Categories
education and schooling ideological culture

Disparate Outcomes, Desperate Logic

“Virginia AG’s office finds elite Loudoun STEM school discriminates against Black, Hispanic students,” declared The Washington Post headline. 

Falsely. 

On Friday, Attorney General Mark Herring — another blackface-​wearing state government leader — issued a 61-​page report, saying “the Office of Attorney General Division of Human Rights finds there is reasonable cause to believe that Loudoun County Public Schools’ administration of the Academies of Loudoun program resulted in a discriminatory disparate impact on Black/​African-​American and Latinx/​Hispanic students.” 

Though the investigation found the admission process to be “facially-​neutral,” The Post informs that the program “in fact barred from admission qualified Black and Hispanic students who applied during the fall 2018 cycle.”

Yet blacks and Latinos were not barred. 

This year, 7 percent of black applicants were accepted and 11 percent of Hispanics. True, the acceptance rate for Asians was 13 percent and 15 percent for whites. But this gets tricky. Given their percentage of the overall student body, Asians were 42 percent overrepresented in the applicant pool, while blacks were 4 percent underrepresented, Latinos 6 percent, and whites underrepresented by a whopping 23 percent. 

“We request that Loudoun County Public Schools eliminate its discriminatory practices,” the report concludes. But … it did not stipulate any specific form of discrimination. Rather, it instructed the school district to work with the Loudoun County NAACP “to begin developing revised policies within 60 days.”

What sort of revisions are likely? 

Lower the entry requirements, reduce testing and “take into consideration the principle of geography/​socio-​economic equity.” 

You see, the problem they’re trying to fix isn’t racism, but the lack thereof.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
education and schooling

Merit No More

San Diego’s school district is weakening its grading system because of “racial disparities.”

Yearly averaging of grades will end. Why? The practice, it is said, has penalized students who do poorly early in the year, presumably unfairly.

Teachers will also be prohibited from taking into account whether homework is submitted on time and how students behave in class. These aspects of performance will instead be incorporated into a “citizen grade.”

Richard Barrera, VP of the school district, says “to be an anti-​racist school district, we have to confront practices like this that have gone on for years and years.”

Student behavior has sometimes been called “deportment.” Grading it separately is nothing new. But San Diego’s rationale for doing so is bad. And eliminating a yearly average (or semester average) discourages students from working diligently all year long.

What if, under the hobbled system, grades still exhibit “racial disparities”? The logical conclusion is an end to grades and to merit-​based distinctions.

Many reasons for academic disparities among different groups are possible. But let’s say that kids of certain color tend to have lousier home lives than kids of other color, and therefore do worse in school. 

If so, disparities in performance cannot be attributed to attempts to objectively assess schoolwork. 

And the problems won’t disappear if grades disappear.

Any silver lining? 

Well, if you’re a substandard teacher, meaningless grades for students will also make it harder to know when you, the teacher, are doing substandard work.

Though the metal most apt, here, is much baser than “silver.”

Lead seems about right. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
education and schooling folly

Not Fired for Teaching

The headline states that a “USC Professor Who Used Chinese Word That Sounds Like English Slur” was “ ‘Not Dismissed Nor Suspended.’ ”

Sure. The professor was “only” removed from the course he was teaching.

Greg Patton, who teaches business communication at the University of Southern California, had been telling students about “filler words,” which for native English speakers is stuff like “uh, uh, uh.” We apparently don’t all grope for words in exactly the same way. If one grew up speaking Mandarin, one tends to say “nèi ge, nèi ge, nèi ge.”

No sooner had the example been provided than a contingent of the perpetually aggrieved lurched into action. 

Their failure to simply talk to Professor Patton, and the overkill of their response — including a letter claiming that his utterance “offended all of the Black members of our Class.… Our mental health has been affected.…” — suggests the disingenuousness of that response.

A USC dean issued an abject public apology. 

Patton also, regrettably, apologized.

Fortunately, many of Patton’s students, and others, rose to his defense, including Chinese class members who noted that Patton’s “use of ‘nei ge’ [was] an accurate rendition of common Chinese use, and an entirely appropriate … illustration of the use of pauses.”

If only the professor had been a mind reader and expert military strategist, he might have avoided this land mine. But training in proactive appeasement of bullies is not the solution here. 

What’s needed is a determination to stop appeasing bullies.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
education and schooling

The Panic Over Pods

“You really want to get the best for your child,” a father told NBC News, describing his family’s motivation to secure private educational services.* They are part of the “Pandemic Pod” movement “now sweeping the nation” — as so many public schools offer only remote learning this fall. 

Increasingly, parents are getting together to form small groups — or “pods” — and hire a teacher to better provide instruction to their children. 

