The University of Connecticut is under fire this week after a report that it would create a living space segregated by race. The school is concerned about the lower graduation rate for black students. So it has arranged for black-only housing to try to maintain a more supportive environment. Others call is segregation and a return to pre-Brown v. Board of Education values. The university has insisted that it is not a separate dorm and that the reports have been overblown, as discussed on Snopes.
I have long warned about a trend toward segregated schools and classes based on race, gender, and sexual orientation. While advancing laudable goals, the means of the ScHOLA²RS House (“Scholastic House of Leaders who are African American Researchers and Scholars”) is troubling. While few would argue with special programs to help any struggling student, the creation of race-specific zones or housing is a substantial retreat from conceptions of race-blind institutions.
Vice Provost Sally Reis rejected such arguments and insists that “It’s no more segregated than putting individuals with an interest in entrepreneurship together because they have common interests.” Most people would see a considerable difference between having a dorm for business students and a dorm for black students. One is based on an immutable trait that has long polarized the nation and produced gross inequalities. The other is an intellectual interest that is shared across gender, racial or other demographic lines.
Yet, Erik Hines, a UConn professor who will serve as faculty advisor to the ScHOLA²RS House students, said that UConn may plunge even further into such segregated housing: “We have all types of learning communities. If they bring forth a proposal to our Office of Programs and Learning Communities they will be considered by our executive director.”
The university insists that it is not creating separate housing:
ScHOLA²RS House is a Learning Community designed to support the scholastic efforts of male students who identify as African American/Black through academic and social/emotional support, access to research opportunities, and professional development. The intent of this Learning Community is to increase the retention and persistence of students using educational and social experiences to enhance their academic success at UConn and beyond in graduate and professional school placement. ScHOLA²RS House will encourage involvement with the larger university community to foster peer and mentor relationships and will actively engage students in inclusion efforts at UConn.
It has specifically responded to media reports through Dr. Erik Hines:
Twelve students already have contacted us with interest in living in Scholars House. Participation is, of course, entirely voluntary and its programming will be open to all in the University community, not only black male students.
This living community will also be located in the new Next Gen Hall when it opens this fall, so Scholars House students will live among 700-plus other students from all backgrounds while at the same time having access to specialized educational and social experiences to encourage success in their college careers.
To correct misinformation that some have unwittingly spread, this learning community will not be separate, nor is the building only going to house this group of students. Rather, this will be one of several learning communities whose residents live in Next Gen Hall, along with other students who aren’t in learning communities.
Source: Fox
Monty’s been quaffing DNA shape shifting, cancer colored, chemically sweetened ‘it’s all the Republicans fault!” Kool aid. He needs a serious detox at this point.
Bruce: Exactly.
Monty, two wrongs don’t make a right, that’s what people are so upset about, Hence the rise of non establishment candidates
The communist version of pouring coffee on the homeless:
http://www.indiana.edu/~easc/programs/special/images/zicheng_000_000.jpg
“No less ad hominem than your teacher remark”
That was an actual fear I have, based on your inaccurate and false posts.
Not an insult at all, but a query from a concerned citizen with children.
I was arguing the facts.
You weren’t using any facts at all.
You wrote down various words and strung them together, but few if any of your sentences were factual.
You’re the one who has troubling sorting the fruit ( as in apples and oranges.)”
Prove it.
And admit it, you got chuckle out of seeing that poor guy scalded
SJWs always project.
I never saw the video.
However, pointless cruelty is a favorite of communists and socialists (see Mao’s Cultural Revolution, and Stalin’s Gulags for myriad examples, not to mention that favorite socialist summer camp, Dachau)
(SJW is a descriptor for you, and a reliably accurate one based on your posts, and so not an ad hom)
“State of mind is what is relevant here.
No, it isn’t.
I readily admit that Obama and Romney were fraudulent BS data when reporting the true unemployment rate.
Your “point” is that Romney was poised to take “credit” for a fake number that was going to go down anyway.
So what?
Obama and Romney were bothe either fools or lying about the actual unemployment rate, and the subsequent “fall” in that fake rate means, well, what?
What’s your point, other than that you dislike Romney?
The actual serving President was lying to you then and is still lying to you about unemployment.
That seems the more salient point.
No less ad hominem than your teacher remark, sport.
I was arguing the facts. You’re the one who has troubling sorting the fruit ( as in apples and oranges.)
And admit it, you got chuckle out of seeing that poor guy scalded
State of mind, both Romney’s and the guzzling kool-aid class, is what is relevant here. Period. Again, you didn’t bother pointing out Romney’s speciousness when he made the claim.
BTW: Obama wasn’t the first president to use those BS data to measure his track record. I recall W trotting them out until he let the economy tank
“Aren’t you supposed to be paying homeless people to scald themselves ”
Ad hominem.
