Talk:Lee Academy (South Carolina)

Further reading

This study provides some information that might help the article: [1] Jacona (talk) 22:21, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Problematic on so many levels

Hello Pmwatson17, your recent edits to Robert E. Lee Academy were rolled back because they weren't based on independent, reliable sources. I appreciate that you registered as an editor. As of now, yours is considered a Special Purpose Account, one created to work on one or a small number of articles. In any case, if you are the headmistress of the school, you have a conflict of interest wp:COI. More generally, and something I would expect from someone who is responsible for producing graduates who are literate and capable of critical thinking, I observe that writing in the first person plural is entirely inappropriate for an encyclopedia. The work gives a single reference, the school's website. Basically, you are making an argument from authority. If one of your seniors turned in a research paper written in this voice with a single reference supplied by the subject of the essay, what grade would you give? Your text overwrites valuable information about the grade levels the school serves. More to the point, it whitewashes the school's history, well documented from 1965 until 2016. History is not always what we want to hear, but hear it we must. I invite you to exercise your editing skills on other articles. After you learn the rules for a COI editor, you may contribute to this school's article. Rhadow (talk) 22:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Request to update Lee Academy Page

To: whom it may concern.

Hello, dear editors and BillHPike, Jacona.

I found that the information on this page is extremely biased, unsourced and violates several WP policies including, undue weight, tendentious editing, NPOV, unverifiable sources and more. I’ve made a list of edits and provided new sources also explain my point of view. Please, kindly revise the page without prejudice. 

Update 1: Move the name (title) of this page to a new one: “Lee Academy” or “Lee Academy, Bishopville”

   We recently renamed the school to “Lee Academy”. 

Sources: 1) Secondary source about new head of school and re-branding. https://www.theitem.com/stories/head-of-lee-academy-details-the-reasons-behind-name-change,348704

2) New school’s website: https://www.myleeacademy.org

Update 2: Infobox panel Please, change the website name to myleeacademy. The current name is outdated and no longer correct. https://www.myleeacademy.org

The page now has undue weight to specific topic, in this case “segregation”. Although we do not reject the fact of being established as a segregation school in 1965, the school has been transforming and many reforms were applied. Update 3:

During the 2015-2016 year, the school enrolled a single black child.[1]

This is outdated and biased information. I also believe that this doesn’t belong to the Lead Section. We are no longer a segregation school and we are do not discriminate black students. Please, check our Admission requirements: Lee Academy does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national or ethnic origin when considering applications of prospective students or personnel. The Academy is a 501(c)3 corporation https://www.myleeacademy.org/admissions Unfortunately, the tuition is still high and unaffordable for many students in the city but this comes from the fact that we are a private school and governmental financial aid or scholarship is not available. In comparison with many other schools, the tuition is relatively low and it covers the wages of the teachers and other educational activities. The school also provides 30% of the college credits.

Update 4: As of June 1, 2020, we have a new head of school - Brad Bochette (a graduate of Florence Christian School and a former athletic director at The King's Academy)

https://scnow.com/sports/high-school/brad-bochette-talks-about-his-move-to-job-as-head-of-school-at-robert-e/article_48b4c176-7618-11ea-9011-3fa14d3f493c.html

Update 5: Please, update the positive information about our school: https://www.theitem.com/stories/head-of-lee-academy-details-the-reasons-behind-name-change,348704

Update 6: The school is named after the Confederate general and slaveholder Robert E. Lee. According to Tom Turnipseed, Robert E. Lee academy was part of a pattern of segregation academies established in response to desegregation and named after Confederate leaders.[6] This is biased information. First, the school has a different name now related to the county name (Lee County) Our county has the same name (Lee County) and the public school in Bishopville is named “Lee Central High School”. Please, remove “ slaveholder”. Although it is correct but this doesn’t belong to this page and makes it look non-neutral, clearly violating NPOV policy. In relation to our page, this looks very biased and the reason the school was named after him back in 1965 was not because he was a slaveholder. If you use the same logic, then you can add the same information to many other schools in the US as many founding father including George W. Washington were slaveholders. I can agree to this only if you put the same information to all the schools named after George W. Washington and other editors do not remove this information. I brought this example to show the absurdity of this term.

Update 7: As of 2000, Robert E. Lee academy did not enroll a single black student. In contrast, 92% of students in Lee County public schools were black.[7

This is incorrect. Please show also new and correct statistics: As of 2019, the school had 5 Asian, 3 black, 1 Hispanic, 1 Native American, 5 mixed races and 268 white students. If you take a look at the statistics of Bishopville 2010 census, “The racial makeup of the city was 65.83% African American, 32.83% White, 0.11% Native American, 0.44% Asian, 0.22% from other races, and 0.57% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 1.31% of the population.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishopville,_South_Carolina

(Demographics Section) Other races are represented equally to the Whites or even higher. The only exception is Black population but this is due to the financial barrier and relatively high tuition fees. http://www.schooltuitions.org/school/bishopville-sc-robert_e_lee_academy The public schools are free and have free or subsidized lunches. Please, show all the statistics properly if you decided to do it.

Update 8: In contrast, 92% of students in Lee County public schools were black.[7

Again, this is incorrect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_County,_South_Carolina https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishopville,_South_Carolina Black population: 64.3% White population: 33.4 %

Now, it looks like a very different picture, isn’t it?

Update 9: As of 2020, the school prohibits Afro style haircuts

This is taken out of the context. The handbook citation:

“Boys’ hair must be clean and neatly groomed. Hairstyles may not have unnatural color or be extreme, radical e.g. afro, mohawk, ponytail, or rat tail.” This is related to our policy for all students including all races and ponytail or rat tail have nothing to do with race. If you want to write it properly, then add all this citation or remove “afrojack”. Now, it looks like a biased edit or for at least as a biased original research.

Update 10 Remove this sentence: Tunispeed argued that, as a result of the support of Robert E. Lee Academy by Bishopville's white power structure, public schools in Lee county struggled to raise taxes to educate their predominantly black student populations.[6]

https://www.newspapers.com/missing.php

This source doesn’t show the article (unsourced) and also looks like original research.

Fritzsmith20 (talk) 12:50, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

• I will use the source you provided to update the article. As far as the founding of the school, that's history, and as many Robert E. Lee fans have been fond of saying in recent days, we can't erase history. That's also true as of the demographics as of a point in time. I believe the demographics cited in the article come from the NCES, which may use a different geographic grouping than you're using. The term "afrojack" is not in the article, don't know what you're talking about. Thanks for your interest. Jacona (talk) 12:59, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
• The article states that they are going to change the name, but have not as of yet officially done so. And the head of school went out of his way to be clear that the renaming has nothing to do with racial tolerance.Jacona (talk) 13:11, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

• Fixed this link. The article is very interesting as it points out what the effect of having virtually all the white kids has done for education in the county. Support for funding the schools has been virtually non-existent, the roof even collapsed at Bishopville High School, but the tax base has fled to supporting Robert E. Lee Academy. This school was founded by racists for the purpose of perpetuating segregation and unequal education, and has succeeded in doing so for far too long. It is still segregated at this time.Jacona (talk) 13:49, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Second request for updates

Hello, Jacona! Thanks for your help. Yet, you didn’t address some of my requests. Please, check this again:

1) As of 2020, the school prohibits Afro style haircuts. – This is taken out of the context and makes an impression of discrimination in effect while it is not the case at all. Here is the source used (citation 10) The handbook citation used: (p.p. 37-38): https://2e48fab1-412c-4897-acc3-9e2d1cd9bf54.filesusr.com/ugd/8aca29_2babb3b8e6df459eae2d958ff11d87a2.pdf

“Boys’ hair must be clean and neatly groomed. Hairstyles may not have unnatural color or be extreme, radical e.g. afro, mohawk, ponytail, or rat tail.” This is related to our policy for all students including all races and ponytail or rat tail have nothing to do with race. If you want to write it properly, then add the entire text from the citation instead of using just “afrojack style haircuts”. ‘’’It clearly makes the wrong impression again.’’’

2) Please, move the page to a new name as we have all the sources for that: New page title: ‘’’Lee Academy’’’ or ‘’’Lee Academy, Bishopville’’’ This source officially and clearly shows new name of the school as of July 21, 2020: https://www.theitem.com/stories/head-of-lee-academy-details-the-reasons-behind-name-change,348704 (Secondary source) If you scroll down the page, you will see the institution is referred as “Lee Academy” thereafter. Even the screenshot of the article shows the new name of the school on our new website: Lee Academy, Bishopville And our new website shows the same information: https://www.myleeacademy.org

You have two sources and it is more than enough to rename the page according to the WP guidelines.

3) The head of school is Maria Watson This information in the History section is no longer correct. You already put it right in the Infobox panel using our new source - Head of school Brad Bochette[

4) Please replace “slaveholder” with “an American Confederate general “ or -a commander of the Confederate States Army during the American Civil War as it shows on his own page in the Introduction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Lee#Lee's_views_on_race_and_slavery According to this main article about Robert E. Lee, his views on slavery are very complex and no editor names him “a slaveholder” on his own page. See, section: Lee's views on race and slavery

Therefore, I conclude, we have an example of a marginal biased and non-encyclopedic opinion on this Wikipedia page which would most probably not be tolerated on Robert E. Lee’s own page. I suggest to ask any of Robert E. Lee’s page editors whether I’m right or not.

5)))‘’’One-sided biased use of the sources:’’’ ‘’’The use of the sources is out of the context and one-sided. This is an outdated source from 1990s (citation# 7):’’’ https://www.newspapers.com/clip/56299779/its-time-for-educational-justice/ According to the same source, “Lee County is two-thirds black with half of them living in poverty.” This is actually the main obstacle now – the school fees which are not affordable because the most of the population lives below average income in the US. Even our fees in comparison with many private schools are lower than average but we can’t afford to lower them even more because we need to pay teachers and for the school’s infrastructure and other services. We do not receive any public financial aid. Another source (citation# 12) speaks about positive changes, which reflect that segregation is the part of our history but doesn’t exist in the present. The only barrier is financial but as the school is private (with no financial aid from the government), it simply cannot afford reduce the rates for students with lower income

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/black-and-white-football-players-find-common-ground-in-a-south-carolina-county/2014/10/30/d381b08c-5b31-11e4-b812-38518ae74c67_story.html

Another source (citation# 12) speaks about positive changes, which reflect that segregation is the part of our history but doesn’t exist in the present. The only barrier is financial but as the school is private (with no financial aid from the government), it simply cannot afford reduce the rates for students with lower income If we still had any segregation in effect (which is unlawful) – these event would not be possible!

Fritzsmith20 (talk) 13:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I previously made several of these changes, only to have them wiped out as collateral damage of another editor's posting of copyright violations, so I'm not in a rush to get back to it. As far as the name change, the last time I checked, which was after the source provided above, the name change was still not legally effective; I decided to wait for that. I will make some updates when I have time to work on this, but I won't be hasty as this has proven controversial, so I want to check sources carefully. As for statements (excuses?) as to why few minorities attend the school, one has to be careful and look into it in-depth. In many segregation academies the racists tend to put up a lot of smoke-and-mirrors proclaiming non-discrimination in order to gain tax-exempt status while simultaneously creating barriers and providing warnings (name it after a famous slaveholder, use a mascot that implies racism, etc.). It's OK, we have time, there is WP:NODEADLINE. Jacona (talk) 14:30, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

The source for the name change states: "The K3-12 school, which is a member of the South Carolina Independent School Association, has yet to officially make the change." Without a reliable source that they actually have changed the name, I think it's unwise to change the article. Maybe they'll follow through, maybe not. Jacona (talk) 16:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Follow up on the name change: Lee Academy exists in Bowman, SC. The school of that name appears to have closed, but they have maintained their status with the SC department of corporations. The Robert E. Lee Academy change to the same name may never achieve legal recognition. Jacona (talk) 17:47, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

