Pretend we're stupid (you often do) and explain to us how this state of affairs invalidate's nolu chan's statement that included California in his examples of recent prejudice and discrimination against blacks.
The judge who ordered the minority kids placed on IEP's would seem to have agreed with nc, no?
And will you insist that his intervention measures do not amount to depriving kids on IEP's of a common progress benchmark with other children who are not subjects of the court's tuition?
Does the judge's order:
a) help the children by getting them the assistance they need in the form of IEP's, or
b) conceal the continued operation of certain problems, the problems that were causing the children to underperform on STAR's, and in effect palliating not fixing and therefore prolonging the problems?
If the latter, does the judge's standing order amount to "institutionalized racism"?
Or is it "institutionalized racism" to expect children "of color" to be able to perform to standards on tests designed for the children of a Caucasian American society? Or to expect that they won't?
"When did the white people stop beating their wives?"
Isn't liberalism great?
Nolu's post implicitly supports the author of the article who contends that the State is discriminating by not screening young black children; the judge claimed the State was discriminating by screening young black children. It is a no-win situation.