Readers write for Dec. 25, 2010

The 4-3 vote to change the school boundaries in Eden Prairie was very controversial ("Eden Prairie OKs changing school lines," Dec. 22). Many people have opposed the change, stating that it would "ruin" their child's education.

As a student, I felt the change was more about evening out the differences in social and economic standards. I believe that racial integration and income-level integration is inevitable. As more and more people decide to live in Eden Prairie, there will be diversity. There will be an ever-increasing number of people of different races, and there will be those who are fortunate and those who are not as fortunate. As it is in many other cities, these differences may make Eden Prairie separated over time. I am afraid that this would spill over into our school system.

Keeping the current school system for a prolonged period would segregate the schools, which would go against what Eden Prairie Schools want to be, which is "where students are educated for success in our diverse and changing world." I fear a school system in which there are schools with only certain types of people. This is a diverse and changing world, and we need to change along with it. Nonintegrated schools simply won't cut it.

Eden Prairie's education standards are already some of the best, and they will only improve with diversified classrooms within each school. Now that the decision has been made, we should look to the brighter side of things and think about how we can improve upon this decision -- not just remember how things used to be.

ADARSH RAVISHANKAR, EDEN PRAIRIE

• • •

We all want our own children and grandchildren to have the best educations possible. In addition, citizens guided by enlightened self-interest will want every child to have an excellent education. Today's children will grow up to run the country. Let's prepare them to deal with the huge challenges that face a collective society.

We have been welcomed with open arms by both teachers and kids. Our thought is that if it takes a village to raise a child, we can each one/reach one/teach one.

LOIS HALL AND Phil Morton, Eden Prairie

• • •

I am responding to Prof. Myron Orfield's unwarranted assertion that "a group of white racist parents" opposed the Eden Prairie pupil redistribution plan ("All eyes on school boundary vote," Dec. 20).

As someone who has been involved in civil rights, has taught school and is currently responsible for scoring school achievement tests, I am asking Orfield and the advocates of student redeployment to make their case based on proven results. While I heartily support objectives of equality and fairness, I must ask: Where have similar programs been successful in closing achievement gaps?

Where is the evidence that somewhere, anywhere, altering the student mix has produced measurable, substantial and sustained improvement in closing this achievement gap?

Results of similar, long-term efforts in Minneapolis and Milwaukee are hardly reassuring. Countless school districts have made concerted efforts to redistribute students based on socioeconomics and race. If there are success stories, I would like to hear them. Where is the evidence that these expensive, disruptive moves achieve the desired performance goals?

Finally, I would like someone to explain why redeployment is supposed to work. Do poorer students learn more when sitting next to affluent students? Does a mixed-enrollment school produce better student behavior? Since Eden Prairie's schools are virtually identical in terms of quality and programs, why would redistributing children improve performance? I'd really like to know.

DOUG LIND, EDEN PRAIRIE

In a Dec. 22 Opinion Exchange column about Christianity ("In the United States, it is no longer one with the culture"), Ross Douthat used the term Christian or Christianity 20 times, but not once the name of Jesus.

A Christian message without Jesus is nothing more than cultural and political noise.

Any wonder that there is a lack of power, influence or awe in the "movement" Douthat refers to?

WARD BREHM, WAYZATA

• • •

Here are the top 10 reasons why Jesus would not be born in Minnesota:

9.Relatives all vacationing in Boca Raton.

8. Mary unable to nurse due to frozen milk.

7.Politicians threatened to arrest and deport Jesus as an illegal alien.

6.Wise men cannot follow star because of six-month cloud cover.

5.Doesn't want to be associated with the Minnesota Vikings.

3.Federal health care money declined for people living in poverty.

2.Snow caved in roof of stable.

1.Inn is serving lutefisk.