racially based academic standards?

[glen]

Speechless:
http://tampa.cbslocal.com/2012/10/12/florida-passes-plan-for-racially-based-academic-goals/

 

[DaveSimmons]

This is why Fark.com has a [ Florida ] tag.

---
"On Tuesday, the board passed a revised strategic plan that says that by 2018, it wants 90 percent of Asian students, 88 percent of white students, 81 percent of Hispanics and 74 percent of black students to be reading at or above grade level. "
---

I could possibly see having different goals for different economic classes, since well-off kids generally have a better head start, go to better schools, and have more support from their parents. But race-based? That's a great message to put out there to both parents and their children.

 

[Smoblikat]

Hope and change my friends.

This is the goal of affirmative action

 

[nehalem256]

Hope and change my friends.

This is the goal of affirmative action

This is more like the opposite of affirmative action.

Affirmative action would lower the standards for whites, blacks, and hispanics so that an equal % was at or above grade level.

 

[Smoblikat]

This is more like the opposite of affirmative action.

Affirmative action would lower the standards for whites, blacks, and hispanics so that an equal % was at or above grade level.

No, it makes it so minorities get special treatment. A great example is college admissions.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Asians are pretty smart. Whites not quite there. Hispanics are ok. Blacks just can't cut it.

Thanks Fl

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I thought the education system/schools were supposed to challenge our students equally to give them the best possible shot at a decent job/life.

 

[SheHateMe]

I thought the education system/schools were supposed to challenge our students equally to give them the best possible shot at a decent job/life.

Not in Florida, I guess.

No, it makes it so minorities get special treatment. A great example is college admissions.

This has nothing to do with Affirmative Action.

 

[Anarchist420]

I think they must just be trying to make the standards more uniform so that blacks will fail. The Republicans love forced uniformity because Hamilton is their man and he was a national socialist... he even has the same initials as Adolph Hitler, they both reportedly died from bullet wounds they wanted, and their favorite Amendment would even be the 14th one which are the 14 words of their lies. 14 is a really bad number, it is not to be touched.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I think they must just be trying to make the standards more uniform so that blacks will fail. The Republicans love forced uniformity because Hamilton is their man and he was a national socialist... he even has the same initials as Adolph Hitler, they both reportedly died from bullet wounds they wanted, and their favorite Amendment would even be the 14th one which are the 14 words of their lies. 14 is a really bad number, it is not to be touched.

So Asians needing to be at 90% and blacks at 74% qualifies as more equal?

 

[Anarchist420]

I'm going to make my mind wage intellectual revolution all by myself to make myself the mind by, of, and for the second Articles of Confederation!

EDIT: Not really... I mean the 2nd Declaration of TRUE Independence where each State voluntarily and without threats becomes a pro-secession microstate of its own. No treaties are necessary for liberty! In fact treaties hurt liberty.

 

[SheHateMe]

I don't understand why they need to set racial standards for a Statewide test....

 

[Anarchist420]

So Asians needing to be at 90% and blacks at 74% qualifies as more equal?

Kind of. Equality vs. inequality is a mostly false dichotomy.

 

[Anarchist420]

I don't understand why they need to set racial standards for a Statewide test.... __________________

To exercise the Republican Party's illusionist ideology of "dual sovereignty", that's why.

 

[theevilsharpie]

For a goal to mean anything, it has to be realistic. It's no secret that there's an educational achievement gap between different races, and ignoring that reality in the name of political correctness is a sure way to fail.

It sounds like Florida has set higher (if differing) goals for all groups, and as far as I'm aware, everyone gets the same standardized tests. It's not like students of a particular race are being ignored or left behind by this new plan.

404 Outrage Not Found

 

[Svnla]

So Asians needing to be at 90% and blacks at 74% qualifies as more equal?

Maybe because that how Asian students did in HS graduation compared with other races?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...-nation/who-isnt-graduating-from-high-school/

Asians = 92%
Whites = 82%
Blacks and Hispanics = 65% (God knows how sucking they are even more in inner cities).

No wonder why AA and set aside programs are exist. Funny how Asian students are kicking ass WITHOUT any AA and set aside programs while certain groups are still SUCKING bad even with AA/set aside programs.

 

[bfdd]

lol @ racism

of course racism is alive and well in this country, no one can just drop the fucking subject and just treat people like fucking people. Nope got to treat someone differently because of some perceived slight due to their "race". Nonsense, absolute nonsense that does nothing but perpetuate racism, incite divide and breed hate.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

lol. Asians are doing well enough on their own. They don't need some silly new age administrators and policies to make sure they reach that.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Hey the Nobel Prize is racist because the winners for science are disproportionately Jewish by capita. Need affirmative action there.

 

[glenn1]

I don't understand why they need to set racial standards for a Statewide test....

Because before they simply allowed students to fail at the natural rate for their race and/or ethnicity, which is a lot higher than the standards they're aiming for.

Personally, I'd rather not waste any more than the bare minimum of resources for poorly performing students since it diverts them from the students who actually want to learn. I'd even go so far as to force students who drop out to repay the state for the monies expended in the futile attempt to provide them an education.

 

[Geosurface]

A lot of previously confusing things click together and make sense once you realize that different populations having different histories, in different parts of the world, with different selection pressures for different attributes has a lasting effect on those populations, and that the human brain is every bit as susceptible to evolution's impact as the rest of the body.

If certain populations maintained civilizations with agriculture, architecture, having to plan for winter, etc. That environment favored certain traits in those humans in those environments. Other populations who were living a dramatically different style of life, did not face the same selection pressures.

