Talk:Casady School

Oklahoma Low‑importance

	Oklahoma portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oklahoma, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oklahoma on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OklahomaWikipedia:WikiProject OklahomaTemplate:WikiProject OklahomaOklahoma articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Schools Low‑importance

	Schools portal This article is related to WikiProject Schools, a collaborative effort to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.SchoolsWikipedia:WikiProject SchoolsTemplate:WikiProject Schoolsschool articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please sign any discussion by typing --~~~~ after your post. --nertzy 05:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please let the Current Issues section remain. It is a highly significant part of the Casady experience, and the point of Wikipedia is to provide unbiased, informative articles.

Casady School[edit]

If the point is to provide unbiased information about Casady School, then that is the argument for removing the Current Issues section. It is purely inflammatory, completely biased and is a personal point of view vs. the facts about the school contained elsewhere in the article.

Current Issues Section[edit]

As a highly involved and concered alumna of Casady School, I applaud the Current Issues section because it reflects the attitude of about half the student body or more. Everyone is aware of the fact that Casady is dominated by Nichols Hills kids and parents. It is a fact that many of the trustees are from Nichols Hills and that all hail from wealth. It is also a fact that Casady is not as ethnically deverse as most other independent schools; at no point in Casady's history has the upper division had more than ten African-American and Hispanic students combined (student body of over 300). The sentence about the gay-strait alliance actually occured.

The reason this segment is not bias (and actually makes the piece less so) is because this aspect of Casady school is overwhelming. Parents and students frequently discuss these issues, and they have been present since at least the 1970s. I understand why someone not affiliated with Casady may feel what is expressed in the previous comment after reading the section. But any student, faculty member, or alumni is aware of the issues expressed in the section.

As a member of the Casady community, I feel strongly that the current issues section is appropriate. Though it may be a bit too impassioned, it is still honest. I feel this way because of a deep affection and concern I have for Casady. I hope the Casady community will work on these issues and improve them in the long run.

Something being overwhelming does not make it unbiased. I would like to hear a better defense than that. Also, the important part is not whether this information is presented, but how it's presented. Currently the article has POV problems in that it only gives one side of the argument. --nertzy 05:31, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current Issues[edit]

the section is such an incredibly inherent part of life at Casady. Nothing that is objectively written about Casady should dismiss these issues because they are so crucial to the experience of being a student at the school. Anyone connected to the school (like the person who made the previous comment) has absolutely no doubt about this.

Revisions[edit]

If users plan on adding to this page, please make edits informative and don't add unnecessary revisions to the already existing work. The last user, 151.205.101.250, has made the page less informative and less readable with his/her contributions. There was more information in the already existing opening paragraph. The user's revisions of the paragraph were also poorly written. The user's prose was again poor (and less detalied) in his/her revision of the Current Issues section, where the user arbitrarily added the St. Mark's comparison while deleting other, more relavant details.

Current Issues Section[edit]

"Casady is one of the most generous and diverse independent schools in the Southwest. Casady has a number of Indian and Middle Eastern students as well as several students from Russia and Asia. There is also a substantial number of Jewish students."

As a recent alumnus, I feel this statement glosses over the lack of racial diversity in the school. True, there are a number of students who hail from different backgrounds and bring a new perspective to the traditional, Judeo-Christian culture Casady embodies. However, I don't feel the school adequately appreciates these differences. This is not the administration's fault-- it is a symptom of the need for high schoolers to feel as though they have to fit in. The majority of the students are white and upper-middle class, and many of those students do live in Nichols Hills. As an alumnus, I know exactly what people mean when they refer to the "Nichols Hills lifestyle." The problem, it seems, will be deciding how to formalize such trends in a Wikipedia article. I don't pretend to know the right way to say it, but the first sentence, the way it stands, is poorly stated. It masks the inherent lack of overall diversity and intermingling in the school (represented by the "gay-straight alliance fiasco of 2005", as I like to term it, as well as the physical separation between Vose North and South), and reduces students of different backgrounds to numbers of countries on the map.

Additionally, I feel like the entire section is poorly written. But perhaps I just have a bias for good grammar.

Please make helpful contribution to this page and elsewhere on Wikipedia. Don't make pages less informative with revisions.