I know you don't agree, but it's a fact. Ask any anthropologist.

Sure, I'll ask him/her if someone of any shade is raised in any other culture from birth, what tribe are they?
Bet I know the answer.

You should ask some Australian Aboriginals how they feel about their culture after being taken from their tribe as a child and raised in a white environment.

You might be surprised at their response.

It's considerably more than coincidence that children tend to share both culture and melanin with their parents.

How one is born is complete coincidence. You choose your morals, character, and everything else that matters in life.
Especially Canada.
Please enlighten me on the shade of Canadian culture?

I would not be surprised at all and don't agree with force, so you are not disagreeing with me at all.
That those children were kidnapped and jailed in those "schools/camps" is a tragedy worthy of FAR more world consideration.
That they are dark and have that culture has to do with their environment and how long they have been there, not how they think.
However, if an Abo child is adopted at birth by a light, American, suburban family, what is his/her culture?

Most (if not all) Aboriginal people will tell you that regardless of where they are brought up or by whom, they have a connection to this land that can't be broken. They are the land and the land is them. Similar to Indigenous American philosophy. I know people who were taken as very small children and lived in white society all their lives until such time as they could return to the land and their tribe. In many cases this is an incredible trial because there were no good records kept at the time.

To answer your question though, the child has both cultures. You can't stop someone being Aboriginal just because you put them in a white society.

I have said this numerous times, this segregation will likely encourage integration on a larger scale. Let me say that again, it will encourage integration on a larger scale. If we segregate the kids and get them a better education, then they can get jobs they would not normally get going to the schools we have now. Then when more black kids are holding jobs that makes more money, they can move to the suburbs and further integrate society.

I showed you that article and I can tell you I have the word of more than one person who knows what they are talking about. It makes sense anyways.

Why do you think black kids do worse than white kids in integrated schools? Until you can answer that question we can get nowhere with this subject.

But the results aren't the same. That means there is some variable that you are not looking at. Social pressures play a large role in this and it has been shown that social pressures can influence academic results. Look up Jane Elliot for an example.

No, the reason is much more psychological. It really doesn't have as much do to with the material as it does with role models and atmosphere.

Shit, I think I just broke my leg falling down that slippery slope.

No, this is not PC bullshit. This idea goes against PC, just look at the reaction given when this idea was brought up. PC says that if we put everyone together we will all be happy. But guess what, that isn't happening so we need to fuck the current method and find something that works. This is a potential method so we might as well give it a try.

Actually, this formula would work for that, but it would have to add a twist to it. Do you get the point of this segregation idea rkzenrage? I mean seriously, what is the logic behind it?

Really? Do I really need to pull out the stats? I mean, just for one, there is a study that says that a white guy with a criminal record has the same chance of getting a job as a black guy without a criminal record when they both have the same credentials. Most of the advantages you don't see and you can't even takes statistics of anyways. What do you think institutionalized means?

So you think that family is the sole influence on education? So that means my brother and I should have gotten the same scores throughout high school because our parents pushed us and emphasized education the same for both of us? But guess what, we didn't.

So you don't think teachers, environment, administration, friends, expectations from society, role models, and overall determination have no effect on how well a child does in school? Parents obviously have a large effect but it is definitely not the sole influence.

The Rabbit Fence. Great flick; I have a copy.

rabbit proof fence, and yes, it's a good movie. a classic in fact.

I hear the call of an open mind
leaving all that PC crap behind
Black-focused schools may not be the way
but blacks aren't served by the schools today

Don't be a fool or a PC jerk
If what we have just doesn't work
We need to try a set-up that's new
Why don't we see what these schools can do?

WRT RK's post #66, "Abo" is considered derogatory and offensive. Please use "Aboriginal" or "Indigenous".

And as a white college-educated 35-year-old male, I believe their IS racial advantage and disadvantage and since I care about social justice I want to see that addressed.
The best way to address it is at the education level, not at the job selection level. If that means tailoring education systems to the needs of disadvantaged minorities, then we should do this. I'd certainly like to see more black teachers, and I wouldn't mind trying black-only schools, but I'd like to see these schools have regular "mixer" events where students from different backgrounds do things together.

you aren't going to fix test results unless you can change the family. end of story. the color of skin doesn't matter. the emphasis placed on education and the living environment matter.

