Plato Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Saw this on the channel 18 Facebook page. (First time to upload a pic. Hope it works) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 So a black kid with a 3.5 is going to be called down? Come on. Do it for all kids who are struggling and do not lump all black kids into a group of underachievers. Adults should know better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plato Posted December 13, 2012 Author Share Posted December 13, 2012 About 300 comments on that Facebook post. Most agreeing with your position Clyde. No matter how ridiculous the state testing accountability system is, these school administrators should know better than this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 So the middle-class white kid with a 1.8 GPA doesn't get called down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I truly believe this was done with good intentions. It's just poor execution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
True blue (and gold) Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 So a black kid with a 3.5 is going to be called down? Come on. Do it for all kids who are struggling and do not lump all black kids into a group of underachievers. Adults should know better. Exactly. We've met with all of our 10th-12th grade students for goal setting, looking at transcripts, ACT or PLAN scores, etc, not just black students or poor students. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PutMeInCoach Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I truly believe this was done with good intentions. It's just poor execution. Racism is racism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plato Posted December 13, 2012 Author Share Posted December 13, 2012 Black people are mad about the racist overtones of the letter. White people are mad that the black kids are going to get additional assistance that the white kids aren't going to get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Racism is racism. I do not think this falls into the category of racism since it also includes free lunch kids. Again, that free lunch kid may have a 4.0 but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
True blue (and gold) Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I agree with you both that the intention is good, but the execution is poor. There is a big push for "gap reduction" in the accountability model. If you have so many of certain subgroup, their scores are compared with those not in that subgroup. If there is a "gap" of a certain amount, you must show gap reduction. Unfortunately, if you have the exact same grades/needs as someone in that subgroup and you are not in the subgroup, then you might get slighted, a school gets more credit in raising the gap kid's scores than the non-gap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
True blue (and gold) Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Subgroups may include minorities, special needs, free/reduced lunch students. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PutMeInCoach Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I do not think this falls into the category of racism since it also includes free lunch kids. Again, that free lunch kid may have a 4.0 but... It doesn't have to have intent to be racism. Why group African Americans in with kids who get free lunch? Wouldn't it be just as simple to do them separate. Why is there a need to bring a race by itself in the first place? I agree like you they probably had the best intentions in mind but come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I agree with you both that the intention is good, but the execution is poor. There is a big push for "gap reduction" in the accountability model. If you have so many of certain subgroup, their scores are compared with those not in that subgroup. If there is a "gap" of a certain amount, you must show gap reduction. Unfortunately, if you have the exact same grades/needs as someone in that subgroup and you are not in the subgroup, then you might get slighted, a school gets more credit in raising the gap kid's scores than the non-gap. I assume we agree the school should be looking out for all of the kids that are on the wrong path or on the path of failing to graduate, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PutMeInCoach Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Subgroups may include minorities' date=' special needs, free/reduced lunch students.[/quote'] That answers my second question... However, that letter just doesn't pass the eye test. IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 It doesn't have to have intent to be racism. Why group African Americans in with kids who get free lunch? Wouldn't it be just as simple to do them separate. Why is there a need to bring a race by itself in the first place? I agree like you they probably had the best intentions in mind but come on. Decades of history show that AS A GROUP black students perform worse than white students. So saying that is not a racist statement. If "gap achievement" has value, fine. Just don't bring in kids that are doing fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts