Discussion Post Activity (20 min)
Which Discussion Post Got You Thinking The Most? How so?
Benny
I feel like this final episode reinforces much of the content explained in the other episodes. The school officials still caters to white parents and when they want change through integration it’s only because they’ve been outcompeted in their own system that they once had an overwhelming advantage in. The section with the superintendent showed that school officials and white parents are constantly trying to dodge accountability for their actions; school inequality is always someone else’s fault. She repeatedly say’s “it’s not my decision” and blames her lack of anti-segregation actions because it needs the “chancelors approval”. I find it interesting that the DOE’s stance on integration and desegregation is by promoting it “organically” despite the fact that even after more than half a century these problems have still persisted. Hence, the DOE still refuses to acknowledge desegregation as a problem despite feeling morally superior to their southern counterpart.
Erica
English reaction #5: “We Know It, When We See It.”
A moment in Episode 5, ““We Know It, When We See It.”, that stood out to me was when Miriam Nunberg (mother and lawyer in D.O.E & Civil Rights)’s son was not accepted into the Big 3 and after talking to the higher ups in the District, Miriam was told that they could pull strings and could probably get her son in. Similarly, Amelia Costigan (mother of twins), got off the waiting list by luck. She used the words “we won”, which she reflected back later saying that it was too self-absorbed of her to only think about her own kids but not about everyone else’s. When Amelia said “If her kids won, someone else’s children lost.”, this line stuck with me because even though Amelia was happy that her kids were able to make it through, it meant others were denied the opportunity. This made Amelia question the fairness of the system, like less privileged students with different backgrounds being left out. This brings out the idea that high quality education doesn’t ONLY come from inequality but also from privilege, race, and status.
Ammar
“We know it when we see it” is such a shocking phrase when brought up! It feels very off, the fact that there are no specific things they look for but a vague feeling, and while it’s maybe not directly racist, there is definitely a clear bias here.
White parents were almost always involved in these groups that involve a whole district of different kinds of people, it never seems to come to them that they should also involve the majority. On top of this, the doe frequently played against the POC, which caused a lot of mistrust and a what feels like hopelessness. This kind of felt like a positive feedback loop of the doe failing it’s citizens causing them to stop trying, then new groups come in.
Interesting how the solution to stop white parents from overtaking the conversation, was to not let them talk and lots of planning ahead of time.
Khaz
One of the most surprising moments in Nice White Parents Episode 5 is the idea of “screening for nice.” It’s shocking to think that schools are putting such high expectations and pressure on nine-year-olds, using vague, subjective criteria to decide their futures. A principal openly saying, “We screen for nice,” and another administrator claiming, “We know it when we see it,” makes it clear how the system can be manipulated to favor privileged students while pretending to be fair.
What really stood out was how some parents of color weren’t even focused on integration—they just wanted better reading programs for their kids. While white parents were debating diversity and equity, these families were just trying to get basic resources that should have already been there. It raises a bigger question: Who gets to decide what change looks like?
Miriam Nunberg, a civil rights lawyer, didn’t question the system until her own son was denied entry into the top schools. That’s when she finally started seeing how unfair it was. This connects to Derrick Bell’s interest convergence theory—the idea that real change only happens when those in power see a personal benefit. But should we really have to wait for privileged people to feel uncomfortable before things get better for everyone?
Another Discussion Post You Saw?
Okay, let’s talk about some reactions to classmates’ thoughts.
Some themes I noticed from episode:
- PMS and “winning”: to “win” a spot but then shifting to “winning” fight with DOE. Doesn’t all of this seem so driven by these parents’ competitiveness or desire to have an influence? Is this true? If so, how much is it true? And does it matter?
- Around half way through the episode (around 28:00), Joffe-Walt seems to be painting a picture of what was effective to do: create pressure on the DOE and politicians, organizing with all parents, carefully planning how to work with all parents and implement any changes. How skeptical should we remain? What was promising?
- What do you make of “interest convergence”? It is a bit ambiguous toward the end: that some of what works is simply those in power need their piece of the pie to get interested but the hopeful reading is that some of these parents’ “interest” was to not be ashamed of their behavior and to live up to their ideals. What do you make of that?
- For a podcast called Nice White Parents, it makes sense to focus so much on, well, nice White parents. Kind of a bummer, though, that one of the lessons seems to be that this group of people needs to be involved for anything to happen. Is that the lesson? How can they have less influence so we can have a podcast called, idk, Parents?
Research Projects and Podcast (20-30 min)
I’m going to meet with people starting today and finishing up on Wednesday. If you did not sign up for a time to meet with me, sign up now.
Everyone’s been thinking of things, though. What do we have so far?:
- The history of the SEEK program
- How have DEI programs helped students
- How do schools get built and why? What is the process for that?
- What are the new adaptations to limit integration?
Let’s stand back and look at this list together. What might we do as a class together? Should it be one podcast or more? How many episodes?
One possibility we could do is to follow up on how District 15 did since Nice White Parents was recorded. Was the plan implemented? How did it go? Etc.
But what do you think? We can’t make everyone 100% happy but we can try to get as close as we can.
What are some initial ideas and should we take a vote yet? I can make a Google Form really quick and you can fill it out. We can change but will need to decide on the topic(s) probably by mid-March or so.
Rhetorical Analysis Draft Reading (30-45 min)
How are we feeling about getting your revision done by Wednesday, March 5 by 11:59pm?
CHANGED: Thursday, March 6 by 11:59pm
To think more on this project, let’s read another good first draft like we did the other day.
First, let’s remember good tenets of offering (and receiving!) feedback that we came up with from February 19:
- Be clear and be specific
- Not be nit-picky, losing forest for trees. Make sure the most important things stand out
- Ask writer about kind of feedback they want and also ways to give it
- Start with the positives and then move to constructive criticisms
- Present options rather than demands
- When receiving feedback, being optimistic. Be ready to receive.
For this draft, I want you to focus on:
- Like last week, where are there specific observations of rhetorical choices/effects and an explanation of why they are meaningful? What was 1-2 of your favorite moments from this paper?
- What is the argument of this paper, do you think? Could the argument be different in a new draft?
- Where can this writer be more specific? Both in claims and exploration of evidence and in the main argument itself.
To find the paper after today, go to Brightspace>our class>Student Writing (see left part of page under “Visual Table of Contents Widget”)>Rhetorical Analysis Draft 1 March 3
If Time, Independent Work (20 min)
We probably won’t have time, but if we do, work on your rhetorical analysis revisions and I can come around to check in with people about questions.
Next Time (5 min)
-Work on your rhetorical analysis draft, which must also include the cover letter. What again is in that cover letter?
-I also expect your weekly private writing. Here again is the prompt: Think back to something that you have done that made you proud–like proud in a way that’s like, “Damn, I can do this.” What was it? Why were you so proud? What helped you get to that moment where you felt you did a really good job at something? What did you do? But, also, what did others do for you that helped you get to that point? I want you to think about this because I want you to feel proud about the work you do on the podcast this semester.