I agree with Glenn, almost chapter and verse, "If a poor Asian kid living in a 3-room apartment with four siblings can ace the test, black kids can do it, too. We just need to put our heads down and do the work.”
As Glenn implies in his video on Twitter--no, I will not call it X--almost any other position rests upon the racism of low expectations. In fact, I might suggest that the racists who hate affirmative action and the progressives who love it both feel the same way about Black people---we cannot make it without help.
"The main sources of disparities .... the benefits of two-parent households....obstacles faced by young boys, particularly those raised in households without their biological fathers."
Well, duh. But try and push a traditional two parent family narrative and see where that gets you. Or that boys are getting the short end of the stick academically (and probably culturally as well).
My perscription: (1) Merit and only merit, must reign paramount in all public policies, including institutions that get government assistance. (2) Absolutely no DEI etc etc. (3) The John Rawls philosophy regarding taxation should continued, but strictly limited to government assistance to those who have fallen through the cracks, THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN. (4) All judicial appointments, SCOTUS excluded, by an 'independent' Commission. (5) All junior school students must be educated and inculcated in 'civics'.
I agree that there is an extraordinary wasteful spending on a variety of governmental, bureaucratic and union driven excess that takes away from the actual education of all students. I do believe however that there are less costly options such as charter and private and parochial school choice that produce significantly better results for poor and minority students that if were introduced on a state and local level will greatly improve both educational outcomes with resulting productive family,economic and citizenship outcomes. Simply a much better use of less money not by politicians and bureaucrats on theIV of union monies We need to do something both as a moral requirement and a need to preserve our country
The notion that certain demographics can only succeed if given an assist is disgustingly racist. The human mind and heart have no color. For a half-century now, a disproportionate number of black and Latino kids have been shunted into low-quality public schools, their parents' ability to get them into better schools blocked at every turn by Democrats and their union allies. When black kids are allowed to attend charter, parochial, or other private schools, guess what? They perform just as well as their white and Asian classmates (as do their Latino classmates).
Children live up or down to the expectations placed upon them. Social promotion, in which (again, disproportionately black) students are advanced to the next grade even if they didn't master the material in the grade they were in, has resulted in generations of kids given a high school diploma but not the skills nor knowledge that diploma is supposed to represent. Funny that's never mentioned in reparations talk.
In California, school funding is disbursed by the state to local districts on a per-student basis (well, student class day - no funding when a kid misses a day). BUT that per-student rate varies based on the local property tax rate. So the state spends MORE PER STUDENT in schools in rich white areas than it does in schools in low-income, predominately black or Latino neighborhoods. How this doesn't violate the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause is beyond me.
In California, the state is also promoting a plan to eliminate advanced classes in math (no more high school calculus) and the sciences to promote "equity." Which only means, of course, that rich white families will hire tutors or put their kids in after-school programs, while kids from poor families will lose out on any possibility of a quality college-prep education.
Black and Latino parents overwhelmingly tell pollsters they want access to better educational opportunities for their children - either via academically challenging charter schools, or voucher programs to allow working- and middle-class families access to the same opportunities the rich want for themselves.
Instead, Illinois, New York and other Democratic-controlled states are cutting back on charter and voucher programs - denying the kids they claim to care so much about the same opportunities they demand for their children.
There seems to be an assumption by those who favor affirmative action in college admissions that without a degree from a top 20 college one can not lead a successful financial , psychological, or emotional life. I guess all those like me who didn’t go to a top 20 school must be failures. What hubris.
A remarkable amount of attention is being given to how many students of color get access to an Ivy League education relative to the percentage of their ethnicities in the population. The reality is that admission to an Ivy League school is not within reach of white students either, including those who are among the most gifted and talented. The Ivy League schools were created to provide advanced educational experiences for the children of rich white people, and that is what they continue to prioritize. Are these people "the next generation of leaders"? Yes, because in the U.S. and most other places, wealthy people comprise the ruling class and vice versa. Do I care if more black people are admitted to this highest rank of the national social hierarchy? No.
