I believe there is a gradual consensus developing as to what schools can and cannot do in decreasing the achievement gap. For example, Jay P. Green this Fall wrote an article titled The Odd Couple: Murray and Rothstein Find Some Unexpected Common Groud. Two experts with polar opposite views of the nature-nurture spectrum have concluded that there is little schools can do to improve educational achievement. Charles Murray of Bell Curve fame believes schools are limited by the cognitive potential of students. Richard Rothstein, the author of this book, believes poverty and its attendant social ills is responsible for the achievement differences.
CHAPTER 1: SOCIAL CLASS, STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND THE BLACK-WHITE ACHIEVEMENT GAP
Prior to the Supreme Court’s desegregation decision (1954) it was widely believed that the black-white education achievement gap resulted from racial prejudice and resource differences between white and black schools. It was assumed this decision would reduce or end this gap. Kenneth Clark also testified that segregation inevitably led black students to achieve less.
One can debate as to how this decision was reached, but their can be no doubt that the decision was a wise one.
In his book "The Tempting of America" (page 82), Robert Bork supported the SCOTUS decision for the following reason: ”By 1954, when Brown came up for decision, it had been apparent for some time that segregation rarely if ever produced equality. Quite aside from any question of psychology, the physical facilities provided for blacks were not as good as those provided for whites. That had been demonstrated in a long series of cases . . . The Court's realistic choice, therefore, was either to abandon the quest for equality by allowing segregation or to forbid segregation in order to achieve equality. There was no third choice. Either choice would violate one aspect of the original understanding, but there was no possibility of avoiding that. Since equality and segregation were mutually inconsistent, though the ratifiers did not understand that, both could not be honored. When that is seen, it is obvious the Court must choose equality and prohibit state-imposed segregation. The purpose that brought the fourteenth amendment into being was equality before the law, and equality, not separation, was written into the law.”
While the Brown decision was widely hailed, it did not reduce the black-white achievement gap. By 1964 the gap remained and Congress ordered a study to find out why. James S. Coleman led a major effort and he came to an unexpected conclusion—variations in school resources had very little to do with the black-white gap. Instead the crucial variables were the family of origin, social circumstances and the income continuum.
Perhaps a better take on the Coleman report can be found: HERE. New York University summarizes the Coleman Report thusly:
”Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 called for a survey "concerning the lack of availability of equal educational opportunity by reason of race, color, religion, or national origin in pubic educational institutions at all levels." Following this act, Coleman studied 600,000 children at 4,000 schools and found that most children attended schools where they were the majority race. Further, schooling between white and minority schools were similar. Teachers' training, teachers' salaries, and curriculum were relatively equal. The results, however, found that minority children were a few years behind that of the whites and that the gap widened by the high school years. In conclusion, the academic achievement was related to family background in the early years, but going to school allowed for a greater disparity between the academic differences between whites and blacks.
”Coleman's work had a far-reaching impact on government education policy. The following year, another study conducted by the Civil Right Commission, Racial Isolation in the Public Schools confirmed Coleman's findings. The government introduced a policy of affirmative action to racially integrate schools and to end de facto segregation produced by income level and neighborhood ethnic composition. A result of the policy was the busing of school children to schools outside their neighborhoods. The aim was to achieve racial balance between schools by preventing black enrollment from exceeding 60%.
Great efforts were made to refute the Coleman Report. For example, even now on Wikipedia the Coleman Report is seen as documenting the need for integration and affirmative action; there is no mention that the achievement gap results from cultural and class rather than educational differences. But the Coleman Report has stood the test in time and remains a major authoritative source. In retrospect, one real problem was the failure to consider innate intelligence differences.
In addition, economist Eric Hanushek has found classroom size (40 vs. 15 students) had an inconsequential effect on achievement Ditto for funding and school outcomes. Again, the crucial variable is the family of origin and related issues. Professor Hanushek also points out that since 1960 educational spending has tripled (in inflation adjusted dollars) but school achievement is basically flat. You can find a Hanushek’s bibliography with links HERE.
