• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

America’s Schools are More Diverse Than Ever, But the Teachers are Still Mostly White

Why do you need a bachelors to teach basic education? Thats probably a problem, too much expense required to get and keep a job that doesn't pay enough to justify the expenditure and time.

Education programs themselves typically constitute two years of a teacher-candidate’s life.

In that timeframe, you are being educated not only on pedagogical theory and direct experiences, but some manner of legal expectations (in some ways, not nearly enough).

In some ways, the push has been to make it easier for people to get into the education field by making *those* programs even shorter, but I think that’s probably the opposite approach that needs to happen. We graduate tons of educators who haven’t been exposed to content necessary to follow state or federal laws and expectations.

That becomes a problem for district and state administrators, because when an individual or systemic issue arises, it falls upon those folks to ensure that the right people are receiving the right information so that they are following correct procedure or practice. And they are fairly correct in raising the idea that their involvement should be minimal and that we need to do a better job with preparation programs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Last edited:
The Mecklers and Rabinowitz' of the world are outraged that Latino and black children are being taught by....blech...white teachers! Nevermind the fact that Meckler and Rabinowitz admit that being a teacher is often a thankless, unhappy profession with low pay:


People of color are less likely to go into teaching and less likely to stay in it. Education requirements, low pay, unhappy workplaces and lack of respect all can contribute. The result: At every step on the road from high school student to classroom teacher, people of color fall away.

It's not enough white children make up less than 50% of American students , now the Meckler Rabinowitz' demand that the teachers be non-white as well. Diversity means openly discriminating against the men & women who teach your children now, according to the Meckler Rabinowitz' of the world.

Given the fact that less than 50% of American children are white, and non-whites are either not educated enough, or simply not interested enough in becoming teachers, what might be in store for the American educational system in 20 years, when all those pesky pale white teachers retire?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/local/education/teacher-diversity/

Maybe if we worried less about what the teachers' skin color was and more about what they're teaching we'd be better off. You know that whole MLK thing in action. :cool:
 
The racial imbalances of faculty are important to consider, not just because of some of the intangibles discussed in the article, but also because of the biases that school staff have been known to display toward those who come from different backgrounds than they.

How you address the staffing imbalance is another matter entirely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
With a long history of posting threads designed to provoke racial animus. Like I said. :shrug:

Oh, I assure you I have no questions about your motives.

I dont think many question your motives as it has been obvious for a long time. We already know your motives.

The racial imbalances of faculty are important to consider, not just because of some of the intangibles discussed in the article, but also because of the biases that school staff have been known to display toward those who come from different backgrounds than they.

How you address the staffing imbalance is another matter entirely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The agricultural industry is 90% white. Who wants to refuse food until the agricultural industry is racially balanced? Volunteers?
 
The agricultural industry is 90% white. Who wants to refuse food until the agricultural industry is racially balanced? Volunteers?

It’s your prerogative to be childish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
It’s your prerogative to be childish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Oh, but it isn't childish to publish an article in WaPo whose main point is that white people lack the 'flavor' needed to teach those spicy brown people. And you believe Meckler and Rabinowitz when they say the poor educational outcomes of black and Latino students is the fault of white teacher's skin color.
 
The agricultural industry is 90% white. Who wants to refuse food until the agricultural industry is racially balanced? Volunteers?

This is hilarious. You lost. You are not a soldier of odin, you are not an aryan ubermenschen, you are not a defender of the white race. Just an edgy ****lord who desperately wants validation in your life. You can change and not get badly beaten in a “race war” you will be fighting alone as even the ones you call your people rebel against you or you can give it up and actually do something productive.
 
Oh, but it isn't childish to publish an article in WaPo whose main point is that white people lack the 'flavor' needed to teach those spicy brown people. And you believe Meckler and Rabinowitz when they say the poor educational outcomes of black and Latino students is the fault of white teacher's skin color.

If it is really so hard for you to 1) understand that a student internalizes messages and that some of those messages may not be helpful for their self-esteem and eventual life goals 2) that street-level bureaucrats may do their job in a biased or unfair manner, contrary to the goals of your legislature, the United States Congress, or federal courts....

