A recent commentary of mine evaluated the effectiveness of certain policies, among which was race based school discipline.
An article by authors Katherine Kersten and Catrin Thorman in the fall issue of Thinking Minnesota documents the issue. Anyone who cares about our children and their education should be horrified by the egregious conduct of the Minnesota Department of Human Rights [MDHR].
MDHR is using bullying tactics to impose a radical ideology on schools that has wreaked havoc across America and failed to achieve improved performance by minority students. Everywhere implemented, race based discipline has resulted in increased violence, chaos in classrooms, and students who feel free to act out, disrespect, threaten, and assault school personnel.
Here is a direct quote by the authors. “MDHR claims 43 schools are disciplining black and Native American students above their proportion of the student population. These racial disparities, it says, are caused by racially discriminatory policies, not differences in student misconduct.” MDHR sent letters to the schools, threatening legal action unless radical changes in policy are made. So far at least 37 schools have caved in and signed on to the radical plans that insist in a reduction for discipline of minority students, presumeably to levels commensurate with their percentage of population.
[How ironic that union dues of teachers who are the subject of these defamatory allegations go to support the politicians and candidates who author them!]
Does State or Federal law support MDHR efforts on the issue? The U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a 1997 decision that, “Racial disciplinary quotas violate equity in its root sense. They entail either systematically overpunishing the innocent or systematically underpunishing the guilty. They place race at war with justice.” Minnesota law prohibits schools from treating a student differently “on the basis of their race, sex, or other protected characteristics.” In order to justify their radical policy, MDHR must use racial bigotry by schools as the excuse. The actual goal? MDHR Commissioner Lyndsey is quoted in the article as saying the policy “will help build a stronger Minnesota that is ready to embrace the dramatic demographic changes in our near future as our population ages and becomes more diverse.”
Dear readers, how do unelected bureaucrats become empowered to enact social planning like this? The short answer is from our current governor and attorney general.
Now a short review of the track record of race based discipline. Implemented in 2014 in Syracuse, N.Y., violence exploded. By 2015, a union survey of teachers found 57% had been threatened, 36% assaulted, many verbally and sexually harassed. A teacher was stabbed in 2017. New York City experienced similar if not more serious problems. Closer to home, the St. Paul school district implemented a sister program in 2010 financed with millions of district dollars. The results? Miserable failure. Teacher Aaron Benner, an African American, wrote in the Pioneer Press, “There is no limit to the number of times a disruptive student will be returned to your class.” He further stated that safety, not teaching, had become his main concern.
Mr. Benner has since resigned from teaching. Can’t say I blame him. He was a fourth grade teacher.
A recent Thinking Minnesota poll of 500 registered voters touched on nine specific areas of concern to Minnesotans, one of which addressed using racial quotas for disciplining students. The results show that Minnesotans reject it by the resounding total of 59 points, a strong indication that some of our political leaders are way out of step with the majority of state citizens. The other eight issues addressed by the poll touch on areas of concern that are very revealing. I urge readers to visit AmericanExperiment.org to evaluate the methods and results of the poll. Our leaders need to hear from us on racial discipline and other important issues, and it occurs to me an excellent oppurtunity to do so will soon be here.
God Bless until next time,
Jeff
Hawkeye63 says
Ms. Ramaker, your rebuttal is effective as a personal attack but is totally lacking in facts and substance.
What kind of actions are contained in the new policies schools have agreed to follow? Are all students subject to equal treatment, or is race a factor when chosing the response to unacceptable behavior?
Mr. Erding’s premise seems to be that discipline should be color blind; that no ethnic group or gender should be treated differently than another, but all treated the same. That position is consistent with state and federal law and hardly seems to justify your contention that he is some kind of right wing radical who has abandoned his Christian faith.
In addition, Mr. Erding listed sources, authors names, statistics, and urged readers to do further research on the subject, none of which you did in your rebuttal. It is certainly disappointing that a person professing to be a member of entities that determine education and race relations in Minnesota would submit such a poorly done article. I hope this is an anomaly and not an example of the best you can do.
Kindra Ramaker says
Mr. Erding’s references…if you looked at them…were to articles such as one titled “No Thug Left Behind”
This isn’t even thinly veiled racism. This is out loud and proud racism.
I stand by my comments. Mr.Erding is misinterpreting statistical analysis of data as policy position, because he doesn’t understand what is going on. He is pointing readers to bad sources not related to these local issues at all. Your assertion that he is sharing valid viewpoints on this issue leads me to believe that you also did not look up the OCR report that was issued to the Rochester Public Schools, nor their policy responses.
If residents of Fillmore county want to truly understand these issues … I recommend they seek out community engagement groups with people who are actually aware of the issues rather than those asserting themselves as experts who are not.
