Mom of 1, I did not mean to offend you or make any implications about your son or about anyone else. I simply said that I inferred that many or most of the kids who need remediation probably need it because they're not as smart as many of the kids who don't. Given the lockstep pacing of schools today, this was a reasonable conclusion.
This is the quote. The issue is that in many school systems, "many or most of the kids who need remediation" ARE under-served minorities. if you look at any of the measures of achievement used in this country, white children and Asian children ON THE WHOLE are significant out performing black children and latino children ON THE WHOLE. I personally cannot believe that racism (and racism absolutely translates into economic inequalities as well) is not a significant piece of the equation. But, you said in this comment that the unequal achievement is because the remedial students aren't as smart. I take offense to that conclusion.
Take three families that are economically equal, and whose kids are equally intelligent. The family that emphasizes academics will likely have more academically successful kids than the family that emphasizes sports, which will in turn will likely perform better than the family that doesn't care about the kids. Take another two families. If the parents love each other and stay together, they will likely have academically more successful kids than families that do not. These factors vary across race, but it is not racism.
I am torn as to what the right answer is. How does one choose between the child that grew up in a supportive environment and has then put in a lot of effort to learn, vs. the talented child that was never encouraged to learn? Affirmative action may seem like a good idea in theory but it seems to often be gamed (e.g. Elizabeth "High Cheekbones" Warren, and many Blacks at Ivy League coming from wealthy West Indies families).
