Category: Higher Education

To report increasing diversity requires two percentages: last year’s ‘percentage’ of minority enrollment vs. this year’s. To compare last year’s ‘total number’ of minority to this year’s total may prove an increase in minority enrollment, but it does not prove an increase in ‘diversity,’ because growth in white enrollments must be factored in. Yet some reporters and editors persist in the fallacy of reporting ‘increasing diversity’ in terms of growth in minority enrollment.

Name that fallacy? How about the fallacy of standalone diversity?
Not only do raw numbers of minority enrollment fail to track diversity, but diversity percentages on campus fail to supply their own significance. The significance of a diversity percentage on campus has to be assessed in terms of the off-campus ratios. This is because the whole question of diversity arises in the context of civil rights and de-segregation.

“Together, African-Americans and Hispanics represent about 55 percent of Texas’ 15-to-34 population, but only approximately 36 percent of the students in Texas higher education,” says a July report from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Closing the Gaps). These are the sorts of numbers that should accompany every report on campus diversity. There is a target we are trying to achieve through diversity.

At Texas A&M, this year’s numbers illustrate the fallacy of reporting increases in minority enrollments as simple facts of ‘increasing diversity’. Although total numbers of first-time Black and Hispanic students increased, there was no increase in the percentage of diversity.

The failure to increase on-campus Black and Hispanic diversity past a combined 17.6 percent is significant in light of what the Coordinating Board says above. With 36 percent of college aged minorities enrolled across the state, A&M fails to produce half-a-loaf in terms of the relevant talent pool.

But the significance of the flat-diversity curve is further dramatized by the fact that ‘minorities’ make up most of the college-age population. They are not ‘minorities’ at all.

Under “Read More” please find our updated chart of first time enrollment by gender and ethnicity at Texas A&M University.

CHART BELOW
Enrollment Ratios 2000-2004
for Texas A&M University

Race/Ethnicity & Gender

CHART BELOW
Enrollment Ratios 2005-2009
for Texas A&M University

Race/Ethnicity & Gender

Note: Between 1994 and 1998, the ratio of:

–Black first time students fell steadily from 4.8% to 2.7%

–Hispanic first-time students

peaked at 14.7% then fell to 9.1%

–White first-time students increased steadily from 76.3% to

82.0%

Source: OPIR/ip/Profile98(p.8)

Note: without ratios to overall population, the raw numbers of minority enrollments have little civil rights significance.–gm

Most immigrant patients have jobs and pay taxes, through paycheck deductions or property taxes included in their rent, administrators at the Dallas and Fort Worth hospitals said. At both institutions, they have a better record of paying their bills than low-income Americans do, the administrators said.
The largest group of illegal immigrant patients is pregnant women, hospital figures show. Contrary to popular belief here, their care is not paid for through local taxes. Under a 2002 amendment to federal regulations, the births are covered by federal taxes through Medicaid because their children automatically become American citizens.

These cases are not affected by new regulations that went into effect on July 1 requiring Medicaid patients to provide proof of citizenship, Texas health officials said. They said they believed that only small numbers of illegal immigrants had received other Medicaid benefits.

New York Times, “Texas Hospitals Reflect Debate on Immigration” by Julia Preston, July 18, 2006

As it turns out, we clipped last week’s story from the Dallas Morning
News for good reason. This week begins with a news report posted
at GOPUSA that Republicans in the US House of Representatives will be
pursuing the issue of border incursions along the Rio Grande river
involving "military style" uniforms and equipment.

Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter T. King (R-N.Y.), along with
Reps. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), Michael McCaul (R-Texas), and Steve Pearce
(R-N.M.) announced on Friday that they have asked Mexican Ambassador to
the U.S. Carlos de Icaza to explain what’s going on.

They’ve also written to U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, asking them to
investigate and report back to Congress….

McCaul expressed concern about individuals in Mexican military
uniforms helping drug smugglers cross the border. He pointed to a
recent press report saying that law enforcement officers on the U.S.
side observed Mexican military humvees equipped with .50 caliber
weapons escorting drug traffickers back into Mexico to provide them
safe haven.

Meanwhile, over at the Texas Farm Bureau website,
Victoria County Sheriff T. Michael O’Connor claims that 90 percent of
the migrant traffic through his jurisdiction are OTMs (other than
Mexicans):

"I would say 10 percent at most are people from Mexico. The
rest are a makeup of people from Central and South America," says
Victoria County Sheriff T. Michael O’Connor, who polices the "fatal
funnel," a main thoroughfare for illegals traveling Highways 59 and 77,
en route to Houston. "There have even been some from the Middle East,
Russia, and China. The U.S. border with Mexico is not a free border,
but south of that, all borders are open borders. People come into
various ports in Central and South America, and they find their way
here. Their main means of transportation today is rail. They get to the
Texas border and then find their way via a trafficking issue. They pay
thousands and thousands of dollars to get to the Houston area."