So, at the very least, two-thirds of the variation in achievement between black and white students can be attributed to the preschool family experience. In spite of this, educators continued to assume changing the schools would alleviate the achievement gap. Some educators claimed this or that educational approach would reduce or eliminate the gaps. Professor Rothstein to his credit does not ignore these findings; he attempts to understand and explain them.
Before I can proceed with some of his arguments and finding it is important to understand what is meant by “achievement tests.” These tests are measures of average differences between lower and middle-class students. Repeated testing over multiple subjects suggest the average achievement difference between lower and middle-class students is one-half to one standard deviation—or about 7.5 -15%. Put another way, if white students average at the 50th percentile, then blacks average between the 16th and 31st percentile. Usually this is shortened such that when the white, average achievement test 50%, the black average is 23%.
Since achievement occurs as a Gaussian distribution (Normal or Bell Curve Distribution), this means that in spite of having a lower average score lower-class students will have significant number of average and above average students who score above the 50th percentile of middle-class students.
Further complicating discussion is, that for the most part, what schools and the government test for is proficiency not achievement. If students on a test reach a particular point they are considered proficient. If all students reach a particular point then there is 100% proficiency. If only half pass the particular test point this is 50% proficiency. What is calculated in proficiency measures is the differences between white or middle-class proficiency and black or lower-class proficiency. When you read an educational make sure you know whether it is a measure of achievement or proficiency.
Proficiency tests have a shortcoming—depending where you set the proficiency you can alter the statistic. That is, if you make the proficiency passing point very easy you can ensure almost 100% of students pass. You can set the cut score low enough that both black and lower-class students pass and compare favorably (equivalently) to white or middle-class students. Usually, when policy makers ask for results they are given differences in proficiency not achievement.
The author states unequivocally when he discusses differences in social class producing achievement gaps he means, ”A gap in average achievement in the wide range of skills schools should produce—not only basic math and literacy, but also the ability to reason and create; an appreciation of history, science, art and music; and good citizenship, self-discipline and communication skills.” (Page 16)
A final preparatory point is the author is a believer in nurture not nature. Notwithstanding this, he recognizes from adoption studies children achieve more on the basis of their biological rather than their adoptive parents. Then, quite puzzlingly, he denies even the possibility of genetic differences between black and white students. He says:
”The importance of genetic makeup to academic achievement is rarely discussed in America today, partly because the atmosphere has been poisoned by those who claim that there are differences in academic ability, attributable to genes between average black and average white students. There is no reasonable basis for such a claim and there is every reason to believe the genetic potential within races is identical, or nearly so. Blacks did not become over-represented in the lower class in America because their genetic makeup was inferior, but because they were enslaved, then segregated and barred from equal opportunity for more than a century.” (Page 17)
In a word, Professor Rothstein denies any innate, racial IQ differences and sees all such differences as being due to longstanding racial and class differences. Of course, he has no citations to back this up, but accepts it as a matter of faith. I will come back to this in the discussion but, for the meantime, it is important for the reader to recognize his underlying beliefs in this matter.
The author takes the next forty pages to buttress the points made in the Executive Summary. In the briefest of terms the social class and racial differences are:
- Parents of different social classes and races raise their children somewhat differently.
- As of 2004 upper-class children have used a computer by age 5. The comparable figure for middle-class children is 50% and for lower class children 20%.
- Educated parents (college and beyond) use larger vocabularies and more complex sentences then lower-class parents.
- Parent occupation correlates with parenting styles as to issues of reasoning and obedience.
- Middle-class parents more often than not help with a child’s homework; lower-class parents more often than not do not help with homework.
- Professional parents when speaking to their children speak about 2000 words per hour, working-class parents 1300 words per hour and welfare mothers about 600 words per hour. (page 28)
- By age three children of professional parents have a vocabulary 50% greater than children of working-class parents and 200% more than children of welfare mothers.