Then I have nothing to tell you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
If it is really so hard for you to 1) understand that a student internalizes messages and that some of those messages may not be helpful for their self-esteem and eventual life goals 2) that street-level bureaucrats may do their job in a biased or unfair manner, contrary to the goals of your legislature, the United States Congress, or federal courts....

Then I have nothing to tell you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Teachers are street level bureaucrats? They're harmful to the self esteem and life goals of minority students? Wtf are you talking about man?
 
Teachers are street level bureaucrats? They're harmful to the self esteem and life goals of minority students? Wtf are you talking about man?

Yes. Someone has to carry out the duties of the government and deliver or carry out those duties to the actual citizenry. That’s the definition of a street-level bureaucrat. Every time you go to the DMV to register your vehicle, you’re engaging with a street level bureaucrat, who is tasked with performing discrete tasks asked of the government entity.

They can be. They can also be beneficial to the self-esteem and life goals of minority students.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Last edited:
Yes. Someone has to carry out the duties of the government and deliver or carry out those duties to the actual citizenry. That’s the definition of a street-level bureaucrat. Every time you go to the DMV to register your vehicle, you’re engaging with a street level bureaucrat, who is tasked with performing discrete tasks asked of the government entity.

They can be. They can also be beneficial to the self-esteem and life goals of minority students.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

There are plenty of inner city schools that hire black teachers, and the students are still underperforming. Yet Asian immigrants and first generation Americans of Asian backgrounds excel academically. The problem is culture, and parallel societies, not white teachers.
 
The agricultural industry is 90% white. Who wants to refuse food until the agricultural industry is racially balanced? Volunteers?
Why is everything always about race with you? (haha, just kidding, we all know why)

Also, if you think who grows our food is the same as who teaches our children, then you probably ought not post on the Internet.
 
It's not enough white children make up less than 50% of American students , now the Meckler Rabinowitz' demand that the teachers be non-white as well. Diversity means openly discriminating against the men & women who teach your children now, according to the Meckler Rabinowitz' of the world.

Although I will admit that I have not taken a deep dive in the relevant studies or datasets for this specific issue, I must point a few things out.

There are good reasons to suspect that cultural and ethnic background are correlated, if only because of the influence of parents and family. People will share some biological trait with their parents and broader family outside of cases of adoption and they will obviously tend to share at least some cultural traits with them as well. For reasons that should strike absolutely everyone as perfectly obvious, people from different cultural background may not all agree on the definition of a good life. The choices we make in life all involve trading off one inconvenience for another. You can put more effort into your studies, but only at the expsense of other activities. You can start a business of your own during your spare time, but only if you give up some of your leisure. If you go to college, it will be time consumming and will probably involve accruing some debt and working long hours after class. You can prefer to work longer hours, be more flexible on your schedule for your employer and spend less time with friends and family once you are out on the labor market. It's the kind of things that will tend to increase your income and your prospect for professional advancement later. You can go for a career involving risk or you can go for a career that is more stable.

Why would anyone expect that people from different cultures would all come down with the eact same picture of how to balance these sacrifices? The problem is that if I am correct in assuming that culture influences how we make those choices and that culture is related to your racial background, you will get a pattern where Black people, Asian people, White people, Jewish people, etc. make different choices throughout their lives and that will tend to land them in different circumstances. Demographic factors can also play a role in producing variation along the ethnic dimension: not all groups necessarily have the same age or sex composition, the same birth rates, etc.

The problem with the "quota crowd" is then simply put. The only way that you can look at a difference between the ethnic composition of the general population and the ethnic composition of a profession as evidence of discrimination is if you assume away the impact of all other possible factors on outcomes. If you think in terms of "white" versus "non-white," you have a binary or dummy variable. The "bias" in proportion can be obtain in a regression framework by regressing a variable measuring outcome on a constant and the dummy variable. Their point of view is that this univariate model will not incur an omission bias. This is strikingly stupid, not to mention it would be easy to demonstrate to be false with adequate data. The truth is that when you look at any group of people based on any characteristic, you likely have a complicated interplay of biological factors, cultural factors and institutional arrangement in the broader society. It's incredibly unlikely that you can boil every down to just one source of variation (discrimination). In some cases more than others, assuming away biology is also going to be stupid (a case in point would be sex differences in personality, skill sets and life priorities). It's not easy to uncover discrimination because you cannot just assume all of the problems I mentionned out of existence. You have to filter them out of the way to isolate the things in which you are interested.
 