Not that I particularly disagree with any of the points made about improving education for poor kids, I would still suggest that the goal of trying to achieve proportional representation of racial groups is not a worthy goal. Ending discrimination is a worthy goal. The End.
After reading about the negative effects of Covid school closures, I looked for a way to help local elementary school kids. The local senior center had a flyer for Communities in Schools. After passing the background check and completing a brief training session, I began volunteering in a 3rd grade classroom last year. The teacher asked me to work with 5-6 students who didn’t know their times tables. I brought my daughter’s Lego set so kids could figure things out; i.e., find 4 of the 8 bump pieces and literally count to find 4x8=32. I found free worksheets and we solved the problems together. I am retired so I would go to the school a couple of times a week for 30 minutes. This year, I was asked to be a Lunch Buddy for a 2nd grader; the student doesn’t need academic help, just some one-on-one time. I encourage Professor Loury’s readers to check out Communities in Schools; it is a national organization and you can make a positive impact on young students.
Well written and thoughtful…only one issue in my view… 2 parent households are not a “privilege”…they are the result of committed individuals who make good choices. They also come about due to sacrifice and hard work. None of us choose our parents. Parents must create the right environment for kids to flourish. Thomas Sowell has documented the impact of this dynamic. If large, mostly “blue” cities would allow more school choice, the situation discussed here would improve.
When MIT brought back the SAT, I think a year or two ago, it issued a public notice/explanation why it was doing so. It was shortish, but had 2 footnotes, I remember, alas no link.
And I remember MIT stating in one of the footnotes that it offered classes to catch-up students that were not as proficient in Math as they should be. But then it said that those classes only went to either Calculus 1 or more likely, Algebra 2?
So what it was saying, in essence, was that by removing the SAT, it had admitted students who performed at a level for whom even its catch-up were too rigorous. I was amazed.
I know that there has been a noticeable amount of attention paid to the drop in Black/Hispanic enrollments at MIT and other selective schools, but nonetheless, some were enrolled. Won't these universities ask about the study/family life of these students and apply those lessons to others?
So, I wonder, Is the ultimate issue that within progressive/left circles, it is practically verboten to in any way responsibilitize Black and Hispanic for their situation? Because to do so is to re-victimize the victim and possibly most of all, to dilute the notion of systemic racism.
I agree with Marty Moran. Our urban public education system has failed Black and Hispanic children for decades. We are locked into an operational and governance system that prevents innovation and creativity, mostly because of the rigidity of union contracts on the entire process and because the core leadership comes out of this same restrictive system. The two teachers unions exert outsized control over Democratic politicians whose only solution is to pour more money into a failed system. Urban parents exposed to charter schools and other choice initiatives express enthusiasm at the results. Look at the success of Success Academy in NYC despite profound union and progressive politician opposition. Their children rank at the top of the entire state of NY test rankings. Consider the writings of Thomas Sowell on the unqualified success of charter schools in giving hope and promise to those lucky enough to become enrolled.
Why do people say that this or that school/institution has failed our …. children?! Where does the responsibility rest? Plenty of minorities have succeeded in life: Thomas Sowell, Glenn Loury, John McWhorter, Roland Fryer. Do these individuals get the credit for their achievements or do we give it to their schools? There are even many more “average” individuals who just go onto have good lives and share their formula for average success with their children: graduate from HS or alternatively learn a marketable trade/skill, go to work even if you don’t get a job you like, don’t have children before you get married. That doesn’t require more taxes or “better” schools, just better actions by individuals.
“the rigidity of union contracts on the entire process and because the core leadership comes out of this same restrictive system. The two teachers unions exert outsized control over Democratic politicians whose only solution is to pour more money into a failed system. “
"Our urban public education system has failed ̶B̶l̶a̶c̶k̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶H̶i̶s̶p̶a̶n̶i̶c̶ ̶[all our] children for decades."
The idealogical battle, whether it was anti-STEM over a decade ago or race-centric indoctrination now, the clarion call has been for equality; yet rather than lifting the MOS has been to retard those "likely" to benefit.