It shows initiative — and a refreshing sense of parental responsibility. Of course, not everyone can afford to hire a private teacher. 

“It just seems really privileged,” a Portland, Oregon, woman advised The Washington Post.

“The frantic activity … of families soliciting private tutors for their children,” San Francisco school board member Alison Collins explained, “is frightening to many black parents and parents of color.” 

L’Heureux Lewis-​McCoy, associate professor of sociology of education at New York University, called the private effort: “opportunity hoarding.” 

“For those families that are most vulnerable, particularly lower-​income families, black families, brown families, language-​minority families,” declared the professor, “they are locked out of that.”

“Experts say that will widen the education gap,” NBC reporter Stephanie Gosk chimed in. 

Ah, the experts — and their Procrustean** obsession!

Their fixation on gaps and inequality, as opposed to enhancing opportunities and achievement where possible, leads to the absurd notion that we should deny educational opportunities to some children (our children) unless we can provide those benefits to all children … city-​wide, statewide, nationwide — or worldwide.

Read a bedtime story to your kid or grandchild tonight. Insist on quality … and leave the equality to feckless education theorists.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


* The father and the family happen to be black.

** Procrustes, in Greek myth, was a robber who made his victims lie on a bed and stretched them out if they were too short for the bed, or lopped parts of them off, if too tall; killed by Theseus on said bed: “Procrustean” is a synonym for absurdly strict egalitarianism.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
education and schooling

End Educational Freedom Now!

“A rapidly increasing number of American families are opting out of sending their children to school,” Erin O’Donnell informs in the May-​June issue of Harvard Magazine, “choosing instead to educate them at home.” 

Yippee! Thanks for the great news — right?

Not to O’Donnell, or to Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Bartholet. O’Donnell’s article is something of a friendly regurgitation of Bartholet’s Arizona Law Review article, entitled, “Homeschooling: Parent Rights Absolutism vs. Child Rights to Education & Protection.”

Bartholet “recommends a presumptive ban on homeschooling.” Why? Because, as O’Donnell offers, it “violates children’s right to a ‘meaningful education’ and their right to be protected from potential child abuse …”

Her evidence? Professor Bartholet offers none. Harvard Magazine does not need any.

Avoided, perhaps, because research shows students educated at home significantly outperform public school students on standardized tests. 

As for the specter of homeschooling as massive smokescreen enabling vicious child predators? “The limited evidence available shows that homeschooled children are abused at a lower rate than are those in the general public,” Dr. Brian Ray reported in 2018, adding that “an estimated 10% (or more) of public and private schoolchildren experience sexual maltreatment at the hands of school personnel.”

So, what is going on here? 

Perhaps O’Donnell provides the explanation, writing that “surveys of homeschoolers show that a majority of such families … are driven by conservative Christian beliefs, and seek to remove their children from mainstream culture.” 

Oh, my, can that be permitted? Should people choose their own religious and cultural beliefs? May parents freely educate their kids?

Bartholet calls that “essentially authoritarian control,” which is “dangerous.”

There, she is correct. Homeschooling is dangerous … to experts hell-​bent on telling us what to think.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

home schooling, education, Harvard, authoritarianism,

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
education and schooling subsidy

The Most Foolish Bank of All

There are few things more foolish than turning the Department of Education into a bank.

“Congress never set up the U.S. Department of Education to be a bank, nor did it define the secretary of education as the nation’s ‘top banker,’” said Betsy DeVos, Trump’s controversial Department of Education secretary, at an annual education conference in Reno. “But that’s effectively what Congress expects based on its policies.”

Secretary DeVos “recommended that Federal Student Aid (FSA) — the nation’s largest provider of financial aid — be spun off from the Education Department so student loans can be better managed and administered,” Forbes summarizes.

The FSA is a bank, but not a very good one. It makes bad bets, which Mrs. DeVos tries to make clear by asking a few rhetorical questions:

  • “Is it any surprise … that both principal and interest are currently being paid down for only one in four loans? 
  • “Nearly 11 million borrowers have loans that are delinquent or in default? 
  • “And 43 percent of all loans are considered ‘in distress’?”

Even worse, the loans amount to an especially cumbersome form of subsidy, one that has corrupted the university system, misallocated higher education resources and inflated tuitions, and sunk generations into debt.

While DeVos’s reforms might possibly be an improvement, what if the troubles associated with the federal government’s student loan programs are not the result of how they are managed, but that the federal government is involved at all?

Centralizing consumer credit in specialized Congress-​created lending institutions (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) was at the heart of last decade’s massive financial crisis. Shouldn’t a major banking reform focus on avoiding the moral hazards involved in government-​run credit and subsidies?

DeVos’s plan doesn’t strike me as educated on this angle.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


education, bank, loans, Devos,

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts