Enso

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 4:26 p.m.

That millions of people already know these statistics and the majority don't.

USRepublic

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 4 p.m.

To stretch your argument.... It must not be news to black people Which is more pathetic?

godsbreath64

Wed, Dec 14, 2011 : 12:44 a.m.

Are you having a bad day keeping up "the compound"? If you can take seriously someone fawning over Don Bee and his regurgitated fascism, then I can see why. Mass media during electoral college years fail to retain substantive credibility. Also, calling someone defending the constitutional America as a schtick clarifies difficulties that may go beyond today. So, ...

thecompound

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 8:07 p.m.

^^That's what you got out of the New York Times article Bob was referring to?? Your schtick is getting old.

godsbreath64

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 5:45 p.m.

Donny is darkness chasing light. Where does that leave you? Constitutions are what matter, not the dogma of class. Nice try, though.

DBH

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 1:54 a.m.

Did you read the article? If not, see my response to @Macabre Sunset (6:37 PM). If you did read the article, I fail to see the reason for your remark.

Usual Suspect

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 3:18 a.m.

Because they're better behaved.

a2citizen

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 12:37 a.m.

Actually, no. If you read the article you would have noticed: Latinos make up 60 percent of district enrollment, whites make up 32 percent of the enrollment and blacks less than 8 percent. So in a nutshell the issue is: Why does 32 percent of the enrollment only receive 22 percent of the expulsions?

DBH

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 8:52 p.m.

@a2citizen (and @thecompound), if what this boy did is characterized by the school district as "sexual assault and obscenity" when, in fact, it clearly was not (as described in the article), that calls into question the validity of the other charges for which he was previously disciplined. Even IF the other charges are valid, based on the description of the "sexual battery" in question, the gravity of this latest violation of his is a trumped-up charge on the part of the school. If they wanted to expel him, then expel him based on what he ACTUALLY did, not some made-up charge that clearly does not conform to what occurred. Otherwise, if you think the school's behavior in this case is justified, the message you are sending the boy (and anyone else who knows of the case) is that the end justifies the means. "Yeah, we all know that he really didn't commit sexual battery and obscenity, but he's been a bit of a troublemaker and if we charge him with this then we can expel him and get him out of our hair." Is this the lesson you want him and others to learn? Sure, a school-by-school comparison would be nice, but that does not invalidate the usefulness of statewide statistics. Both are, or would be, informative. Why they did not do the school-by-school analysis, I don't know. Maybe it will be published at a later date, maybe not. That doesn't mean that the statewide stats should be ignored. Baby and bathwater sort of thing, you know?

a2citizen

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 3:44 a.m.

@dbh: you said it again..."...statewide evidence..." Honestly, I have a problem with this analysis. The study had ample opportunity to compare punishments in the SAME SCHOOL. But the researchers chose to overlook this. Different schools have different administrators with differing opinions. As far as the expelled kid goes...he obviously needs a level of oversight that the local school is not able to provide. According to the article he was involved in no less than five separate incidents prior to slapping the girl. So that probably means he was actually involved in many more incidents that were not reported. Had he slapped my daughter I would want him expelled. It may only be a "slap" but it is a measurable level of violence. He is eleven and has already been involved in several assaults. When he gets older the slaps turn punches, then to trigger squeezes. I am definitely not a fan of public school administrators but when they finally throw in the towel on a kid I won't second guess the decision. I would rather see teachers expending their energy on educating kids that want to learn rather than raising kids that parents don't want to raise. If that means farming the miscreants out to a community school, well, hey, it's a cold cruel world. Maybe his mother should take him to work with her one day where she supervises farm labor and point out to the fields of grapes...and say, kid if you don't take your education seriously I can get you a job here in 6 years. The kid made it to sixth grade in a public school. How long do you think he would have lasted in a private school?

thecompound

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 3:24 a.m.

