[Andre_Wanglin]

Why do you characterize normal parental investment as privilege? Is it to exculpate parents who neglect their children? Again, as the students in The Promise School not only enjoyed these "privileges" but also twice as much schooling, what would happen if all students received twice as much schooling? Does it stand to reason that the claimed success in closing the achievement gap would persist? In terms of resource allocation, why should some populations be excluded from receiving this additional benefit?

I have never heard anyone express any prejudice toward "Asians" regarding a lack of intelligence. In fact, the usual stereotype is precisely the opposite.

[bildung]

> Why do you characterize normal parental investment as privilege? Is it to exculpate parents who neglect their children?

Children usually can't choose their parents. The point of public school services like those described in the study is to lower the burden on disadvantaged children.

[lern_too_spel]

> Why do you characterize normal parental investment as privilege?

Privilege: a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people.

The children of educated parents have many advantages, some of which I have enumerated. Black children are born disproportionately to uneducated parents due to generations of denying blacks education followed by generations of denying them good education in an environment that is conducive to education (where there are multiple parents at home who can help, for example).

> Again, as the students in The Promise School not only enjoyed these "privileges" but also twice as much schooling, what would happen if all students received twice as much schooling?

As I already stated, white students in aggregate are already receiving more extracurricular educational enrichment. Adding more schooling would be substitutive with that additional education.

> In terms of resource allocation, why should some populations be excluded from receiving this additional benefit?

Excluded from what? This should be an option to anybody. White students in Harlem had the same access to these programs.

> I have never heard anyone express any prejudice toward "Asians" regarding a lack of intelligence.

The literacy rate in Korea was 22% at the conclusion of WW2, but Korea now performs near the top in international exams. Descendants of Chinese who arrived in the 19th century continue to perform poorly on intelligence tests, yet we see Hong Kong and Shanghai perform very well on those same tests.

The 19th century stereotype of Chinese was of opium-addled superstitious barbarians.

[sheepmullet]

> Black children are born disproportionately to uneducated parents due to generations of denying blacks education

Not long ago the average white American had only a basic formal education.

My father left school when he was 12 and over half his class left at that age.

My grandfather left school when he was 10.

If that was a key reason then we would only have to have waited a generation.

[lern_too_spel]

You had the advantage of good schooling in a decent (though not great) environment, just as the Koreans and Shanghai kids did or are an outlier. You take one advantage and claim that's the only one. Blacks have for generations lived in an environment where they did not have access to jobs that require an education, even if they were able to obtain one by sheer force of will, leaving entire communities without a drive for attainment.