Hawkeye63 says
Ms. Ramaker, I looked back at the article. I saw no reference to any local school. Did you? I did not see any reference to ” No thug left Behind”. Where did he refer to that? Please point it out.
I looked up Mr.Erdings sources, found them well researched and credible. If you have examples of MDHR. Policies on discipline that are raising the academic performance and behavior of minority students from a credible, independent source, please sharel them. If they have merit and have been successful, there must be reliable supporting data. If you are unable to supply such data, then shame on you for slandering the name of someone who has pointed out actions by an unelected government entity that are detrimental to students.
Hawkeye63 says
Ms. Ramaker, you have failed to provide any facts or data to support your accusations of racism. I have read and re-read Mr. Erding’s commentary, and I am baffled at your reference to “No Thug Left Behind”and to local schools and entities that are non-existent in the commentary.
How can you use non existant items to support your positions?
Is it true that MDHR sent 43 letters to schools and threatened to sue them? If not, please say so. Specifically, what data presented by Mr. Erding is inaccurate?
What actions and protocols have been imposed by MDHR? Have they been effective in improving student performance or not, and what data can you provide?
What if Mr. Erding’s motive is to point out actions that the data and evidence shows is actually making things worse in our schools? If that is the case, as the article in Thinking Minnesota contends, you have falsely accused a person of racism. If you cannot provide supporting data, your rebuttal is little more than character assassination. That is a sad thing. I hope it is not the case. Please reply and give us some data to support your position and the actions of MDHR. If you cannot, you should be prepared to apologize. Thank you.
MaryAnne says
Well said Kindra. Over the years I have seen Mr. Erding become more and more open about his racist and bigoted views. I have prayed too that Jesus finds His way into Mr. Erding’s heart. Many of his pieces have become unfounded and twisted ‘truths’, he often takes things out of context and uses them to support his ideology. In this piece in particular, everything you said is true, kindra, actual fact true – unlike Mr. Erding. And based on Mr. Erding’s previous pieces, I don’t know if there is a person left in fillmore county that would ever believe Mr. Erding supports public education in any way.
Kindra Ramaker says
Fillmore County Journal Readers – as both a member of the Fillmore County discussion group addressing “Conversations on Race in Fillmore County” as well as being informed by my work on the Olmsted County Human Rights Commission -I would like to address an opinion piece published in the Fillmore County Journal written by Jeff Erding, a long term citizen of Wykoff Minnesota, a carpenter, and my Catholic catechism teacher.
Mr. Erding jumps in with both feet into issues of human rights and public policy while doing very little to establish any sort of fundamental knowledge of either, despite how authoritatively he feels empowered to speak on both. I’d like to start by addressing his claim that the MDHR is “MDHR is using bullying tactics to impose a radical ideology”. Since my role as an Olmsted County Human Rights commissioner allows me to be very familiar with the mission of the Minnesota Department of Human Rights – I can only assume that this radical ideology he refers to is the idea that every child has an equal right to education – since this IS the ideology that each person who works in this department is committed to serving. He references race based discipline – which he does not define nor cite actual policies to establish this as something that is real. If Mr. Erding were actually acting from a sincere desire to understand and solve problems, he may have actually approached his research from a place of curiosity and intent to understand. The article shows that he did not approach his piece with curiosity or a desire to understand the issue more deeply because nowhere does he indicate any sort of understanding of the policies that have been implemented since the2015 OCR report in the Rochester Public Schools example and the fact that there are no “race based discipline policies”. Mr. Erding cites a 1997 decision by the US 7th Circuit Court of Appeals which actually has no application to the remedies that have been put in place by schools in our area to address the very real and data driven problems identified in Rochester Public Schools.
Mr. Erding also chooses to gas-light the issue by quoting teachers from a teachers union out of context – implying that their position is that the abuse that they suffer at the hands of students is in fact FROM the minority students who are experiencing disproportionate disciplinary action. He does not use either direct quotes or data to support his very strongly positioned assertion.
Speaking from a very personal place, as a student in Mr. Erding’s Catholic Catechism classes, I am both flabbergasted and deeply heartbroken at the divergence from the teaching of Jesus that Mr. Erding exhibits in his very racist attitudes towards the children of our communities. What breaks my heart most profoundly – is that one can have a family member who will undoubtedly be the victim of racism at some point in their life, and have none of the compassion that Christians are called to have to be brave enough to be a part of the solution rather than one of the oppressors. I speak from a place of a deep desire to root out racism in rural Minnesota when I call upon those who may have influence with Mr. Erding to call him back to the place of his Christian roots and reexamine his intentions.
I write this response expressing my personal opinions and not in formal response from the Olmsted County Human Rights Commission.
Thomas E.H. says
I think you paint with the right colours to depict Mr. Erding. I would be impressed to see this response of yours in the next week’s paper!