A student internalizes messages and that some of those messages may not be helpful for their self-esteem and eventual life goals.

Everyone has built and progressively updated an image of themselves, as well as have formed some kind of ideal picture of themselves. Obvious, there is absolutely no reason for any of this to peculiarly well articulated and explicit, although you can suspect that it is very useful to add details and depth to this picture. The ideal is also elusive for the obvious reason that no one who is even remotely honest with themselves can claim to be the man or the woman they could be. That's my problem with the "self-esteem" crowd. They think that if you pet people in the back, they will come to see themselves in a better light and move on to become very productive. This makes sense as far as moral is concerned, but it doesn't make sense when it comes to the self-image of people. The reason is that if you are far from your ideal and you know that you're not doing much of anything to get there, you are not wrong to not be happy with yourself. The "self-esteem" crowd has everything backwards. You don't feel good and then get busy doing something productive on account that you feel good. It's the other way around. There is a bunch of things that you should be doing per your own judgement of what you should be doing. You know it and you also know that you're cheating at your own game, breaking your own rules when you do not do it. The way you stop looking down at yourself is simple: convince yourself to do at least a few of the things you think you should be doing -- or, perhaps, stop doing things you think you should not be doing. If you do this even for just a few days, you'll slowly earn your own respect.

Students don't need to be congratulated ad nauseam. If you face challenges forthrightly, if you get down to business and try to overcome the obstacle, you will learn to respect yourself just as will others. And if you fail at some point, getting back up on your feet and finding a way to either tackle of circumvent the problems that go you down in the first place is what you should be doing. There is nothing that can make you feel like you could conquer the whole world than seeing yourself take a hit and keep going after what you want.

[T]hat street-level bureaucrats may do their job in a biased or unfair manner, contrary to the goals of your legislature, the United States Congress, or federal courts.

The issue is that I am not a racist: I don't think that people are biased because the tone of their skin doesn't match the tone of the skin of people around them.

I have a friend with whom I play tennis over the summer. We often meet up and talk off the court. He is considerably older than me, but he's such a wonderful friend. Anyhow, when he was younger and his kids were studying in high school, he would have kids from the whole neighborhood over and teach them about mathematics, history and litterature, helping them out with their homework and their assignments. He happens to be black, some of the kids happened to be asian and others happened to be white. It never occured to anyone that this was a problem.

Frankly, comments like those made by the radical left are disgusting. And mind you, they will dump all over any ethnic group as soon as it benefits them. They're power hungry authoritarian lunatics.
 
Last edited:
Although I will admit that I have not taken a deep dive in the relevant studies or datasets for this specific issue, I must point a few things out.

There are good reasons to suspect that cultural and ethnic background are correlated, if only because of the influence of parents and family. People will share some biological trait with their parents and broader family outside of cases of adoption and they will obviously tend to share at least some cultural traits with them as well. For reasons that should strike absolutely everyone as perfectly obvious, people from different cultural background may not all agree on the definition of a good life. The choices we make in life all involve trading off one inconvenience for another. You can put more effort into your studies, but only at the expsense of other activities. You can start a business of your own during your spare time, but only if you give up some of your leisure. If you go to college, it will be time consumming and will probably involve accruing some debt and working long hours after class. You can prefer to work longer hours, be more flexible on your schedule for your employer and spend less time with friends and family once you are out on the labor market. It's the kind of things that will tend to increase your income and your prospect for professional advancement later. You can go for a career involving risk or you can go for a career that is more stable.

Why would anyone expect that people from different cultures would all come down with the eact same picture of how to balance these sacrifices? The problem is that if I am correct in assuming that culture influences how we make those choices and that culture is related to your racial background, you will get a pattern where Black people, Asian people, White people, Jewish people, etc. make different choices throughout their lives and that will tend to land them in different circumstances. Demographic factors can also play a role in producing variation along the ethnic dimension: not all groups necessarily have the same age or sex composition, the same birth rates, etc.

