Home > Uncategorized > Spike Lee Says More Black Male Teachers Needed!

Spike Lee Says More Black Male Teachers Needed!

No they aren’t!

We don’t need any black teachers. We just need good teachers plain and simple. Unless race makes a difference in performance…

If race makes a difference in job performance than a case could be made that no black people should be allowed to teach or perhaps white people or asians. Race doesn’t matter!

Judge by the content of their character, not the color of their skin right? Or does that only apply to certain groups?

Advertisements
Categories: Uncategorized
  1. 2011/02/07 at 07:27

    As a parent of children in school (and a former student myself), I want my children to have a diverse school population of kids and teachers. Something would be lacking in education, as far as I’m concerned, if that were not the case.

    As a former educator and one who has studied in the field of education, I am pretty sure there are studies that would support this ideal – specifically studies that support the notion that minority students do better when they have minority role models. I could try to look into those studies, if you’re interested.

    So, philosophically and as a matter of improved schools, I’d like to see a diverse population of good teachers.

  2. 2011/02/07 at 09:39

    I would like to see a diverse population of both teachers and students. Diversity of ideas, not skin color. I cant think of a worse criteria to demand diversity of. Perhaps fingernail length.

  3. 2011/02/07 at 14:02

    So, EVEN IF studies showed that minority school children had improved scores when they had minority teachers, you’d be opposed to trying to increase the number of minority teachers?

    I thought you were all about the evidence and going where the evidence takes you.

    What would you think if you were a minority parent in a school with only white teachers and you knew that studies showed that diversity would likely improve your child’s educational experience? (You’re not a minority parent in that situation, are you? I don’t want to assume…)

    My children’s educational experience (and mine before them) was greatly improved by having a diversity of people, views and ethnicities in their schools. That would be a deal-breaker for me, if the local school was lily white. My wife and I deeply value the benefits of diversity, as do our children.

  4. 2011/02/07 at 17:08

    Lets revers the issue and say that white students do better with white teachers or even better that students of all races do better when educated with only those of their own race.

    Would you be for bringing segregation back?

    Or do we accept, what most hold to be a basic human truth, that race is irrelevant, like eye color and other immutable characteristics.

  5. 2011/02/07 at 17:14

    And of course I’m not a minority, don’t you know that conservatives are all old, white, male, racist people? At least if you watch MSNBC, I think that’s still their story.

  6. 2011/02/07 at 20:50

    Nate…

    Would you be for bringing segregation back?

    If white children were doing disproportionately poorly and white teachers were disproportionately under-represented in schools and research showed that increasing white teachers helped, would I be in favor of pushing to increase those numbers? Yes. Why wouldn’t I? Why wouldn’t anyone?

    But that’s not the situation we’re in, is it?

    So again I ask: If research showed that this would make improvements in kids education, would you really be opposed to it?

    And no, I didn’t know that you were white or conservative, although I would have guessed as much. But I try not to make presumptions.

  7. 2011/02/07 at 21:10

    I’m not old though, I have that going for me.

    I should make one thing clear. I’m not opposed to private parties hiring based on race. If someone doesn’t want to hire black people, or wants to hire only black people I feel that’s their business.

    I do not think it is a good policy for the government to do hiring based on race quotas, of any kind. the best applicants should be selected without regard to race.

    In other words I don’t support any type of state endorsed racism, regardless of whether the outcome is or is intended to be either positive or negative.

  8. 2011/02/07 at 22:45

    Trying to hire more folk of color is not racism, by definition.

    Racism: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race (Merriam Webster)

    This desire for hiring based on being more proportionately racially is NOT racism, it does not fit the definition of racism.

    If you think it is a bad idea (in SPITE of studies), then make that case, but it just isn’t racism. Fair enough?

  9. 2011/02/07 at 23:01

    It fits fine with the definition you provided. If you interpret it a different way, than that’s your business.

    You think turning a white person away because you don’t have enough black people isn’t racism? You just provided justification for hiring no black teachers in Augusta, Maine. We only have a very small number of black students, if any on most grades.

    Making hiring decisions based on the idea that that persons race should be taken into account is racism in my book. Regardless of the circumstance.

    The way to get more black teachers is for more blacks to go to school to be teachers because they wish to. Not to create a system where some jobs are more available for one race than another.

  10. 2011/02/08 at 06:51

    You think turning a white person away because you don’t have enough black people isn’t racism?

    No. It’s not. It just isn’t. Look again at the definition:

    a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

    Hiring qualified teachers of a particular race to balance out the staff racially is NOT doing so because they believe that race is the primary determinant of human traits. It just isn’t not in any way at all. If you think so, by all means, explain HOW that fits with the definition.

    It also is NOT at all due to a belief in the inherent superiority of a particular race. It just isn’t. If you think so, then make that case, but I can’t imagine how you could squeeze racism out of that. It does not fit the definition.

    Just because it’s racism in your book does not mean your book is the dictionary.

    Would you care to try to explain HOW it’s racism, provide some support for that charge, or are you just saying “it’s racism because I say it’s racism”?

    Once again, as you suggested in a previous post: I would need some evidence and not just “’cause I say so.”

  11. 2011/02/08 at 07:11

    Consider this: If I am not mistaken, studies also show that elementary school students benefit educationally from having more male teachers (male teachers are typically WAY under-represented in elementary school). So, some schools try to encourage the hiring of more male teachers.

    Why? NOT for reasons of sexism, but because it is reasonable to consider a balance of men and women to be more advantageous for the students.

    Now, someone could CALL that sexism, but it would NOT be sexism simply because someone called it that. Words have meanings and hiring men or minorities for these reasons is NOT in fitting with the definition of sexism or racism.