Use your imagination a little bit and think what sort of traits, in everything from thought patterns, problem solving, conflict resolution, demeanor, breeding strategy, lactose tolerance or carbohydrate tolerance, etc etc might be favored by a colder climate, and less necessary in a warmer climate?

This isn't about value judgments favoring one type of existence over another, it's not about racism, or prejudging people, it's about using common sense and not thinking that humans have some special "get out of natural selection free" card, or that our skulls started shielding our brains from it's effects some several thousand years ago, in order to protect our feelings and our desire for equality. Nature doesn't do equality. Nature's one and only concern is fitness to survive and reproduce in a certain environment. It makes no value judgments.

Do not be shocked and amazed when people today who are more genetically similar to the people who first developed mathematics, architecture, science, economic systems, academic environments, etc are better able to excel in those areas now. The same traits which were selected for in their populations which in turn gave rise to those things, are still present and still giving them a leg up in those areas.

Also do not make the mistake of thinking this means that another population doesn't have ANY individuals like that, or that the first population has nothing BUT individuals like that. It's about percentages, you will find individuals of all types, in all populations. Just not in equal percentage.

 

[StrangerGuy]

A lot of previously confusing things click together and make sense once you realize that different populations having different histories, in different parts of the world, with different selection pressures for different attributes has a lasting effect on those populations, and that the human brain is every bit as susceptible to evolution's impact as the rest of the body.

If certain populations maintained civilizations with agriculture, architecture, having to plan for winter, etc. That environment favored certain traits in those humans in those environments. Other populations who were living a dramatically different style of life, did not face the same selection pressures.

Use your imagination a little bit and think what sort of traits, in everything from thought patterns, problem solving, conflict resolution, demeanor, breeding strategy, lactose tolerance or carbohydrate tolerance, etc etc might be favored by a colder climate, and less necessary in a warmer climate?

This isn't about value judgments favoring one type of existence over another, it's not about racism, or prejudging people, it's about using common sense and not thinking that humans have some special "get out of natural selection free" card, or that our skulls started shielding our brains from it's effects some several thousand years ago, in order to protect our feelings and our desire for equality. Nature doesn't do equality. Nature's one and only concern is fitness to survive and reproduce in a certain environment. It makes no value judgments.

Do not be shocked and amazed when people today who are more genetically similar to the people who first developed mathematics, architecture, science, economic systems, academic environments, etc are better able to excel in those areas now. The same traits which were selected for in their populations which in turn gave rise to those things, are still present and still giving them a leg up in those areas.

Also do not make the mistake of thinking this means that another population doesn't have ANY individuals like that, or that the first population has nothing BUT individuals like that. It's about percentages, you will find individuals of all types, in all populations. Just not in equal percentage.

I have a much simpler explanation without using genetic history. People are simply not equal beyond the basic rights, stop pretending they are.

 

[SheHateMe]

A lot of previously confusing things click together and make sense once you realize that different populations having different histories, in different parts of the world, with different selection pressures for different attributes has a lasting effect on those populations, and that the human brain is every bit as susceptible to evolution's impact as the rest of the body.

If certain populations maintained civilizations with agriculture, architecture, having to plan for winter, etc. That environment favored certain traits in those humans in those environments. Other populations who were living a dramatically different style of life, did not face the same selection pressures.

Use your imagination a little bit and think what sort of traits, in everything from thought patterns, problem solving, conflict resolution, demeanor, breeding strategy, lactose tolerance or carbohydrate tolerance, etc etc might be favored by a colder climate, and less necessary in a warmer climate?

This isn't about value judgments favoring one type of existence over another, it's not about racism, or prejudging people, it's about using common sense and not thinking that humans have some special "get out of natural selection free" card, or that our skulls started shielding our brains from it's effects some several thousand years ago, in order to protect our feelings and our desire for equality. Nature doesn't do equality. Nature's one and only concern is fitness to survive and reproduce in a certain environment. It makes no value judgments.

Do not be shocked and amazed when people today who are more genetically similar to the people who first developed mathematics, architecture, science, economic systems, academic environments, etc are better able to excel in those areas now. The same traits which were selected for in their populations which in turn gave rise to those things, are still present and still giving them a leg up in those areas.

Also do not make the mistake of thinking this means that another population doesn't have ANY individuals like that, or that the first population has nothing BUT individuals like that. It's about percentages, you will find individuals of all types, in all populations. Just not in equal percentage.

So what you're saying is...your race determines in one way or another your desire or ability to do things like...learning.

Blacks, Whites, Asians, and Latino's are not equal...evolution has made us all capable and incapable of certain things.

Basically what you're doing is generalizing an entire group of people

 

[Geosurface]

So what you're saying is...your race determines in one way or another your desire or ability to do things like...learning.

Blacks, Whites, Asians, and Latino's are not equal...evolution has made us all capable and incapable of certain things.

Basically what you're doing is generalizing an entire group of people

I believe I have more common ground and common purpose with people who think like I do, value the things I do, and have the same goals I do regardless of which racial group or combination of racial groups they come from, than I do with people who are from exactly the same racial group as me, but lack those values.

I think there are evolutionary reasons why the quantity of such people may be higher or lower in one group vs. another, but regardless of the raw numbers and percentages... on a personal level, I value those who think like I do more than those who look like I do.

I would choose to live in a neighborhood of responsible, law-abiding, intelligent blacks as the only white person over a neighborhood full of shiftless, meth-addicted, crime-committing, ignorant whites any day. No contest.

It's not a matter of valuing certain genetic groups over others, it's a matter of understanding how natural selection has left some groups with higher or lower percentages of certain traits, and in the valuing of those traits... taking that into account.

Make sense?

 

[SheHateMe]

Make sense?

Uh yea, I understood you the first time. Natural selection between races and all that.