White Students No Longer Majority in Schools

[Katzndogz]

The title of the OP is slightly misleading, probably in an effort to make the issue broader than it really may be.

White students are no longer a majority in PUBLIC schools.

While this certainly has something to do with birth rates and illegal immigration of Hispanics, it also has something to do with homeschooling and private schooling being more available. Free accredited Online Education is becoming a more popular option for whites while Free and Reduced Lunches are a more popular option for Hispanics.

Online Free Burritos are not very nutritious.

Rather than multiculturalism, this is an indication of some massive resegregation. Public schools will become de facto nonwhite, and soon non Asian as well. A side effect will be, those without children in public schools will not be very likely to vote for increased funding for public schools, nor for politicians that support increased funding.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Man, you have to wonder how many ways they can find to beat down white people ?

anyone notice that lately?

everything from how there is white privilege to the schools now

You think they have a hate going on for white people or something?

sheesh

They want us gone and destroyed. I am afraid our children and grandchildren will end up being genocided or enslaved because of the left's hate.

 

[Unkotare]

Did someone mention multiculturalism? This liberal buzzword for the inability to assimilate certain immigrants is testament to that failure itself.

There is no such "failure" in the US, despite the efforts of those on the far left to make it so.

 

[Unkotare]

This is the primary reason the US lags behind largely homogeneous wealthy countries in Europe and Asia.

There is no such "lag" occurring.

 

[Unkotare]

East Asians are not going to allow multiculturalism. The future is theirs.

Cultures are always changing. In East Asia as well.

 

[RoadVirus]

White Students No Longer Majority in Schools

For the first time ever, U.S. public schools are projected this fall to have more minority students than non-Hispanic whites enrolled, a shift largely fueled by growth in the number of Hispanic children.

White Students No Longer Majority in Schools

Which means more and more schools will have to dumb down the standards to make sure the growing Hispanic population of kids can graduate.

 

[RoadVirus]

tell you what all you pasty faced scare shitless morons, remember if you go into a nursing home or medical facility be careful that you don't mouth off about minorities as they will be the ones taking care of you an your loved ones

How civil of you.

Liberals *shakes head*

 

[Pennywise]

Getting worried about not having the majority? Tough shyt...

Whites are the only race not entitled to fight for their majority status. European culture is the only culture not allowed preferential treatment.

You are a zombie.

 

[RoadVirus]

White Students No Longer Majority in Schools

For the first time ever, U.S. public schools are projected this fall to have more minority students than non-Hispanic whites enrolled, a shift largely fueled by growth in the number of Hispanic children.

Non-Hispanic white students are still expected to be the largest racial group in the public schools this year at 49.8 percent. But the National Center for Education Statistics says minority students, when added together, will now make up the majority.

About one-quarter of the minority students are Hispanic, 15 percent are black and 5 percent are Asian and Pacific Islanders. Biracial students and Native Americans make up a smaller share of the minority student population.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan called the changing population a seminal moment in education. "We can't talk about other people's children. These are our children," he said.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com White Students No Longer Majority in Schools

This sucks. The report a few years ago said that we had 5 years before children under 18 becomes majority non-white clearly is wrong. Wrong because children pre-public school are even higher non-white percentages. Get ready for the shit to hit fan.

Good. Sooner whites realize there's more ethnicities in the world, the sooner they'll get over any racist feelings of superiority.

Multiculturalism and education is the solution, not the problem.

More Liberal "We're one big happy family" bullshit.

I'm sure everyone wishes the world were like that, but guess what: IT ISN'T!!!

Once you get it through your thick Liberal skull that "multiculturalism" is the biggest social fuckup ever conceived, you'll see things a hell of a lot more clear and you'll be better off in the end.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Good. Sooner whites realize there's more ethnicities in the world, the sooner they'll get over any racist feelings of superiority.

I'm actually pained when I read moronic statement like this which indicate a deep imbibing of propaganda. Bearing witness to the actual cheering on of upcoming social fracture. The ignorance of history combined with mindless championing of 1984-style propaganda is like driving by a gory car-wreck.

