Is U.S. education truly getting worse?

[AsleepAtTheKeyboard]

I hear all the time that the U.S. public school system has deteriorated, and quality of education is worse now than XX years in the past. I am bombarded by damning anecdotes, and nearly swept away with the sincere and fervent emotions of those assaulting a "broken" system. But before I join the chorus of condemnation, I wish to verify my (and others') assumptions. I don't like singing in falsetto.

Here is what I've been able to find so far, plus my concerns about the quality of data.


U.S. Math scores rank very poorly compared to other industrialized countries.
apa.org/monitor/mar05/scores.html (sorry, still can't link)

Concerns: This study has not existed for a long period of time, so the only thing I can see from it is that we currently rank poorly. I cannot infer decreasing quality unless I am given other data to complete the picture. Also, the difference between U.S. and first place is about 10%. Could a dichotomy between low-performing inner-city schools and standard school districts lower our average scores?


Standardized tests - I wasn't able to find any of these that kept the same standards over the past 30 years. One person I know claims that tests are being dumbed down, teachers protesting any version that reveals them to be incompetent.

Concern: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I still need more.


Literacy comparisons are slightly more sophisticated anecdotes, at least when I encounter them. Usually they take an example of 19th century writing and compare it with current classroom creations. The difference is vast.

Concern: Isn't there a selection process for which 19th century letters and other works survive? A Civil War documentary would hardly choose an unintelligible letter over one that is poignant, insightful, and eloquent. I can't be sure that these are fair comparisons - not just their best against our worse.


Anecdotes. Yes, anecdotes. But there are so many of them! I have a friend who tells me of his school's multi-million-dollar football stadium, but molding science textbooks. I hear public school science teachers who complain of $200 budgets. My own mother tells me that she never would have learned of World War II had not her father been involved in it. There are so many stories, seemingly a different dozen from each new person I meet.

Concern: These are still just stories, perhaps modified by time, distance, and retelling. Many of these I hear close to source, but in the end I still have no data, no large-scale facts to make quantified judgments on and from.


Conclusion: I have a collection of impressions and data that doesn't tell the whole story. Is this enough to reasonably conclude a declining school system, or is it merely a tower of leaky buckets? Where do I go from here for hard data?

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

We may rank poorly in math compared to other countries, but it doesn't appear to have worsened in the past 30 years:

http://lpadev.learningpt.org/gaplibrary/text/mathscores.php

~~ Paul

[tsg]

* tsg quietly waiting for someone to post a "I purposely stumped a cashier at Burger King the other day therefore these kids today don't know math" story....

[drkitten]

Conclusion: I have a collection of impressions and data that doesn't tell the whole story. Is this enough to reasonably conclude a declining school system, or is it merely a tower of leaky buckets? Where do I go from here for hard data?

Quick answer: no, it's not enough.

Here, for example, are some historical SAT scores (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0883611.html). The correlation between columns 1 and 4 (time against math scores) is substantially negative (-0.4394), suggesting that average math scores have in fact decreased over time. At the time time, the correlation between columns 1 and 7 is substantially and even more positive (0.7508). So are students getting worse at math, but better at reading?

Beyond that, these statistics don't tell the whole story. More students are college-bound today, so more students (not just the elite) take the tests. Even if the tests stayed identical, a larger and less elite pool would result in overall lower scores simply because more non-elites would be taking the tests.

[Fnord]

My opinions are more-or-less in agreement with AsleepAtTheKeyboard's. In addition, I'd like to see more emphasis in education on the "Four R's":

1) Reading. People should have reading and comprehension skills that are at least the equivalent grade of their age minus 5 years, or 12th grade, whichever is less.

2) WRiting. This includes basic grammar, spelling, and punctuation. An adult should be able to write an essay explaining a goal, their plan to achieve that goal, and their motivations for achieving that goal. The next step is resumé writing.

3) ARithmentic. An adult should be able to balance a checkbook, set up a budget, and calculate such things as area, volume, proportion, and compund interest.

4) Reason. This is the tough one. IMHO, most adults* do not know how to reach a valid conclusion that is based on available facts. Basic reasoning skills (http://education.calumet.purdue.edu/Vockell/EdPsyBook/Edpsy7/edpsy7_reasoning.htm) (link) include, but are not limited to:

a) Storage an Retrieval Skills: Common methods of learning and remembering what's been learned.

b) Matching Skills: Includes categorization, extrapolation, analogical reasoning, evaluation of logic (deduction, induction, and fallacies), and evaluation of validity.

c) Executive Procedures: Common methods of inferring non-explicit information. Includes elaboration, problem solving (determining what the real problem is and the most effecive and efficient solution), and composition.

(* - Includes yours truly, now and then.)

[fuelair]

And comparisons should be based on countries with equivalent school systems (proportion of students with low SE, mid SE and high SE backgrounds in the system and
proportional per cap spending on education at a minimum). Comparisons with systems that outspend per cap or reduce low end counts of students can't be accurately used - or not to rate the schools as schools anyway- though the total data certainlyl could be used to show the value the governments/population actually place on education.

[Cainkane1]

Actually education is getting better in the USA because more and more parents are sending their children to private school or are homeschooling them. Public school is a disaster. Better than nothing maybe.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Actually education is getting better in the USA because more and more parents are sending their children to private school or are homeschooling them.
You trust parents to do a good job homeschooling? Why?

~~ Paul

[fuelair]

You trust parents to do a good job homeschooling? Why?

~~ Paul
Because two parents obviously know much more about how to teach and the intricacies of the subject areas than people who are merely trained to teach and degreed in the subject areas.

Not to mention that so many people with special political and religious axes to grind are just waiting to help them do that teaching!!:D:rolleyes::jaw-dropp

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Actually education is getting better in the USA because more and more parents are sending their children to private school or are homeschooling them. Public school is a disaster. Better than nothing maybe.

Statistically, private schools are no better than public. They just have a biased sample of students with better socioeconomic status.

[athon]

Beyond that, these statistics don't tell the whole story. More students are college-bound today, so more students (not just the elite) take the tests. Even if the tests stayed identical, a larger and less elite pool would result in overall lower scores simply because more non-elites would be taking the tests.

This part needs repeating.

Education is not the same now as it was half a century ago. Even in the past twenty years there have been massive changes in educational culture across the globe. Speaking from my own experience in Australia, retention rates have increased, the need for trade qualifications through RTA (registered training authorities) has arisen, educational pathways through vocational education have diversified... to put it bluntly, it's incredibly naive to just compare the numbers and think education has gone downhill.

Please keep in mind I'm not necessarily commenting on the US system, but rather from my perception of the same thing being said of the Australian one.

Retention numbers are the amongst biggest influences on the statistics. Those who dropped out before to find unskilled labour are now encouraged to remain in school and look to developing skills in a trade or practice. A better indicator of education is to look at changes in overall literacy and numeracy rates, not just figures within an education system, as well as changes in skilled labour.

Athon

[Jeff Corey]

Quick answer: no, it's not enough.

Here, for example, are some historical SAT scores (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0883611.html). The correlation between columns 1 and 4 (time against math scores) is substantially negative (-0.4394), suggesting that average math scores have in fact decreased over time. At the time time, the correlation between columns 1 and 7 is substantially and even more positive (0.7508). So are students getting worse at math, but better at reading?

Beyond that, these statistics don't tell the whole story. More students are college-bound today, so more students (not just the elite) take the tests. Even if the tests stayed identical, a larger and less elite pool would result in overall lower scores simply because more non-elites would be taking the tests.
Great point. Stanovich, in How to think straight about Psychology made the same point when the Reagan people said that HS teacher's salaries were negatively correlated with SATs, state by state. Low salaries in Miss, higher in CA. Lower SATs in CA than Miss.
But in CA at the time, a huge percentage of HS grad had free access to college, while fewer Miss students had any reason to take SATs or even finish HS.
Selection bias, bad data.
I use this example a lot when explaining that correlation doesn't imply______________.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Retention numbers are the amongst biggest influences on the statistics. Those who dropped out before to find unskilled labour are now encouraged to remain in school and look to developing skills in a trade or practice. A better indicator of education is to look at changes in overall literacy and numeracy rates, not just figures within an education system, as well as changes in skilled labour.
Amen, brother!

A kid used to have a lot of choices in life: work on the family farm; apprentice to a tradesman; take over the family business; finish high school and then get a job; go to college; continue on to grad school; become a laborer; become a domestic; get married and have kids.

Now there shall be only one choice: go to college.

~~ Paul

[JoeEllison]

You know, as you improve one issue, other areas might trend downward. You reduce your dropout rate, and you lower your overall average test scores. You get more kids into college, you get lower SAT scores.

My high school pulled a stunt in the opposite direction in order to improve scores: they refused to allow anyone except seniors and hand-picked juniors to take the SAT. Yes, it made it harder for people to get experience taking the test, but it sure made the principal happy to "improve" the average test scores.

[TriangleMan]

More statistics for people to look at if they wish: the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) (http://www.pisa.oecd.org/pages/0,2987,en_32252351_32235731_1_1_1_1_1,00.html). A pretty good multi-national comparison done every 3 years. I think it started in 2000 though so it won't be great for historical trend analysis.

[technoextreme]

Amen, brother!

A kid used to have a lot of choices in life: work on the family farm; apprentice to a tradesman; take over the family business; finish high school and then get a job; go to college; continue on to grad school; become a laborer; become a domestic; get married and have kids.

Now there shall be only one choice: go to college.

~~ Paul
In reality when they say go to college it doesn't necessairly get rid of the above. I've known and worked with plenty of people who went to college just to get a tradeskill. It's a great idea too because it beats working at McDonalds.
My high school pulled a stunt in the opposite direction in order to improve scores: they refused to allow anyone except seniors and hand-picked juniors to take the SAT. Yes, it made it harder for people to get experience taking the test, but it sure made the principal happy to "improve" the average test scores.
Well there is those PSATs.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

In reality when they say go to college it doesn't necessairly get rid of the above. I've known and worked with plenty of people who went to college just to get a tradeskill. It's a great idea too because it beats working at McDonalds.
No, certainly one goes to college for a purpose. But nevertheless, everyone shall go to college.