O’Connor has a political voice worth respecting, since it is not often
that county sheriffs are also former vice chairs of the Texas A&M
University System Board of Regents. But we have good reason to doubt his thumbnail statistics (as quoted) since official figures
reported from the Department of Homeland Security indicate that 92
percent of foreign nationals apprehended in 2004 were "natives of
Mexico." Putting ourselves into a posture for reading tea leaves, we’d
stick by our previous predictions that
this border issue is being set up by Republican interests for
exploitation, and we’d add one more thing: keep an eye on O’Connor’s
electoral career.

The two part series at the Texas Farm Bureau web site begins with a
sentence about 9/11 and is a tellling marker of the way that the border
issue is being increasingly framed within a war on terrorism context
that criminalizes migrants and militarizes the reflexes of state policy.

Meanwhile, at the American Chronicle website, columnist Barbara
Anderson today files her third border opinion of the year, this time calling
out for "a well regulated militia". The vaunted language of the
Fourth Amendment right to carry guns is placed in context of Minutemen
who she calls "the closest thing we have to a militia". Along
with the Republican chime, Anderson also hits up last week’s report of
"military style" uniforms and guns at the Rio Grande. She pleads
for "sovereignty" in the form of a "sturdy fence":

Is this the time for a “well regulated Militia”? It seems the
disciplined Minutemen may be an answer for the pressing need of eyes
and ears, and some defensive arms, along our wide open southern border
until the government catches up with the sentiments of outrage by its
citizens.

And while we’re on the subject of the war on terrorism, here’s a telling exchange at Monday’s White House Press briefing:

Q According to data currently available at the Department of Homeland
Security Funded Terrorism Knowledge Base, the incidents of terrorism
increased markedly in 2005: worldwide attacks were up 51 percent from
the year before, and the number of people killed in those attacks is up
36 percent; since the year 2000, attacks are up 250 percent, and deaths
are up 550 percent. How do you reconcile those numbers with your claim
that you’re winning the war on terrorism and putting terrorists out of
business?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, just look at the facts. If you look at the facts,
many of al Qaeda’s known leadership have been put out of business.
They’ve been brought to justice. They’ve either been captured or
killed. No longer is America waiting and responding. We’re on the
offense; we’re taking the fight to the enemy. We are engaged in a war
on terrorism. The enemies recognize how high the stakes are. And one
thing the President will talk about, continue to talk about tomorrow
night and in the coming weeks, is that we continue to face a serious
threat.

This is a deadly and determined enemy. But the difference is now that
we’ve got them on the run, we’ve got them playing defense, we’re taking
the fight to them. And all of us in the international community must
continue to work together. We’ve been fortunate that we haven’t been
hit again since the attacks of September 11th. And that’s in no small
part because of the great work of our men and women in uniform abroad,
and because of the great work of our intelligence community, and the
great work of our homeland security officials here at home who have
worked together using vital tools, like the Patriot Act and other
tools, to help disrupt plots and disrupt attacks.

And there’s great progress being made. But the President made it clear
after September 11th that this was going to be a long war, but he’s
going to continue acting and leading and doing everything in his power
to win that war so long as he is in office. And we also have to work to
continue to advance freedom. And 2006 was a year of progress when it
came to advancing freedom around the world. The Middle East is a
dangerous, troubled region, and that’s why it’s important we continue
to support the advance of democracy throughout that region.

MALDEF FILES SEGREGATION SUIT ON BEHALF OF LATINO CHILDREN

Lawsuit alleges ESL used as a proxy to discriminate against minority students in Dallas public school

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS – Today, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), the nation’s leading Latino legal organization, filed suit in federal district court against the Dallas Independent School District (DISD) and the principal of Preston Hollow Elementary School alleging civil rights violations by segregating and discriminating against
Latino schoolchildren.
The Latino parents represented by MALDEF, Organizacion para el Futuro de los Estudiantes
(OFE), allege that Preston Hollow illegally uses its English as a Second Language program to
segregate Latino and minority students from Anglo students, irrespective of their language
abilities. The documents in the case show that Latino students who are proficient in English are,
nonetheless, channeled into classes masked as “English as a Second Language.” Preston Hollow
organizes its general education classes and even combines some grades to ensure that Anglo
students, who comprise just 18 percent of the school, sit in majority white classrooms.