When in history has multiculturalism every been more successful for social peace than what is generated by a unified culture? Where in the world are today are we seeing more peaceful multicultural societies than culturally unified societies. How's multiculturalism working out in Iraq today, how about Syria, how about Rwanda, how about the former Soviet Union, how about Yugoslavia, how about Czechoslovakia? Nowhere today and never in history has this been a better model for how to construct society. When it's been tried, as in the Soviet Union and the Ottoman Empire it's fractured the nation or empire into pieces. Canada came within a hair's breadth of fracturing.

But who cares about history or social dynamics so long as one can strut around and act all fucking enlightened by parroting mindless liberal propaganda.

Multiculturalism and education is the solution, not the problem.

It's a fucking cancer which is destroying society:

A bleak picture of the corrosive effects of ethnic diversity has been revealed in research by Harvard University’s Robert Putnam, one of the world’s most influential political scientists.

His research shows that the more diverse a community is, the less likely its inhabitants are to trust anyone – from their next-door neighbour to the mayor. . . .

The core message of the research was that, “in the presence of diversity, we hunker down”, he said. “We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it’s not just that we don’t trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us. . . .

When the data were adjusted for class, income and other factors, they showed that the more people of different races lived in the same community, the greater the loss of trust. “They don’t trust the local mayor, they don’t trust the local paper, they don’t trust other people and they don’t trust institutions,” said Prof Putnam. “The only thing there’s more of is protest marches and TV watching.”​

 

[Meathead]

This is the primary reason the US lags behind largely homogeneous wealthy countries in Europe and Asia.

There is no such "lag" occurring.

You would need to review American placement in a variety of socioeconomic indicators to understand what is happening globally. It is inevitable that with globalization and competition from other countries, the US becomes less economically dominate. We are spending much capital on education, and yet our schools perform at mediocre levels.

America is producing grads with degrees in Gay & Lesbian Studies and Inner-City Education while the far east is producing scientist engineers. This does not bode well for our future.

Finally, the demographics of the US population is likely to leave a lack of semi and skilled workers which will have to be increasingly supplemented from abroad and could create a more permanent underclass of unskilled Americans, many of whom will be unassimilated minorities and thus multiculturalism.

 

[Rikurzhen]

The title of the OP is slightly misleading, probably in an effort to make the issue broader than it really may be.

White students are no longer a majority in PUBLIC schools.

While this certainly has something to do with birth rates and illegal immigration of Hispanics, it also has something to do with homeschooling and private schooling being more available. Free accredited Online Education is becoming a more popular option for whites while Free and Reduced Lunches are a more popular option for Hispanics.

Online Free Burritos are not very nutritious.

OK, it's a technically misleading title, but within a few years the majority of children entering public and private kindergarten will be non-white for in 2011 the majority of births were non-white:

The U.S. Census Bureau today released a set of estimates showing that 50.4 percent of our nation's population younger than age 1 were minorities as of July 1, 2011. This is up from 49.5 percent from the 2010 Census taken April 1, 2010. A minority is anyone who is not single-race white and not Hispanic.​

 

[Rikurzhen]

Can you both say that again, couldn't hear you clearly through your white hoods.

Oh look everyone, someone is peacocking about how enlightened he is. A zero-calorie comment which serves no damn purpose other than to showboat and enhance his reputation.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Did someone mention multiculturalism? This is the primary reason the US lags behind largely homogeneous wealthy countries in Europe and Asia.

"Lags Behind?"

He didn't indicate a metric. I'd find it entirely plausible that there is more social trust in Japan, less racial strife in Poland, less need to stomp on liberties in order to buy racial peace in Lithuania.

 

[Flopper]

Oh, yes, experimental schools. Look at the real world. Keeping elementary students in at risk schools an extra two hours a day would accomplish nothing except increasing truancy. Young kids begin to shutdown after lunch. Remember these kids aren't there to learn. There're there because a parent sent them, a free breakfast and free lunch.

Hey, hold up there buddy!!!! You were the one who objected to my point that some problems are not solvable. Now you're telling me to look at the real world. That's funny.

These experimental schools illustrate the point that there is actually a solution which exists. The problem here is scalability, idealism and politics.

Put this question to liberals. Would you support a program for troubled students which mandated twice as many hours of instruction per school year than is the case for normal students? Oh yes, incidentally, this will result in a segregated school system where these Intensive Schools are primarily filled with minority students. The bright side however is that this works to close the achievement gap.

