15 English H
18 November 2013
Argumentative Response upon Don't reduced the bar on education criteria
The general argument made by Leonard Pitts Junior., in his job, Don't reduce the bar on education requirements, is that claims are trying to correct education by simply lowering all their expectations every certain selection of students. Specifically, he argues that they're creating separate and unequal efficiency standards because of their black, white colored, Hispanic, Hard anodized cookware, and handicapped children. He writes, " Florida set a goal of getting 86 percent of light kids in or over grade level by 2018. For dark kids, the goal is 74 percent. ” With this passage, he can suggesting that schools happen to be wrongly creating lower education standards and are even varying the standards between races. In conclusion, Pitts' perception is that this " reverse racism” gives youngsters of hispanics the wrongly diagnosed idea that they will carry a few inherent deficit that makes them unable to compete with various other kids on an equal playing field.
Pitts is right, because it is wrong to lower specifications to make pupils appear wiser. More specifically, establishing different specifications for different cultural groups is additionally infuriating. For instance , an example Pitts' applied was that athletic directors have noticed a decline in white youngsters going out for basketball. That they feel like they cannot compete with the black youngsters. What if we addressed that by decreasing the casing for light kids? This analogy shows a situation similar to that of the training standards. General, no one really wants to know that they are inferior for something simply because of their competition. Therefore , in conclusion, Pitts constitutes a wonderful disagreement on why lowering these kinds of standards is wrong. Finally, they can't correct education by simply lowering the bar. They must get it done by training the students.