The San Francisco Board of Education released a slew of stats on high school performance, broken down by race. We knew the answers in advance: Asians do best, then whites, then Latinos, and blacks do worst.
No surprise. Perhaps also not surprising, to regular readers, are the systemic advantages blacks are given, which it turns out we can quantify to a certain extent.
Before we get to that, and given blacks did so poorly in relation to Asians, and given SF is woke, and therefore disinclined to record true numbers, it’s rational to suppose the differences might be even larger than reported. So take all that is below as a sort of minimum effect.
My proof the woke lie is this piece by a self-identified woke capitalist-hating abortion-loving pro-CRT lefty teacher who weeps about systemically rewarding substandard, and even absent, performance in blacks.
We don’t know where this teacher is, but on absenteeism he said (and his italics) “The district is not allowed to remove any student from the program on the basis of non-attendance.”
Now, when I say the district is “not allowed” to do so, I don’t mean they’re forbidden by some state law or local ordinance. Rather, the district actively embraced this policy as part of their larger equity and racial justice overhaul, and even bragged about doing so in public-facing materials. Their explicit position is that requiring attendance for any district program unfairly victimizes children of color, as does factoring in attendance to any student’s grades during the regular school year.
His fellow teachers say things like “Trying to register more students of color for AP classes is inherently racist and Putting greater value on AP classes at all is an expression of white supremacy.”
And they don’t like whites:
When I said I was concerned that [the new weekly schedule] would require leaving some sections of the curriculum untaught, a colleague said that might actually be a good thing, because most of our students are white and their test scores dropping slightly would help shrink the racial achievement gap in our state. Again, to clarify: I don’t mean my colleague had a a more nuanced approach to testing that a dishonest interlocutor could twist to sound like that. I mean my colleague literally spoke those words.
That’s enough. You get the idea. Now let’s get to SF’s numbers.
Chronically absent from school:
Black: 63.4%
Latino: 46.3%
White: 19.5%
Asian: 8.4%.
The opposite of this is, I suppose, chronic school attendance:
Asian: 91.6%
White: 80.5%
Latino: 53.7%
Black: 36.6%.
Like you, I don’t know what “chronic” means exactly. But on the assumption it is a bad thing, and that the criterion has been applied to all equally, then, as said above, Asians best, blacks worst.
Graduated:
Asian: 95.1%
White: 90.4%
Black: 86.0%
Latino: 76.7%
Given blacks are absent more, but also graduate at decent rates, SF must be overrating blacks, a common practice.
The Graduated/Attendance ratio captures this idea partly. We’d expect this to be about 1 in a “fair” system. Not exactly 1, of course, since even kids who never miss a day can fail to graduate. Numbers greater than 1 indicate, to some rough extent, how much groups are rewarded for non-performance.
Graduated/Attendance Ratio:
Black: 2.35
Latino: 1.43
White: 1.12
Asian: 1.04
Only 36% of blacks regularly attend school, but 86% graduate. Whereas 92% of Asians attend regularly and 95% graduate. Blacks are awarded more for lower performance, and a lot more than Asians.
Another key metric is suspensions, which are bad. Some 4.5% of blacks are ever suspended, but only 0.1% of Asians: blacks are 45 times worse.
College attendance and math performance are an interesting contrast, given how closely (I was reminded of this on Twitter) the two numbers are.
College Attendance – Math Task Performance & Ratio:
Asian: 84.3% – 81.4% & 1.04
White: 74.8% – 80.8% & 0.93
Latino: 54.6% – 55.3% & 0.99
Black: 45.7% – 40.6% & 1.13.
Once again, Asians best, blacks worst. To the extent math contributes to college attendance, blacks are again given an advantage. However, blacks might not be enrolling in STEM-heavy majors, where math is essential. There’s also likely a marked dichotomy in math-necessary subjects for whites (many of the less able go into “Communications” or “Business”). This statistic is therefore more difficult to interpret.