The numbers speak for themselves, the proficiency of "whites" - especially boys/males - has been declining for decades; but to progressives this is apparently of little if any concern. Just the cost of doing business! The bright spot - if one is generous - is the "asian" demographic, which [continued to] excels relative to other three.
And why is one "group" so much better than others? Perhaps its the home environment where emphasis is placed on betterment rather than entitlement or recriminations/guilt. Ask any parent who sacrificed much to come here it was in no small part for their kids to have a better life.
It all starts at the pre K thru elementary level thru high school. Public charter school choice options scholarships to private and religious schools all should be employed and scaled up dramatically. For over 50 years notwithstanding enormous amounts up money pouring into public education, the system has and continues to fail minority and other low income people. How long do we continue this madness of condemning children to such limited and desperate lives? It is truly evil
America needs to confront the fact that it’s discussing Affirmative Action as though we were in the middle of the 1950s: Jim Crow era. Segregation enforced by law. Largely discussed as an opposition between black and white Americans. And they’ve thrown in so many vague concepts like “white privilege”, “structural racism”, and several others as being specifically directed at black America.
But that’s not what we’re seeing here. What was the “white privilege” that saw the proportion of white Americans fairly consistent before and after the recent court decisions? When what we, in fact, did see was that the representation of black and hispanic students declined slightly while asian enrollment surged. While America is talking about oppression of minorities in all of this, and how white America has somehow benefited, what we were really seeing was Asian enrollment being hurt for years, even in the face of stronger applications, so that other minority racial groups could be admitted with less merit.
And all in the name of “tearing down structures of oppression”. I’m not even that old, but it kills me to think I’m considered old-fashioned for calling this out as being even more ridiculous than Jim Crow. At least Jim Crow laws weren’t trying to present themselves as some antidote to racial discrimination when racial discrimination was precisely what they were.
I agree with Glenn, almost chapter and verse, "If a poor Asian kid living in a 3-room apartment with four siblings can ace the test, black kids can do it, too. We just need to put our heads down and do the work.”
As Glenn implies in his video on Twitter--no, I will not call it X--almost any other position rests upon the racism of low expectations. In fact, I might suggest that the racists who hate affirmative action and the progressives who love it both feel the same way about Black people---we cannot make it without help.
"The main sources of disparities .... the benefits of two-parent households....obstacles faced by young boys, particularly those raised in households without their biological fathers."
Well, duh. But try and push a traditional two parent family narrative and see where that gets you. Or that boys are getting the short end of the stick academically (and probably culturally as well).
My perscription: (1) Merit and only merit, must reign paramount in all public policies, including institutions that get government assistance. (2) Absolutely no DEI etc etc. (3) The John Rawls philosophy regarding taxation should continued, but strictly limited to government assistance to those who have fallen through the cracks, THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN. (4) All judicial appointments, SCOTUS excluded, by an 'independent' Commission. (5) All junior school students must be educated and inculcated in 'civics'.
I agree that there is an extraordinary wasteful spending on a variety of governmental, bureaucratic and union driven excess that takes away from the actual education of all students. I do believe however that there are less costly options such as charter and private and parochial school choice that produce significantly better results for poor and minority students that if were introduced on a state and local level will greatly improve both educational outcomes with resulting productive family,economic and citizenship outcomes. Simply a much better use of less money not by politicians and bureaucrats on theIV of union monies We need to do something both as a moral requirement and a need to preserve our country
The notion that certain demographics can only succeed if given an assist is disgustingly racist. The human mind and heart have no color. For a half-century now, a disproportionate number of black and Latino kids have been shunted into low-quality public schools, their parents' ability to get them into better schools blocked at every turn by Democrats and their union allies. When black kids are allowed to attend charter, parochial, or other private schools, guess what? They perform just as well as their white and Asian classmates (as do their Latino classmates).
Children live up or down to the expectations placed upon them. Social promotion, in which (again, disproportionately black) students are advanced to the next grade even if they didn't master the material in the grade they were in, has resulted in generations of kids given a high school diploma but not the skills nor knowledge that diploma is supposed to represent. Funny that's never mentioned in reparations talk.