The family environment is of course enormously important - probably more important that the school. But that doesn't justify calling "end of story". School is still part of the story.
It's very hard to see how we can "change the family" without getting outrageously invasive. Short of forced fostering or institutionalization, there is only so much we can do. These extreme options were tried in Australia and are now regretted.
But we can work on school systems relatively easily. Getting the parents more involved in their kids' learning might help, but won't address the worst cases. We should do what we can, but not expect huge rapid progress.

But if the family cares deeply about the color of their skin, rightly or wrongly, it can be a reasonable way to meet them halfway. This project in theory already represents families who care, at least enough to actively send their kid to a different school that they believe will be better for them. The real improvements to the community would only possibly come after a few years of the school being in operation, when borderline parents, who maybe care but just don't have a clue what they're doing, have a chance to see the success of the students in the all-black school, and talk to the other parents in the community who already sent their kids there.

Tell the working mom in the ghetto that she has to read to her kids every night after her second shift, and she may just give up right there. But tell her (or rather, have her neighbors and friends show her) a way that she can get her children into a better environment just by applying for this free school, and maybe she'll do it. Is it really better because the teachers are all black, or because the kids are from families who care more and are able to build a better environment for themselves? Why does it matter? To care means to have at least some hope for success, and sometimes it helps to demonstrate the possibility of success to people in a more approachable manner.

Do you have any proof of this? I have given a source that states that by placing black children in a different environment, you can improve results. I also know of teachers with first hand experience in this area that support this idea so this isn't just a random article that contradicts reality.

Then that also brings up the question on why my brother and I had such different grades in high school. My best friend and his twin sister also had different grades too. Can you explain this if the sole factor is family?

Genetically, of course, but social pressures can have a large influence on people. If I take a kid with brown eyes and a kid with blue eyes with equal intelligence capacity and raise them to believe that people with blue eyes are genetically inferior to people with brown eyes, do you think even with the same family and school system that they will produce similar educational results?

Yes, it is an enormous factor. Why do you think they are trying to change the environment for black kids?

Hilarious! Man that was awesome!

Speaking of Australia (and I typed Abo because I wasy being lazy and did not want to type the whole word... I consider lots of things lots of things, whaaaa, you know I don't believe in offensive words).

Ah, another one of your intelligent posts that do nothing expect prove your ignorance in this debate. I wouldn't expect more from someone with a, correct me if I'm wrong, 170 IQ. :p

Now, since you can't seem to grasp what I am getting at, I will have to take this in small steps and hopefully you can follow along.

I initially said,
which seems like a paradox but if you attempt to understand the situation as a whole we can see that this actually does make sense.

Let look at our current situation and I will be using examples with random numbers so they mean nothing.

Right now, the United States is very segregated racially and I am assuming we would like to see integration on a larger scale or at least not fight integration.

So lets look at a public high school in New York where, for the 100 black students, the graduation rate is 50%, only 5 of those 50 that graduate move onto college, and only three of those five actually graduate from college. Lets assume that those three get good jobs and are able to move out of the inner city into an area that is largely white while the other 97 stay in the inner city. Besides that, since the low graduation rates and consequently large crime right, whites and business are reluctant to move into that neighborhood.

Well, the people in that area decide to try something new and work with these black-emphasized schools. Lets take another 100 kids. Since these schools are suppose to raise graduation and college acceptance rates, 75 of the kids graduate from high school, 15 move onto college, and 12 graduate from college. That means instead of three, we have twelve kids that will get good jobs and move into mainly white areas. Not only that, but because of the higher graduation rate and consequentially lower crime rate, businesses and other racial groups will move into the area raising the integration of that area.

Get it? The segregation of schools will help black kids get better jobs and move out of the inner city. With the current integration schools we just see the kids segregate themselves and the cycle continues.


Now I am assuming because of your comment that had absolutely no substance or backing to your side and only consisted of a failed attempt to attack my credibility you have no actual reply and given up on the subject. Am I right?

Thanks LJ, you have learned to fit right in.
In no way will an all black school encourage what they are stating it will.
No better jobs, no fewer drop-outs, none of it.

Well maybe LJ was right?

Anyways, do you have anything to support your views? I have given my side and backed myself up many times and you don't provide anything.

And we shouldn't prevent this from happening just because we have doubts. I have already stated this before, the current system is NOT working. We are not integrated and we will not be as long as we follow the same path. We might as well try something new and risk the chance of it failing, even though evidence goes against this doubt.