~~ Paul

[Trakar]

We may rank poorly in math compared to other countries, but it doesn't appear to have worsened in the past 30 years:

http://lpadev.learningpt.org/gaplibrary/text/mathscores.php

~~ Paul

Couple of things, 1) this really doesn't go back far enough for the predominant anecdotal commentary, which typically refers to US outstripping academic leadership in the 50's and 60's. and 2) this only refers to US students. The anecdotal evidence could still be accurate even if the US has stayed relatively static, provided foriegn students have made tremendous advances in their accomplishments.

[technoextreme]

No, certainly one goes to college for a purpose. But nevertheless, everyone shall go to college.

~~ Paul
Bad analogy alert. Bad analogy alert. Most people go to college to get a tradeskill,work on the family farm, and do a bunch of those other things you listed. Trust me. I know a few family members who went to college just so they could work on a farm. You really can't learn a tradeskill without going to a college/school.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Bad analogy alert. Bad analogy alert. Most people go to college to get a tradeskill,work on the family farm, and do a bunch of those other things you listed. Trust me. I know a few family members who went to college just so they could work on a farm. You really can't learn a tradeskill without going to a college/school.
What does my comment have to do with any analogy?

Anyhoo, I understand your point, but I disagree. People used to do all sorts of things without going to college, certainly including working on the family farm, in the family business, or learning a trade. Remember apprenticeship?

However, perhaps things have gotten so complex these days that everything requires a college education. If that is the case, then we better expect scores to drop, because not everyone has equal talent when it comes to playing the college game.

~~ Paul

[athon]

However, perhaps things have gotten so complex these days that everything requires a college education. If that is the case, then we better expect scores to drop, because not everyone has equal talent when it comes to playing the college game.

~~ Paul

I think it has more to do with job competition. Taking two individuals at face value, the one who can present evidence of more skills would sooner get the position, regardless of whether all of those skills are completely relevant. Add to that greater reliance on technology in nearly all trades, and I think it's obvious why colleges are initially overflowing with hopefuls who then drop out after they discover it's not for them.

Athon

[bpesta22]

Statistically, private schools are no better than public. They just have a biased sample of students with HIGHER INTELLIGENCE

Fixed!

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Fixed!

Evidence?

[JoeEllison]

Well there is those PSATs.

They pulled it with those, too. No bad stats for our school.:rolleyes:

[bpesta22]

Evidence?

I can't present any that would satisfy the "skeptics" here as they have discounted the whole field. Not to derail the thread neither. If interested, I'll post to one of the few threads here where we beat this to death.

[ImaginalDisc]

I can't present any that would satisfy the "skeptics" here as they have discounted the whole field. Not to derail the thread neither. If interested, I'll post to one of the few threads here where we beat this to death.

A) The "Fixed" gag is verboten.

B) Try posting valid evidence to support your assertion.

[Radrook]

Regardless of improvements in othe areas if the major fault isn't fixed then it's for naught.

The major fault in USA education is its negligence in teaching its citizens how to think cogently. Such training should be started at the earliest age possible to make it second nature. This training should be buttressed by classes in ethics. This double emphasis would create citizens who will not commit crimes based on reasons they feel are justified. They will also be able to examine political issues properly and not be swayed by sly politicians who gain votes mainly on charm or physical appearances or by making promises impossible to keep. Such training will also make for better inter-citizen relationships. Why such training is neglected is beyond me.

[Trakar]

Regardless of improvements in othe areas if the major fault isn't fixed then it's for naught.

The major fault in USA education is its negligence in teaching its citizens how to think cogently. Such training should be started at the earliest age possible to make it second nature. This training should be buttressed by classes in ethics. This double emphasis would create citizens who will not commit crimes based on reasons they feel are justified. They will also be able to examine political issues properly and not be swayed by sly politicians who gain votes mainly on charm or physical appearances or by making promises impossible to keep. Such training will also make for better inter-citizen relationships. Why such training is neglected is beyond me.

You seem to answer your own question.

Advanced/well-developed critical skills are not conducive to the type of marketing system inherent to US capitalism. Follow the money.

[bpesta22]

A) The "Fixed" gag is verboten.

B) Try posting valid evidence to support your assertion.

Is A really a rule here?

I'll pass on B and withdraw the comment.

[Radrook]

You seem to answer your own question.

Advanced/well-developed critical skills are not conducive to the type of marketing system inherent to US capitalism. Follow the money.

Yet there is money lost in the billions based on faulty thinking skills and that loss of money dfoesn't seem to matter does it?

BTW
I was once involved in a casse where a woman dashed acrross tyhe doubled yellow lines restricting her to stay in place until the light changes. She slamnmed into my car as I was legally passing on her right. In court the female judge asked her why she had done that. Her reply was: "Ummm, he was trying to get by me!"

[VillageIdiot]

Isn't it much more likely that surveys are becoming more and more anti-American? Somebody needs to fix this. Richard Dawson?

[athon]

Is A really a rule here?

I'll pass on B and withdraw the comment.

If you do find some evidence, Pesta, could you put it up for discussion in a new thread? In my experience and reading, while some private schools are indeed selective, there are far more factors influencing the results of their students. It would make for a good discussion.

Athon

[Radrook]

Anyone here see the film Idiocracy? That's exactly where we are headed!----------------------------------Not!

[Tokenconservative]

We may rank poorly in math compared to other countries, but it doesn't appear to have worsened in the past 30 years:

http://lpadev.learningpt.org/gaplibrary/text/mathscores.php

~~ Paul

I love this sort of "teacher reasoning"

So, because things were bad 30 years ago and because those in control of this data have learned how to make it look like it's not getting worse, what we have today is, ipso facto, "good."

Wow.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

* tsg;3153627 quietly waiting for someone to post a "I purposely stumped a cashier at Burger King the other day therefore these kids today don't know math" story....

I stump them alla time.

Only it's linguistic stumping. I order something and they say, "Que!?" I order again, more loudly and slowly, and they say, "Que!?"

Works as well at Wal-Mart.

Tokie

[Rob Lister]

Seems to me that many in this thread, including myself at first, are forgetting the goal.

Education is not the end, only the means to an end. What matters is not the test scores, but how that education, as a whole over the population, is effecting the desired outcome.

Now, the desired outcome is a political question, and everyone has their own view of what is desired. If you (we) could agree on one or three points concerning that which is 'desired' then we could better judge the effectiveness of the U.S. educational system. Until we do so, we're just spinning our wheels.

How about:

Standard of living (all things considered including the digital divide, central heating, cable television, health care, yada)

Economic stability (of the individual and the nation)

Add your own or subtract from mine.

[Trakar]

Seems to me that many in this thread, including myself at first, are forgetting the goal.

Education is not the end, only the means to an end. What matters is not the test scores, but how that education, as a whole over the population, is effecting the desired outcome.

Now, the desired outcome is a political question, and everyone has their own view of what is desired. If you (we) could agree on one or three points concerning that which is 'desired' then we could better judge the effectiveness of the U.S. educational system. Until we do so, we're just spinning our wheels.

How about:

Standard of living (all things considered including the digital divide, central heating, cable television, health care, yada)

Economic stability (of the individual and the nation)

Add your own or subtract from mine.

This seems an excellent point!

I would suggest that such is an issue of many goals and the prioritizing of those goals. Likewise instead of looking for one universal standard, perhaps we should be looking for a system that is much more multi-tiered and composed of alternately focussed programs and curricula to different segments of the student population based upon abilities and interest. I know a lot of US school systems claim/strive for this, but IMO, they fail much more often than not.

Perhaps the education system is not flexible nor diverse enough to adjust to changing and multiple prioities/needs?

[Tokenconservative]

Seems to me that many in this thread, including myself at first, are forgetting the goal.

Education is not the end, only the means to an end. What matters is not the test scores, but how that education, as a whole over the population, is effecting the desired outcome.

Now, the desired outcome is a political question, and everyone has their own view of what is desired. If you (we) could agree on one or three points concerning that which is 'desired' then we could better judge the effectiveness of the U.S. educational system. Until we do so, we're just spinning our wheels.

How about:

Standard of living (all things considered including the digital divide, central heating, cable television, health care, yada)

Economic stability (of the individual and the nation)

Add your own or subtract from mine.

Those are wonderful ideals, but have nothing to do with the view of leftist or their education system (American public schools system).

The primary focus by these two parties is to create good little leftists who can be counted upon to continue helping the US march into socialism and to make sure they don't get "too smart" because educated people tend not to be good little soldiers.

Tokie

[Rob Lister]

Those are wonderful ideals, but have nothing to do with the view of leftist or their education system (American public schools system).

The primary focus by these two parties is to create good little leftists who can be counted upon to continue helping the US march into socialism and to make sure they don't get "too smart" because educated people tend not to be good little soldiers.

Tokie

I wasn't considering the right or the left, only the issue of usefulness. Please confine your rhetoric to the political forum.

[Tokenconservative]

I wasn't considering the right or the left, only the issue of usefulness. Please confine your rhetoric to the political forum.

Hmmm...no, I don't think I will.

Anyone who believes the American public schools system is, today, aimed at educating Americans is either very pollyannish, or him/her/otherself a "part of the problem."

The American schools FIRST mission is exactly what I identified it as.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

This seems an excellent point!

I would suggest that such is an issue of many goals and the prioritizing of those goals. Likewise instead of looking for one universal standard, perhaps we should be looking for a system that is much more multi-tiered and composed of alternately focussed programs and curricula to different segments of the student population based upon abilities and interest. I know a lot of US school systems claim/strive for this, but IMO, they fail much more often than not.