In California, school funding is disbursed by the state to local districts on a per-student basis (well, student class day - no funding when a kid misses a day). BUT that per-student rate varies based on the local property tax rate. So the state spends MORE PER STUDENT in schools in rich white areas than it does in schools in low-income, predominately black or Latino neighborhoods. How this doesn't violate the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause is beyond me.
In California, the state is also promoting a plan to eliminate advanced classes in math (no more high school calculus) and the sciences to promote "equity." Which only means, of course, that rich white families will hire tutors or put their kids in after-school programs, while kids from poor families will lose out on any possibility of a quality college-prep education.
Black and Latino parents overwhelmingly tell pollsters they want access to better educational opportunities for their children - either via academically challenging charter schools, or voucher programs to allow working- and middle-class families access to the same opportunities the rich want for themselves.
Instead, Illinois, New York and other Democratic-controlled states are cutting back on charter and voucher programs - denying the kids they claim to care so much about the same opportunities they demand for their children.
Black students got the message. Applications to HBCUs increased dramatically. We now await the Conservative attack on HBCUs.
There seems to be an assumption by those who favor affirmative action in college admissions that without a degree from a top 20 college one can not lead a successful financial , psychological, or emotional life. I guess all those like me who didn’t go to a top 20 school must be failures. What hubris.
A remarkable amount of attention is being given to how many students of color get access to an Ivy League education relative to the percentage of their ethnicities in the population. The reality is that admission to an Ivy League school is not within reach of white students either, including those who are among the most gifted and talented. The Ivy League schools were created to provide advanced educational experiences for the children of rich white people, and that is what they continue to prioritize. Are these people "the next generation of leaders"? Yes, because in the U.S. and most other places, wealthy people comprise the ruling class and vice versa. Do I care if more black people are admitted to this highest rank of the national social hierarchy? No.
Not that I particularly disagree with any of the points made about improving education for poor kids, I would still suggest that the goal of trying to achieve proportional representation of racial groups is not a worthy goal. Ending discrimination is a worthy goal. The End.
After reading about the negative effects of Covid school closures, I looked for a way to help local elementary school kids. The local senior center had a flyer for Communities in Schools. After passing the background check and completing a brief training session, I began volunteering in a 3rd grade classroom last year. The teacher asked me to work with 5-6 students who didn’t know their times tables. I brought my daughter’s Lego set so kids could figure things out; i.e., find 4 of the 8 bump pieces and literally count to find 4x8=32. I found free worksheets and we solved the problems together. I am retired so I would go to the school a couple of times a week for 30 minutes. This year, I was asked to be a Lunch Buddy for a 2nd grader; the student doesn’t need academic help, just some one-on-one time. I encourage Professor Loury’s readers to check out Communities in Schools; it is a national organization and you can make a positive impact on young students.
Only the unqualified ones.
Well written and thoughtful…only one issue in my view… 2 parent households are not a “privilege”…they are the result of committed individuals who make good choices. They also come about due to sacrifice and hard work. None of us choose our parents. Parents must create the right environment for kids to flourish. Thomas Sowell has documented the impact of this dynamic. If large, mostly “blue” cities would allow more school choice, the situation discussed here would improve.
When MIT brought back the SAT, I think a year or two ago, it issued a public notice/explanation why it was doing so. It was shortish, but had 2 footnotes, I remember, alas no link.
And I remember MIT stating in one of the footnotes that it offered classes to catch-up students that were not as proficient in Math as they should be. But then it said that those classes only went to either Calculus 1 or more likely, Algebra 2?
So what it was saying, in essence, was that by removing the SAT, it had admitted students who performed at a level for whom even its catch-up were too rigorous. I was amazed.
I know that there has been a noticeable amount of attention paid to the drop in Black/Hispanic enrollments at MIT and other selective schools, but nonetheless, some were enrolled. Won't these universities ask about the study/family life of these students and apply those lessons to others?
So, I wonder, Is the ultimate issue that within progressive/left circles, it is practically verboten to in any way responsibilitize Black and Hispanic for their situation? Because to do so is to re-victimize the victim and possibly most of all, to dilute the notion of systemic racism.