@DBH, I think another example is the boy who got expelled for calling the substitute "fine" (or cute, depending on which news source you read). From the different stories I read about that instance, it sounded like the "sexual harrassment" was more of a last straw than anything else. But now the kids mom wants to sue the school, so that kind of backfired for the school.

DBH

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 1:42 a.m.

@a2citizen, he was expelled for sexual assault and obscenity. He had a history of other issues, yes, but the expulsion was precipitated by this charge which was clearly bogus. Either he was, or he wasn't, guilty of sexual assault and obscenity. If he wasn't guilty of the charge (and I hope, given the actual circumstances, that you do not feel he was), then the expulsion was unwarranted. Regarding statistics, you would then just ignore statewide evidence of racial discrimination in Texas and North Carolina?

a2citizen

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 12:24 a.m.

Yes, I read the article...I didn't consider that sexual assault. However, the punishment meted out is in response to continuous infractions over several years, including "flipping off" his third grade teacher and two other instances of assault. The article had plenty of opportunity, and it seems resources, to discuss two different punishments for the same crime in the same school. It passed on that opportunity. Unfortunately, I am left with the sense that the Center for Public Integrity is trying to fit round pegs into square holes If two students at Tappan get two different punishments for the same infraction you have a problem. If a student at Bach gets a different punishment than a student at Slausen you might have a discussion, but you don't necessarily have a race issue.

DBH

Mon, Dec 12, 2011 : 11:55 p.m.

Did you read the actual article? One example of "sexual battery and obscenity" was a prepubescent boy who turned 11 one day before he and another boy ran up to a female classmate and swatted her on the rear, laughing and saying, "Want to see what football players do?" "The girl testified that she felt uncomfortable and embarrassed by the prank. McKinley told the panel that his client wanted to apologize, which the boy did. McKinley then explained, quoting from statutes, his position that the boy's behavior, while unquestionably wrong, did not rise to the legal definition of sexual battery at his age. For a student to be guilty of sexual battery, McKinley said, the school's burden is to prove the pupil acted out in a 'lewd and lascivious' manner to obtain sexual gratification or to commit sexual abuse." Think his action fits the definition? And I think statistics by school districts, counties, or state give a broader view of the treatment of students, since it reduces the variability inherent in smaller numbers. I would not discourage school-by-school comparisons, but both types of analyses are useful.

DBH

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 3:27 p.m.

@Macabre Sunset, the AnnArbor.com article is about "School discipline practices nationwide" not just Ann Arbor.

Macabre Sunset

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 3:34 a.m.

I've lived in North Carolina. What takes place there has no relevance to what takes place in Ann Arbor. There is a lot of racial tension in the South that I've never seen here. Here, we have a system with more black principals than white principals. We're spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to try and solve a problem that can't be solved without changing how toddlers are parented. We have plenty of anecdotal evidence that black children can't be disciplined in the Ann Arbor schools. I understand this is the latest cause celebre from the left wing. It's not doing these children any favors. Not disciplining problem students leads to students who are ill-suited for society, unemployable and completely dependent on the left wing for basic sustenance. Which might be what the politicians want, but it's not what we as a society need.

jcj

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 2:16 a.m.

"According to the policy center's report, discipline data collected in 2010 in North Carolina showed that of all black students cited for a first-time cell phone violation in schools, 32 percent were given out-of-school suspension. But less than 15 percent of white students received the same punishment for the same violation." Now here is something concrete that if true is wrong any way you slice it.

DBH

Mon, Dec 12, 2011 : 11:43 p.m.

Did you actually read the article? "The analysis also found that 97 percent of disciplinary actions in Texas were at the discretion of local school directors, not based on laws requiring expulsion. Black students were 31 percent more likely than students of other ethnicities to receive discretionary discipline when the researchers controlled for variables other than race. A separate report released in October by the National Education Policy Center at the University of Colorado, Boulder, highlighted evidence of racially disproportionate discipline elsewhere. According to the policy center's report, discipline data collected in 2010 in North Carolina showed that of all black students cited for a first-time cell phone violation in schools, 32 percent were given out-of-school suspension. But less than 15 percent of white students received the same punishment for the same violation." Reconcile the above with your statement that "...what the 1% seems to want (those in ivory towers in charge of the school systems) is for white students to be punished more harshly for the same crimes."

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 4:38 p.m.

Agree with you on every point except one, DonBee. The most vociferous opposition to this will not come from teachers. It will come from parents. If you doubt this, I encourage you to look at the discussions in A2.com every time a proposal for a balanced school year is considered by the school board. Parents' priorities: 1) Babysitting service 2) Convenient vacation times 3) Their children will be promoted no matter how poorly they perform. 4) Education? What's that? And, of course, for far too many families, sports fall above education, as well. Parents are the problem. Good Night and Good Luck

grye

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 1:55 p.m.

Nice comeback Don.

DonBee

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 3:48 a.m.

Mr Briegel - First I don't advocate cutting taxes. I do advocate using the current tax money better. I also don't advocate cutting more money from education. Again I do advocate using what is there better. I would seriously consider what will be abhorrent to most current educators. I would seriously look at the following changes to our system: 1) group students by ability, not by age 2) no social promotion, you get it or you don't move up 3) year round school - not a balanced calendar but a 48 week school calendar - 1 week off a quarter 4) adopting the German system for tracking students - some get on the college track, some on the apprentice track, some on (put your idea here) track by 7th grade. 5) Increase vocational education 6) Increase the use of in school use of on-line classes for advanced students I can hear the screams now. But I really think this is the right path forward. We see people complaining that students don't have the skills for "XYZ" job in the articles posted today. We see a high drop out rate in our "College or Bust" education system today. We see a high unemployment rate on graduates from college over the last two years. Maybe it is time to try to match education to the student. Germany, a major power house in manufacturing, engineering and many other areas, is on to something with their education system.

Michigan Man

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 1:10 a.m.

Such an old story - nothing new hear at all! The academic elite,liberal left and union educator stooges have been trying to solve this problem for decades - and it only get worse. Think of the wasted dissertations at U of M, billions of $ down the drain and still no solution. Even worse with Team Obama and the former Chicago public schools superintendent (Arne Duncan - basketball playing buddy of BO) now in charge. Really glad we still have private/religious schools so those really interested in a serious education will not get jacked around in the public system.

thecompound

Mon, Dec 12, 2011 : 11:22 p.m.

They could start by ending their contract with snake oil salesman Glenn Singleton (PEG) and use that money as a start.

AMOC

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 3:34 a.m.

Ciba- What locations / countries / school systems do you think have no problems with disparate rates and severity of discipline for some group(s)? I have looked at educational practice in many countries and can't think of one.

a2citizen

Mon, Dec 12, 2011 : 11:49 p.m.

"...Asian students..." Seeing as how the study be discussed focused on San Francisco that is a very interesting question.

DBH

Wed, Dec 14, 2011 : 3:38 p.m.

I don't know if the "libs" would be all over a research project supported by Tom Monaghan or not. Speaking only for myself (and, for what it's worth, I consider myself an independent, not a liberal, though I personally think such labels are next to worthless), it would depend on the nature of the project, of course. My god, man (or woman), think for yourself! Don't just jump to a conclusion based on some preconceived notion. Not all endeavors are "liberal" or "conservative." You have relegated your world to two containers. Life is a lot more complicated than that. As I stated in my original reply to you, @outdoor6709 and @cinnabar7071, I did not "...ignore the evidence provided for [me], i.e., funding my Mr. Soros." I, in fact, commented that the funded projects "seem fine to me." They still do. Regarding ignorance, your original comment "I think, perhaps, that DBH may simply choose to look the other way" when, in fact, "[you] don't know [me] from Adam" is what prompted me to characterize your remark as ignorant. And that, my friend, IS the point.