- On the average and cumulatively children of professional parents have heard 45 million words; on the average and cumulatively children of welfare mothers have heard only 13 million words.
- When queried in grade school, almost all children aspire to college; however, only 35% of white children and 17% of black children actually graduate from college.
- Upper class parents are more involved with their children’s school than lower-class parents.
- Fifty percent of the children of lower-class parents have untreated visual problems when they enter school.
- Forty-two percent of black children watch television six or more hours a day; only thirteen percent of white children watch television 6 or more hours a day.
- Lower class and poor children are much more likely to move from school to school; on the average, poor children have attended three or more schools before entering the third grade.
Lower class and poor children are much more likely to require special education services. Of the new money given to schools 40% has been for special education. (Page 144)
- The author notes the “No Child Left Behind Act” requires that within a time frame of 12 years, these differences must be remedied.
The author carefully documents with discussion and references the empirical basis of the above, brief conclusions. While unspoken he assumes these differences are due to nurture not nature; hence, the unspoken, implied remedy is to seek out means to end these class, racial and economic differences.
CHAPTER II: SCHOOLS THAT ‘BEAT THE DEMOGRAPHIC ODDS’
The author notes the previous chapter documented the many ways in which social class differences prepare enhance or diminish a child’s chance to learn. Each of the studies as listed makes only a small difference, but added together they result in a significant learning gap between lower-class and middle-class children.
He sees these differences as an average achievement gap and this means “demography is not invariably destiny.” Some lower-class children will out-perform but the pervasive differences in school readiness overwhelm most and are responsible for the achievement gap.
Professor notes, that on the contrary, there are claims made that a school or educational system can reduce or eliminate the achievement gap. In this chapter, Professor Rothstein examines these claims.
Usually, a charismatic educator will claim that he or she has a way to eliminate the gap. Setting high standards, consistent discipline and a focus on basic skills are usually involved in this “new” educational system.
One person who claims he can eliminate the achievement gap is William Sanders and his Tennessee value-added system. He assumes the major variable is teacher ability and performance. Dr. Sanders compared pupils that had average teachers with a group that had teachers who were in the top quintile of effectiveness. Beneficial results occur but this requires that teachers increase educational proficiency by almost 50%. Further Dr. Sanders claimed this only for mathematics; since mathematics is the biggest of the achievement gaps, focusing solely on this will result in an apparent diminution of the achievement gap. Professor Rothstein also notes that Sanders does not describe what the actual differences are between a mediocre and a superior teacher..
Some what similar to the Sanders approach is the money approach. Here, higher ability teachers are paid more than lesser ability teachers. This approach has often been used to transfer teachers from suburban to inner city schools. Unfortunately, most teachers will not make the jump.
Similarly the Hanushek Plan in Texas, the Heritage Foundation’s no excuses schools, KIPP Academies, 90/90 Schools, Mather School, Pentagon Schools and many others have made claims of having a way of eliminating the achievement gap. Close examination as shown by Professor Rothstein documents that sampling errors and defects in measurement are responsible for many of the alleged claims.
The author concludes this chapter by the following: ”…there is nothing illogical about a belief that schools, if well operated, can raise lower-class achievements…But while the belief is not illogical, it is implausible…many claims by instructional heroes or methods that close the gap upon examination are unfounded…”
CHAPTER III: STANDARDIZED TESTING AND COGNITIVE SKILLS
Tested over time, and over many cognitive skills, average black achievement is between one-half and one standard deviations (7.5-15%) less than white students.
The author notes two problems with this statistic. First, there are problems in test construction that can mislead. Second, standardized tests of achievement do not measure non-achievement or non-cognitive necessary skills.
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act measures success and failure by proficiency tests. Educators report the percent of students who have achieved the previously defined standard of proficiency. The NCLB Act also gives benchmarks for below basic, basic, proficient or advanced. Panels of citizens decide where the lines are drawn. These proficiency tests are not an objective fact, but, rather, a subjective judgment.
