question for Bracey on Re: Fw: More NY Times

[Free2teach1@aol.com]

Jerry,
 
I'm not quite clear what you mean by being careful about interpreting  this 
study. Perhaps you could elaborate on the raw data
and how it might be properly and accurately interpreted. Although the  raw 
data or statistical numbers might not show public schools do as well as  
privates, isn't the significance of the study the focus on adjustments  for "client 
differences" and how these findings are interpreted in the  broader political 
context?
 
Thanks,
Judy R.
 
In a message dated 7/18/2006 12:42:20 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
gbracey1@verizon.net writes:

Seeing Jim Horn's comments, thought he and other ARNers  might find my 
comments of some interest.  We have to be careful about  interpreting this study, 
though.  It doesn't really show that the publics  perform as well as the 
privates.  That's clearly not true in the raw  data.  It shows that the privates' 
advantage is due largely to their  clientele and the publics would match them had 
they the same clientele.   But they don't.  The study's adjustments for 
client differences are  statistical.  It's a welcome finding that will surprise 
some, but in  reality the publics need to continue to find ways of educating 
harder to reach  kids--all those poor children, minority children, special needs 
children, and  English Language Learners



 
Judy  Rabin

Given the existence of an idealized vision of the community,  movements of 
protest are likely to occur within the political nation when the  discrepancy 
between the image and the reality comes to seem intolerably  wide.

--   J.H. Elliott