Getting back to the crux of the argument, Michael writes: > The MPS function at a sufficiently > high level of mediocrity that, as has been stated repeatedly, > students can get into college. What they don't do is > educate many of the minority students that attend them and > they do not provide a true quality education for gifted students.
I agree with the first part of the last sentence (though it has more to do with poverty), disagree vehemently with the second (the point I've been trying to make throughout the debate). I'd ask Michael to cite ANY data that indicates gifted students aren't being well-educated in MPS. District-wide test scores say nothing about individual talent cohorts, by the way. This is my point about the broad brush of critics. MPS has a huge problem educating kids from broken homes and in poverty. There may be better ways to do it, but no one has proven that on a district-wide scale. At the same time, there are thousands of kids - who are not mediocrities, and neither are their parents - who are getting a great education at MPS. While I disagree with Doug Mann's "proof," he is at least banging at the right problem - whether MPS educates poor and minority kids well while educating better-prepared and -supported kids. I think the argument that talented kids get an inferior education within MPS is largely an emotional response (and indeed, the stronger data, such as it is, is the hundreds of kids who get into excellent colleges and the thousands who do well in college, not just "get in"). David Brauer King Field Over and out TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. 2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject (Mpls-specific, of course.) ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