Perhaps the education system is not flexible nor diverse enough to adjust to changing and multiple prioities/needs?


This is how it worked pre-circa 1965, when the left (again) got its hands on the system (Dewey and his crowd tried this in the 30s, but were shown the door).

Since then, mediocrity--at best--has been the goal.

One thing we tend to forget is that this generation of "teachers" was "educated" by the previous generation in the same schools, who were themselves "educated" in the same schools by their predecessors. You have to go back to the 1950s, to find real education in our public schools.

Tokie

[Rob Lister]

I'm not asking what it is, I'm asking if it is effective for the end goal

[Leicontis]

Looking at Americans today, it would seem that our schools are often failing at all of their stated goals. Consider the question asked of Miss Teen South Carolina (but for the sake of your own brain cells, try to forget her answer), and what it implies for our knowledge of the world. How can we, as a people, be expected to make good decisions about things that so many of us apparently don't have even a basic understanding of?

The problem is compounded by political and economic leaders, who have no incentive to fix anything. To improve education would require politicians to make unpopular decisions (like spending enough money to pay teachers as much as other professionals with similar levels of education). Plus, a poorly-educated populace is easier to manipulate, which is good for both politicians and businesses, but bad for the little guy. As long as the little guy doesn't realize this, however, nobody will do anything about it.

One thing that always makes me shake my head is when people say things like "teaching's not that hard a job," "they're just in it for the money," "I could do a better job," etc.. The third statement often comes from people that haven't done a good job raising their children, which makes me wonder why they think they could handle a group of 20 of them. As to the second statement, my response is, "What money?!" Public school teachers are, in my experience, rarely paid salaries even close to those given to people with the same level of education, training, and experience in other fields. The generally resentful/condescending attitude towards teachers and the common disdain among the uneducated poor for education and those with it only serve to handicap the educational system and those within striving to improve the lives of their students.

[Tokenconservative]

I'm not asking what it is, I'm asking if it is effective for the end goal

What?

[Tokenconservative]

Looking at Americans today, it would seem that our schools are often failing at all of their stated goals. Consider the question asked of Miss Teen South Carolina (but for the sake of your own brain cells, try to forget her answer), and what it implies for our knowledge of the world. How can we, as a people, be expected to make good decisions about things that so many of us apparently don't have even a basic understanding of?

The problem is compounded by political and economic leaders, who have no incentive to fix anything. To improve education would require politicians to make unpopular decisions (like spending enough money to pay teachers as much as other professionals with similar levels of education). Plus, a poorly-educated populace is easier to manipulate, which is good for both politicians and businesses, but bad for the little guy. As long as the little guy doesn't realize this, however, nobody will do anything about it.

One thing that always makes me shake my head is when people say things like "teaching's not that hard a job," "they're just in it for the money," "I could do a better job," etc.. The third statement often comes from people that haven't done a good job raising their children, which makes me wonder why they think they could handle a group of 20 of them. As to the second statement, my response is, "What money?!" Public school teachers are, in my experience, rarely paid salaries even close to those given to people with the same level of education, training, and experience in other fields. The generally resentful/condescending attitude towards teachers and the common disdain among the uneducated poor for education and those with it only serve to handicap the educational system and those within striving to improve the lives of their students.

Americans, because of what we are and where we are, have always been a bit ignorant of the rest of the world (and why not be? Do they matter?).

Using the schools as a political football is not good. The left uses the schools as a laboratory to churn out other leftists (very effectively, by the way). Extremists on the "right" (so identified by the left-advocacy media) want to do stupid things like teach ID and Creationism in the public schools. As if there is time in the day to teach the thousands and thousands of different creation stories...oh, that's right...they just want to teach the ONE...as soon as they can agree on which version of that they want to have taught....

Manipulation/control is the issue: the dumber they make us, the easier it will be for them to control us. Exactly so.

Tokie

[Rob Lister]

Well, you're big on pointing out perceived problems but a bit short on suggesting viable solutions.

[Jeff Corey]

Hmmm...no, I don't think I will.

Anyone who believes the American public schools system is, today, aimed at educating Americans is either very pollyannish, or him/her/otherself a "part of the problem."

The American schools FIRST mission is exactly what I identified it as.

Tokie

The word is "pollyannaish". And you're wrong about the mission. It's really about training innocent children into accepting all sorts of Neocon rightwingnut propaganda. You know, Weapons of Mass Instruction.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

I love this sort of "teacher reasoning"

So, because things were bad 30 years ago and because those in control of this data have learned how to make it look like it's not getting worse, what we have today is, ipso facto, "good."

Wow.
Wow is right, dude.

I am not a teacher.
There is apparently a conspiracy to rig the data.
I said absolutely nothing about it being good or bad.


Just in case someone doesn't remember what I said:

We may rank poorly in math compared to other countries, but it doesn't appear to have worsened in the past 30 years:

http://lpadev.learningpt.org/gaplibr...mathscores.php


~~ Paul

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Manipulation/control is the issue: the dumber they make us, the easier it will be for them to control us. Exactly so.
Wait, but who are "they"? If they are people who went to public schools, then somehow the brainwashing didn't work. If they are people who went to private schools, then clearly private schools are a bigger threat than public ones. Ditto for people who went to parochial schools, or were homeschooled.

The only other thing I can think of is that they are people who went to public school before the public schools became dupes of the leftist agenda. In that case they must be fairly old and will die soon, so it's only a temporary problem.

Oh wait, I suppose it's possible that they are all foreigners, people who went to the good Japanese or German schools.

Who are they, for God's sake?

~~ Paul

[Tokenconservative]

Well, you're big on pointing out perceived problems but a bit short on suggesting viable solutions.

Rob: It looks from your post count that you've been here a while. You might think about either using the quote function or at minimum, identifying who it is you are directing your words to/responding to.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

The word is "pollyannaish". And you're wrong about the mission. It's really about training innocent children into accepting all sorts of Neocon rightwingnut propaganda. You know, Weapons of Mass Instruction.

Hmmm...so it is...I mispelled, so you know what that means: everything I have said or think is utterly, and completly wrong!!!! And the proof is my lousy spelin!!!!!

Sheesh.

LOL. Right. We have so many rightwingneoconsecludedcompoundpigignantracistsexi sthomo'phobic'backwoodswarmongeringchickenhawkhate rs teaching in the schools.

The teachers at my kids school who have rational perspectives do so soto voce (hope my spelin is correct!) while those with SOP/Playbook leftist screed, cant, slogans and propaganda seeping from their pores shout it from the rooftops.

What century to you live in?

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Wow is right, dude.

I am not a teacher.
There is apparently a conspiracy to rig the data.
I said absolutely nothing about it being good or bad.


Just in case someone doesn't remember what I said:

~~ Paul

1. Glad you finally cleared that up
2. So you are simply an apologist for the PSs? Wife is a teacher, then? Dad? Mom?
3. You use the word "conspiracy" a lot, but yes, there IS just such a "conspiracy" afoot.
4. And so you believe that by not taking a stance on something that so clearly REQUIRES a stance: even if true (not true, in fact...the numbers are cooked), the fact that our math scores have been abysmal over the past 30 years bothers you not in the least? Have you been paying any attention whatsoever to how US society has changed over that time? Do you know what's required to develop and build the thing attached to the thing in front of you upon which you are reading my words? Any idea at all?
5. Not taking a stance IS taking a stance, one that in a de facto way says: I am okay with this.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Wait, but who are "they"? If they are people who went to public schools, then somehow the brainwashing didn't work. If they are people who went to private schools, then clearly private schools are a bigger threat than public ones. Ditto for people who went to parochial schools, or were homeschooled.

The only other thing I can think of is that they are people who went to public school before the public schools became dupes of the leftist agenda. In that case they must be fairly old and will die soon, so it's only a temporary problem.

Oh wait, I suppose it's possible that they are all foreigners, people who went to the good Japanese or German schools.

Who are they, for God's sake?

~~ Paul

The brainwashing does not "take" on everyone. Ask the N. Koreans. Those with very strong families (not the kind you libs like to see!) and parents, grandparents etc. who work for themselves, especially (something else you libs'd like to do away with!) come out thinking differently. My kids at 14 and 16 recognize how twisted to the left is the thinking of many of their teachers (fortunately their bio teacher who was, by District decree, forced to show Algore's movie, laughed at it apparently throughout and then had them watch that debunking movie--and told the class: go ahead and complain about my showing this if you want. I have been doing this for 25 years and if this school fires me, I'll have another position inside a week, for more pay--I wonder why he'd say that if the system is not very much leftist directed?).

MY kids are not brainwashed because their mom and dad (married to each other, and whose kids--near as I can tell--don't have any other "parents") are capitalists who pay HUGE amounts in taxes and have run their own businesses for decades. But in talking to some of their friends, I can see that THEY are swallowing the leftist cant hook, line and sinker.

And we live in one of the "reddest" parts of a largely "red" state.

Now, let me see if I follow your leftist argument (and I do): Those like my kids, who come out of the PSs NOT brainwashed into all sorts of leftist ideology, are the "problem."

Ah.

I don't know about Japanese schools, but German schools are even more leftist than are US schools, and are entirely organized around a centralize government. Remember: it's in Germany where they are contimplating making Global Warming "denial" a crime punishable by fines and imprisonment.

Tokie

[NobbyNobbs]

One thing we tend to forget is that this generation of "teachers" was "educated" by the previous generation in the same schools, who were themselves "educated" in the same schools by their predecessors. You have to go back to the 1950s, to find real education in our public schools.

Tokie
Wait a sec. Our teachers learned from the previous group, who learned from their mentors, on back. You say you have to go back to the 1950's to find good teachers. But apparently, they don't seem to have passed on their knowledge of teaching. So they couldn't have been very good teachers, then, eh?

My kids at 14 and 16 recognize how twisted to the left is the thinking of many of their teachers

Tokie


Ah, but do they recognize how twisted to the right their father's thinking is?

