Does Discrimination Cause Poor Performance In School For Black Kids From Impoverished Families?
Walter Williams doesn't think so. He writes in his emailed newsletter (which Reason Foundation's Manny Klausner sent me):
Putting greater emphasis on black successes in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds is far superior to focusing on grievances and victimhood. Doing so might teach us some things that could help us today. Black education today is a major problem. Let's look at some islands of success from yesteryear, when there was far greater racial discrimination and blacks were much poorer.From the late 1800s to 1950, some black schools were models of academic achievement. Black students at Washington's racially segregated Paul Laurence Dunbar High School, as early as 1899, outscored white students in the District of Columbia schools on citywide tests. Dr. Thomas Sowell's research in "Education: Assumptions Versus History" documents similar excellence at Baltimore's Frederick Douglass High School, Atlanta's Booker T. Washington High School, Brooklyn's Albany Avenue School, New Orleans' McDonogh 35 High School and others. These excelling students weren't solely members of the black elite; most had parents who were manual laborers, domestic servants, porters and maintenance men. Academic excellence was obtained with skimpy school budgets, run-down buildings, hand-me-down textbooks and often 40 or 50 students in a class.
Alumni of these schools include Thurgood Marshall, the first black Supreme Court justice (Frederick Douglass), Gen. Benjamin Davis, Dr. Charles Drew, a blood plasma innovator, Robert C. Weaver, the first black Cabinet member, Sen. Edward Brooke, William Hastie, the first black federal judge (Dunbar), and Nobel laureate Martin Luther King Jr. (Booker T. Washington). These examples of pioneering success raise questions about today's arguments about what's needed for black academic success. Education experts and civil rights advocates argue that for black academic excellence to occur, there must be racial integration, small classes, big budgets and modern facilities. But earlier black academic successes put a lie to that argument.
In contrast with yesteryear, at today's Frederick Douglass High School, only 9 percent of students test proficient in English, and only 3 percent do in math. At Paul Laurence Dunbar, 12 percent of pupils are proficient in reading, and 5 percent are proficient in math. At Booker T. Washington, the percentages are 20 in English and 18 in math. In addition to low academic achievement, there's a level of violence and disrespect to teachers and staff that could not have been imagined, much less tolerated, at these schools during the late 1800s and the first half of the 20th century.
Many black political leaders are around my age, 81, such as Rep. Maxine Waters, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton and Jesse Jackson. Their parents and other authorities would have never accepted the grossly disrespectful, violent behavior that has become the norm at many black schools. Their silence and support of the status quo makes a mockery of black history celebrations and represents a betrayal of epic proportions to the blood, sweat and tears of our ancestors in their struggle to make today's educational opportunities available.
I was exhausted last night, so I only posted the post and not my comment on it, but I'll comment now.
Walter Williams points out that being poor and black has not kept black people in generations past from making great successes of themselves. Williams does not explicitly mention what I believe is the root of the problem.
In short, what previous generations had that current generations lack is intact families. I've read the Moynihan Report, but I've gone beyond that. From talking with Sarah Hrdy, Daniel Nettle, and other anthropologists as well as understanding "Life History Theory," I believe that the 70 percent out-of-wedlock birth rate of black women is a huge problem causing huge problems in black children.
In the past, even if maybe one child on a block or a few children in a neighborhood were raised by single parents -- including single mothers after a father died -- there weren't vast numbers of children raised by single parents. There was, very importantly, stability that comes from having an environment populated by family units -- intact family units, sometimes with mother, father, and a grandmother in the home.
"Life History Theory" is a scientifically-supported theory about how organisms react -- adaptively -- to risky, unstable, and even violent environments. If you are likely to die young, it is adaptive to mate faster (be promiscuous) and take risks (including being violent) in a way it is not in more stable environments.
Too many children of black parents are now growing up in unstable environments, largely -- I believe -- due to a lack of fathers in many homes in a neighborhood. (By the way, you can per, Judy Stacey's research, have a two-parent family with two same-sex parents, and have the kids turn out really well -- but it helps if those kids are not growing up in an unstable environment due to many other children being from single-parent families and promiscuous and risk-taking because of it.)
Just to be clear, the effect we're seeing in the black community, from all the children growing up without the stability of a family environment, is not a black thing. Any children raised this way, in this sort of environment, are likely to have the entirely adaptive reaction to a risky, unstable environment.
To read more on Life History Theory (and automatic "fast" or "slow" adaptive strategies that are triggered), see Marco del Giudice's excellent scientific papers and book chapters here.
Has anyone in this realm actually read The Bell Curve?
The election of the idiot Trump and a few other social trends make me think we need to come to grips with inherent limitations of intelligence in a very sober and explicit way.
Crid at February 21, 2018 1:04 AM
I'm still pissed off by a bad travel experience tonight, but I'm not taking the previous comment back.
Yet.
Crid at February 21, 2018 1:07 AM
But listen to this, no matter what
Crid at February 21, 2018 1:37 AM
Yes, I know he's secretly Canadian.
Still.
Crid at February 21, 2018 1:40 AM
"Has anyone in this realm actually read The Bell Curve?"
I don't know; I see a lot of the same things happening among whites out in the sticks. However, you can make an argument that this is not inconsistent with the Bell Curve's hypothesis -- e.g., in both cases, it's the result of maladaptive mating.
Cousin Dave at February 21, 2018 6:32 AM
Out of curiosity who are the young black leaders? Maxine Waters and Jesse Jackson are around 80 and I know those names. But who are the younger ones? Is Obama it? He at least is 56. Other groups don't have leaders like american blacks, so is this the end of that trend?
Ben at February 21, 2018 6:53 AM
Absent fathers are certainly one of several causes. (But of course we will argue forever over whether this is caused by irresponsible behavior by parents or by whitey incarcerating those fathers.) Al Sharpton's teaching blacks that they shouldn't bother making successes of themselves but just wait for bailouts is another. But the big problem is the lack of discipline in schools. And politically-correct school boards make it impossible to cure that except by privatizing the schools. This needs to happen yesterday.
jdgalt at February 21, 2018 7:30 AM
> I see a lot of the same
> things happening among whites
> out in the sticks.
Oh, indeed, that's true. Hence, I affirm, Trump.
Crid at February 21, 2018 8:19 AM
If you look at trailer park whites where there is a lot of drug use and crime among the parents, and also welfare and single mothers, you get the same thing. The kids grow up in chaos and have a high chance for crime and teen pregnancy themselves. Doing well in school requires a stable home life. An additional factor you get with an intact home is an emphasis on achievement, discipline, and more attention to the kids. Reading to your kids does not take money (you can check out books by the armful from the library) but helps them tremendously. In the typical slum household, there are no books and no one reads to the kids or talks to them. They are often left alone.
The Democrat dogma that blacks can't succeed on their own but need handouts is also likely holding them back. If you believe you can't succeed, why try? That is a logical response. An alternative response is: double down on working hard, dress sharp, don't live your life drunk or stoned, show up on time. Maybe you will still face discrimination but you will do much better than the guy who ends up in jail. My black neighbor was like this: hard working, well-spoken, sharp dresser and he was able to retire before me. This is culture and requires a cultural change. It is not something government can do by throwing money at it. Government hand-outs make it worse, especially when at the same time government makes it harder to start a business, to get a license to braid hair, and makes housing more expensive.
cc at February 21, 2018 8:43 AM
Fathers.
Also, why are people compelled to say "family units" rather than "families"?
Crid at February 21, 2018 8:57 AM
My experience is that while education levels are trending upward, actual intelligence is trending downward.
I remember discussing this with a manager at a finance company for which I worked in the early '90s shortly after we had been purchased by a large bank. She knew she would not be retained because she had no degree and banks love credentials. Being in her fifties, she was better educated than many of our twenty-something college graduate managers, but she had no "piece of paper."
In encounters with several recent college graduates I am appalled at how little they actually know. They need calculators for any number over 10 and can only discuss historically significant events at a very superficial level, believing commonly-held myths instead of investigating the truth. Their grammar is terrible ("between you and I" or "I had ran the report") and their ability to string together a coherent narrative beyond a few sentences is abysmal.
We've dumbed down our society in an effort to equalize outcomes and have proven Moynihan correct. The average person in the US now has no more intelligence than one of those air ferns that collect nutrients from whatever blows their way.
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." ~ Winston Churchill
Conan the Grammarian at February 21, 2018 9:42 AM
...we need to come to grips with inherent limitations of intelligence in a very sober and explicit way. ~ Crid at February 21, 2018 1:04 AM
The soution is easy, but probably politically impossible. Get rid of the racial spoils system. Stop bean counting by perceived superficial traits like ethnicity and phenotype.
Individualize education through heavy use of computer learning and allow the people that cannot be educated due to social pathologies or low intelligence opt out for something non academic.
The current public school funding formula is to blame for a lot of this mess.
They get money for bodies in seats, and hours in the classroom, not any kind of quantifiable educational results with those bodies.
Isab at February 21, 2018 11:14 AM
It's something that has been happening for decades. Teachers in the private and public educational sector have been complaining that kids are not being taught how to think, that the contents of the approved curricula is nothing more than memorizing filler.
Of course, when you tell the teachers to actually uh, teach, the get pissy and bitch that that's someone else's job.
Sixclaws at February 21, 2018 12:42 PM
The problem, Six, is that all they're being taught is how to think or look something up. They're not being given reference points for their arguments. Rote memorization is a dirty word in modern education circles.
Memorizing dates and events is tough, but it provides chronological reference points and historical context.
Memorizing multiplication tables is tough, but it provides instant references for handling large calculations.
Memorizing grammar rules is tough, but it provides a framework for expressing one's self, in writing and verbally.
Having an internal library of facts enables one to frame arguments and analyses, to quickly maneuver through mental minefields, and to avoid being conned by someone who sounds like he knows what he's talking about.
You can't argue the Civil War is you don't know when it occurred or what happened during it. You can only argue that slavery was bad and therefore everyone who fought for the South was, by default, evil - so you pull down the statue and congratulate yourself on your righteousness.
Conan the Grammarian at February 21, 2018 12:59 PM
But of course we will argue forever over whether this is caused by irresponsible behavior by parents or by whitey incarcerating those fathers.
Johnson started the disintegration of the black family in the 2nd half of the 60s and the Great Society "war on poverty". Black women on welfare discovered that having a father around put a crimp in their benefits. So, they went from fathers to sperm donors.
And if you look at the statistics regarding education results prior to 1960 to post 1960 it becomes startlingly obvious that something went pear shaped.
And now that white illegitimacy is creeping up towards the rate in the black community, you see the same thing happening to the poor white folk.
I R A Darth Aggie at February 21, 2018 1:08 PM
But the big problem is the lack of discipline in schools. And politically-correct school boards make it impossible to cure that except by privatizing the schools. This needs to happen yesterday.
No, the big problem is parents — not just black or white, poor or rich, religious or irreligious.
The lack of discipline at home translates to lack of discipline in schools. The kids are not angels at home and then rotters when the school bells ring.
I'm all for privatizing schools as long as it's done with private (as in non-taxpayer) funds, but the dumbing down of children is directly related to the dumbing down of parenting skills in America.
I also agree with Conan that rote memorization has a bum rap in today's society; it has many benefits, not the least of which is providing a benchmark for "standardized testing," which us oldsters used to call "testing." Somehow grades were better under that onerous system, which is all that matters for those of us who cut the checks but have almost zero say.
Kevin at February 21, 2018 1:27 PM
"The problem, Six, is that all they're being taught is how to think or look something up. They're not being given reference points for their arguments. Rote memorization is a dirty word in modern education circles."
No Conan, they aren't teaching either of them.
Most of my interactions with teachers both as a student and as a parent follow this formula.
Teacher:"Go do x"
Me:"How do I do x? Can you give an example?"
T: "No"
M: "Is this x?"
T: "No"
M: "Is this x?"
T: "No"
M: "Is this x?"
T: "No"
M: "Is this x?"
T: "No"
If your parents can teach you that is one option. If you can self teach from a book that is another. But if you are depending on the teachers you are out of luck. Mind many nay most of those teachers are wonderful individuals. They are nice and caring. But they are completely incapable of providing clear directions. And that extends all the way from mathematics to what kind of snacks parents are required to provide. To some extent this feels intentional.
Kevin, you are entirely part of the problem. Without breaking the public school monopoly there is zero hope of any sort of reform. Instead costs will continue to balloon and quality will continue to fall. You mentioned the 'old' school system. And do you know what really set it apart from today's system? It wasn't standardized. The teachers didn't come from a teaching college. They had degrees in math or history instead of degrees in education. They didn't follow requirements from the department of education because they didn't take any money from them. Instead they could solve their own problems according to their own local needs. That isn't possible today. A school in Colorado, one in Texas, California, or Pennsylvania they are all the same. The students are different but you could swap the entire staff out from any other school in the US and nothing would change. They are all indistinguishable. And as long as that holds true there will be no improvement.
Saying we should all have better parents is nice but it doesn't make anything better.
Ben at February 21, 2018 3:54 PM
The above explanation misses an important motor:
When government pays for everything, there is no link whatsoever between effort and achievement. Why should some thug behave when he's going to get his EBT card anyway? Why should a woman care who she has sex with when the government will pay? And pay. And pay.
Aid programs remove consequences entirely. There is no work to miss upon arrest.
Radwaste at February 21, 2018 6:48 PM
When government pays for everything
You/we/us are the product being sold. The provider will always go with the demands of the entity actually paying for the service provided, no matter what the negative consequences might be for the subject.
Just wait until we have socialized medicine. It'll be as fantastic as socialized education!