Politically, the segregation which results as a byproduct of sorting by ability is going to piss off idealist whites, sensitive minorities and it will really rile up the parents of troubled white kids who now get stuck into these massively minority schools.

In effect this would be a separate but "more than equal" school system for this type of schooling would require more resources to accomplish the same proficiency levels as seen in traditional schools.

I very much doubt people will actually put student outcomes above their perceptions of how schooling SHOULD function.

Is the study you reference concluding that poor performing students do better with more hours spent in class as opposed to better instruction? If so, I would appreciate a link to it.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Oh, yes, experimental schools. Look at the real world. Keeping elementary students in at risk schools an extra two hours a day would accomplish nothing except increasing truancy. Young kids begin to shutdown after lunch. Remember these kids aren't there to learn. There're there because a parent sent them, a free breakfast and free lunch.

Hey, hold up there buddy!!!! You were the one who objected to my point that some problems are not solvable. Now you're telling me to look at the real world. That's funny.

These experimental schools illustrate the point that there is actually a solution which exists. The problem here is scalability, idealism and politics.

Put this question to liberals. Would you support a program for troubled students which mandated twice as many hours of instruction per school year than is the case for normal students? Oh yes, incidentally, this will result in a segregated school system where these Intensive Schools are primarily filled with minority students. The bright side however is that this works to close the achievement gap.

Politically, the segregation which results as a byproduct of sorting by ability is going to piss off idealist whites, sensitive minorities and it will really rile up the parents of troubled white kids who now get stuck into these massively minority schools.

In effect this would be a separate but "more than equal" school system for this type of schooling would require more resources to accomplish the same proficiency levels as seen in traditional schools.

I very much doubt people will actually put student outcomes above their perceptions of how schooling SHOULD function.

Is the study you reference concluding that poor performing students do better with more hours spent in class as opposed to better instruction? If so, I would appreciate a link to it.

Look at the KIPP schools. Their strategy doesn't focus on some magic solution from teachers, instead they swamp the kids with immersion - if you add up all the extra instructional time over a school year it nearly doubles the class time found in public schools. On top of that the teachers are on call for questions after they leave the school - the pupil can phone them for help in the evening. Then there are the obligations that the parents have to assume.

The strategy is sound and it draws from a key point of developmental psychology - the more you control the environment of a child the less you allow the child's inclinations to manifest. This becomes more and more difficult to achieve as a child matures - they begin to exert themselves. In this education model, the environmental influence crowds out inclinations.

The key point is that the material is masterable even for these troubled kids - they just need more time to digest the material - twice as much time as a normal student.

A NEW REPORT documents again that middle school students in the Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) outperform their counterparts in traditional public schools -- and debunks some of the arguments often used to discount KIPP's success. One reason KIPP students learn more is that they are in school more. KIPP's experience, and that of other schools with extended learning, should prompt the nation's schools to face up to the need to change the school calendar.

The report last month by Mathematica Policy Research looked at 22 KIPP middle schools across the country, including two in the District, and found consistent, significant gains. Half the schools showed gains in math for students after three years in the school that were equivalent to 1.2 years of extra instruction, and 0.9 year of additional instruction in reading.

The report, commissioned by KIPP, debunked the argument that the schools succeed by "creaming" the best students from the districts they operate in. In fact, researchers said KIPP students are more likely to be low-income and black or Hispanic and, prior to their enrollment in KIPP schools, to have lower-than-average test scores in their local school districts. The study also found nothing unusual about attrition rates at KIPP schools; in other words, the schools are not pressuring weak students to leave in order to make the stats look good.

What does set KIPP apart is the amount of time students are in school. A regular school day is from 7:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., plus extra weeks in the summer. Some schools even offer Saturday programs. That's up to 600 more hours a year in school than children who attend traditional public middle schools. The extra hours, said KIPP spokesman Steve Mancini, "allow us to turn 'or' into 'and,' " since a common complaint of teachers is not having time to cover the curriculum and deal with individual student needs. The extra time also allows more planning and collaboration among teachers.​

 

[Samson]

Did someone mention multiculturalism? This is the primary reason the US lags behind largely homogeneous wealthy countries in Europe and Asia.

