Not sure about that. With correlated predictors you cannot reliably ascertain on whether the effects on a dependent variable are the result of one correlated predictor or another. In this case to what degree is school achievement due to SES or racial factors. The actual analyses we did was looking at parental involvement in school achievement. Given that ethnicity and SES presumably are antecedent, yet have their own effects on the other downstream variables, ascertaining the direct and effects solely due to parental involvement and not the correlated predictors was extremely difficult.Its the same argument used for whether or not to use a correlated or orthogonal rotation in a maximum likelihood factor analysis.
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Jerry Barnes <critic...@gmail.com> wrote: > > You are confusing fact with correlation. > > On statistics, if you torture the numbers long enough, they'll tell you > exactly what you want. > > On your correlation, I contend that you can disregard race altogether. I > say that the number one indicator of poverty is poverty. That is, someone > from a poor family has a higher chance of being poor regardless of race. A > kid from a poor white family has a greater chance of being poor than a black > kid from a middle class family. A Hispanic kid from a poor family has a > greater chance of being poor than an Asian kid from a middle class family. > And so on. > > > "BTW that's an interesting narrative you saying. Its almost as if that's how > you want it to be." > > Nice. Good strategy. Shift and deflect. Then only narrative I want is for > every man to be successful on his own terms on an even playing field. > > I could and will say the same of your narrative. You want race and poverty > to be interrelated. If it is true, and it's not, then the failure of > welfare doesn't have to be explained. If it is true, and it's not, then the > redistribution of wealth might seem fair. If it's true, and it's not, then > you don't have to explain the absolute failure of schools when in comes to > educating minorities. > > > I'll go even further and say that this narrative of yours is straight up > racism. You are implying that certain races are doomed to poverty just by > their race. A dangerous attitude that justifies people accepting > generational poverty. > > Let me leave you with some words and statistics from Walter Williams, who is > black: > > Only 30 to 40 percent of black males graduate from high school. Many of > those who do graduate emerge with reading and math skills of a white > seventh- or eighth-grader. This is true in cities where a black is mayor, a > black is superintendent of schools and the majority of principals and > teachers are black. It's also true in cities where the per pupil education > expenditures are among the highest in the nation. > > Across the U.S., black males represent up to 70 percent of prison > populations. Are they in prison for crimes against whites? To the contrary, > their victims are primarily other blacks. Department of Justice statistics > for 2001 show that in nearly 80 percent of violent crimes against blacks, > both the victim and the perpetrator were the same race. In other words, it's > not Reaganites, Bush supporters, right-wing ideologues or the Klan causing > blacks to live in fear of their lives and property and making their > neighborhoods economic wastelands. > > What about the decline of the black family? In 1960, only 28 percent of > black females between the ages of 15 and 44 were never married. Today, it's > 56 percent. In 1940, the illegitimacy rate among blacks was 19 percent, in > 1960, 22 percent, and today, it's 70 percent. Some argue that the state of > the black family is the result of the legacy of slavery, discrimination and > poverty. That has to be nonsense. A study of 1880 family structure in > Philadelphia shows that three-quarters of black families were nuclear > families, comprised of two parents and children. In New York City in 1925, > 85 percent of kin-related black households had two parents. In fact, > according to Herbert Gutman in "The Black Family in Slavery and Freedom: > 1750-1925," "Five in six children under the age of 6 lived with both > parents." Therefore, if one argues that what we see today is a result of a > legacy of slavery, discrimination and poverty, what's the explanation for > stronger black families at a time much closer to slavery a time of much > greater discrimination and of much greater poverty? I think that a good part > of the answer is there were no welfare and Great Society programs. > > > It seem that you enjoy your statistics. These statistics are sobering and > sad. Where does the poverty come from? Mr. Williams thinks a lot of the > poverty problems come from government interference instead of race. I > agree. > > > J > > - > > The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are > willing to work and give to those who would not. I think myself that we have > more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on > the labor of the industrious. - Thomas Jefferson > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:323325 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
