Days Black People Not Re-Enslaved By Trump

Thursday, February 05, 2015

Only The Black Schools?

The SF Public Press has an article entitled "As Parents Get More Choice, S.F. Schools Resegregate" In which we find the following:
Why does it matter whether schools are diverse? One reason is academic performance. Recent studies from Stanford and the University of California, Berkeley, show that many students do much better on tests when placed in integrated classrooms, and that all kids are much less likely to grow up with racial stereotypes and prejudices. Far from being opposed to each other, excellence and diversity go hand in hand. [my underlines]
Many students do much better on tests when placed in integrated classrooms. This is almost verbatim from the Brown V. Board decision. But then look at what was said after:
In 2009, San Francisco Unified asked Linda Darling-Hammond at Stanford University to study the academic effects of racial isolation. She found that black and Latino students did better at diverse schools than they did at ones where their race was in the majority.
So it's not "students" but certain students. Since:
Not all racially isolated schools underperform. KIPP Bayview Academy, a charter middle school, outperforms the other predominantly black schools, making it one of a handful of outliers. In addition, almost all of those dominated by Asian students test in the upper third — the inverse of the picture at black- and Latino-dominated schools. [My underlines]
Oh so the "certain students" who apparently "need" to be in integrated schools are only Black and Hispanic (who can be of any race) students. The data is pretty clear that neither Asians or Whites "need" to be in integrated environments to do well.

Therefore it's pretty clear that the subtext of this piece is that Black and Hispanic students, therefore Black and Hispanic people need the presence of Whites (and/or Asians) to do well in school/work. Doesn't that strongly imply that the authors believe that Black people are inferior to the rest?

Seriously. If only one group does horribly in a test when isolated from other groups one would come to the conclusion that something is wrong with the group since ONLY that group does horribly.

Mind you the article discusses living patterns and income. But we also know that income and intelligence (doing well in school) are linked (higher paying jobs usually require more schooling)

But a San Francisco Public Press analysis of school district statistics found that achievement correlates with income, not race. On average, Asians at racially isolated schools are more affluent than blacks and Latinos. Class seems to matter for all groups. Poor Asians struggle almost as much on standardized tests as do other impoverished students.
Cart meet horse. Income correlates to achievement because high paying jobs require relatively high academic achievement. Poverty is highly correlated to low academic achievement (and intelligence). The data on that is clear. Hence the "discovery" that poor Asians struggle academically would make sense as it is highly likely that those poor Asians are not as academically gifted as their richer peers. Also a part of the problem with the SF study (linked in the article) is that it uses school lunch qualification as an indicator of poverty. The problem with that is that the school lunch programs have been expanding and no longer simply include the poverty stricken. But lets look at this:
Asian students may also fare better at diverse schools. At the city’s most diverse high school, Ruth Asawa San Francisco School of the Arts, the academic performance index (which rates schools on a scale of 200 to 1,000) for Asian students is almost 900. But at the two high schools where the Asian population is highest, Galileo and George Washington, they score closer to 800.
Looking at the API 3 year average for Ruth Asawa we see:

1) Notice the black scores:439 - 577 average 541. Far below the school average of 844. So much for being in close contact with white students. And if being close to white students is supposed to help then what would the scores be like in their absence?

2) Asian scores: 876 - 926 average: 897. Above the average for the entire school as well as above the white average.

Now for Galileo High:

1) Do you notice one HUGE difference? The sample size at Galileo is an order of magnitude larger than that of Ruth Asawa. Seems to me that such a large difference implies an entirely different demographic set between the two schools. That said:

2) Black scores: 488-537. Average: 509. 0ver 200 points below the school average. Apparently being near so many Asians didn't help.

3) Asian scores: 803-827. Average: 818. Above the average for the school and above the average for the white students. Only 79 points behind Ruth Asawa.

In either case, trying to "concern troll" for Asian students when in both systems they outperform Wayyyyyy better than their peers (hard using that term with some of those disparities). I also want to bring the reader's attention to the following schools:

Gordon Lao
Charles Drew
Malcolm X Academy

Notice that the Asians in this highly Asian elementary school average 859. This school is about 90% Asian.

Notice the black scores at this all black school: 646. higher than the previously mentioned HS scores but well below the Asian scores.

Notice the black scores here at this small charter school. 684. Better than the HS scores previously mentioned but still way behind the Asians in their Asian only schools or where they are "integrated". And this is a charter school with presumably highly motivated parents and students AND a very small student body which guarantees a high level of interaction between students and teacher.

For the sake of comparison, Thurgood Marshal HS:

Blacks: 488 517. Average 495. Nearly 200 points off the school average of 645 (showing that Asawa and Galileo are schools of an entirely different class.

Asian: 714-766. Average: 737. Significantly lower than their peers at either highly Asian schools or in the "diverse" Performing Arts school. It could be argued that Asians in 'highly diverse" schools actually "suffer" Academically compared to their performances where they are in the vast majority or where certain other students are a small minority. Still though, as with every other school, Asians perform higher than the school average and about 300 points higher than the black students (at a school named for Thurgood Marshal!!!!)

Again, there is a strong implication in the data presented. Time to be clear eyed about it.