You scare me, Token. Honestly. You claim to have been a teacher (which, honestly, I doubt. I sure as hell wouldn't hire you), yet you believe in brainwashing, that it's ok to teach your personal political leanings in school, etc.

Thank the FSM you don't teach my kids. And good luck to yours.

[volatile]

Remember: it's in Germany where they are contimplating making Global Warming "denial" a crime punishable by fines and imprisonment.

Psst! Global warming is that way (ttp://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=96420).

How come you post about global warming in every single Forum subsection except the appropriate one? How come you blather about GW in every unrelated thread but the one specifically set up for you to do so (ttp://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=96420)?

If you want to talk about GW, and you so, so clearly do, then go and do it in the right place. Please.

[Rob Lister]

Tokie, you're off in lala land, as far as I'm concerned. This thread is about the quality of our educational system. Pick a metric and discuss.

[volatile]

Wait a sec. Our teachers learned from the previous group, who learned from their mentors, on back. You say you have to go back to the 1950's to find good teachers. But apparently, they don't seem to have passed on their knowledge of teaching. So they couldn't have been very good teachers, then, eh?

You're assuming the conspiracy theory needs to be internally consistent, and you're assuming that TC has thought his opinions through, Nobbs. It's statements like that which make it fairly manifest that he hasn't the slightest clue about the logical content of his blathering...

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

1. Glad you finally cleared that up
And that, my friends, is the ultimate classic Tokie. He jumped to the conclusion that I am a teacher, but is glad that I finally cleared it up. I wonder how many other conclusions he's jumped to whose targets have not managed to clear them up for him?


So you are simply an apologist for the PSs? Wife is a teacher, then? Dad? Mom?
No, no, no, and no.


And so you believe that by not taking a stance on something that so clearly REQUIRES a stance: even if true (not true, in fact...the numbers are cooked), the fact that our math scores have been abysmal over the past 30 years bothers you not in the least?
Why would you assume that?

~~ Paul

[Tokenconservative]

Wait a sec. Our teachers learned from the previous group, who learned from their mentors, on back. You say you have to go back to the 1950's to find good teachers. But apparently, they don't seem to have passed on their knowledge of teaching. So they couldn't have been very good teachers, then, eh?

Ah, but do they recognize how twisted to the right their father's thinking is?

You scare me, Token. Honestly. You claim to have been a teacher (which, honestly, I doubt. I sure as hell wouldn't hire you), yet you believe in brainwashing, that it's ok to teach your personal political leanings in school, etc.

Thank the FSM you don't teach my kids. And good luck to yours.

Sigh...

Begining in approx. the mid 60s, this was CONSCIOUSLY changed by leftist growing in numbers and power in ALL public institutions. As I've said, Dewey and his crowd of communists saw the goldmine for leftist indoctrination the schools offered in the 30s and 40s, but the nation was...less inclined to permit that in those days.

The "old school" ideals of the times prior to about this time were slowly (lefties are nothing if not patient) weeded out of the PS system. Does this mean every teacher is a pinko? No, but they don't have to be when they are educated in a leftist system K-postgrad. Mostly, they are simply spigots for spewing the approved leftist cant, which is why they themselves (unlike in the past) do not have to be terribly bright to "teach." They are not teaching...they are indoctrinating and even Stalin recognized that the best political officers were cowards without much going on upstairs.

My kids recognize (because I have told them to be aware of it, for one reason) that I have a particular political bent that is very much right of center and that they need to analyze what I tell them through that understanding.

As a lib, your kids are simply indoctrinated and you'd be horrified if they had an original thought.

I am glad I scare you. I was personally asked by a principal to take over a 5th grade class that was utterly out of control and had driven their 1st year teacher to a nervous breakdown. While they were far, far behind in every area, let's look at math since it is most easily quantifiable: they were, on avg., (I tested them with homeschool materials) when I started, working at about the 2nd grade level. When I left, as I've said, perhaps 1/3 of them (those most skilled in math) were ready for 7th grade math, most of the rest were up to where they shoud've been or a bit beyond. I saw the same results in all the subjects.

I was fired.

I was fired because the 6th grade teachers learned what I was doing and did not like it.

If I scare you, you horrify me. You have no problem with seeing a leftist worldview taught in the public schools because, after all, that's the "right" view...it's yours! But if anyone suggests offering a little balance, you are "scared."

Why is that? Oh...wait, you don't need to answer...I already know. You are a leftist and the left hates and fears nothing so much as the truth.

Tokie

[NobbyNobbs]

Sigh...

Begining in approx. the mid 60s, this was CONSCIOUSLY changed by leftist growing in numbers and power in ALL public institutions. As I've said, Dewey and his crowd of communists saw the goldmine for leftist indoctrination the schools offered in the 30s and 40s, but the nation was...less inclined to permit that in those days.

The "old school" ideals of the times prior to about this time were slowly (lefties are nothing if not patient) weeded out of the PS system. Does this mean every teacher is a pinko? No, but they don't have to be when they are educated in a leftist system K-postgrad. Mostly, they are simply spigots for spewing the approved leftist cant, which is why they themselves (unlike in the past) do not have to be terribly bright to "teach." They are not teaching...they are indoctrinating and even Stalin recognized that the best political officers were cowards without much going on upstairs.
Tokie


I've realized for some time that you are a loony. For some reason, it took this long for me to realize you are a loony conspiratist.

This explains a lot.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Begining in approx. the mid 60s, this was CONSCIOUSLY changed by leftist growing in numbers and power in ALL public institutions. As I've said, Dewey and his crowd of communists saw the goldmine for leftist indoctrination the schools offered in the 30s and 40s, but the nation was...less inclined to permit that in those days.

The "old school" ideals of the times prior to about this time were slowly (lefties are nothing if not patient) weeded out of the PS system. Does this mean every teacher is a pinko? No, but they don't have to be when they are educated in a leftist system K-postgrad. Mostly, they are simply spigots for spewing the approved leftist cant, which is why they themselves (unlike in the past) do not have to be terribly bright to "teach." They are not teaching...they are indoctrinating and even Stalin recognized that the best political officers were cowards without much going on upstairs.
Could you give us a specific example of one of the most important commie pinko modifications to the curriculum to weed out the more politically correct rightwing ideals? I'm not sure whether I'm going to hear a political modification or an educational modification, but I'm game for either.

~~ Paul

[drkitten]

Could you give us a specific example of one of the most important commie pinko modifications to the curriculum to weed out the more politically correct rightwing ideals? I'm not sure whether I'm going to hear a political modification or an educational modification, but I'm game for either.


Allowing uppity colored folks to attend classes just like they was human.

[Mashuna]

I am glad I scare you. I was personally asked by a principal to take over a 5th grade class that was utterly out of control and had driven their 1st year teacher to a nervous breakdown. While they were far, far behind in every area, let's look at math since it is most easily quantifiable: they were, on avg., (I tested them with homeschool materials) when I started, working at about the 2nd grade level. When I left, as I've said, perhaps 1/3 of them (those most skilled in math) were ready for 7th grade math, most of the rest were up to where they shoud've been or a bit beyond. I saw the same results in all the subjects.

I was fired.

I was fired because the 6th grade teachers learned what I was doing and did not like it.


Of course. You were too good a teacher, so they fired you. I'm entirely convinced that this is the whole story, and there is indeed a conspiracy against you. All other teachers are terrible, compared to how good you were. If only they'd kept you on.

No wonder you veer off to the right all the time. You're dragged over by the huge chip on your shoulder.

[volatile]

Of course. You were too good a teacher, so they fired you. I'm entirely convinced that this is the whole story, and there is indeed a conspiracy against you. All other teachers are terrible, compared to how good you were. If only they'd kept you on.

No wonder you veer off to the right all the time. You're dragged over by the huge chip on your shoulder.

Nominated. For Truth.

[volatile]

My kids recognize (because I have told them to be aware of it, for one reason) that I have a particular political bent that is very much right of center and that they need to analyze what I tell them through that understanding.

As a lib, your kids are simply indoctrinated and you'd be horrified if they had an original thought.



What do your kids think of anthropogenic global warming? Seeing as there is no evidence at all of your personal position (i.e. that it isn't happening), I'm guessing that if they share your view it is not through objective study of the issue, but simply by having taken your opinion by rote.

Who's kids are indoctrinated?

[Tokenconservative]

Of course. You were too good a teacher, so they fired you. I'm entirely convinced that this is the whole story, and there is indeed a conspiracy against you. All other teachers are terrible, compared to how good you were. If only they'd kept you on.

No wonder you veer off to the right all the time. You're dragged over by the huge chip on your shoulder.

No, there were some okay teachers there. A couple of them pulled me aside and, soto voce, expressed their support for what I was doing.

Um...are you under the impression that I care whether you believe this or not...or whether you are capable of understanding it?

Sorry if I led you down that primrose path.

That's exactly what the principal who insisted I come work for her told me: the 6th grade teachers are "worried" that you are moving your kids ahead too quickly.

But you are clearly my intellectual superior, please...tell me how else I might've taken that?

I worked very hard at that 5th grade class, allowing my lucrative "real" business to slide considerably (losing tens of thousands of dollars income that year). I had parents from the class calling/emailing me as much as 2 years later with updates on how well their kids were doing, and just after, to tell me how lousy the "new" teacher (a member of the Dance of the Lemons in that district as it turns out) was.

Am I angry about what the school did to those kids. I came to care very deeply about most of them and was very saddened when I was introduced to what the public schools are REALLY for.

It's something along the same lines of what I experienced when I was a part-timer during college at a large computer store (I was the de facto manager of software; this was when such stores had thousands of software titles on their shelves): the gen'l manager asked me what we should do to make the software area more utilitarian. I gave him some ideas that I thought would make it easier for the two largest groups of our software customers to find what they were looking for (typically, this involved someone tracking me down--no idea what they did on my off days).