"Lags Behind?"

He didn't indicate a metric. I'd find it entirely plausible that there is more social trust in Japan, less racial strife in Poland, less need to stomp on liberties in order to buy racial peace in Lithuania.

So, we're depending upon what we personally find Plausible?

The population is Japan, and most of Europe is dying. Death rates outnumber births.

This seems to be a particularly important characteristic where the USA does not "lag."

 

[Rikurzhen]

"Lags Behind?"

He didn't indicate a metric. I'd find it entirely plausible that there is more social trust in Japan, less racial strife in Poland, less need to stomp on liberties in order to buy racial peace in Lithuania.

So, we're depending upon what we personally find Plausible?

The population is Japan, and most of Europe is dying. Death rates outnumber births.

This seems to be a particularly important characteristic where the USA does not "lag."

No, we're not finding our own definitions, we're acknowledging that your assumption of economic metrics was too restricted and was not implied by Meathead.

As to your concluding comment, let me get philosophical with you. If we magically transferred all 310 million Americans to Africa and simultaneously transferred 310 million Africans to America to take our place, would America still be America?

 

[Flopper]

Hey, hold up there buddy!!!! You were the one who objected to my point that some problems are not solvable. Now you're telling me to look at the real world. That's funny.

These experimental schools illustrate the point that there is actually a solution which exists. The problem here is scalability, idealism and politics.

Put this question to liberals. Would you support a program for troubled students which mandated twice as many hours of instruction per school year than is the case for normal students? Oh yes, incidentally, this will result in a segregated school system where these Intensive Schools are primarily filled with minority students. The bright side however is that this works to close the achievement gap.

Politically, the segregation which results as a byproduct of sorting by ability is going to piss off idealist whites, sensitive minorities and it will really rile up the parents of troubled white kids who now get stuck into these massively minority schools.

In effect this would be a separate but "more than equal" school system for this type of schooling would require more resources to accomplish the same proficiency levels as seen in traditional schools.

I very much doubt people will actually put student outcomes above their perceptions of how schooling SHOULD function.

Is the study you reference concluding that poor performing students do better with more hours spent in class as opposed to better instruction? If so, I would appreciate a link to it.

Look at the KIPP schools. Their strategy doesn't focus on some magic solution from teachers, instead they swamp the kids with immersion - if you add up all the extra instructional time over a school year it nearly doubles the class time found in public schools. On top of that the teachers are on call for questions after they leave the school - the pupil can phone them for help in the evening. Then there are the obligations that the parents have to assume.

The strategy is sound and it draws from a key point of developmental psychology - the more you control the environment of a child the less you allow the child's inclinations to manifest. This becomes more and more difficult to achieve as a child matures - they begin to exert themselves. In this education model, the environmental influence crowds out inclinations.

The key point is that the material is masterable even for these troubled kids - they just need more time to digest the material - twice as much time as a normal student.

A NEW REPORT documents again that middle school students in the Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) outperform their counterparts in traditional public schools -- and debunks some of the arguments often used to discount KIPP's success. One reason KIPP students learn more is that they are in school more. KIPP's experience, and that of other schools with extended learning, should prompt the nation's schools to face up to the need to change the school calendar.

The report last month by Mathematica Policy Research looked at 22 KIPP middle schools across the country, including two in the District, and found consistent, significant gains. Half the schools showed gains in math for students after three years in the school that were equivalent to 1.2 years of extra instruction, and 0.9 year of additional instruction in reading.

The report, commissioned by KIPP, debunked the argument that the schools succeed by "creaming" the best students from the districts they operate in. In fact, researchers said KIPP students are more likely to be low-income and black or Hispanic and, prior to their enrollment in KIPP schools, to have lower-than-average test scores in their local school districts. The study also found nothing unusual about attrition rates at KIPP schools; in other words, the schools are not pressuring weak students to leave in order to make the stats look good.

