4 ms·

I don't think artificial integration is the solution. It certainly didn't work very well in San Francisco. Kids should go to school in their neighborhoods. Fami

by pbreit 11y ago

I don't think artificial integration is the solution. It certainly didn't work very well in San Francisco. Kids should go to school in their neighborhoods. Families should get involved. People need to start taking some responsibility for making things better. I know that sounds right-wing but I really think that's what needs to happen. And obviously it can. Just need humans to get together and decide to change.

tdees40 11y ago
So your position is "separate schools should make themselves more equal"?
- emodendroket 11y ago
  Well, is that surprising? Politically speaking, in word the US is committed to integrated schools but in deed it is not really a priority and most of efforts do essentially look like "separate but equal." I think it's shameful but it's reality.
- protomyth 11y ago
  Not the OP, but that's the point of having a system of schools with multiple locations. They should be equal or else some kid is getting held back. The big part of the problem is the continued use of property taxes and local bonds to pay for schools. Poor neighborhoods don't have the money for either.
- pbreit 11y ago
  I'm not even sure what "separate schools" means. Yes, schools are separate. But at some point, a school's constituents need to take some responsibility for improving conditions. You can't just send the kids across town, driving the wealthy kids out of the public system. That is not the solution. I guess I'm just a little bit tired of the suggestions that the solutions lie with everyone else except for the people involved.
bluthru 11y ago
We have data that shows that desegregation is very effective. However, people seem to stop there and not question why it's so effective. It's not nice to think about, but isn't desegregation just "diluting the problem until it no longer creates a poisonous learning environment"? I agree that I don't get the impression that some communities aren't doing all that they can to improve education irrespective of funding.
- pbreit 11y ago
  I've seen one example of integration (San Francisco) and it was a complete disaster. The TAL episode suggests the exact same thing happened in Boston. I don't see how it would not happen. Some people may benefit but the system takes a nose dive.
ap22213 11y ago
It doesn't sound all that right wing to me (I'm left wing). I think you're just highlighting one of the primary underlying issues: parents, likely because of personal and economic factors, don't have the time or energy to be involved in their children's education. I looked up some stats on Newark schools. $1B in expenditures for 43,000 students. Or: a relatively high $23,000 per student. Increasing an already sufficient budget by 20%, when the district arguably can't effectively use its current funds seems like a mistake. It probably would have been more effective just to pay the families of the students $4600 as incentive to be more involved.

by pbreit 11y ago

tdees40 11y ago

So your position is "separate schools should make themselves more equal"?

emodendroket 11y ago
Well, is that surprising? Politically speaking, in word the US is committed to integrated schools but in deed it is not really a priority and most of efforts do essentially look like "separate but equal." I think it's shameful but it's reality.
protomyth 11y ago
Not the OP, but that's the point of having a system of schools with multiple locations. They should be equal or else some kid is getting held back. The big part of the problem is the continued use of property taxes and local bonds to pay for schools. Poor neighborhoods don't have the money for either.
pbreit 11y ago
I'm not even sure what "separate schools" means. Yes, schools are separate. But at some point, a school's constituents need to take some responsibility for improving conditions. You can't just send the kids across town, driving the wealthy kids out of the public system. That is not the solution. I guess I'm just a little bit tired of the suggestions that the solutions lie with everyone else except for the people involved.

bluthru 11y ago

We have data that shows that desegregation is very effective. However, people seem to stop there and not question why it's so effective. It's not nice to think about, but isn't desegregation just "diluting the problem until it no longer creates a poisonous learning environment"? I agree that I don't get the impression that some communities aren't doing all that they can to improve education irrespective of funding.

pbreit 11y ago
I've seen one example of integration (San Francisco) and it was a complete disaster. The TAL episode suggests the exact same thing happened in Boston. I don't see how it would not happen. Some people may benefit but the system takes a nose dive.

ap22213 11y ago

It doesn't sound all that right wing to me (I'm left wing). I think you're just highlighting one of the primary underlying issues: parents, likely because of personal and economic factors, don't have the time or energy to be involved in their children's education. I looked up some stats on Newark schools. $1B in expenditures for 43,000 students. Or: a relatively high $23,000 per student. Increasing an already sufficient budget by 20%, when the district arguably can't effectively use its current funds seems like a mistake. It probably would have been more effective just to pay the families of the students $4600 as incentive to be more involved.