The problem with the "quota crowd" is then simply put. The only way that you can look at a difference between the ethnic composition of the general population and the ethnic composition of a profession as evidence of discrimination is if you assume away the impact of all other possible factors on outcomes. If you think in terms of "white" versus "non-white," you have a binary or dummy variable. The "bias" in proportion can be obtain in a regression framework by regressing a variable measuring outcome on a constant and the dummy variable. Their point of view is that this univariate model will not incur an omission bias. This is strikingly stupid, not to mention it would be easy to demonstrate to be false with adequate data. The truth is that when you look at any group of people based on any characteristic, you likely have a complicated interplay of biological factors, cultural factors and institutional arrangement in the broader society. It's incredibly unlikely that you can boil every down to just one source of variation (discrimination). In some cases more than others, assuming away biology is also going to be stupid (a case in point would be sex differences in personality, skill sets and life priorities). It's not easy to uncover discrimination because you cannot just assume all of the problems I mentionned out of existence. You have to filter them out of the way to isolate the things in which you are interested.

Meckler and Rabinowitz are journalists, not scientists. They write for the Washington Post, a left leaning newspaper. Your comment is far too nuanced and inclusive of diverse variables that might explain difference in outcomes amongst cultural, ethnic and racial populations. They want the simplest answer possible for explaining difference in outcomes, and it must be one that conforms to the the expectations of a left leaning, mainstream media company. So, they simply blame disparities on the demographic that they blame virtually every one of society's problems on. This is their formula; identify a problem within society- find a way to blame white people for it- done.
 
Meckler and Rabinowitz are journalists, not scientists. They write for the Washington Post, a left leaning newspaper. Your comment is far too nuanced and inclusive of diverse variables that might explain difference in outcomes amongst cultural, ethnic and racial populations. They want the simplest answer possible for explaining difference in outcomes, and it must be one that conforms to the the expectations of a left leaning, mainstream media company.

Although the details of their mistake are specific the left, I do not think that the left has a monopoly in this regard. Rather, it seems to be tied to a broadly human cognitive tendency.

Most people most of the time put the near totality of their efforts toward establishing the consistency of their theories with observed data. But that is not how they should think about it. That's the black swan problem all over again: no matter how white swans you see, short of seeing all of them, you can never conclusively say that all swans are white, yet it takes just the one black swan for your presumption to be conclusively disproven. If you want to convince yourself or anyone else that your theory is a good theory, look for evidence that it is wrong. If you whack as hard as you can at something and it still survives, there's a decent chance it might be good enough to be useful.


Trying to falsify what you believe to be true is the right way to do things, but we more often than not fail to do just that.
 
In K-12 I had 4 black teachers and 1 of them I had twice because he changed grades same year I did. Didn't have a single Hispanic teacher.
 
The teachers and administrators mostly suck, that is the much more important problem.

The deeply into this Dark Age we cant manage such basics as education anymore.

We are so screwed.
 
Why do you need a bachelors to teach basic education? Thats probably a problem, too much expense required to get and keep a job that doesn't pay enough to justify the expenditure and time.

That's why we need career oriented 1-2 year degree/certification programs. The notion that many jobs require a bachelors degree is the biggest scam going!
 
This kids teachers were almost all white... and he says this: "That created tension with his mother. “I would go home and start talking about the weather and gas prices and my mom would be like, ‘Where did you get that from?’ ”"

ummmmm.... what the ****? the kid talks with his mom about issues and the weather and that bothers her? Is he supposed to come home and care and talk about 50 Cent instead? And the problem according to the article is supposedly white people...? Who apparently stirred his interest about real life things?

This article is stupid, racist and anti-white.
 
Probably. After all, homeschooled children typically score higher on standardized tests than public school children - and many of their parents have no degrees at all.

That does not reflect the quality of the education... more higher income and educated parents will home-school their kids than lower income and uneducated ones... obviously skewing the statistics.
 
"Diversity" here implies that the race of the teacher should match the student. This is a racist concept. If a black student needs a black teacher, maybe they also need a black bathroom and a black water fountain?

My mom and other older white female teachers faced big discrimination and racism from the predominantly Latino schools and school district in which they worded. They were pressured continually in the hope that they would quit... and most did (or transferred). The Latino teachers and Principal were very racist and eventually won out. This was twenty years ago too...
 
Back
Top Bottom