<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Elite Programs Lableled as &#8216;Elitist&#8217;</title>
	<link>http://rabenstrange.com/2007/12/04/elite-programs-lableled-as-elitist/</link>
	<description>Adventures in 日本</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 23:41:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Anderson</title>
		<link>http://rabenstrange.com/2007/12/04/elite-programs-lableled-as-elitist/#comment-4173</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 06:03:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rabenstrange.com/2007/12/04/elite-programs-lableled-as-elitist/#comment-4173</guid>
		<description>Interesting observation.

The report which was presented to the district was lengthy and complicated.  It contained a lot of suggestions on academics and vision in the program, paths to deal with growth, and several suggestions on helping explain advanced learning to parents in Seattle schools.

APP is more out of whack than you might think.  While 69% of the population of Seattle as a whole is white,  only 42% of the students in Seattle Public schools are.

As the parent of a child in APP, I am happy with the program, but the makeup of the school is a little brain-bending.  In addition to the racial demographics, an inordinate percentage of the parents are professionally employed and have advanced degrees.  The school is skewed not only racially but economically as well.  I've remarked it doesn't look like Seattle, it looks like the top 10-15% of Seattle.

Anyhow, buried in that big thick report were some suggestions on how to get more minority (read: Black and Hispanic.  Asians are already well-represented) into the program.

The author of the Times article, being lazy, dialed in on this and wrote an article that all but accuses the APP program of institutional racism, which I consider to be unfair.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting observation.</p>
<p>The report which was presented to the district was lengthy and complicated.  It contained a lot of suggestions on academics and vision in the program, paths to deal with growth, and several suggestions on helping explain advanced learning to parents in Seattle schools.</p>
<p>APP is more out of whack than you might think.  While 69% of the population of Seattle as a whole is white,  only 42% of the students in Seattle Public schools are.</p>
<p>As the parent of a child in APP, I am happy with the program, but the makeup of the school is a little brain-bending.  In addition to the racial demographics, an inordinate percentage of the parents are professionally employed and have advanced degrees.  The school is skewed not only racially but economically as well.  I&#8217;ve remarked it doesn&#8217;t look like Seattle, it looks like the top 10-15% of Seattle.</p>
<p>Anyhow, buried in that big thick report were some suggestions on how to get more minority (read: Black and Hispanic.  Asians are already well-represented) into the program.</p>
<p>The author of the Times article, being lazy, dialed in on this and wrote an article that all but accuses the APP program of institutional racism, which I consider to be unfair.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
