's bad because segregation and it's an excuse for a poorly performing school.

Note that I'm talking strictly about our area. There are plenty of schools in America that are majority white and perform poorly.

If it's an all-white school, it's also bad because of segregation. Specifically, segregation is why there's an all-white school.

I'm impressed, though, that you consider poverty and segregation merely an "excuse" for a school with low test scores.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think to some degree this is an issue of framing and language.

People complain if a school is "too white" that it's not "diverse." But you never hear that complaint trotted out if a school is majority black or Hispanic. You hear a different sort of complaint, but there are some schools in DC that are close to 100% black and no one wrings their hands about "diversity."

So one reason people get their noses bent out of shape in these discussions is they feel attacked, as if having a child in a white-majority school is somehow an affront.

In any case, all of this has more to do with housing policy than educational policy.

No, people wring their hands about segregation. Because it is segregation.

It's bad for kids to be in high-poverty, segregated schools. Just ask the "you're sacrificing your child's education for PC 'diversity'" poster(s) on this thread.

You just made my point about language and framing.

If it's an all-white school it's bad because lack of diversity, even though the school itself may perform very well.

If it's an all-black school it's bad because segregation and it's an excuse for a poorly performing school.

Note that I'm talking strictly about our area. There are plenty of schools in America that are majority white and perform poorly.

Anonymous wrote:I think to some degree this is an issue of framing and language.

People complain if a school is "too white" that it's not "diverse." But you never hear that complaint trotted out if a school is majority black or Hispanic. You hear a different sort of complaint, but there are some schools in DC that are close to 100% black and no one wrings their hands about "diversity."

So one reason people get their noses bent out of shape in these discussions is they feel attacked, as if having a child in a white-majority school is somehow an affront.

In any case, all of this has more to do with housing policy than educational policy.

No, people wring their hands about segregation. Because it is segregation.

It's bad for kids to be in high-poverty, segregated schools. Just ask the "you're sacrificing your child's education for PC 'diversity'" poster(s) on this thread.