I agree with Marty Moran. Our urban public education system has failed Black and Hispanic children for decades. We are locked into an operational and governance system that prevents innovation and creativity, mostly because of the rigidity of union contracts on the entire process and because the core leadership comes out of this same restrictive system. The two teachers unions exert outsized control over Democratic politicians whose only solution is to pour more money into a failed system. Urban parents exposed to charter schools and other choice initiatives express enthusiasm at the results. Look at the success of Success Academy in NYC despite profound union and progressive politician opposition. Their children rank at the top of the entire state of NY test rankings. Consider the writings of Thomas Sowell on the unqualified success of charter schools in giving hope and promise to those lucky enough to become enrolled.
Why do people say that this or that school/institution has failed our …. children?! Where does the responsibility rest? Plenty of minorities have succeeded in life: Thomas Sowell, Glenn Loury, John McWhorter, Roland Fryer. Do these individuals get the credit for their achievements or do we give it to their schools? There are even many more “average” individuals who just go onto have good lives and share their formula for average success with their children: graduate from HS or alternatively learn a marketable trade/skill, go to work even if you don’t get a job you like, don’t have children before you get married. That doesn’t require more taxes or “better” schools, just better actions by individuals.
“the rigidity of union contracts on the entire process and because the core leadership comes out of this same restrictive system. The two teachers unions exert outsized control over Democratic politicians whose only solution is to pour more money into a failed system. “
Word!!
"Our urban public education system has failed ̶B̶l̶a̶c̶k̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶H̶i̶s̶p̶a̶n̶i̶c̶ ̶[all our] children for decades."
The idealogical battle, whether it was anti-STEM over a decade ago or race-centric indoctrination now, the clarion call has been for equality; yet rather than lifting the MOS has been to retard those "likely" to benefit.
The numbers speak for themselves, the proficiency of "whites" - especially boys/males - has been declining for decades; but to progressives this is apparently of little if any concern. Just the cost of doing business! The bright spot - if one is generous - is the "asian" demographic, which [continued to] excels relative to other three.
And why is one "group" so much better than others? Perhaps its the home environment where emphasis is placed on betterment rather than entitlement or recriminations/guilt. Ask any parent who sacrificed much to come here it was in no small part for their kids to have a better life.
It all starts at the pre K thru elementary level thru high school. Public charter school choice options scholarships to private and religious schools all should be employed and scaled up dramatically. For over 50 years notwithstanding enormous amounts up money pouring into public education, the system has and continues to fail minority and other low income people. How long do we continue this madness of condemning children to such limited and desperate lives? It is truly evil
Take a look here for another point of view.
https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/elite-education-journalism-still?publication_id=295937&post_id=146011176&isFreemail=false&r=3pjcc&triedRedirect=true
Bingo. Point, set, match to Saul.
That was an excellent article.
I wonder how much money could they spend, if they wanted to prove that some horses are not faster than other horse?
Then setup the government agencies necessary to ensure they all cross the finish line at the same time.
America needs to confront the fact that it’s discussing Affirmative Action as though we were in the middle of the 1950s: Jim Crow era. Segregation enforced by law. Largely discussed as an opposition between black and white Americans. And they’ve thrown in so many vague concepts like “white privilege”, “structural racism”, and several others as being specifically directed at black America.
But that’s not what we’re seeing here. What was the “white privilege” that saw the proportion of white Americans fairly consistent before and after the recent court decisions? When what we, in fact, did see was that the representation of black and hispanic students declined slightly while asian enrollment surged. While America is talking about oppression of minorities in all of this, and how white America has somehow benefited, what we were really seeing was Asian enrollment being hurt for years, even in the face of stronger applications, so that other minority racial groups could be admitted with less merit.
And all in the name of “tearing down structures of oppression”. I’m not even that old, but it kills me to think I’m considered old-fashioned for calling this out as being even more ridiculous than Jim Crow. At least Jim Crow laws weren’t trying to present themselves as some antidote to racial discrimination when racial discrimination was precisely what they were.