The school website still says Robert E Lee Academy about 5 times in this one minute audio.Jacona (talk) 01:11, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

No consensus

Jacona , BillHPike and some others. You, guys are not capable of editing this page neutrally it looks like you have a conflict of interest that you haven't declared on your pages. You are confined by your own world of biases and prejudices if you think that this page is neutral and encyclopedic. I detailed all my edits yesterday following the request of the Fritzsmith20 and based them on new sources and also using the same sources but you simply reverted it with no explanation - as if you own this page. Even the information in the lead section (no black students in 2016) is a false claim because it is based on the source that indicates completely different picture from the year 2018 with full statistics. I think this page and your activity must be fully investigated and checked by OTRS and more adequate editors - those who think that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and neutral source of information for everyone, not a platform for any specific agenda. It is about time to have a second opinion on your activity and so called "neutral editing". --2601:1C0:CB01:2660:9D96:78DD:BFDE:1379 (talk) 22:52, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

I do not have any relationship to the school in question, nor the school district, nor any other entity mentioned in this article. Do you?Jacona (talk) 23:08, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't either and it is clearly reflected in my edits yesterday where I commented everything I did and used mostly the same sources where the information has been cherry-picked for serving specific agenda. And I don't believe you are neutral because to come to edit with certain opinion is also COI. Every page has to be treated neutrally based on the sources given and regardless of the editor opinion, do you remember that? Yet, I found your correspondence with another editor where you express your opinion and edit based on that opinion. This is why I think you have a COI. While I'm trying to see a full glass, you tend to see only empty part of it ignoring the more complex picture. It looks like you simply not capable of seeing things different because of your intrinsic opinion. No offence, but I think editors should avoid editing those pages where they have emotions - it is natural that they won't be able to edit neutrally. It is a serious issue for Wikipedia as a neutral source for everyone. For example, if I, as a new Wikipedia reader, encounter this page, I would think that the school is still stuck in the 1960s while it is clear by the sources that in the last 20 years, the school has been making significant efforts to reform and the sources confirm it: athletics, school name change. Even statistics you use are "cherry-picking" - Lead section: " no black child in the school in 2016" while the source is statistics from 2018 where it shows 268 whites, 5 Asians, 3 blacks, 5 mixed races. Why don't you use all the statistics from the source and engage in "cherry picking"? Even the school brochure, where it clearly says that the school forbids a number of haircuts (not just Afrojack) including Mohawk (hardly African hairstyle), rat tail and others. indicates selective use of information. Also, I've read the discussion here and found the sources about the school change name to "Lee Academy" which you stubbornly use to recognize as if it is the fight for your life, whether the school will be renamed on Wikipedia or not. There are many more things and this page is as far from completed as it can be - it smells like 1960s on this page while we are in 2020! 2601:1C0:CB01:2660:9D96:78DD:BFDE:1379 (talk) 00:08, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Conflict of interest is defined as "Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships. Any external relationship can trigger a conflict of interest. That someone has a conflict of interest is a description of a situation, not a judgement about that person's opinions, integrity, or good faith." I have no conflict of interest with this article nor anything within it. I ask again, reading the definition above, do you have a conflict of interest? Here's a question for you: are you editing both as a logged-in user and also anonymously under an IP? In response to the name change "controversy", the only source provided recognizes that the name has not been officially changed, and another school is incorporated in South Carolina under the name Lee Academy.Jacona (talk) 01:43, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

The definition of Conflict of Interest is Wikipedia's, not mine. I provided the link, if you would bother to read it. Did you, your family, or friends attend the school or work for the school?