Amen
It's a fact that things aren't working for some pupils.
There seems to be an attitude that it is somehow pandering to a select group of people. But problems in education cost more money for society further on down the line. There's a higher cost to not trying.

This is a way to try and change things before people end up claiming benefits, committing crime, getting free healthcare.

What's the worst that can happen? Really?

There was a very interesting programme called The Unteachables on Channel 4 recently about disruptive and soon-to-be-excluded children of 14-15. I watched it huffily at first, thinking "The system isn't failing, they are! They need to learn to fit in, they'll have to for the rest of their life!"

The series changed my mind. Of the 16 kids selected for the study course, 9 (a clear majority) completed it and were back at school making progress the next school year. It changed their whole attitude to school and learning. I realised that some pupils do need a different approach - and who suffers if they don't get it? Well, the children of course. And then me at a later date.

Sure, as long as you feel the same way about a white only school when someone wants one.

No, LJ chose to ignore the multiple times I stated that the tests were incorrect and that I don't believe that I am that intelligent and chose just to use that one small part of the statement to try to hurt me, which you are now doing too because you are exactly like him. Someone who uses something they know about someone to try to hurt them when you simply disagree with them instead of debating them with your intellect like a stand-up human being. The proof is clear, shown by your above action.
A good thing, now I know who you are.

If this addresses me - all but one of the kids in the CH4 documentary in the were white. Race (black culture, call it what you will) is less of an issue in the UK than socio-economic status. I am all for targeting children whose needs aren't being met by the current education system. I would rather see something tried than call the wah-hah-hambulance saying "It's not fair to the kids who are already succeeding!" because they are the one who will have to deal with an uneducated sub-class in 20 years time.

As long as we look at people as different based on their shade we will CAUSE this problem and will never be able to solve it with anything that continues that behavior. Racism is racism is racism, the only way to end it is to acknowledge that there is only one race, the human one and treat us all like the single race we are, African descendants who each have different familial backgrounds, with different distances from the equator for different periods of time.
I am not "white". Even if one wanted to look at me like that, I am Cherokee, Scottish, Irish, Welsh, Apache, Caribbean and probably African American (we are 99% sure, other than the fact that we are all African)... so what am I? I am human, anything else is a lie and needs to be openly treated as such.
As soon as we treat all who treat each other as anything but human as a negative the better.

Don't be so hung up on skin colour RK - the title of the report was misleading.
It is about cultural differences.

I have cultural differences to people born in my own country to white families.
I have cultural differences to people born in this country to Asian families.
Admitting this does not make me racist.
Everyone I know has overcome these differences via education - but I am aware I don't meet the people who haven't. But in the last four months I've heard them - on the bus, in the Job Centre, in the Council Office, at alcohol counselling.

Different cultures do not deserve affirmative action. But they do deserve the best chance anyone can give them at being a valuable member of society and that starts in childhood.

To say you typed Abo because you were being lazy is exactly why there's a problem with race. Aboriginal people have been vicitmized ever since white settlement. All they want is for their race to be respectfully named. Believe me, if there were an Aboriginal person viewing your words, they would be incredibly offended by being called an 'abo'.

Education is working towards a more inclusive mix of curriculum in Australia. There is much more emphasis on the study of culture which focuses on the historical aspects. We definitely don't have it right. In fact, we're almost as far away from right as any other nation. I do believe we're on the right track though. Helping students understand the differences in culture goes a long way towards breaking down the metaphorical barriers between different groups. It takes away the 'hoodoo's' associated and creates a meaningful learning environment.

With regard to the comment about what happens at home has more influence. That's true, however what some families lack in social capital can only be supplied by outside influences. In most cases this is school. If the parents are racist or have closed minded views, then there's not much the school or any other government institution can do about it, but if the state has an opportunity to 'educate' the child in social matters which will (hopefully) create a better world view for the child, then why shouldn't it happen? This of course then means the children of that child will be one step further up the ladder and so on, so that hopefully after a number of generations the community at large is less racist etc. This is my utopia where education is concerned.

So what does that have to do with schools for minority groups? Not a whole lot, but if what I have dreamed of happened, there wouldn't be a need for people to send their kids to 'white only' or 'black only' schools (even if that were the case proposed here which I acknowledge it's not). It would mean that every child regardless of race, creed or religion would benefit from the same level of education.