Because of political considerations, the NCLB each state sets its own proficiency standards. Some states, because of the federal penalties involved, seem to be setting proficiency standards lower as a means to avoid penalties. Again, ”…critics can make the test score gap seem extraordinarily large if they define proficiency as half-way between the average score for blacks and whites.”
Finally, there is an increasing tendency to “teach up to the test.”
CHAPTER IV: THE SOCIAL CLASS GAP IN NON-COGNITIVE SKILLS
Repeated polls have shown Americans want something more than reading, writing and arithmetic.
- Over two- thirds want values taught.
- Almost 80% of parents believe in teaching how to be a good citizen.
- Only 50% of parents believe test results are important.
- Overwhelmingly, focus groups (business, government , clergy and school board members) believed it was more important to prepare young people to become good citizens than it is to excel academically.
There are three basic things that augur for lifetime success. The first is family background. The second is the length of time spent in school. The third is non-cognitive skills or what we call character traits.
Antisocial behavior is negatively correlated with income: the lower the income the greater the chance for antisocial behaviors. Black children are only slightly more prone to antisocial acts than whites. Depending on how the “antisocial act” is defined, the average black antisocial score is 47; the average score for white children is 34. If you change the definition of antisocial the difference is only 3%.
High school students who reported they assumed they would do as well or better than others, earned more as adults. Students with similar SAT scores but different class rankings showed that class rank augurs for financial success.
Workers with neat homes earn more than workers with less neat homes.
Employer surveys suggest black high school graduates have less of a work ethic and interact less well with workers, supervisors and customers.
Employer tests for integrity, willingness to change and so forth are better predictors of successful employment than tests on math and reading.
Preschool, Head Start and Project STAR have been suggested as providing both cognitive and non-cognitive skills training. The hope was intelligence, achievement and character traits could be improved upon.
Black children gain in academic skills from Head Start; however, the cognitive test score advantages seem to disappear by the third grade. This was not true for the avoidance of criminal activity and other non-cognitive measurements—these lasted for years. This finding is not restricted to Head Start; other early intervention programs have found similar results.
The Perry Study
The “Perry Study is the most frequently cited preschool study. It is now a classic and has been used to calculate benefits of preschool. This was done in Michigan by taking three and four year-olds and assigning them to either a model preschool or to nothing. The average child had parents who dropped out of high school. Only half of the fathers were employed. Of those who were employed they held unskilled or semiskilled jobs. The children uniformly had low IQs and were destined to attend the Perry Grade School; almost all the children in this school had characteristics like the study group.
Those in the preschool attended two and one half hours every weekday. Teachers went to the mother’s home and assisted her in changing her interaction with her child. Both at home and at school the program consisted of exploratory and inquiry learning.
After the first year, average IQ gains were 13 points or almost one standard deviation. By age seven half these gains were lost and by age ten there was no IQ advantage.
The experimental group did better on non-cognitive measures and these lasted. Both the experimental and control groups have been studied for over twenty years. Fewer of the experimental group was placed in special education and more graduated from high school. Fewer of experimental group were arrested, went on public assistance or became pregnant out-of-wedlock. Members of the experimental group were arrested half as much as the controls and they also earned a statistically significant better income than the control group.
The Perry Study has been accepted as gospel truth and above scientific reproach; however, Darcy Anne Olson pointed the following out in her 1999 Cato Report:
- Independent reviewers have pointed out sampling errors and other methodological flaws in the study.
- Those attending preschool (the experimental group) had to have one parent at home during the day.
- Up to 1999 (thirty years) no one has replicated the Perry results.
- In spite of virtually no corroboration, the savings estimated at seven dollars for every dollar spent have been used over and over with the result that several states including New York have implemented these programs.
- The Department of Health and Human Services 1985 study of Head Start failed to find any long term benefit after the second grade in IQ, non-cognitive learning, achievement-motivation scores, self-esteem and social behavior scales.