    So, unless you have any other supported reasons, I think reasonable people can conclude this is a reasonable goal. Doesn’t that (ie, requiring some supported and sound REASONS for taking actions rather than just because someone said “it’s bad”) sound reasonable?

  12. 2011/02/08 at 08:33

    I’m gonna let you have the last word because I’m getting bored.

    I just don’t buy semantic arguments. People have worked since black people were used as farm implements to erase racial preferences from society. Regardless of what you think of the definition that Wikipedia provided you, we are still talking about racism, simply not the angry cross burning kind.

    Dictionary.com tells us: a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

    And Merriam Webster gives us this one: racial prejudice or discrimination.

    There is no one definition. It seems to me that the primary thing that binds them all together is the belief that be a particular race makes one more apt or more capable. For example being black makes you better able to teach black students.

    There is no reason that that should be so. If these nebulous ‘studies’ do indeed show such a thing I would bet my VA health insurance that what you are looking at is the result of social factors. If that is the case than hiring more black teachers to replicate that result would actually be harmful as it would reinforce their preference for black people.

    You want to know what I would consider evidence to change my mind on racism? Evidence that there is a true difference between races when it comes to teaching, if black teachers are only better with black students, perhaps we need to not have any black teachers to get rid of that racial preference.

    There is a place for racial preference in hiring. Hollywood. That’s it.

  13. 2011/02/08 at 08:54

    To be clear I didn’t mean you and wikipedia, just that most people run their lives from the site and its not the sole repository for information.

  14. 2011/02/08 at 09:28

    Fair enough, many people over-depend upon wikipedia. But since my definition was the first one from Merriam Webster, I knew that did not apply to me.

    If you are using the very watered down, atypical definition of racism that MW offers as a secondary definition, then I STILL don’t see the ENCOURAGING OF HIRING MORE MINORITIES as “discrimination,” and it certainly isn’t prejudice. Discrimination would be refusing to hire ANY from one race (discrimination against black applicants or white applicants, for instance). This isn’t that. It’s the encouraging of hiring more qualified black teachers in order to balance out the teaching roster because studies show that it helps in the education process.

    If you consider that discriminating, I guess in a sense it is: Discriminating in favor of a better educational environment for our children. THAT I think all reasonable people can support.

  15. 2011/02/08 at 09:30

    Just between you and me – please delete this as I don’t intend it for other eyes (if I knew how to email you, I would, but I don’t…):

    …Calling such encouragement “racism” just seems reactionary and overly defensive and seems to be missing the point, which is improved education especially for those who are struggling the most.

    I don’t think you’ll win anyone to your view by calling that racism.

    Rather, just tween you and me, it comes across as a bit like a cracker who is protesting too much, if you know what I mean.

    It sounds like you’re rejecting objectivity, rejecting research, rejecting reason and playing the race cards for reasons of racism on your part. At least, that is how it’s coming across to me.

    One man’s opinion.

  16. 2011/02/08 at 09:47

    I said Id let you have the last word and I will, but I’m not against encouraging the hiring of anyone. Like I said I support the right of a organization to be racist in their hiring, but not the government.

    I’m only against the idea that we NEED more of any one race. If you believe that than you are well within your rights to do so and to assist to that end, financially or whatever.

    I’m only against the inevitable government programs to hire minorities. To me regardless of what social preferences the students have they should only get the best teachers, not the best black and the best white and the best latino and the best….. I want the best over all being paid out of my taxes.

  17. 2011/02/08 at 10:44

    I’m only against the idea that we NEED more of any one race. If you believe that than you are well within your rights to do so and to assist to that end, financially or whatever.

    And my point is that IF research shows this to be true, I support it. I’m opposed to just doing what we think best without consideration or research, just blindly taking this action or that action because someone said it seemed best to them. I need a little support/rationality.

    Given your earlier demand for evidence, I’d have thought you’d agree with this over-all notion of rational, research-based best practices.

    For the record, I do not believe (could be wrong, but don’t think so) that schools individually can deliberately choose to NOT hire a woman teacher simply because they are encouraging more men to be involved or NOT hire a white teacher simply because they are wanting more blacks involved. IF a qualified teacher who happens to be a woman or a minority applies, schools by law have to treat the application seriously.

    As far as I know, all this is about is simply the encouraging of more minorities into the teaching fields. It’s an overall suggestion, not a specific legal requirement, as far as I know.

    Beyond that, I also know at least around here, that if two applicants applied for a teaching position – one well-qualified and experienced white teacher and one UN-qualified and inexperienced black teacher – that the schools will hire the most qualified. They don’t want inadequate teachers in the classroom. Who would?

    But encouraging the hiring of more minority teachers or men teachers in elementary school? I definitely support that overall suggestion as it is, I believe, rational and research-based.

    Is it your suspicion that Spike Lee would like to see unqualified, bad teachers in classrooms, as long as they are black?

    Not according to that article, where he said…

    “Great teachers spawn great teachers,” Lee said. “If you’re a bad teacher, you’re not going to put anything out there that is going to inspire anyone to teach.”

  18. 2011/02/08 at 12:28

    You seem not to like the word racism. It’s not a bad word. We all recognize that at its base it means race is a factor. None of the definitions required it to be a bad word.

    The NAACP is a racist organization. Their whole point is to promote the advancement of colored people. There is nothing wrong with that.

    If schools are treating everyone equally than I have no issues. If we get to the point where schools are saying “need more black teachers, we are below quota” than we have a serious problem, regardless of what research says about the effectiveness of minority teachers with minority children (I still maintain that any discrepancies should be tossed out because of the likely and illogical racial preferences of the students in question).

    No I don’t think Spike Lee wants unqualified teachers to be hired because of their race. I only took issue with him saying we need more black teachers.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: