busybody..
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2002
- Posts
- 149,503
A recent directive in the Plymouth-Canton Community Schools urges administrators to scan resumes for "cues" that applicants are from a minority racial group. Tip-offs can include job-seekers' residence, college attendance, fraternity or church membership and employment history.
Nearly a quarter of Plymouth-Canton's nearly 19,000 students are minorities, compared with less than 3 percent of its educational staff. District officials say they want to close that gap while hiring the most-qualified candidates.
Why do these diversiphiles insist that if 25% of the student population is minority (black? hispanic? asian?) that the teacher population needs to mirror that percentage? And why limit it to the district and not apply it to individual schools? Or down to the classroom? If the teacher population were 50% minority, do you think they would be trying to fire half the minority teachers? And why don't these diversifiles apply this 'proportional representation' theory to sports? Why not tell the NBA that since the US population is only 12% black that only 1 black guy can be on the floor at any one time between the 2 teams playing? As stupid as that sounds, and it should, that is exactly the 'logic' that they are using. Yet diversiphiles like Ann Marie Hudak - chairwoman of the Plymouth-Canton Citizens for Diversity and Inclusion - are pushing skin pigmentation diversity rather than quality education:
"Our teaching population should reflect the student population, because, based on statistics, kids who see themselves reflected in teachers tend to score higher on tests, and it's important for our children."
Why doesn't the school district discriminate on the basis of ideology? Based on the voting record of the district, why aren't teachers hired for being of a certain ideology based on how the districts votes? Or on eye color? Or on height and weight? Why the obsession with just skin pigmentation? The Michigan Education Association (MEA) supports the racial discrimination. Natch. I should point out that Michigan voters overwhelmingly passed the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) back in 2006 (called proposal 2 on the ballot) that was supposed to have removed any discrimination in the public square based on race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, etc. That included the so-called affirmative discrimination action programs in public schools and universities and in hiring. Apparently, it didn't quite turn out that way in Plymout-Canton. But at least not all school districts are on the skin pigmentation diversiphile bandwagon:
Bob Freehan, a district spokesman, says the Warren schools have no plans to use race as a factor in hiring.
"The system we use for hiring doesn't look at the cultural background," Freehan said. "We look for teachers who are student-focused and curriculum-focused."
As it should be. I did my schooling as a kid through Warren Consolidated, so thumbs up to my alma mater school district! Exit question: shouldn't a prosecutor be looking at charges against the leaders of this school district since they are plainly violating state law?
Nearly a quarter of Plymouth-Canton's nearly 19,000 students are minorities, compared with less than 3 percent of its educational staff. District officials say they want to close that gap while hiring the most-qualified candidates.
Why do these diversiphiles insist that if 25% of the student population is minority (black? hispanic? asian?) that the teacher population needs to mirror that percentage? And why limit it to the district and not apply it to individual schools? Or down to the classroom? If the teacher population were 50% minority, do you think they would be trying to fire half the minority teachers? And why don't these diversifiles apply this 'proportional representation' theory to sports? Why not tell the NBA that since the US population is only 12% black that only 1 black guy can be on the floor at any one time between the 2 teams playing? As stupid as that sounds, and it should, that is exactly the 'logic' that they are using. Yet diversiphiles like Ann Marie Hudak - chairwoman of the Plymouth-Canton Citizens for Diversity and Inclusion - are pushing skin pigmentation diversity rather than quality education:
"Our teaching population should reflect the student population, because, based on statistics, kids who see themselves reflected in teachers tend to score higher on tests, and it's important for our children."
Why doesn't the school district discriminate on the basis of ideology? Based on the voting record of the district, why aren't teachers hired for being of a certain ideology based on how the districts votes? Or on eye color? Or on height and weight? Why the obsession with just skin pigmentation? The Michigan Education Association (MEA) supports the racial discrimination. Natch. I should point out that Michigan voters overwhelmingly passed the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) back in 2006 (called proposal 2 on the ballot) that was supposed to have removed any discrimination in the public square based on race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, etc. That included the so-called affirmative discrimination action programs in public schools and universities and in hiring. Apparently, it didn't quite turn out that way in Plymout-Canton. But at least not all school districts are on the skin pigmentation diversiphile bandwagon:
Bob Freehan, a district spokesman, says the Warren schools have no plans to use race as a factor in hiring.
"The system we use for hiring doesn't look at the cultural background," Freehan said. "We look for teachers who are student-focused and curriculum-focused."
As it should be. I did my schooling as a kid through Warren Consolidated, so thumbs up to my alma mater school district! Exit question: shouldn't a prosecutor be looking at charges against the leaders of this school district since they are plainly violating state law?