As expected, given the inability to argue the facts.
“There is more than one way to define world status and mine is more accurate”
No, the definition of third world is exactly what I wrote.
Now you are changing your terms of discussion for ‘third world’ to “world status”, whatever that means.
Meaning you just make stuff up (SJWs always lie.).
“Good day and good luck.”
And monty bravely ran away, he bravely ran away; as all SJWs do.
Fleming: Aren’t you supposed to be paying homeless people to scald themselves with coffee or are you running late, too?
“But the only relevant point here is Romney’s attempt to use those figures to bolster his candidacy.”
No, that is your relevant point, which apparently was this:
Obama was using “flawed” (BS) unemployment data, and Romney was “predicting” the BS rate would go down, which was already known to be happening anyway, so he lied or trying to claim credit or he was a fool or something.
When in fact, the number was a lie in 2012 and was even more of a lie in 2104.
So your ‘relevant point’ is a useless one, based on falsity.
I disagree with your defition of third world/ first world. There is mmore than one way to define world status and mine is more accurate, and, by the way, more accurate describes conditions.
Good day and good luck.
monty. please tell me you are not a teacher in any capacity.
Fleming: I don’t disagree with the unrepresentative quality of the unemployment figures. But the only relevant point here is Romney’s attempt to use those figures to bolster his candidacy. Period. If you have a contention with the data Romney was using, you should have voiced your opposition then. Doing so would have been a momentary break in your cheerleading.
Raising them now is merely irrelevant quibbling.
“The definition of a third-world nation is one..”
False.
The term arose in context to the Cold War and is/was a euphemism for “poor.”
.
The First World meant that you aligned with the US and NATO (i.e., capitalism), and the Second World meant you supported Communism and the Soviet Union.
A third world country was a developing nation (i.e., impoverished, backward) unaligned with NATO or the USSR.
Bruce: I didn’t say anything about Hillary or coin flips or Iowa. Isn’t there a wildlife refuge somewhere you need to occupy?
Before you go, a little education for ya…The definition of a third-world nation is one that exports the majority of its raw materials and imports the majority of its finished goods, a first-world nation is the opposite. Before Reagan took office, we imported more raw material and shipped more finished goods and by the time he left that trade balance had shifted and we had become debtor nation.
Make sure you take plenty of water when you go to Malheur; I’m sure they have enough kool-aid
“The focus was on moving the kids on, not to hold them back, whether they were prepared or not. ”
That’s been the focus in public schools for >75 years.
Hardly Laura Bush’s fault.
It would be interesting to link this with the brilliant, ‘No child left behind.’ routine pushed during the administration of the three stooges, championed by the wife of the main stooge. I taught inner city kids in elementary and middle school during that deplorable administration. The focus was on moving the kids on, not to hold them back, whether they were prepared or not. The ill preparedness starts with the coddling of kids from dysfunctional families in kindergarten and the first couple of years of elementary. The professional and disconnected perception is that it is not the kid’s fault as they are first a product of idiot parents and then of overwhelmed teachers. By the time they get to middle school some are hopeless and some are doing just well enough to be candidates to be ‘moved on’. Those that were ‘moved on’ get into college and university and are not prepared.
When I was a student in the early sixties in Canada, we had two programs: General Program for those who were not planning on going to University and just wanted the old ‘High School Diploma’, regardless of ability, and University Program for those planning on continuing to University. If you took the University Program for the three years of High School you had to take languages, math, and science at a level to afford entrance to most Universities. If you took the General Program and decided you wanted to go to University, then you needed to pass a set of rigorous exams and/or spend a year in a preparatory college before entering University. The level of a High School graduate in the University Program in Canada was somewhere at the level between a first and second year general studies American university student. Most Americans who try to get into a Canadian University find they have to take an extra year to prepare first.
In the US this would be an appropriate system to meld those kids who were ‘moved along’ under the genius of the ‘No child left behind’ program to the requirements of a University program.
Sometime during a person’s education, if they are behind, they need to take the time to catch up.
issac – having both taught inner-city kids under NCLB, delivering the tests, developing curriculum and monitoring teachers, I can say that for the most part I agreed with NCLB. Sadly, some schools, maybe yours, cheated. And it was a problem to have kids who failed still be promoted into high school where they were taking high stakes tests. Now, I had to remediate them, then teach them all they needed to pass NCLB. Considering everything, it worked out well.
… which Forbes didn’t bother pointing out at the time was flawed.”
Not flawed, wrong.
So you admit Obama was using ‘flawed,’ wrong or deceptive data in 2012, and yet somehow point to that fraudulent number subsequently “declining” as evidence against Romney.
Horse-hockey.