Also, with teachers unions involved, teaching is like 5th or 6th on the list of goals.
I R A Darth Aggie at February 21, 2018 8:02 PM
A variation of Jim Hightower's advice on playing poker: Look around, and if you don't see a product being sold, you're the product.
Conan the Grammarian at February 21, 2018 8:13 PM
Kevin, you are entirely part of the problem. Without breaking the public school monopoly there is zero hope of any sort of reform. Instead costs will continue to balloon and quality will continue to fall.
You're welcome to break the "public school monopoly" as long as you don't use public funds.
The usual use of "school reform," however, means decrying Uncle Sugar's influence while still demanding his sweet tax money.
A school in Colorado, one in Texas, California, or Pennsylvania they are all the same. The students are different but you could swap the entire staff out from any other school in the US and nothing would change. They are all indistinguishable.
I couldn't disagree more. Many rural schools teach agriculture in all its forms; high schools in a place like New Orleans likely teach music in a way that's very different than anywhere else. Some schools focus on baseball rather than football, soccer rather than basketball.
And as long as that holds true there will be no improvement.
So it's society's fault when a kid fails? We'll have to disagree on that one.
Saying we should all have better parents is nice but it doesn't make anything better.
It certainly doesn't, but naming the problem never hurts.
Kevin at February 21, 2018 8:29 PM
Then just be honest about things Kevin. Admit you want to close all public schools.
As for the variation in schools, you are flat wrong. Even the things you mention as differences are pretty insignificant. So the music class in Orleans has more jazz than one in DC. Boy, things are totally different and the students are way better educated. As I said even if you swap out every single teacher from ones in another state you will still have those same 'differences'. They aren't teacher driven but student driven.
'So it's society's fault when a kid fails? We'll have to disagree on that one.'
'It certainly doesn't, but naming the problem never hurts.'
I don't care about fault. Blame God. Blame the Devil. Does it really change anything? Yes it doesn't hurt anything. Of course it doesn't help anything either. The reality is you aren't getting some magic new parents any time soon. You are no different than the people who complain that socialism just hasn't been done right yet.
Ben at February 22, 2018 6:22 AM
"You're welcome to break the "public school monopoly" as long as you don't use public funds."
The other side of that coin, though, is that I maintain that if I'm not using public funds, then the government should not have the power to collect those taxes from me. That's the problem. There has long been a Grand Bargain among the general public: schools are paid for by broad-based taxation, included taxes paid by people who do not have school-age children. Everyone agreed to this because everyone recognized that public education had benefits to society at large: we produced more capable workers, and increased the general level of knowledge so that people could better exercise their rights and duties as citizens.
But then the Marxists arrived. One of the first rules in the Dictator's Handbook is that an ignorant and superstitious population is easier to control than an educated one. Towards that end, if the Marxists ever were to gain control of the U.S., the public school system had to be destroyed. The tactic that evolved was twofold: in the middle-class areas, convert the schools to political indoctrination centers. In the poor areas, just make them completely dysfunctional. In both areas, assert that government control over the children, via the schools, supersedes the parents' control. They succeeded in those specific goals. Fortunately, the population at large remains aware enough that they recognize what is happening, even if they don't know what the causes are.
So the Grand Bargain is now broken. Poor people are being processed through the pipeline, which produces nothing but more poor people. Middle class parents are either fleeing the system altogether, or getting their children into the isolated pockets of the system that remain more or less functional. As many people who don't have school age children see it, the system no longer provides any direct or indirect benefit to them, and they're beginning to ask why they have to keep paying taxes to support the system. At one time, the employment of teachers created a social buffer against this sentiment; nearly everyone had a relative or a neighbor who was a schoolteacher, and that made it more personal to them. However, now that schools are replacing teachers with highly-paid, elite-class administrators, that source of goodwill is drying up. And since public events no longer take place on school grounds (because of "assault rifles", dontcha know), most people no longer have any contact with their town's schools whatsoever. They are simply one more example of expensive, impersonal government bureaucracies that appear to serve no useful function. The NEA yelling and screaming and stamping their feet won't change this perception one bit -- in fact, it reinforces it.
Cousin Dave at February 22, 2018 6:52 AM
"The election of the idiot Trump"
Everyone who voted against my candidate is stupid and my local sports franchise is my identity.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at February 22, 2018 2:09 PM
Quite right Cousin Dave. I'm quite willing to end public schools in their entirety. But that will involve rewriting a large number of state constitutions. Many states have public education obligations written into theirs.
Ben at February 22, 2018 5:22 PM
I dunno if I want large numbers of unschooled kids running around
NicoleK at February 24, 2018 11:28 AM
Leave a comment