It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Feds Order Colleges to Stop Checking Criminal/School Discipline History ...

page: 1
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2016 @ 09:49 PM
link   
The U.S. Department of Education is stretching their arms of enforcement into the college background check system.

Now they want schools to "overlook" criminal and school disciplinary actions.

The reason is because somebody thinks it is discriminatory against minorities.

Well maybe it is, but why is the Obama Administration going wild with regulations that are ultra-authoritarian?

I bet it's because it's an election year.

(full title too long for thread title)
Feds Order Colleges to Stop Checking Criminal/School Discipline History Because it Discriminates Against Minorities


The Obama administration has ordered the nation’s colleges and universities to stop asking applicants about criminal and school disciplinary history because it discriminates against minorities. Institutions are also being asked to offer those with criminal records special support services such as counseling, mentoring and legal aid once enrolled. The government’s official term for these perspective students is “justice-involved individuals” and the new directive aims to remove barriers to higher education for the overwhelmingly minority population that’s had encounters with the law or disciplinary issues through high school.

Instructions are outlined in a cumbersome document (Beyond the Box) issued by the U.S Department of Education (ED) this month. It says that “data show plainly that people of color are more likely to come in contact with the justice system due, in part, to punitive school disciplinary policies that disproportionately impact certain student groups and racial profiling.” Because education can be a powerful pathway to transition out of prison and into the workforce, it’s critical to ensure that admissions practices don’t disproportionately disadvantage justice involved individuals, the directive states. Colleges and universities should also refrain from inquiring about a student’s school disciplinary history—including past academic dishonesty—because that too discriminates against minorities. Civil rights data compiled by ED show “black students are suspended and expelled at a rate three times greater than white students and often for the same types of infractions.”


What about Safety ?





posted on May, 20 2016 @ 09:59 PM
link   
Modern day public schools....



Obviously any background checks for this sort of thing is simply "discriminating" against minorities.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 10:02 PM
link   
“justice-involved individuals”... Ahahahaha.

I'm glad our tax dollars helped pay for the hours long meeting between advisors that it must've taken to invent such a deliciously PC term for criminals.

It's like "undocumented migrant workers" but even more so clean sounding!



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 10:49 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


It already started with our grade schools and high schools. The Justice Department has threatened schools who discipline too many minorities by withholding funds.

Barry the Traitor is pushing for an all out race war. His punk ass needs led out of the white house in chains!


edit on 20-5-2016 by seeker1963 because: sp



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 11:17 PM
link   


The reason is because somebody thinks it is discriminatory against minorities.


Absolutely astonishing they don't think the same thing about gun control.

They ALWAYS love trying to have their cake and eat it too.
edit on 20-5-2016 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 11:22 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

By stating that it is discriminatory against minorities is a racist stance because that means the administration thinks that minorities have a discipline problem.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Feds Order Colleges to Stop Checking Criminal/School Discipline History
False.

There is no such order. Nor is there any suggestion that discipline records not be examined.
www2.ed.gov...

edit on 5/20/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
but why is the Obama Administration going wild with regulations that are ultra-authoritarian?


Care to show us those regulations?



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Sort of like not being able to look away from a car crash, I actually read through that thing. There is SO much fluff in there I couldn't decide what to quote so I'll opt to go with the target audience and start from there....





Who should read this guide?

College and university presidents, admissions personnel, enrollment management staff, academic deans, student services personnel, professors, and counselors

Organizations that work with justice-involved individuals


Except for the New-Speak term "justice-involved individuals" I have no problem with providing guidance to organizations who's specific goals are to help criminals make better decisions moving forward.

As for the first group (university presidents, admissions personnel, etc)... I would find it comical if there weren't such serious repercussions.

People (either students through loans or parents directly) are prepared to shell out hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay for their or their child's education and now we are stripping away their right to know who they are going to be learning with (or living with if it's an away-school)?

If people feel that there is a disparity in how high school students are disciplined (which I personally have never seen proof of, only vague theories in both directions), then make that argument on the high school level. Fix it there.

At the end of the day, even if one proposes that a white kid got away with something that a black kid wouldn't have gotten away with... True or False?.... did the kid do the thing he got punished for? If so, do prospective schools have a right to know who they are letting in so that can be conveyed to people that are about to make one of the most important (and expensive) investments of their entire life?

Editorial: I suspect this is another one of those situations where people cheer something.... so long as it doesn't affect THEIR kids in a negative way.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 11:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: xuenchen
but why is the Obama Administration going wild with regulations that are ultra-authoritarian?


Care to show us those regulations?


Bathroom police, for starters.

School lunches, for seconds.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: eluryh22

There is SO much fluff in there I couldn't decide what to quote so I'll opt to go with the target audience and start from there...
I agree that there is much fluff in the document.



If so, do prospective schools have a right to know who they are letting in so that can be conveyed to people that are about to make one of the most important (and expensive) investments of their entire life?
They do. And they should have the sense to not base the decision on a simple yes/no criterion. Once you get through the fluff that's what the document actually says. Such a decision is unfair in general and statistically unfair to blacks (that, as you say, is another topic).

No government order that anything be done. No regulations. The OP is erroneous. Surprise.



edit on 5/21/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 12:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I just feel that if the government put as much effort into providing people with opportunities on the front end as they do with sweeping things under the rug on the back end, EVERYONE would be better off.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 12:10 AM
link   
a reply to: eluryh22

I'm not sure what you mean. On the surface that's a pretty liberal outlook, it would seem.

How do you think the government should provide opportunities?



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 12:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Sadly, it's not a big leap from government "guidelines" to government mandates.... As seen recently with the whole trans-bathroom distraction where schools are threatened with funding (or lack thereof).

Note: Colleges (especially private ones) are a different issue. I get that.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 12:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: eluryh22

I'm not sure what you mean. On the surface that's a pretty liberal outlook, it would seem.

How do you think the government should provide opportunities?


I'll absolutely explain but at the moment it's late in my neck of the woods and time for me to shut down (the computer and the house).

I'll just say I don't consider myself a liberal or conservative (based on the current definitions). I consider myself a realist.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 12:19 AM
link   
a reply to: eluryh22




Sadly, it's not a big leap from government "guidelines" to government mandates.... As seen recently with the whole trans-bathroom distraction where schools are threatened with funding (or lack thereof).

The only government mandate involved with that were the laws passed by the state and local governments about who has to use which restroom. And is quite different from this topic.


I consider myself a realist.
A reasonable position. I guess. Depends on how you view reality though, doesn't it?

edit on 5/21/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 03:30 AM
link   
SPAM REMOVED BY ADMIN
edit on May 22nd 2016 by Djarums because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 03:31 AM
link   
a reply to: openInvent

What court case are you referring to?



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 06:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: xuenchen


It already started with our grade schools and high schools. The Justice Department has threatened schools who discipline too many minorities by withholding funds.

Barry the Traitor is pushing for an all out race war. His punk ass needs led out of the white house in chains!

Way too many variables for a good old fashioned race war. It ain't just black and white anymore. Some people seem to lust for a race war.



posted on May, 21 2016 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I always thought doing background checks only discriminates against criminals


The federal government probably doesn't have any legal authority to do this anyway, except for threats of withholding funds like they have been doing.

With all the stunts Obama, the liar of the millennia has pulled just to get votes in the past, this stunt follows that same exact pattern. Obama is a terminal disease for this country and we can't get rid of the skunk fast enough.



new topics




 
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join