He looked at me as if I were an utter moron and told me, "no...that's not important. What I mean is how can we make it look better for when the regional manager visits?"

I had no idea how to do that. Just as I had no idea how to stop kids from learning in that 5th grade class. Which is why they fired me, and got a "real" teacher.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

What do your kids think of anthropogenic global warming? Seeing as there is no evidence at all of your personal position (i.e. that it isn't happening), I'm guessing that if they share your view it is not through objective study of the issue, but simply by having taken your opinion by rote.

Who's kids are indoctrinated?

One of them doesn't really have an opinion. She likes hot weather and she like cold weather and doesn't really care which is going on outside.

The other has read a bit on this and believes that it is likely that human activity MAY be having a SLIGHT impact, but that most likely we are not having the sort of impact Global Warmingists believe we are.

Which is much like my own opinion, and which will be to you, proof--PROOOOOOFFFFFFFFF!!!--that she is brainwashed little ninny.

Whereas YOUR kids, believing as YOU do, that (American) humans are DESTROYING MOTHER GAIA WITH THEIR SUVS!! is proof of their highly evolved sense and extensive, wholly rational and non-prejudiced education on the issue.

And this is SOP/Playbook for a lib: if the child of a conservative (shocker!) holds some of their parent's views, they are "brainwashed." If the child of a liberal holds all of the views of their parent, they are "enlightened."

And someone was wondering in here why I can't engage libs in "rational" discourse....

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Allowing uppity colored folks to attend classes just like they was human.

My favorite stalker! "Dr" Kitten!


Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Could you give us a specific example of one of the most important commie pinko modifications to the curriculum to weed out the more politically correct rightwing ideals? I'm not sure whether I'm going to hear a political modification or an educational modification, but I'm game for either.

~~ Paul

You're going to have to give this one another shot. This jumble is too confusing for me to pick through. Um...the right is not politically correct...that's the left.

I have no idea what it is you are asking me.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

I've realized for some time that you are a loony. For some reason, it took this long for me to realize you are a loony conspiratist.

This explains a lot.

I guess I've not paid enough attention to you to know this much about you one way or another.

Not sure whether I should be flattered, or just add you to my growning list of stalkers.

BTW: why is it it's a "loony conspiracy" when it's something a conservative doesn't like, but not the same when it's something a lefty doesn't like?

Can you explain the difference?

Tokie

[JoeEllison]

I was fired.

No great surprise there... should be interesting to go back to the beginning, and read your posts as "disgruntled former employee with a right-wing blind spot."

[Tokenconservative]

No great surprise there... should be interesting to go back to the beginning, and read your posts as "disgruntled former employee with a right-wing blind spot."

LOL.

And there is the libbie projectionism again: because libs promote their ideology in classrooms, that therefore means that conservatives do.

Tokie

[Mashuna]

I had no idea how to do that. Just as I had no idea how to stop kids from learning in that 5th grade class. Which is why they fired me, and got a "real" teacher.

Tokie

Sorry, couldn't see the rest of your post past this chip. I'm sorry again that you were such a good teacher they had to fire you.

[Flo]

I hear all the time that the U.S. public school system has deteriorated, and quality of education is worse now than XX years in the past. I am bombarded by damning anecdotes, and nearly swept away with the sincere and fervent emotions of those assaulting a "broken" system. But before I join the chorus of condemnation, I wish to verify my (and others') assumptions. I don't like singing in falsetto.

[snip]

Conclusion: I have a collection of impressions and data that doesn't tell the whole story. Is this enough to reasonably conclude a declining school system, or is it merely a tower of leaky buckets? Where do I go from here for hard data?


I keep hearing exactly the same here in Europe (mostly the two systems I know well, France and Switzerland).

Unfortunately, Tokie systematically butting in with his sour grapes and his various fetishes prevents all significant discussion of this fascinating subject. :rolleyes:

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

You're going to have to give this one another shot. This jumble is too confusing for me to pick through. Um...the right is not politically correct...that's the left.
I was addressing you, so I believe the term "politically correct" applies to the right.

Could you give us an example of how the left has modified the curriculum to weed out the ideals of the right? I ask this in response to your statement:


The "old school" ideals of the times prior to about this time were slowly (lefties are nothing if not patient) weeded out of the PS system.

~~ Paul

[Leicontis]

I keep hearing exactly the same here in Europe (mostly the two systems I know well, France and Switzerland).

Unfortunately, Tokie systematically butting in with his sour grapes and his various fetishes prevents all significant discussion of this fascinating subject. :rolleyes:
This is what makes the Ignore List so wonderful, especially with postcount inflators like Tokie. Makes for much faster, smoother reading of threads!

Back on topic...
I don't know about other countries, but here in the U.S., there seems to be a large subculture that disdains education. A large portion of this subculture is very poor, due to their inability to get high-paying jobs, due to their lack of education. Strangely, they don't seem to understand the connection, and still consider education a waste of time and money, to the point that some of these people will vote to cut the budget of the school their own children attend, if it means saving $0.10 a year on their taxes.

Of course, on the flipside, their are those who use public schools as free daycare, and expect the teachers to pretty much raise their children for them.

Members of both groups, of course, are quite fond of saying how much better they'd be at teaching than the people with degrees and decades of experience in the field of education. Huge budget disparities in school districts are the norm, thanks to the fact that much of a school's budget comes from local property taxes - rich neighborhoods tend to have well-funded, modern schools (partially just as a way of flaunting their wealth), while poor neighborhoods tend to have run-down, underfunded, overfull schools (partially due to their disdain of education and reluctance to spend more of their already tight budget on it). Throw in the "as long as I've got mine" types, who will try and shrink the budget of any service they don't have use for (such as education for those without school-age kids), and politicians who haven't got the foggiest clue about the things they're managing, and you've got what passes for the funding of a public school system in the U.S. today.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

... rich neighborhoods tend to have well-funded, modern schools (partially just as a way of flaunting their wealth), ...
I live in a wealthy town, but we must not know how to flaunt our taxes. The grade school is literally falling town, with roof repairs made three or four times a year; bats, squirrels, and chipmunks living in the ceiling, a foundation now lower than the surrounding ground, etc. We rank about 70 out of 90 for the number of computers per student in grade and middle schools. The septic system was shot and required monthly pumping until two years ago, when we finally replaced it under orders from the state. And yet people move to this town specifically for the school, and have for decades.

My guess is that we're spending our money on the teachers and staff.

~~ Paul

[Leicontis]

My guess is that we're spending our money on the teachers and staff.

Sounds highly plausible to me. My high school was pretty run-down (though not as badly as the school you describe), and was in fact quite poorly-funded, but had incredibly good teachers. I'm a 24-year-old graduate metallurgy student, and I haven't taken a biology course since 10th grade (about 8 years ago). I can still understand a lot of what my wife (the neurobiologist) says when she talks shop, and I credit this to my excellent biology teacher. A number of the teachers were on a comparable level to him, despite the lousy conditions in which they worked. My guess is that the teachers that were most interested in just educating children were the ones most likely to stay in a low-paying district, whereas the less driven teachers flowed to the high-paying schools.

A side question - were there a lot of retirees/senior citizens in your town? In some areas, people without children are hesitant to pony up for a school that doesn't directly benefit them (in others, these same people are some of the most ardent supporters - go figure).

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

A side question - were there a lot of retirees/senior citizens in your town? In some areas, people without children are hesitant to pony up for a school that doesn't directly benefit them (in others, these same people are some of the most ardent supporters - go figure).
We don't get much argument from senior citizens about taxes going to the schools, which is about 70% of the budget. The problem is that only 2.5% of the tax base is business. The rest is individuals.

~~ Paul

[Flo]

Back on topic...
I don't know about other countries, but here in the U.S., there seems to be a large subculture that disdains education. A large portion of this subculture is very poor, due to their inability to get high-paying jobs, due to their lack of education. Strangely, they don't seem to understand the connection, and still consider education a waste of time and money, to the point that some of these people will vote to cut the budget of the school their own children attend, if it means saving $0.10 a year on their taxes.

Of course, on the flipside, their are those who use public schools as free daycare, and expect the teachers to pretty much raise their children for them.

Members of both groups, of course, are quite fond of saying how much better they'd be at teaching than the people with degrees and decades of experience in the field of education. Huge budget disparities in school districts are the norm, thanks to the fact that much of a school's budget comes from local property taxes - rich neighborhoods tend to have well-funded, modern schools (partially just as a way of flaunting their wealth), while poor neighborhoods tend to have run-down, underfunded, overfull schools (partially due to their disdain of education and reluctance to spend more of their already tight budget on it). Throw in the "as long as I've got mine" types, who will try and shrink the budget of any service they don't have use for (such as education for those without school-age kids), and politicians who haven't got the foggiest clue about the things they're managing, and you've got what passes for the funding of a public school system in the U.S. today.


Hmm, seems one of the most important difference between the US and here is that funding of schools is decided at central/regional government level, and the local populations have no say in it. Teachers are mostly state employees who are dispatched to various regions throughout their careers, with those assigned to the less desirable schools (i.e. in poor, often troubled, suburbs where you find a subculture of disdain towards education) trying their best to be reassigned to better areas.

Situation in Switzerland is better, funds are aplenty and teachers are well paid, the country is still rather wealthy and there's little trouble. However, we still hear the same kind of wailing about the level of education being lower now than it was xxx years ago ...

It sounds like a big part of this wailing originates from people who object to the very concept of giving more than a basic education to the unwashed masses ... The only solutions they advocate are to favor private/religious schools, implement competition between schools, cut funding to the public sector, and introduce vouchers. I've still yet to see a sound argument for the results they promise should those policies be inplemented.

Another point I'd like to see resolved is: what do we measure exactly when we say that education level is worse now than it was earlier ?

[Tokenconservative]

Sorry, couldn't see the rest of your post past this chip. I'm sorry again that you were such a good teacher they had to fire you.


