I think it is funny that SRVUSD stated overall results, and then provided results for Asian students, for Latino students, and for Black or African-American students, but didn't provide results for White students(or would it be non-Latino White students?).

Does the district believe that providing this information would be somehow racist?

Since non-Latino White students are just a bit over half of the district, it's not like the total district score numbers are representative....

CRM - if you read between the lines, the article is basically pointing out how the district caters to minorities and that the white student is not really important. My (white) kids have scored advanced in every section every year they have been forced to take this ridiculous test but since they haven't "improved", they would not have been noted in the results.

Also, if you look at the HS Course Catalog, you will realize even the basic classes have a special one for "English Learners" to make it easier on them. I personally feel my tax dollars should not be going to this and if you come to this country - LEARN THE LANGUAGE!!

@CRM,

Your writing consistently offers the perspective of an educated and intellectual person. That by no means implies such an individual is always 'right' but is hopefully alway objective. I do think we likely agree on little. However, I do respect the time you typically take to construct and present and argument.

That stated, a few weblinks away from the noted article sends you to a CA Dept of Ed interactive webpage whereby you can search for any ethnographic aspect that the coldest or warmest heart, bleeding or not, could possibly ever be interested in studying on the 2013 scores for this district. The 'white' link can be found here as you so sought but did not find (Web Link

I think we would all be better off if we all took the time to look closely at the underlying story and not trust the 'puff pieces' before commenting. Else we merely draw the 'zombie' commentator and tackless human 'lampreys' that wait for someone to translate the article into a two-sentence soundbite so that they can then feed upon the pieces left behind.

CRM makes a good point in that due to political correctness there are no accolades or interest in looking at white scores as this would not meet the goals of the educators at the state level. The money is in the minorities not in white kids. While testing has its place to measure real progress as an aid to increase the effectiveness of our education system it is used for political reasons that serve to divide more than unite.

@Bill,

Parking your idealogical perspectives on statewide agendas, the original DE article is where any interest, accolades or not for those of any ethnicity, gets highlighted. The corresponding CA Dept of Ed links afford you the opportunity to evaluate data and trends - not opinions. I know, it is fascinating how those entities can be different.

Focusing on the original intent of the DE article, it was on SRVUSD - again, not the entire state. While even CRM offered a characterization of the non-Latino white student population, one can clearly infer from recent Census demographics that our community is generally a Eurocentric community (Danville - Web Link Alamo - Web Link and San Ramon - Web Link The one caveat to this generality being the City of San Ramon where there is a strong Asian (Asia-Pac and East Indian) community (~35% in 2010).

If by your charge that "the money is in the minorities not in white kids" that you imply that the Asian and East Indian kids are disproportionately represented at that upper quartile and even decile of their academic classes, you ARE right - and they earn it. In general, they and their parents see the 'prize' at the end of a 'hard' academic chapter of one's life. As for Latino and African-American children, by population in this district, potentially taking a disproportionate slice of the pie...that's a fool's riddle.