One can’t freely choose a narrative on issues that physically impact you. We reason forward using our non-fiction narratives. Living the wrong narrative is like trying to use a New York City subway map on the D.C. Metro or San Francisco’s BART.

Most people use analysis to justify, rather than reach, their conclusions. I believe Mr. Jackson started with a gut perception of what he wanted to do and backed into the essay. He could not reach his essay with accurate, documentable fact as his starting point.

1. Phil Jackson paints a bleak picture regarding drop-out rates and Prometheus 6 wants to correct it.
2. I wade in and say, “Hold on, Jackson’s numbers may be wrong, but he points to a general condition that is true and provides some concrete suggestions about moving on out of the morass.”
3. P6 says, “Indeed the numbers are wrong, and therefore the picture Jackson paints is distorted.”
4. Scruggs says, “Here are some better numbers.”
5. Phil Jackson may find that it’s to his advantage to overstate the problems in Chicago.
6. P6 says that Jackson’s error feeds “the soft bigotry of low expectations,” a phrase that lights up the terrain for me.
7. Meanwhile, P6 has pointed us to other significant source material, like the Advancement Project’s paper on “Education Lockdown” which a friend pointed out to me has echoes of the Jena, Louisiana story.

Meaning no disrespect, I’m reminded right now of that merry band of truth seekers on the Yellow Brick Road, each of us with our own perspectives and needs, arm-in-arming it as we set off to see the wizard. Only we have the benefit of having seen the movie and we know that if the wizard’s there at all, he won’t have any better answers than we ourselves can provide.

For all the current data and sophisticated trend analyses and what-not, the situation may also be seen as a clash of narratives. P6’s conscious use of “The War of Northern Aggression” underscores this, and his link to the WaPo’s article on a recent Pew push poll that fed “white values” as the proper answers delineates two competing perspectives.

Nevertheless, it is an error with consequences. Why would the general public worry about education for Black children if only half of them graduate? It’s an error at the heart of “the soft bigotry of low expectations.”

And I would accept that everyone has their own path but at some point in the real world you’re going to have a vote on issues that affect me.

Estimates of the black high school graduation rate with a regular diploma range between 69- 75%, with the NELS showing about a 74% rate. Of the one-quarter of black students who drop out, about half go on to receive a GED (general education development), which qualifies them for entry into post-secondary institutions and the military.

The apparent low graduation rate is the result of:

The low-graduation rate story exaggerates dropout rates partly because it computes these rates by dividing the number of diplomas awarded by the number of students who were in ninth grade four years earlier. But these calculations fail to adequately account for a national phenomenon known as the “ninth-grade bulge,” which causes ninth-grade enrollment, especially for minorities, to greatly exceed the number of “entering ninth-graders.” Growing public pressure against “social promotion” has led more students to be retained in ninth grade. In the 2000 school year, for example, there were 13% more ninth than eighth graders overall, and 26% more black and Hispanic students in ninth than in eighth grade. Calculating from this atypically high ninth grade enrollment yields graduation rates that are inaccurately low. What’s more, the bulge has grown over the past 20 years, leading to the erroneous finding from these data that graduation rates have fallen.

It’s entirely possible for someone acting in good faith, using currently acceptable sociological methods, to come to conclusions that are off base.

P6 has a lot in common with me. We’re both heavy into truth and justice. Trouble is, he wants me to accept the strength of his convictions without testing my own against the truth that I find.

That is an unfortunate statement. When you explained in my comments that your “may” statements weren’t definitive because you hadn’t fact checked them yet, what was my response?

And I quote: “Fact check away.”

Frankly, I find you want me to accept the strength of YOUR convictions without YOUR having tested the facts at hand. Meanwhile, I’m actually living with the people under discussion, simply reporting what I see. That, and a sprinkle of social science research when absolutely necessary.