- A child’s academic and life performance are also influenced by factors such as genetics, family, neighborhoods and life experiences after birth. These other factors can easily outweigh any preschool experience.
- Since there is no lasting effect of Head Start and other programs the only real justification for them is they provide school readiness for those needing it. This is a laudable goal and one that has wide support from even the critics of the Perry Study.
For those wanting a view contrary to Darcy Ann Olsen’s see The Perry Preschool Project: Significant Benefits: The High/Scope Perry Preschool Project
Among those believing in preschool education is Nobel Laureate James J. Heckman. He has opined favorably on the economic necessity of preschools. Professor Heckman’s field of expertise is economics not education but his views are influential. You can find a Webcast on the Perry Study and its economic implications HERE. A concise print version of Professor Heckman’s convictions can be found: HERE.
To be noted, Professor Heckman has been no fan of The Bell Curve. In 1995 he wrote a long and critical review of this book for Reason Magazine. The review was called “Cracked Bell:’ It can be found HERE.
CHAPER V: REFORMS THAT COULD HELP NARROW THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP
Professor Rothstein does not see school as a solution to the achievement gap. In his way of thinking, preschool may result in long term non-cognitive improvement, but preschool cannot eliminate the achievement gap.
The author retains his fiercely held conviction this it is primarily nurture not a nature that determines the achievement gap. Far from giving up, he believes we must try harder. His proposed solutions are as follows:
- Reduce or eliminate income inequality.
- Reduce or eliminate de facto segregation by race and social class.
- Change the student social class mixture such that no school has 40% or more of its students in a subsidized lunch program.
- Increase housing subsidies and, further, eliminate ghettos.
- Make sure all children, before and after entering school, have visual examinations and treatment.
- Start preschool programs earlier—age six months is a good place to begin.
What the author wants is an end to the achievement gap even it requires a social and economic revolution. .
A GENERAL DISCUSSION OF THE BOOK
Professor Rothstein was thorough and fair in his analyses. He was particularly adept at listing and sourcing social class and racial differences. This alone is worth the price of the book. In addition to that he did a balanced discussion of his major point—preschools and schools have not been able close the achievement gap. He inferred and opined this gap is caused by social and environmental conditions before entry into school. I will have more to say about that later.
I was particularly impressed with his willingness to come up with studies and data that contradicted his opinions. One of his remedies for the achievement gap is to reduce the size and effect of poor neighborhoods. One such experiment was the MTO study where families in five cities—Baltimore, Boston, Los Angeles and New York—were given vouchers to move out of poor neighborhoods. Those interested had to sign up; from this list residents were selected randomly for the subsidized move and rents. Those not selected were the control group. Initially, the results suggested children who moved had higher test scores. At the same time adolescents in the moved group had a higher drop-out rate than those left behind. It was presumed this was due to higher behavioral standards required in the move to schools. At best the results are mixed, at worse there were no appreciable positive changes. It would seem you can take the child out of the ghetto but not the ghetto out of the child. (Pages 136-138)
I was also impressed with Professor Rothstein for not using ad hominem arguments when discussing racial differences. Usually what happens is when anyone implies that class and race distinctions are partially a result of differences in human nature and genes, the nurture proponents shout, “racist.”
The author did a bang up job in the Appendix: What Employers Say About Graduates. I have summarized the author’s conclusions on employability HERE. Some brief examples from the Appendix are as follows.
The National association of Colleges and Employers did a news release in 2004 reporting on their survey of 400 employers in both government and industry. The findings for college graduates were: communication skills, honesty, integrity, interpersonal skills, motivation and initiative. In respect to cognitive skills, the employers where satisfied with a “B” average; once this benchmark was met the employers were felt cognitive skills were less important than the non-cognitive skills and behaviors.