I am too in a way...but given that I make, I dunno, 10-12x more than I did as a teacher, that's okay to some extent.

Too bad for those kids, though.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

I keep hearing exactly the same here in Europe (mostly the two systems I know well, France and Switzerland).

Unfortunately, Tokie systematically butting in with his sour grapes and his various fetishes prevents all significant discussion of this fascinating subject. :rolleyes:

Stop talking to/about me and maybe I'll go away.

If you were not a shrieking leftist who simply cannot stand to have his/her/other assumptions and ideologies assailed, then this would not be a problem for you.

Perhaps you can take a pill before coming online in future?

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

I was addressing you, so I believe the term "politically correct" applies to the right.

Could you give us an example of how the left has modified the curriculum to weed out the ideals of the right? I ask this in response to your statement:
~~ Paul



No..wait...what?

You believe that PC derives from....the right?

If this is what you are saying (and you are often very unclear, which I read as practiced leftist obfuscation) it's laughable. It was who, the Young Republicans who established speech codes on university campuses?

The left has established things like "rainforest math," which is designed to, while muddling young minds about math, show that not just white males use math.

Maybe your youth was different from mine, and I'll admit I did not get very far in math, but as I remember it, math was math and it did not have skin pigmentation.

History books that tell youngsters that the US was "just as much to blame" for the war with the Imperial Japanese as were those self-same Japanese, as a build up to the argument that the a-bombs were unnecessary, is a good example, too.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Sounds highly plausible to me. My high school was pretty run-down (though not as badly as the school you describe), and was in fact quite poorly-funded, but had incredibly good teachers. I'm a 24-year-old graduate metallurgy student, and I haven't taken a biology course since 10th grade (about 8 years ago). I can still understand a lot of what my wife (the neurobiologist) says when she talks shop, and I credit this to my excellent biology teacher. A number of the teachers were on a comparable level to him, despite the lousy conditions in which they worked. My guess is that the teachers that were most interested in just educating children were the ones most likely to stay in a low-paying district, whereas the less driven teachers flowed to the high-paying schools.


That's an interesting observation/supposition, one that I think deserves more attention.

In my opinion (purely anecdotal) indeed, some of the best teachers I run into are in lousy schools while some of the worst "teachers" are in the best schools. I find that teachers identified as the "best" tend to be those who are so-so in their field, but very good at office politics. This is not so very much different from just about any other industry, from what I know.

The question that immediately demands of us is: should the system charged with educating our children be permitted to operate under the Peter Principle?

Given, every school runs the gamut, and it's ALL based on the principal (just as it is in nearly any company--sigh...and no, before any of my detractors [and they are legion] begin howling, copanies do not have principals like schools do and I know that...it's an ANALOGY, folks!) but there it is nonetheless.

Tokie

[Flo]

Stop talking to/about me and maybe I'll go away.


Cut the maybe and we have a deal :D

[Tokenconservative]

Cut the maybe and we have a deal :D

Okay.

But has to be everyone.

And you'll need to provide a link--LIIINNNNKKKK!!!--to prove it.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Question:

Let's say schools today are not doing a worse job than they did 40 years ago (I wonder why that "arbitrary" date was chosen?).

If not, what would they LOOK like, if they were?

Tokie

[Flo]

And you'll need to provide a link--LIIINNNNKKKK!!!--to prove it.



is that something that can be cured, I wonder ?

[Flo]

Question:

Let's say schools today are not doing a worse job than they did 40 years ago (I wonder why that "arbitrary" date was chosen?).

If not, what would they LOOK like, if they were?

Tokie


The question is "a worse job compared to what ? ", instead of compared to "when".

[Tokenconservative]

is that something that can be cured, I wonder ?

Apparently not...it's some sort of man-made genetic disorder that prevents latter-day "thinkers" from actually um...thinking.

When I came up, one debated by obtaining, absorbing/analyzing data and then regurgitating it in a way that suggested you understood it and therein/thereby, making your OWN argument, bolstered by the data and/or arguments of others whom you might reference.

Today, one need only say, "here is the link that you need to read to understand my position," and if one's opponent should say something like...um, can't you make your own argument, why clearly you opponent is a backward-thinking Cretin hopelessly old-fashioned and ignorant of the more tony approaches to "debate" today.

Slap a fedora on my head, a skinny tie around my neck and call me "fogey."

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

The question is "a worse job compared to what ? ", instead of compared to "when".

Hmmm...I'm not sure you understand the problem.

We have to compare apples to apples. It would be difficult to compare and impossible to draw conclusions about the state of our public schools were we to say, compare them to farming practices in the Ukrainian countryside since the collapse of the old Soviet Union, or to utilities construction processes of mid-19th Century England.

See, because it's a school system, we have to compare it to a school system. Now, we can (and do) compare our school system to those of other nations (we always come out wanting), and we could, I suppose compare the current US school system to that of Samaria in the 12 century BCE, but I'm not entirely convinced that would tell us much.

Utility is what we are after in this case, and what better utility might we find than in comparing apples to apples across time?

Tokie

[Flo]

Thanks for definitively demonstrating you've got absolutely nothing of interest to say ...

[Prometheus]

A big part of the difficulty in dealing with this topic is the sparsity of good data. I teach and I also do data-collection/analysis for my school and for my state's department of education. In my experience, virtually none of the published data on educational outcomes can actually be trusted. Standards for collection and reporting of data vary widely from place to place, cheating abounds (what do you expect when you tie people's job security to test scores and then let them control the testing/reporting process), tests are mis-used (eg. placement tests are used to report achievement, etc.). Data is collected and reported with an eye toward meeting defined policy targets, and not in any attempt to conduct genuine science.

Also, SAT's and most of the other tests used are "norm-referenced" (http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/methods/assment/as8lk1.htm)
so they don't actually tell us much about how present students' actual knowlege compares to that of past students. With a norm-referenced test, your score depends not just on how many questions you got right or wrong, but with how everyone else in a random sampling did on the same test in the same year. If everyone get's smarter from one year to the next, then you need to also get smarter to get the same score.

[Jeff Corey]

....Also, SAT's and most of the other tests used are "norm-referenced" (http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/methods/assment/as8lk1.htm)
so they don't actually tell us much about how present students' actual knowlege compares to that of past students. With a norm-referenced test, your score depends not just on how many questions you got right or wrong, but with how everyone else in a random sampling did on the same test in the same year. If everyone get's smarter from one year to the next, then you need to also get smarter to get the same score.
One question. I thought "norm referenced" was based on all the available data. Why use a random sample with all the computing power available and the data are available from machine scored tests?

[Prometheus]

One question. I thought "norm referenced" was based on all the available data. Why use a random sample with all the computing power available and the data are available from machine scored tests?

Good question. I'm not 100% sure, but I believe it has to do with the fact that the primary purpose of a norm-referenced test is to rank and sort students along a bell-curve. These tests don't actually try to measure what the schools are teaching.

The standards-based tests individual states in the U.S. are now using, as required by the "No Child Left Untested" act (can you guess how I feel about that particular law?) are not norm-referenced, but they have a lot of other problems--one being that each state gets to construct and implement it's own test, and the tests are not comparable across states.

Here's a link that mentions briefly some of the problems with the PISA testing mentioned in the OP:
http://www.fairtest.org/examarts/Winter%202004-2005/International.html

[Jeff Corey]

Good question. I'm not 100% sure, but I believe it has to do with the fact that the primary purpose of a norm-referenced test is to rank and sort students along a bell-curve. These tests don't actually try to measure what the schools are teaching.

The standards-based tests individual states in the U.S. are now using, as required by the "No Child Left Untested" act (can you guess how I feel about that particular law?) are not norm-referenced, but they have a lot of other problems--one being that each state gets to construct and implement it's own test, and the tests are not comparable across states.

Here's a link that mentions briefly some of the problems with the PISA testing mentioned in the OP:
http://www.fairtest.org/examarts/Winter%202004-2005/International.html Thanks for the link, but I was just questioning the methodology of using random samples when all the data were readily available. After all, norm referencing was the basis of the Stanford-Binet IQ scores years ago and they used all the data they had to calculate the mean and arbitrarily say that was 100.
This is really a minor point and a way to confuse the Tokin' Conservative.
By the way, I really do know a tokin'conservative/libertarian. She doesn't think that Big Goverment has any right to stop her from growing weed for her own use. And she detests our senator, the next POTUS,
Praise the Lard.

[LostAngeles]

I live in a wealthy town, but we must not know how to flaunt our taxes. The grade school is literally falling town, with roof repairs made three or four times a year; bats, squirrels, and chipmunks living in the ceiling, a foundation now lower than the surrounding ground, etc. We rank about 70 out of 90 for the number of computers per student in grade and middle schools. The septic system was shot and required monthly pumping until two years ago, when we finally replaced it under orders from the state. And yet people move to this town specifically for the school, and have for decades.

My guess is that we're spending our money on the teachers and staff.

~~ Paul

I'd guess Proposition 2 and a Half before anything else. Where I lived in MA was middle-class or so and I remember we couldn't afford anything more than some incredibly thin, flimsy paper one year. The next year was a bit better, but oy.

[Tokenconservative]

Thanks for the link, but I was just questioning the methodology of using random samples when all the data were readily available. After all, norm referencing was the basis of the Stanford-Binet IQ scores years ago and they used all the data they had to calculate the mean and arbitrarily say that was 100.
This is really a minor point and a way to confuse the Tokin' Conservative.
By the way, I really do know a tokin'conservative/libertarian. She doesn't think that Big Goverment has any right to stop her from growing weed for her own use. And she detests our senator, the next POTUS,
Praise the Lard.

I'se confusiated!!!!

First, my nick has nothing to do with "Tokin'"

Second, the reason they do it this way is pretty clear to anyone who is paying attention: the last thing the schools (and their unions) want is for anyone to generate "real" scores.