If the article smells like the 60s, maybe it's because in a predominantly black community, there is a school attended almost entirely by white people, that was founded to provide an alternative to integrated schools, that prohibits African-American hair styles, that is named for a man who beat slaves to a bloody pulp and then poured brine in their wounds and is the number one symbol for the lost-cause romanticization of the Confederacy. As far as whether or not you have a COI, since you're editing as an IP you are free to pretend you're a different person each time. As far as the renaming of the school, no one objects to that, if it's really the name. The school website still refers to the old name in several places, the source provided quotes Bochette, the head of school, saying it's not yet official and South Carolina shows the name belongs to someone else. It may be OK to change the name anyway, but these issues leave me unsure of that, so I'm not doing it, but if ClemRutter or another editor who has experience with that sort of thing agrees the name should be changed, I of course am fine with whatever they say. Jacona (talk) 12:58, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I've already explained you that I don't have a COI - how many times to say for you to understand? I think you gave a very narrow definition of COI which fits your needs and comfort to edit this page with biased opinion. You didn't address my questions regarding other things I mentioned - was it on purpose? Also, I edit from one IP, which is dynamic because of the type of connection - it is a very standard thing here in the US and it looks like you are trying to retaliate somehow. As to the name of the school, I don't see any problem to put it as "Lee Academy, Bishopville" or Lee Academy (South Carolina) - it is really a technical thing very easy to solve for such an experienced editor as you are. I don't see this conversation going the right way as I only see stubborn denial to accept the facts and to apply the encyclopedic approach to edit the page neutrally. Instead, it is going more personal. Good luck with editing.--2601:1C0:CB01:2660:3CAA:15B:D6AA:2EB7 (talk) 02:04, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I've invited other editors to join this discussion by posting at WT:WikiProject Schools — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 02:56, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments from schools project request

This is your article- I can only give observations.

• Making allegations about fellow editors are counterproductive. Before allegations read the relevant Wikipedia policy, wikispeak and common usage are often different.
• This is not a stub- it has references and more than 150 words of prose. It is not stable enough to become a C.
• Naming is not a problem. The page is called by the current name, and in case of duplicates, you put town St John Fisher Catholic High School, Peterborough. All previous names are kept as redirects, in cases like this include a section to explain the name change which here is interesting.
• There is some useful informatiion in Family Handbook this should have a External links.
• When expanding the Academics section a new article on Houghton Mifflin reading scheme is needed
• The infobox needs cleaning- no where does it explain the age range of the kids. Religious affliation is about schools governed by a church.

I am aware that there are changes being made as I type. I hope that this is helpful. ClemRutter (talk) 08:54, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

School accreditation and affiliations

Hello, Jacona! I see that you removed the ==Academics== category. I request that you put that information back. I have the needed references below along with adding an additional affiliation. SCISA Accreditation - https://www.scisa.org/schools/member-listing/102-lee-academy.html

Dual Enrollment college credits affiliation shown at bottom of page 20 on below link https://www.cctech.edu/content/uploads/2018-2019-CCTC-Annual-Effectiveness-Report.pdf

The school is also Internationally accredited by Cognia. http://www.advanc-ed.org/oasis2/u/par/accreditation/summary?institutionId=57582

In the future since there are a few editors working on this project, we would appreciate it that you discuss it on the talk page prior to deleting sections. User:JayBeeEll! just did a good bit of work on the article to help get it into Wiki standards and I hate to see their hard work removed without discussion.

If you do not have time to re-insert it, just let me know and I will be glad to. Fritzsmith20 (talk) 10:32, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I think you will find, as you develop more experience on Wikipedia, that this sort of passive-aggressive approach is not widely appreciated. In particular, I object to being invoked as if it is obvious I agree with your position, or that I object to Jacona's edit. --JBL (talk) 12:43, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Fritzsmith20, please do not address me directly on this page without good reason. I don't own it, nor am I your employee. Secondly, the removed section you refer to was not added by JBL nor by me, but by someone else in 2012. The section has never had any secondary citations. Since JBL was removing (quite properly!) other primary-sourced material, I continued the cleanup. Please don't make false insinuations of impropriety. Finally, who is the "we" you refer to? Are you coordinating your editing with someone else? Does that person or persons have an affiliation with the school? Jacona (talk) 14:34, 11 October 2020 (UTC)