DBH

Wed, Dec 14, 2011 : 3:37 p.m.

First of all, @sbbuilder, if you don't see the ad hominem fallacy in your argument, I am not sure that anything else I can share with you will be helpful. Nonetheless, I will try. Which of the projects cited by @outdoor6709 would you consider to be a "liberal cause?" Neither you nor @outdoor6709 has addressed this. "When does Mr. Soros fund anything but liberal causes?" Check out these links: <a href="http://philanthropy.com/article/Soros-Pledges-100-Million-to/124325/" rel='nofollow'>http://philanthropy.com/article/Soros-Pledges-100-Million-to/124325/</a> ("...Human Rights Watch, which investigates and publicizes human-rights abuses worldwide.") <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/oct/12/george-soros-clean-energy-pledge" rel='nofollow'>http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/oct/12/george-soros-clean-energy-pledge</a> ("...clean energy technology to tackle climate change.") <a href="http://foundationcenter.org/pnd/news/story.jhtml?id=156500007" rel='nofollow'>http://foundationcenter.org/pnd/news/story.jhtml?id=156500007</a> ("...to help eliminate poverty in dozens of African villages."). Any of these look "liberal" to you? They appear to me to be projects concerned with the state of humanity and of the world in general to me. These are not "liberal causes." [continued below]

sbbuilder

Wed, Dec 14, 2011 : 5:34 a.m.

And, DBH, perhaps you can show me examples of my ignorance. Otherwise, lay off the pointess digs, OK.

sbbuilder

Wed, Dec 14, 2011 : 5:32 a.m.

DBH Since when does Mr Soros fund anything but liberal causes? The fact that he has substancially supported research is, in my view, reason enough to call into question the integrity of this organisation. Say, for example, if Tom Monaghan were to ante up a couple of million to support research, the libs would be all over that, wouldn't they? Clearly I don't know you from Adam, but that isn't the point. The point is that you have chosen to ignore the evidence provided for you, ie funding by Mr Soros. Would Mr Soros shoot himself in the foot by footing the bill for conservative research? You know how the game is played. I think not. You just don't want to say so.

mun

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 10:08 p.m.

Yes, investigating prosecutorial misconduct is such an immoral concept, so it must be liberal.

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 5:17 p.m.

It certainly is understandable why an organization concerned with integrity of public officials and of the news media might be perceived as having a liberal agenda. Good Night and Good Luck

DBH

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 5:02 p.m.

For those readers with an open mind regarding the Center for Public Integrity, check out <a href="http://www.iwatchnews.org/about" rel='nofollow'>http://www.iwatchnews.org/about</a> and <a href="http://www.iwatchnews.org/about/our-organization/frequently-asked-questions" rel='nofollow'>http://www.iwatchnews.org/about/our-organization/frequently-asked-questions</a> . Make up your own minds as to whether or not this organization is &quot;liberal,&quot; &quot;conservative&quot; or neither.

DBH

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 3:24 p.m.

@outdoor6709, thanks for that information. All of the projects reportedly funded by George Soros seem fine to me. Are you saying or implying that their nature is somehow liberal? If you are attacking the CPI because of their acceptance of some funding from Soros without looking at the objectivity of the actual investigations, you are promoting a variation of an &quot;argumentum ad hominem,&quot; to wit: &quot;An ...argumentum ad hominem is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it. Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as a logical fallacy.&quot; ( <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem" rel='nofollow'>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem</a> ) The info provided by you, in fact, has no logical basis for supporting the claim that the CPI is a liberal organization, only that SOME of their funding was provided by a wealthy person known to espouse liberal issues. They are not an identity. @cinnabar7071, having opinions contradicted by facts can be a little discombobulating. How do I handle such instances? I change my opinion, of course. In this case, though, I have seen no facts that contradict my impression (it actually wasn't an opinion; I was neutral on CPI until I investigated it) that CPI is not a liberal organization. And @sbbuilder, on what basis are you claiming that I &quot;look the other way?&quot; You know me well enough to make that statement? Obviously, you don't. If and when you offer an opinion in the future, may I suggest that you make it based on knowledge and not based on ignorance? Thanks.

godsbreath64

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 2:56 p.m.