What does set KIPP apart is the amount of time students are in school. A regular school day is from 7:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., plus extra weeks in the summer. Some schools even offer Saturday programs. That's up to 600 more hours a year in school than children who attend traditional public middle schools. The extra hours, said KIPP spokesman Steve Mancini, "allow us to turn 'or' into 'and,' " since a common complaint of teachers is not having time to cover the curriculum and deal with individual student needs. The extra time also allows more planning and collaboration among teachers.​

It's certainly looks like Kipp Schools are successful in improving performance. However, I have to wonder whether that's because the school is basically working with students that are easier to teach and much more committed than their peers. Parents as well as students are carefully screened before being being put in a pool to be selected by lottery. They have to commit to a longer school day, a strict discipline code, parental contact, and a half hour to an hour a day more homework than their peers.

Kipp schools being a charter are state funded, enjoy federal grants in the tens of millions, and substantial private donations. In may areas, their costs are well above public school per student costs. Teachers in Kipp schools typically receive a salary that is higher than they would receive in neighboring public schools. I think Kipp schools are among the best charter schools offering real opportunity for economically disadvantaged students with the drive and determination to succeed, although I suspect they are a relatively small percentage among their peers.

If these schools had to be supported by vouchers and payments from low income parents would they have the same record of success? I doubt it.

Knowledge Is Power Program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
KIPP Public Charter Schools | Knowledge Is Power Program

 

[Rikurzhen]

It's certainly looks like Kipp Schools are successful in improving performance. However, I have to wonder whether that's because they are basically working with students that are easier to teach and much more committed than their peers.

Yes the kids and parents are more committed but this isn't the key factor. That commitment and concern were always there, in fact they have to be present before the parents/student even decide to apply to KIPP lotteries. If the concern and commitment are present during the child's enrollment in public school how come they don't translate into improved performance? The reason the kid is flailing about in public school has little to do with his own commitment or his parent's oversight - it has to do with how instruction is presented and how much time he has to process the material. If he doesn't have the time, then he's always progressing with incomplete knowledge and in the parts where the curricula is designed as a ladder, with latter lessons dependent on mastery of earlier lessons, the kid just gets lost, lost, lost because his foundations are weak and crumbling.

Parents as well as students have to commit to longer school day, a strict discipline code, parental contact, and a half hour to an hour a day more homework than their peers.

Absolutely right. The idea is to swamp that kid, not give him a chance to be distracted. School all the damn time. Luckily this works in getting the kids to proficiency level, which is what we're after. That kid is definitely having less fun and freedom in his life than his public school peers, both in the bad schools and in the very good schools. He has to work twice as hard to get the same results as the normal and good students.

Kipp schools being a charter are state funded, enjoy federal grants in millions, and private donations. In may areas, their per student expenses are well above public school per student costs. Teachers in Kipp schools typically receive a salary that is higher than they would receive in neighboring public schools. I think Kipp schools are among the best charter schools offering real opportunity for economically disadvantaged students with drive and determination to succeed, although suspect they a realtively small percentage among their peers.

Scaling up KIPP creates some problems:

1. The charge of "that's not fair" will ring across the land when some kids are forced to go to school for longer school days, then on Saturdays while their friends are out playing, then for one extra month per year while their friends are enjoying summer break.
   
2. The charge of "that's not fair" from achievement-focused students and parents from wealthier neighborhoods who might fight for the same level of resources being devoted to their kids to help them actually accelerate and enter college at 14. Others may argue that it is unfair to spend more to educate some students, primarily racial minorities and that white and Asian kids are being short-changed by this scheme.
   
3. The liberals and racial leaders will have heart attacks when they see a racially segregated school system because you actually need to do that - having the kids go to the same schools would cause massive headaches - some kids and teachers are there for an extra 3 hours per day, the class schedules for high schools would be a nightmare, there would be no crossover from one stream to another, etc. The question here boils down to "Do you want the kids to achieve or do you want to maintain an integrated system? Pick one only."
   
4. The white parents whose kids are educationally deficient objecting about the fact that their kid is now having to attend a 90%-95% minority school and will try to get him bumped up into the normal-paced schools.

If these schools had to be supported by vouchers and payments from low income parents would they have the same record of success? I doubt it.

If this was scaled up the efficacy of the KIPP approach would diminish. Plenty of parents and plenty of kids just couldn't meet the standards. This drops us back to the "There is no solution" level. This assuming, of course, that state funding foots the bill. Remove generous state support and you reduce further the number of students who can be accommodated.