“Fifty years after Brown v. the Board of Education, it is a shame that segregation continues to plague our schools,” said David Hinojosa, MALDEF staff attorney and lead counsel in the case.

“Using ESL as a proxy to segregate schoolchildren can not be tolerated. This lawsuit is intended to send a message that there is no justification for any school to treat Latino students any differently than white students,” Hinojosa added.

Ms. Lucresia Mayorga Santamaria, lead plaintiff and mother of three children attending Preston
Hollow, stated “The school attempted to omit Latino children from the school brochure because
they did not want the surrounding neighborhood to get the wrong impression. Well, I hope they
all get this impression: we will not stand by any longer because our children deserve the same
opportunities as all other children of Preston Hollow.”

Calling on the leadership of Dallas ISD to now answer Latino parents’ calls for justice, Mr.
Hinojosa added, “We condemn efforts such as these to keep white students together for the sake
of deterring white flight. We call on the superintendent and the Dallas Board to swiftly end the
segregation at Preston Hollow.”

Founded in 1968, MALDEF, the nation’s premier Latino civil rights organization, promotes and protects the rights of Latinos through advocacy, litigation, community education and outreach, leadership development, and higher education scholarships.

Press Release Received via email April 18, 2006

By Greg Moses

OpEdNews / DissidentVoice / CounterPunch

"Next year Lord we’d love to give thanks for everybody’s freedom and
equality, but in the meantime please accept our appreciation for the
fact that after you adjust for race and class, some of our kids seem
not too pulled down by impossible situations."

Such was the blessing spoken by the Texas Supreme Court this
week as justices released a long-awaited school funding decision just
in time for the American Winter Holiday Season.

To the wealthier school districts of Texas (known as the West Orange
Cove plaintiffs) the court granted permission to raise local tax rates
in behalf of ‘educational excellence’ in all the right neighborhoods.

To the rest of us, the court explained how the structure of funding in
Texas does not make it impossible for poor districts to keep themselves
accredited, and therefore the urgent pleadings from the poor districts
for more support cannot be expected to rise to the level of
constitutional concern.
In one sense it was a crisp and clear ruling, cutting through
the panic arguments filed by the state in an attempt to steer the case
away from the godawful facts that had impressed the trial judge. Panic
arguments such as the court has no jurisdiction nor the districts
proper standing were one by one dismissed. After all, the court had
already issued a decade or more of school funding rulings all named
‘Edgewood’ after a famous San Antonio school system.

After cutting through the panic arguments, the court took the facts
boldly in hand and said things like, sure, the buildings look like crap
in these pictures, but what does that have to do with education? The
kids seem to be passing, don’t they? It’s a bad situation, but it’s not
that bad. One fourth of all school districts in Texas have not yet
levied special taxes to support their own school buildings, so the
question of the state’s obligation is beside the point.

This Thanksgiving, we can give thanks to a few attorneys and school
districts who jumped into the lawsuit because they wanted to make sure
the rich districts didn’t run away with all the money. In that
struggle, our longstanding heroes from Edgewood and Alvarado seem to
have maintained a very costly line in the form of a warning from the
Supreme Court that if things get much worse, well there has to be some
limit to the amount of hypocrisy the court will publicly tolerate.

MALDEF was quick to denounce the decision as justice delayed
for the children of Texas. With richer districts now able to ‘enhance’
their schools through higher local taxes than previously allowed, and
with the legislature under no real court pressure to make things more
equal (just don’t let them get much more unequal) the timeline for
justice is matching up a little closer to that previously scheduled
cold day in hell.

“In 2003,” said the court, “Texas ranked last among the states
in the percentage of high school graduates at least 25 years old in the
population.” Fully half the Hispanic students and nearly half the
African-American students drop out during high school. In Texas, Black
and Hispanic students are the majority. By the year 2040, these
‘minorities’ will constitute two-thirds of the population. But the cost
of a just education is difficult to quantify said the court. Glaring
challenges of high school literacy the court could not quite translate
into a single legal reason for constitutional urgency.

There was a dissenting opinion: a heartfelt manifesto for
justice through ‘competition’ duly applied to suggestions for
competition between districts and more tax money for private schools.

BTW, all those anti-affirmative action voices who say we should really
start equalizing education at the elementary level? There were so many
of them hollering when the Hopwood case was news. Today they seem quite
happy to note with the Texas Supreme Court that democracy is still good
enough for constitutional purposes so long as you know how to properly
adjust your expectations for differences of race and class.

Anyway, that’s the news from Texas. Dog bites kid. Pass the turkey please.