How many times can we look at the same data and draw unhelpful conclusions. Apparently forever. https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-america-divided/education/ Evanston Illinois, the home of Northwestern University, is by any measure a community of above average affluence; yet, as pretty much everywhere else, Evanston has its socioeconomic pecking order. Evanston has what many would consider a progressive, and expensive , public school system. In 1985 it adopted an official policy 'that no single racial group shall comprise more than 60 percent of a school’s population.' This resulted in truly integrated schools, and although that specific policy is no longer in effect, the schools remain well integrated. The mix at the one high school is 43% white, 30% black, 18% Hispanic. The only high school is located in a section of town that is majority black and Hispanic, so white kids have to travel to get to high school. There is no other school other than the high school in this part of town, consequently younger students living in the majority black and Hispanic section of town are bused to integrated schools in the town's other school district. This has created an inequality, but not an educational one. Young black children are bused for nine years while at least some of their white classmates can walk or bike to school. Then in the three high school years, the black kids can walk or bike to school, while their classmates from across town may arrive in BMWs. Other than this transportation inequity, however, it is hard to imagine a more equitable, public-education opportunity in a town with a significant minority population. Evanston seems to have done everything within reason, and gone beyond that, to assure equal opportunity regardless of circumstances. And yet on standardized exams, there is a clear correlation between educational achievement and race. Evanston has not been able to erase the correlation despite full integration, marvelously funded schools (>22K$/student-year, nearly double the Illinois average) a magnificent, 63 acre high school campus, with amenities that could make country clubs envious, and a fully integrated, public-school faculty. In Evanston the kindergarten, elementary and middle schools that feed the High School are in district 65, and the High School is in its own district. According to the Bloomberg story referenced above: In December 2015, Fleming [Cecily, racial equality advocate], Burns [Martha, parent activist], and a representative from the NAACP asked the District 65 school board to review black student achievement in more detail than usual. The board agreed, and the data crunchers refined how they measure academic performance. The result was an even larger gap between black and white students than previously reported. One parent said the only part of the 43-page report she was glad to see was the end. The analysis showed that District 65 provided a much better education to white students than black students, no matter their income. (underlining is mine.) Now anyone from another planet looking at the situation in Evanston, and with no other information other than the educational achievement report, might conclude the same thing. But anyone familiar with the Evanston public schools, schools that had done everything conceivable to offer the same educational opportunity, and an outstanding one at that, to all students regardless of race, would have a hard time concluding what was concluded from this report. The Evanston schools went out of their way to provide, and actually did provide, the same educational opportunities to both black and white students. So, if by doing that, they 'provided a much better education to white students than black students,' than either black students need to be taught differently than white students to achieve at the same level, or there are factors entirely apart from educational opportunity and teaching methods in the primary and secondary schools that are responsible for the achievement gap! Apparently those well meaning people of Evanston, and the author of the Bloomberg story as well, managed to escape recognition of the obvious. How much longer can this insanity continue?
In other news authorities are puzzled as to the motive of the latest "allahu akhbar" shouting terrorist.
From piezoe poster link. Evanston’s own research, released in April, shows a similarly large difference between the percentage of black and white students on track to be college-ready. Money can explain some of that: Almost 80 percent of black students come from low-income households. But in Evanston, an achievement gap exists among higher-income black and white students, too. The inescapable conclusion of the report: “Race has an effect on student outcomes in District 65 separate from income.”
"Then in the three high school years, the black kids can walk or bike to school, while their classmates from across town may arrive in BMWs." How could we have missed the obvious solution? BMW's for everyone. Frankly, it'd probably be more cost effective to do that rather than what has been done over the years. There were two distinctly different paths we could have taken decades ago. We could have challenged the children to do better, or we could dumb down everything to accommodate the slowest kid in the class. We chose the later, and we're at where we're at. The reason we chose the later is because politicians and the teachers unions are f'n lazy and always want the quick fix. The kids were sacrificed for politically expediency, a fat check, and of course political correctness.
It would seem that the Evanston schools are already doing everything that could reasonably be expected of them to provide an equal educational opportunity to black and white students. I would be surprised if any of the measures proposed in response to the Evanston school report. such as hiring more minority faculty -- there are already quite a few, will have any statistical effect. What I read loud and clear from between the lines of the Evanston experience is that if one wants to improve the average black achievement level, one should start by looking at factors outside the schools. It would seem to me that the emphasis should be on improving circumstances in the home environment of under performing kids, and from an early age onward. Cutting funding for Headstart is unwise. In fact, expanding the parent and social support functions of Headstart to cover preschool through the first 6 grades could prove to be the nations best investment ever, with huge payoff.
Yeah, we could do that, or we might be so bold as to ask the black man to actually assume some parental responsibilities for the children they create. While we're at it we might suggest that having children at age 14-15 isn't the wisest choice to make. We could even go so far as to say that memorializing and glorifying the thug life just might lead to ruin. All of this would probably be more effective coming from what is now a pitiful excuse for black leadership rather than some white guy. Yep, we could do all this, but that puts the onus on the black community itself. Can't have that. Whoever would we blame? Better to stay in the slave mentality, blame the white devil and keep your hand out while slapping the hand which is being extended to help. Sorry my friend, these people, especially in the large urban areas are lost. Too much damage has been done, for too long, suffered by too many for any fix to work. But hey, lets look on the bright side, they still vote the way LBJ predicted, and at the end of the day that's the only thing which matters. It's the only thing that ever mattered.
What about the possible fact that US blacks on average have a lower IQ? Are we allowed to talk about that? Could it be useful to know this one way or the other?
I understand your point of view. I am coming at this problem in a different way. It seems our experience is telling us that the problem with academically low achieving black students is something other than what the schools are doing. It must be something outside of schools. I do agree that it would be very difficult to reform the parents of many these children. If we can't reform the parents, perhaps we have a chance to rescue the children if we can reach them early enough to counteract negative influences in their family situation. But that won't be achieved with half measures. It would take an intensive effort starting at the preschool age and continuing for a number of years. Initially a parent's influence dominates, but at some point peer pressure becomes just as important, if not more so. Any program aimed at overcoming negative influences in these kids lives needs to harness positive peer pressure. It would be short sighted to give up on these kids, because there is so much to be gained if we can succeed. We could conceivably break the poverty cycle by reaching kids early enough and then not abandoning our efforts too early. (The data shows Headstart abandons kids too early and there is back sliding. By the time they reach fourth grade nearly all the benefits of Headstart have been lost.) I think it is worth a try. The nationwide cost for a 8-10 year trial program would be less than a few F35 advanced fighters, but the pay-off could be hugely greater. (I'm starting to sound like Donald Trump, aren't I.) And a lot of meaningful jobs would be created! I don't know if we would succeed, no one does. Considering the ratio of cost to potential reward, however, it makes sense, to me anyway, to try. I'm fine with my tax money being spent in this way, whereas I'm not fine with it being used to buy 2500 F35s that the Pentagon has said it doesn't want, but our Senate has insisted on buying anyway.