The National Association of Manufacturers surveyed 600 member firms about skill shortages. Their conclusions were: When applicants are rejected for production jobs it was because of problems with employability skills—timeliness, work ethic. The actual figure for rejection for these reasons was 69%. Only 21% of the rejections were because of low math skills and only 39% were rejected for poor reading skills. When it came to rejections for professional jobs, employability skills accounted for 16% of the rejections. while only 4% were rejected for the lack of math and writing skills.
Professor Rothstein believes schools need to educate and train students for the real world and not just “to the test;” this conclusion is empirically based and hard to refute.
I was disappointed that the author did not cite Ruby K. Payne and her A Framework For Understanding Poverty. Self-published in 1996 this book sold over one million copies and her lectures are wildly popular as well. No one in the educational establishment has recognized either this or her other effort written with Don L. Krabil— Hidden Rules Of Class At Work. [Both books have been summarized on FR. Hitting the titles accesses them.]
A GENERAL DISCUSSION OF IQ, ACHIEVEMENT AND THE NATURE-NURTURE CONTROVERSY
As previously noted, Professor Rothstein adamantly refuses to see any racial or class differences in IQ. This is hard to understand since IQ tests were specifically designed to predict academic functioning. In academic circles these tests have been widely used and discussed over the last 100 years. Hernstein and Murray’s book, The Bell Curve (1994) was seen as controversial since it summarized the IQ literature and speculated on the importance of IQ in the determination of social class.
With time and reflection, the Bell Curvehas become accepted as an important contribution to understanding of a myriad of issues—social, economic and educational. In 1995 the Wall Street Journal published the findings of 52 recognized, academic scholars in regards to the Bell Curve. You can find their conclusions HERE.
If this were not enough note that what Rothstein reports as a 7.5-15% black-white achievement gap exactly mirrors the one half to one standard deviation black-white IQ difference (7.5-15 IQ points). Since IQ is a predictor of academic achievement it should be no surprise that it is reflected in educational achievement.
I note the author is not alone in persisting in asserting an absolute equality between the races and classes in average IQ. On the right we have such notables as Thomas Sowell and while on the left Nobel Laureate (in economics) James J. Heckman asserting environmental differences account for the achievement gap.
In spite of no consistent results in reducing the achievement gap, we have spent the last 50 years attempting to do so. Now Professor Rothstein and others are proposing even more radical, government mandated efforts at equalizing social conditions.
One must ask onself, why?
First, the IQ difference between US blacks and whites is between 7.5 and 15 IQ points. Siblings within families, on the average, differ by 12 IQ points. The differences in the human family parallel those in an individual family as would be expected. Is this IQ and resultant achievement gap worthy of past and planned efforts. I think not.
Second, at best the correlation between I.Q. and genetic inheritance is .72. Remember, this is an average does not suggest the heritability of a given person. To get the average heritability of IQ one squares the correlation coefficient. If one does this, one arrives at a figure of .5. This means that, on the average, genetic inheritance only accounts for half the group variance in IQ.
Third, contrary to conventional wisdom IQ correlates with genetic predisposition better and better with age. When it comes to IQ and achievement environmental influences diminish with age. This explains much of the puzzling data from preschool programs—after initial success in reducing the achievement gap followed by a loss by adulthood.
Fourth, and finally, it must be understood that if average black IQ is 85, then 35% of blacks have IQs of 100 or more. At least 25% are above average on white norms.
We are left then with human problems that cannot be remedied with educational effort. As Charles Murray said in a recent Wall Street Journal Article:
”Education is becoming the preferred method for diagnosing and attacking a wide range problems in American life. The No Child Left Behind Act is one prominent example. Another is the recent volley of articles that blame rising income inequality on the increasing economic premium for advanced education. Crime, drugs, extramarital births, unemployment--you name the problem, and I will show you a stack of claims that education is to blame, or at least implicated.
One word is missing from these discussions: intelligence. Hardly anyone will admit it, but education's role in causing or solving any problem cannot be evaluated without considering the underlying intellectual ability of the people being educated. Today and over the next two days, I will put the case for three simple truths about the mediating role of intelligence that should bear on the way we think about education and the nation's future.
