Clueless In Seattle
If it weren’t for the 46,000 remaining captive students for whom it is responsible, it would be hard to regard the Seattle school board as anything other than a bad joke. Indeed, it is so easy to ridicule the Seattle school board that I have done so on more than one occasion — most recently here; earlier here and here.) Sometimes, however, simple description is more effective than attempts at parody (at least my attempts), as revealed by this article in the Seattle Times, “Racism tough to tackle — or even talk about — for Seattle School Board.” (HatTip to Richard Nagel via Hans Bader), which describes the Seattle schools board’s stumbling inability even to discuss race coherently.
In a January meeting to discuss hiring a new superintendent, for example,
Seattle School Board member Darlene Flynn suggested candidates have a “clear understanding of institutionalized oppression” when it comes to improving grades of African-American students.Discussion revealed, however, that the board itself wasn’t anywhere near having a clear understanding of “institutionalized oppression.” some Board members demanded that a successful candidate be able to answer their questions about how racism affected school performance, but they could not agree on the correct answer or answers.
Since 1986, the district has launched at least three plans to close the achievement gap between African-American students and other groups. An effort in 2002 pledged to erase racial disparities in three years. But last year, 73 percent of white 10th-graders passed all three parts of the Washington Assessment of Student Learning, compared with 23.8 percent of black students.This is the school board, recall, that appointed a psychologist, Caprice (!) Hollins to examine textbooks, curriculum, etc., to root out “institutionalized racism.”The district has sought to determine how discrimination affects student learning, and its mission statement, adopted in 2004, reads: “We must recognize the impacts of institutional racism on student success and question any excuses for not making necessary changes.”
Institutional racism, as defined by the district, is “an indirect and largely invisible process that operates automatically and results in less access to services and opportunities of a society based on race.”
She also runs workshops on cultural diversity for administrative staff and oversees teams of teachers, principals and parents who monitor race relations in schools.Alas, perhaps because “institutionalized racism” is, as the board defined it, a “largely invisible process,” she hasn’t had much luck in exterminating it, although she’s closing in on ... summer vacation.
In a recent interview, Hollins said she found no specific district program that was institutionally racist, but she pointed to summer break as an example of systemic problems. Initially devised to allow school-age children to help with farm labor, summer break serves no educational purpose, Hollins said, and the disruption puts struggling students further behind.You will recall Caprice Hollins’ other capricious acts from previous posts, but in case you’ve forgotten:
Last year, Hollins’ Equity and Race Relations Web site attracted national attention when she defined “individualism” and a “future time orientation” as “those aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and whiteness and devalue, stereotype and label people of color....”Predictably, most of the victims of this multiculturalism run amok are minority students. Whether or not as a result of this excessive, and at times unintentionally humorous, emphasis on multiculturalism and diversity, the proportion of white students in the Seattle have plummeted from 68.% to 42.1% over the past thirty years. (See chart accompanying this article.)After an outcry, she removed the statement, and has yet to finalize a new one. Her interim message reads: “Our intention is not to put up additional barriers or develop an ‘us against them’ mindset; nor is it to continue to hold onto unsuccessful concepts such as a melting pot or colorblind mentality.”
Say What?
The article does mention that white enrollment has declined precipitously in the last several decades, as you point out. It however, doesn't say in what manner this has occurred. Have the racial demographics of Seattle itself changed to that extent? Or have more and more white families shifted their children out of public to private or parochial schools? If it's the latter, then presumably, it is the less privileged white students that remain in the public schools, at least to a certain extent. But the white students that remain still do remarkably better than the black students. Do the numbers in the article reflect only public school students, or all students in Seattle? The Seattle School Board seems to have been focusing on the problems that minority students are having for a long time with absolutely nothing to show for it.
It is unfortunate that the article doesn't really have enough data to let the reader form any real idea what's going on here. You seem to follow this pretty closely. Do you have access to more data?
Posted by: George | April 30, 2007 2:29 PM
It just seems hopeless, doesn't it? To read of these inane and silly people can be comforting at first. Surely having presented such ridiculous and contradictory tripe as serious policy discussion has finally discredited these people, right? But that is whistling in the dark. These people are actually in charge and entrenched.
The humanity...
Posted by: mikem![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.discriminations.us/nav-commenters.gif)
|
April 30, 2007 3:13 PM
“We must recognize the impacts of institutional racism on student success and question any excuses for not making necessary changes.”
Institutional racism, as defined by the district, is “an indirect and largely invisible process that operates automatically..."
How does one recognize something, or the impacts of something, that is invisible? Oh yes, by measuring some outcome that could have a thousand contributing factors and holding all but the invisible "factor" constant. The conclusions based on this "analysis" then become axiomatic assumptions and the existence of the invisible entity is considered incontrovertible (and extreme hostilty is directed at anyone who questions either).
I encounter this stuff in real time on a regular basis in the department, college and university where i reside, and I am always left with the same question in my thoughts: Do they believe what they are saying or are they aware of the internal contridictions and simply ignore them due to ideological considerations?
Posted by: Brad | April 30, 2007 3:50 PM
I guess we should all make strides to adopt communism and forget about plans for the future altogether to make sure we don't cause undue pressure on this sector of our society.
Posted by: vnjagvet | April 30, 2007 5:44 PM
Via Joanne Jacobs... also in Seattle.
A private schools emphasis on diversity backfires.
"When this prestigious prep school sought to become more ethnically diverse, donations poured in. But as a pending discrimination lawsuit alleges, the effort may prove more costly than anticipated."
http://www.seattleweekly.com/2007-04-25/news/good-intentions-turn-into-diversity-backlash-at-lakeside-school.php
Posted by: Rory Hester | April 30, 2007 10:22 PM
Thanks for posting that, Rory. It is heartening to read about students standing up and challenging teachers who abuse their positions, especially to direct racial slurs toward their students. Of course, I would be more heartened to read that lower or middle income students had felt empowered to call a racist a racist, rather than elite upper income students. But still, it is an improvement. Apparantly the "irrefutable" notion that black teachers cannot be racists is not accepted by everyone.
(I love her excuse: It was merely descriptive, sniff.)
Posted by: mikem![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.discriminations.us/nav-commenters.gif)
|
May 1, 2007 11:13 PM