So, some cultures are less intelligent than others?
Elitist.
So ironic, because the most ignorant and lest educated people I know, by population, locally, here are light skinned. NO ONE wants to start any special programs or affirmative action for them... why is that?
By your logic, those who are the least educated here should have the affirmative action, right?
You may want to read some of my previous posts on affirmative action.
It only harms those it purports to help and the idea of it is insulting.
I have worked in more than one company that actively used affirmative action... it does not work.
When someone gets a job that they are not qualified for, or even the most qualified for, it only harms them, their group and everyone involved.

No argument with me there. History is always going to be "based on a true story", written by the winners and those with an ax to grind. Mitigating that as best as one can is the job of an educator.
This proposal flies in the face of that mandate in EVERY WAY POSSIBLE.

Typing? WTF?

rkz...it doesn't matter what your reason is for making a racist statement/comment. The only thing that matters is you did whether you choose to agree or not. To be honest, I'm not even Aboriginal and I found the word offensive.

Education is changing. Students are learning to find facts, not just listen to stories told by someone older than them. That's the difference between rote learning and more critical analysis techniques.

As an example, the school my children go to teaches philosophy to all students. Now this might sound like a real wank, but in reality what it's doing is teaching them to question facts and learning how to think in different ways. This is a great strategy for the school, and I support it fully.

And the "hilarious man, that was awesome" was so much different than what I did? I know mine was much more personal but you just took a small part of my post that could very easily be taken wrong and then tried to hurt my creditability by laughing at it with no backing on what you thought was wrong with my statement.

The reason LJ attacks you is not out of pure sport, but because you set yourself up for it. For example, you get very pissy when someone takes your words out of context or you have to repeat yourself but then you just go and do it to other people. If you wouldn't have said what you did, I would have never even thought about using that attack. I am not offended by what you said, just as I am sure you are not offended by what I said, but we can both agree of the frustration we both get when faced with a response such as that.

I will support a white-emphasis school when there is the need for one. Black-emphasis school's could have the possibility of significantly increasing the educational results of black children but there is nothing in comparison for white children.

Either way, if you want to go to a white-emphasis school you can send your kid's to a private school or move to the suburbs, there isn't much difference.

Yes. But for any major changes to happen we need society to change and that will prove to be extremely difficult.

I never said anything about skin colour and intelligence or culture and intelligence. In fact if it were a matter of intelligence the children would be receiving special help anyway.
Did you read my post about the fact the disruptive pupils in the series I watched were all white but one? I'm not going to pretend I know what percentage one in sixteen is, but it's a pretty overwhelming white majority. Would I like disruptive children to be put into a program that has a possibility of working, given they are failing in the current system? Hell yes.
What? I have said (in agreement with other posters) that if you help children at an educational level - the same way you help children with problems in maths, reading etc - then you won't NEED to make allowances/ exceptions based on colour/ race/ culture at a later date.

NOTE TO RKZENRAGE: A black-only school was not proposed. White-only schools are irrelevant.

Are readin', writin' & 'rithmatic, black or white?

It's the same in the states, the difference is in the stats. There's probably a much higher correlation between color and social class here (because there is a VERY big correlation in the states). The problem is not their color, it's their moneys. Now, if you're poor, you have a good chance of being black. If you're black, you have a fantastic chance of being poor.

And rk, my initial reaction (and one that continued until about two days ago) was that this kind of segregation is a bad bad bad idea. It probably stemmed just from a negative association with the words "____-only schools." However, I've changed my mind for two reasons: first, the powers of segregation are not institutionalized really, but are self perpetuating (as piercehawk did a pretty good job of describing, saving me some typing), and second (and more importantly) is that the school will not actually be segregated in rule, just in content. The only way to change these socially stratifying forces is to give special attention to the group that is in need. It might not be "fair" to the rest of the world, but frankly I couldn't give a crap, we've got it alright and we can spare some money and time.

The main point is a large section of our society is getting crapped on from every direction. I could care less who's fault it is, or if someone deserves the help or not, I'd just be happier with a lower class that was more socially mobile... which was supposed to be the American dream.

They're not proposing a black-only school.

You shouldn't be, it is accurate.

Racism is not just a white thing, baby.

Hate to say it, but here in the Mid-South, 90% of our public schools are black-only. Not a racist comment; a fact. My brother and I were the only whites on our bus (standing room only by the time it got to us), and that was 1974.