Today's simple truth: Half of all children are below average in intelligence. We do not live in Lake Wobegon.
A SPECIFIC DISCUSSION OF WHY ACADEMICS CLING TO RADICAL EGALITARIANISM
Some brilliant academics and pundits continue to dispute the idea that mental differences have a genetic component. One broad answer is, E. O. Wilson who recently wrote:
”The second world view is that of political behaviourism. Still beloved by the now rapidly fading Marxist-Leninist states, it says that the brain is largely a blank state devoid of any inborn inscription beyond reflexes and primitive bodily urges. As a consequence, the mind originates almost wholly as a product of learning, and it is the product of a culture that itself evolves by historical contingency. Because there is no biologically based "human nature", people can be moulded…”
The educational establishment overwhelmingly believes in political behaviorism and has so believed since the time of John Dewey.. This is changing. Bit by bit educators are giving up on the idea that an achievement gap can be corrected by school reform. Political behaviorism is a receding and diminishing force. Just as Marxism failed in the marketplace, so will its softer cousin, liberalism, fail as the dominant view in pedagogy.
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: achievementgap; atriskstudents; class; education; publicschools; social; socialism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
Public Education Ping
ANOTHER REASON TO HOMESCHOOL
ping; scary stuff
That's the whole problem in a nutshell. If parents cared enough to help their children then all the perceived educational discrimination would be eliminated. Even if the parent isn't educated, merely instilling proper behavior in these kids at school would go a long way.
—the black “community” needs to pay more attention to Bill Cosby and less to the disciples of John Dewey and Karl Marx—
Maybe we could just change one of the two cultures so it had the same values as the successful culture.
You know model yourself after success ..........
The author makes some valid and common sense observations that children with parents that care about their education tend to succeed academically.
The author then throws away any credibilty by suggesting a massive social redistribution to solve the problems of lousy parenting.
I do like one of the author’s suggestions... that all children should pass some sort of physical examination before acceptance into grade school.
You know model yourself after success ..........
Racist! Uncle Tom! You're working for the man! Back on the plantation!
The black "leaders" actively and militantly resist any such notion. I'm not sure why.
The only way they have been able to close the gap is by dumbing down the white and Asian kids.
bttt
The left is obsessed with differences in outcomes. According to them, the differences are caused by racism.
Wrong.
The differences are caused by pathologies present in the failing community: births to individuals who are not fully involved in the development of the child, negative messages sent by adults to children, racial hatred toward the successful community, blaming failure on the successful community.
No amount of liberal laws will change this because liberal laws caused it.
Implicit in that sentence is the fact that he once thought schools COULD provide the answer.
I'm not sure why anyone would want or need to read further than that sentence.
A lot to read for later!
The main problem in the Black Community is the LACK of family structure. Too many illegitimate births and too many black men who fail to assume parental responsibilities.
Procreation is not an indoor sport - the production of children requires dedication and self-discipline. Kids without a nuclear family and a familial support system do not do well in school and develop into societal time bombs.
Unless the majority of black adults recognize this, these problems will escalate - and like drugs, spread to teh general American community.
Sorry, meant to post the graph.
To close the Achievement gap, mustn’t one first close the IQ gap?
Yes, I agree. Good health care, and especially good vision care, are important aspects of education—especially prior to entering school.
Yes, closing both gaps would be the ticket; however, IQ has a strong biological basis not amenable to enhancement. Like Charles Murray says, “We must accept the fact that half the people are smarter than the other half...” (as I remember the quote)
Friend’s mother used to teach Germnan in Baltimore public schools exactly the way she’d have taught English kids to speak German, i.e. it was the one halfway real study course any of those kids ever encountered in four years of highschool. End result frequently was kids who an English speaking person would take for street/ghetto trash and a German speaking person would have taken for educated people. Nobody ever had any sort of an idea for avoiding “sounding white” while speaking German.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.