It’s important that it’s only (SF says) those who graduate high school who attend college. Since high school graduation is so different, the real rates of college attendance are thus:
Asian: 80.2%
White: 67.6%
Latino: 41.9%
Black: 39.3%.
Perhaps it’s worth repeating that Asians did best, blacks worst. Asians are twice as able as blacks, at least in this measure.
So. Given the theory of Equality, which says all are the same except for circumstance, and that a particular corrosive circumstance is systemic racism, which causes all or nearly all disparities in circumstance….beef and broccoli! Do you know what this means? It means Asians are horribly racist against blacks.
And against whites and Latinos, too.
Buy my new book and learn to argue against the regime: Everything You Believe Is Wrong.
Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal click here; Or go to PayPal directly. For Zelle, use my email.
Dear Briggs,
I am glad that I don’t have to be good at math (although I aced Geometry) to love you and hopefully go to heaven. The Lord is merciful. I am also glad there are people who are good at math, and good at so many things I’m not good at.
Like boats, e.g. I get sick on boats.
Keep fighting! That’s one thing I love too.
I lived in Silicon valley for 10 years while raising kids. There were relatively few blacks, anywhere, except east Palo Alto so I don’t have any school related experience where attendance of black students is concerned. But I can say that east palo alto was not a place you wanted to be at night.
That said, when buying a home (back then you could still buy homes in Silly Valley without being a millionaire), it was well understood by both realtors and home buyers that if the % of students in a particular school exceeded 15% Latino students, the quality of education would be sub standard. The inverse was true of Asian students. If a school population was 15% or more Asian students, you knew the quality of education would be superior…. never saw the situation where you had 15% Asian students and 15% Latino students… so not sure how those two might have canceled each other out.
The contributing factors to Latino concentration causing poor school performance were that schools were required to hire a second teacher in the classroom to co-teach in spanish or portuguese… this led to the pace of learning being slow and limited resources being used to create redundant teachers instead of being used for more additive resources. Latino students also had high rates of absenteeism which often meant re-learning material when they were in class. Asians never presented that issue… they always spoke both English and their native tongue… that and their parents were obsessed with their kids learning and excelling at what they learned. It was an eye opening experience and people literally went around looking for homes in neighborhoods with high Asian student concentration in schools as a result.
The last part of your analysis stumped me. How did you compute the percentages for the “real rates” of college attendance?
For me the last paragraph–“So. Given the theory of Equality…”–needs to be broken down a bit more as I don’t see how your conclusion arises from it. For one thing the main argument regarding systemic racism is that the system was built by whites to serve them at the expense of non-whites. The fact that Asians turn out to be doing unexpectedly well–even surpassing whites themselves–is fortuitous as far as Critical Race Theory goes. This happenstance does not, under the notion of systemic racism, make Asians either racist either directly or systemically.
Only Whites are racist. Asians work really hard. You know that this how the left thinks.
If Whites were not racists ~ racism would be undefinable.
Proudhon formulated the true morality of liberal government:
To be governed is to be kept in sight, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be governed is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, enrolled, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be placed under contribution, trained, drilled, ransomed, exploited, monopolized, extorted, squeezed, mystified, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, despised, harassed, tracked, abused, clubbed, disarmed, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality.
It’s almost like someone’s intentionally dumbing down the population for a world of
lowered expectations.
Part of this is cultural decline. Back in the old days, in the area where I grew up (military brat so moved from east coast to west coast to south), “thug culture” was not tolerated and the ‘n’ word was a slur about someone’s character, not necessarily ‘race’. “Black” teachers routinely disciplined “black” students. “Black” teachers routinely berated “black” students. The idea was to use ‘reverse psychology’ on them to motivate them to do better and not make the “lie become the truth”, which, sadly, did happen. Thomas Sowell wrote a number of books about culture, race, migrations, and economics. He grew up during Jim Crow, too. Ol’ Jim died, but his progeny live on.
Truth is no defence against accusations of racism. This has been established in the English courts in the trial of Nick Griffin.
But they’re good at sports. Some sports …