Cinabar, per your response to mine to counter-republic's &quot;contribution&quot; above, &quot;don't you hate it when facts mess up your opinion, or do you just look the other way? How do you deal with this?&quot;

sbbuilder

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 1:53 p.m.

I think, perhaps, that DBH may simply choose to look the other way. Doggone, but when your precious little paradigm gets poked, and poked good, it really smarts. That's the trouble with funded research of this kind. I'm sure there's another research organisation out there trying its level best to prove the opposite. Instead, in hard science, you come up with a premise and then try your hardest to disprove it. Then you submit the results to peer review. Those folks then poke away, trying to disprove your results. When everyone is on the same page, then the results are published in a reputable journal. See that going on here?

cinnabar7071

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 1:26 p.m.

DBH dont you hate it when facts mess up your opinion, or do you just look the other way? How do you deal with this?

outdoor6709

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 1:07 p.m.

DBH, The same bio also says, &quot;Funding from George Soros The Center has been criticized for accepting large funds from George Soros, a politically active billionaire and critic of the Bush administration.[28][31][32][33] The Web site of one of Soros' organizations, the Open Society Institute, discloses four grants to the Center, all made before his entry into the 2004 presidential contest. They are: A $72,400 one-year grant in 2000 supporting &quot;an investigative journalism series on prosecutorial misconduct.&quot;[35] A $75,000 one-year grant in 2001 supporting &quot;an examination of wrongful convictions resulting from prosecutorial misconduct.&quot;[36] A $100,000 one-year grant in 2002 &quot;to investigate the political spending of the telecommunications industry on the federal, state and local levels.&quot;[37] A $1 million three-year grant in 2002 &quot;to support the Global Access Project.&quot;[38]&quot;

DBH

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 1:52 a.m.

Please provide evidence that the Center for Public Integrity is a &quot;left-wing organization.&quot; One reference ( <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Public_Integrity" rel='nofollow'>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Public_Integrity</a> ) does not support that claim. &quot;The Center receives funding from a large variety of foundations, philanthropic, and private donors. The Center does not accept anonymous donations, government grants and does not lobby, promote or endorse any legislation, policy, political party, or organization.&quot;

KeepingItReal

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 4:33 p.m.

Part of the problem is that racism is alive and well which contributes to this problem but an even bigger problem is the Black community unwillingness to &quot;own&quot; up to its kids and the fact that so many kids do go to school unprepared to function in that environment. It's like watching the Detroit situation. The leaders there do not want to take ownership of the City's financial crisis, because they know it really reflects negatively on them in failing to provide real leadership for it people. So, it's easier to deflect the problem on &quot;racism.&quot; No one is buying that excuse anymore and the same with this problem. The Black community need to take ownership of its children and commit to doing what is necessary to ensure that they exceed academically. While its a feel good activity, hosting a banquet is not going to do it.

USRepublic

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 3:23 p.m.

go...eat... What you seem to be offering here amounts to an iambic pentameter of dribble....

godsbreath64

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 2:50 p.m.

So identifying the source, if not license of racism indicates &quot;thinking nothing will ever change, and the chains will remain(?)&quot; I am happy to report that I don't quite follow what you were trying to say. (whistle)

cinnabar7071

Tue, Dec 13, 2011 : 1:22 p.m.

godsbreath64 with your thinking nothing will ever change, and the chains will remain.

godsbreath64

Mon, Dec 12, 2011 : 11:38 p.m.

&quot;Where do you think the problem really is here?&quot; No-Fault corporatism, ..., histrionics o' status quo , ..., shear fear of competing with alternative pigments on an even playing field, ..., mass media, ..., ... , ...