By doing it this way (or myriad other virtually useless ways) they can always point to the data and say, "...but the data are not complete!"

Their own data. They collect it. AND they get to use that excuse.

Handy.

Most people wish they could base THEIR next raise on data they get to cherry pick about how well THEY performed on their job...

Nice work, if you can get it.

Tokie

[Prometheus]

Second, the reason they do it this way is pretty clear to anyone who is paying attention: the last thing the schools (and their unions) want is for anyone to generate "real" scores.


Who are "they"? Teachers? Unions? Local school comittees? State education departments? Federal D.O.E.? Educational Testing Service? OECD? Parent Teacher Associations? Voters (via referendum)? Congress? State legislatures? A conspiracy of them all?



By doing it this way (or myriad other virtually useless ways) they can always point to the data and say, "...but the data are not complete!"


What would you suggest be done?



Most people wish they could base THEIR next raise on data they get to cherry pick about how well THEY performed on their job...


I've had one 4% raise in 7 years, but it came along with an increase in health insurance co-pays more than double the dollar amount. I wish someone would tell me which data I can "cherry pick" to at least let me keep up with inflation.

[Dancing David]

No..wait...what?

You believe that PC derives from....the right?

Yup, thats the fact.


If this is what you are saying (and you are often very unclear, which I read as practiced leftist obfuscation) it's laughable. It was who, the Young Republicans who established speech codes on university campuses?

The left has established things like "rainforest math," which is designed to, while muddling young minds about math, show that not just white males use math.

The district i work in uses Connected Math, how many use rainforest math?



Maybe your youth was different from mine, and I'll admit I did not get very far in math, but as I remember it, math was math and it did not have skin pigmentation.

History books that tell youngsters that the US was "just as much to blame" for the war

I don't suppose you could tell us which book that is and who publishes it?

Now the basis of the Spanish American War is discussed , but I have yet to read that.

with the Imperial Japanese as were those self-same Japanese, as a build up to the argument that the a-bombs were unnecessary, is a good example, too.

Tokie

[Dancing David]

Question:

Let's say schools today are not doing a worse job than they did 40 years ago (I wonder why that "arbitrary" date was chosen?).

If not, what would they LOOK like, if they were?

Tokie


Well considering the drop out rate forty years ago, I am not sure that would be a good thing. back then the ability to drop out varied widely some as early as seventh grade.

[Tokenconservative]

Well considering the drop out rate forty years ago, I am not sure that would be a good thing. back then the ability to drop out varied widely some as early as seventh grade.

I'm sorry, refresh my memory...now, was it easier to go into a trade or profession without a high school diploma 40 years ago, or is it easier today?

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Who are "they"? Teachers? Unions? Local school comittees? State education departments? Federal D.O.E.? Educational Testing Service? OECD? Parent Teacher Associations? Voters (via referendum)? Congress? State legislatures? A conspiracy of them all?

What would you suggest be done?

I've had one 4% raise in 7 years, but it came along with an increase in health insurance co-pays more than double the dollar amount. I wish someone would tell me which data I can "cherry pick" to at least let me keep up with inflation.

1. Yes. And while you can dismiss this as a CT, in fact, it is what it is. Tell me: we know that the earth revolves around the sun, right? But what would it LOOK like if it were the other way 'round?

2. Be done about the above? I would suggest be done, is that the schools start teaching to the STUDENT, not the test. Of course this is problematic because "teachers" came out of these same schools and are typically the bottom of their graduating classes in college, which means few can teach above the lowest common denominator, because few understand the material themselves. If you are one of those rare teachers to whom this does not apply, you know that what I am saying is true, but you'd sooner pluck out an eye than admit it in a public forum where the possibility--no matter how remote--exists that you might be identified. I saw "The Mist" last weekend in which the basic theme is "fear changes everything." And so it does.

3. I've had no raises in the past 7 years. I have increased my business at least 200%, but I still charge the same, because that's the rate the market will bear. Perhaps if you (collective) were delivering a better product, you could charge more for it? Has that ever occured to you? No, of course it hasn't. That's because your wage is set not by the market but by your union's negotiations. Maybe it's time to leave the union and become a free agent. Lots of private schools pay far more than the public. Lots more pay far less, of course...with no bennies at all. And by the way, why don't you count your bennies into that pay when you calculate it? Care to know what % of my pay I'll be retiring (HAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAWWW!) at? It's whatever I manage to squirrel away during my work life, not the 70-80% of the highest pay you ever earned, that you will see.

Tokie

[Dancing David]

I'm sorry, refresh my memory...now, was it easier to go into a trade or profession without a high school diploma 40 years ago, or is it easier today?

Tokie


Depends most trades accept family memebrs, if union. The industrial bust started fairly soon afetr.

Of course that was the standard excuse parents would give my mother 'my kid don't need english, he just needs a job'; 1969.

Then there was the wonderfull year 1979, when I was competing to get a job at age 19 (entry level at McD's) against guys with a family and a mortage.

[KoihimeNakamura]

1. Yes. And while you can dismiss this as a CT, in fact, it is what it is. Tell me: we know that the earth revolves around the sun, right? But what would it LOOK like if it were the other way 'round?[/qupte]

It IS a CT. Good Call. (Note, you need to proof this.)

[quote]2. Be done about the above? I would suggest be done, is that the schools start teaching to the STUDENT, not the test. Of course this is problematic because "teachers" came out of these same schools and are typically the bottom of their graduating classes in college, which means few can teach above the lowest common denominator, because few understand the material themselves. If you are one of those rare teachers to whom this does not apply, you know that what I am saying is true, but you'd sooner pluck out an eye than admit it in a public forum where the possibility--no matter how remote--exists that you might be identified. I saw "The Mist" last weekend in which the basic theme is "fear changes everything." And so it does.

An ad hom, insult, and unsupported assertion all in one. Incidently, both liberals and conseratives want more testing, so you're assertion falls flat.. again.

[Spindrift]

Of course this is problematic because "teachers" came out of these same schools and are typically the bottom of their graduating classes in college,

Another Token lie!

[Spindrift]

...and I'll admit I did not get very far in math,...

Then why would you have been asked to teach a math class?

[Prometheus]

1. Yes. And while you can dismiss this as a CT, in fact, it is what it is. Tell me: we know that the earth revolves around the sun, right? But what would it LOOK like if it were the other way 'round?

I'm not being dismissive. I only asked for clarification of your position. I'm fully open to the possibility that some such conspiracy may exist, if anyone shows me some compelling evidence for such. I know that I'm not in on any sort of conspiracy, and I'm fairly certain that none of my co-workers are either.


2. Be done about the above? I would suggest be done, is that the schools start teaching to the STUDENT, not the test.


This is what every teacher I know did before "No Child Left Behind" forced them to stop doing so, even the few who were willing to sacrifice their own careers to teach anything other than the new test material have been unable to do so because they get replaced by administrators fearful of losing their own jobs as soon as they try.



Of course this is problematic because "teachers" came out of these same schools and are typically the bottom of their graduating classes in college, which means few can teach above the lowest common denominator, because few understand the material themselves. If you are one of those rare teachers to whom this does not apply, you know that what I am saying is true, but you'd sooner pluck out an eye than admit it in a public forum where the possibility--no matter how remote--exists that you might be identified.


I was at the top of my class in elite private high school, undergrad university, and graduate school. I know many other teachers who are also highly qualified. However, on the whole you are right--there are a great many underqualified, underperforming teachers, especially in the public grade schools. I can't go so far as to say "most", however, since I don't have any numerical data to back up such a claim. I don't think I'll pluck out an eye. And while I don't make any attempt to advertise my identity in this forum, I'm quite vocal in my criticism of the deficiencies of my field. On the many occasions when I've complained of exactly these problems, other teachers have only agreed with me.



I saw "The Mist" last weekend in which the basic theme is "fear changes everything." And so it does.

Haven't seen it, but I agree with the sentiment



3. I've had no raises in the past 7 years. I have increased my business at least 200%, but I still charge the same, because that's the rate the market will bear. Perhaps if you (collective) were delivering a better product, you could charge more for it? Has that ever occured to you? No, of course it hasn't. That's because your wage is set not by the market but by your union's negotiations. Maybe it's time to leave the union and become a free agent. Lots of private schools pay far more than the public. Lots more pay far less, of course...with no bennies at all. And by the way, why don't you count your bennies into that pay when you calculate it? Care to know what % of my pay I'll be retiring (HAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAWWW!) at? It's whatever I manage to squirrel away during my work life, not the 70-80% of the highest pay you ever earned, that you will see.


I'm not in a union. And in fact, I was freelance (travelling around the world teaching English) before I took my current job. I did get paid a lot more for that type of work than any school, public or private, pays in the U.S., though the market has somewhat cooled recently.

I don't see where you got the idea that I disregard the value of my benefits, though they're not nearly as rich as people outside of teaching tend to believe. I get 10 days of paid vacation per year. I do not get paid for the summer months when classes are not in session. I get to purchase my own health coverage at a 50% discount over the individual rate offered to the public, but the rate I pay, and the co-payments required tend to go up every year, while my pay does not. I do not get a retirment pension. I do not contribute to, nor am I allowed to collect Social Security. I do not get paid for holidays.

I, like most of the teachers I know, are not considered "full-time" even though we work more than 40 hours per week. Our employers' budgets have been cut so sharply that full-time positions are rare. Even teachers that are in the union are usually in the same predicament, because union negotiations generally only apply to full-timers, and the employers get around calling us full-time by firing, and then re-hiring, us every semester. This practice also prevents our being able to fight should a teacher be dismissed without good cause.

I get paid an hourly rate, for in-class time only. Although my job description specifically requires me to spend an average of 16 hours per week in meetings, trainings, test sessions, and scoring tests, I don't get paid for any of that time, nor do I get paid for any time I put in to preparing my lessons or grading students' homework. This is the norm in my field, and while I am one of a few teachers who still puts a great deal of time and effort into creating quality lessons, most teachers are not as dumb as me, and they are not willing to do work that they don't get paid for.
This is one of the primary reasons for the poor quality of teaching in many schools.

There's no doubt at all that our education system is broken, and that some of the people you blame are a part of the problem. However, I think the problem is actually a lot larger and more complex than anyone outside of teaching (and few people in the teaching field) understands.

Nevertheless, my primary response to the OP is still that the available data cannot be trusted, so it's not really possible for anyone to back up any strong claims about what should or shouldn't be done.

[LostAngeles]

Then why would you have been asked to teach a math class?

As I understand it, most math teachers, at least in CA, do not have a degree in math. So I'm not surprised there. Considering how much of the advanced math I know gives me ideas on how to better explain the simple math (because the advanced math tells me why the simple math works), I can see why this is a problem.

I am honestly interested in Tokie's methods to get the class from 2nd grade math to "near 7th grade" math.

One of the real problems I'm seeing in working with some students is that their teachers/curriculum are using some very bizzare methods to try and explain things that are just making it worse for the kids. If I get a chance later on, I'll try and demonstrate the really weird, "equation mat," for you.

[Prometheus]

I am honestly interested in Tokie's methods to get the class from 2nd grade math to "near 7th grade" math.

One of the real problems I'm seeing in working with some students is that their teachers/curriculum are using some very bizzare methods to try and explain things that are just making it worse for the kids. If I get a chance later on, I'll try and demonstrate the really weird, "equation mat," for you.

I'll second that. I know that the sort of rapid advancement Tokie describes is possible, as I've seen it happen, but I would honestly like some detailed information as to how he did it, and how he knows he did it (how were students abilities measured before and after his instruction).

[Prometheus]

If I get a chance later on, I'll try and demonstrate the really weird, "equation mat," for you.

Is this what you're talking about?:
http://www.cpm.org/pdfs/information/conference/AC_Solving_w_Manipulatives.pdf

[Jeff Corey]

Could someone tell me what the fark "algebra tiles" are? Google was not my friend on this.

[LostAngeles]

Is this what you're talking about?:
http://www.cpm.org/pdfs/information/conference/AC_Solving_w_Manipulatives.pdf

Yes! They had stuck two of those together with a double bar between them to indicate an equals sign like in 2.75 of that PDF.

Basically, she brought the work up to one of the tutors who had never seen anything like that before so they brought it to me, who had also never seen it. Since all my smarts come from being the one who RTFM, I asked for the textbook. Once I figured it out, I tried to explain it to the student. I wrote out some equation like 3x+7=6x+4. She understood the equation itself, but the mat threw her for a loop. It basically complicated something she understood already.

The idea of using a manipulative like that isn't bad. I think as an actual manipulative it might work better. I don't think handing it out as a worksheet is really the best way to work with it, but technically, IANAE (I am not an educator).

What really bugged me about it, was that it resembled (to me at first look) the Cartesian coordinate graph with an attempt at labeling the quadrants. Most math builds upon things you're already familiar with and from my experience and the experience of folks I've talked to, when you get something new that looks like something you've seen before, a lot of the time they are similar/isomorphic/whatever. The mat isn't like the graphs at all.

[LostAngeles]

I'm giving it a bit more reading. There's definitely some good stuff in there and the usage of algebra tiles makes for some potentially interesting stuff.

I can say, honestly, that the whole use of an equation mat for simplifying and representing equations doesn't seem to work for my learning style at all. I recognize the need for different approaches to the material, though. So, it's not bad, I just don't like it and were I a teacher, I don't think I would demand that every kid be able to do this. I'm just not sure how I would incorporate it for the kids who did need it and the kids who would find it enlightening and still accommodate the kids like the student I mentioned above.

[Paul W]

[N]orm referencing was the basis of the Stanford-Binet IQ scores years ago and they used all the data they had to calculate the mean and arbitrarily say that was 100.


Let's start with some historical facts about IQ measurement.

Binet - in France - was tasked by the French government to devise a method by which children in the school system who needed additional help to achieve the required standards. I can't remember the date and my reference book is the opposite end of the house and I can't be bothered to go get it, because the date is not very relevant.

He devised a series of tests which allowed him to estimate the average level of achievement of children of a range of ages. This allowed him to propose the idea of "mental age" - ie this child was performing at the level expected of a child of chronological age x, say.

IQ was then defined as: (mental age / chronological age) * 100

The use of a multiplier of 100 was not arbitrary: it was just convenient.

Later work by Weschler at Stamford led first to the Stamford Binet and then to the range of Weschler tests - still in wide use for clinical and educational purposes.

Unfortunately, the idea of "mental age" has no real meaning when dealing with adults. Weschler therefore developed the idea that scores on his tests would be converted into distributions with mean 100 and standard deviation of 15. Nothing magical - just convenient. And nothing sinister either.

As a matter of interest, and "multiple intelligences" advocates notwithstanding, the scores on most tests of ability/intelligence are highly correlated. Indeed, the evidence from Factor Analytical studies is that there is a single factor which accounts for 60-65% of the variance in test scores. Most statistically numerate psychologists would see this as fairly convincing evidence that there is just one "intelligence" factor. This does not stop some test publishers from trying to extract - by dubious means - three (or more) factors: verbal, numerical and "spacial"

Before someone flames off at me, any psychologist who uses these tests is well aware that there are likely to be strong cultural factors in the test results: one major engineering group in the UK had to develop their own norms for the tests which they used for selection.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Most statistically numerate psychologists would see this as fairly convincing evidence that there is just one "intelligence" factor. This does not stop some test publishers from trying to extract - by dubious means - three (or more) factors: verbal, numerical and "spacial"
What do you mean by "intelligence factor"? Clearly there are many brain functions that contribute to intelligence. For example, a person can be quite intelligent yet find it difficult to read, and this would clearly affect an IQ test. But that can't be the one intelligence factor to which you refer.

Are you suggesting that if we can control for all the variance in brain function, then we'd find only one intelligence factor?

~~ Paul

[drkitten]

As a matter of interest, and "multiple intelligences" advocates notwithstanding, the scores on most tests of ability/intelligence are highly correlated. Indeed, the evidence from Factor Analytical studies is that there is a single factor which accounts for 60-65% of the variance in test scores. Most statistically numerate psychologists would see this as fairly convincing evidence that there is just one "intelligence" factor.

I'm afraid that this particular argument is one major reason most professional statisticians consider the phrase "statistically numerate psychologists" to be an oxymoron. (That and the over-reliance on correlation as proof of causation that is endemic to the field.) Actual statistics students are taught in their first-year class that reification of factors on the basis of variance is not justifiable.

[Jeff Corey]

... the over-reliance on correlation as proof of causation that is endemic to the field...
Maybe it's endemic in your experience, but I have certainly not found it to be the case. Chapter 2 of our Intro text discusses the issue and our Experimental students are expected to be able to discuss the issues of third variables, directionality and other problems with correlational studies.
Maybe I'm lucky to be in a behaviorally oriented environment and you are not.

[bigred]

Conclusion: I have a collection of impressions and data that doesn't tell the whole story. Is this enough to reasonably conclude a declining school system, or is it merely a tower of leaky buckets? Where do I go from here for hard data?

Unfortunately (and I know the scientifically geeked out JREF community won't like this), "hard data" isn't the be all/end all here, since that data can be misleading, only tell part of the story, etc. For example, higher test scores might mean the tests are easier, not that the kids are doing better - and don't even get me started on kids who are "pushed through" or otherwise given numerous and unbelievable breaks that do them no favors. Not saying such data shouldn't be counted though (I have to mention that or sure as sunshine some Einstein will go "oh so you don't think hard data should count at all!!" :rolleyes: ).

Anyway, I know and have talked to a wide variety of teachers and discussed this online with many more....the ones who feel our educational system is quite broke and kids (generally) in much worse shape than generations past is, oh, somewhere in the mid-to-high 90 percentile area. This goes across areas of the country, age of kids being taught, age/experience of the teachers themselves, and across "classes" (from inner city "slum" schools to middle class, upper-middle class, even some pricier private ones). Granted I haven't exactly had an in-depth discussion with every single teacher in the land, but I find it highly unlikely that my experience is so skewed as to be grossly off-base.

[The Gnomon]

Regardless of improvements in othe areas if the major fault isn't fixed then it's for naught.

The major fault in USA education is its negligence in teaching its citizens how to think cogently. Such training should be started at the earliest age possible to make it second nature. This training should be buttressed by classes in ethics. This double emphasis would create citizens who will not commit crimes based on reasons they feel are justified. They will also be able to examine political issues properly and not be swayed by sly politicians who gain votes mainly on charm or physical appearances or by making promises impossible to keep. Such training will also make for better inter-citizen relationships. Why such training is neglected is beyond me.

It's not too far beyond me. The stakeholders in having a populace easily swayed by invalid argument, attractive-but-faulty logic, and other devious methods of persuasion are numerous and powerful. Business, politicians, religous leaders are some who come to mind. A clear-thinking populace who could arrive at valid logical conclusions is not in their best interest. Therefore, teaching clear thinking in the schools is not demanded by politicians, the business community, or institutional churches.
:eye-poppi

[The Gnomon]

Also, SAT's and most of the other tests used are "norm-referenced" (http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/methods/assment/as8lk1.htm)
so they don't actually tell us much about how present students' actual knowlege compares to that of past students. With a norm-referenced test, your score depends not just on how many questions you got right or wrong, but with how everyone else in a random sampling did on the same test in the same year. If everyone get's smarter from one year to the next, then you need to also get smarter to get the same score.

Good point. If scores represent relative standing, they cannot be meaningfully compared across different testing populations (years).

Also - the question of "What needs to be taught?" is highly relevant. In my days, basic understanding of the use of a slide rule was essential to technical success in higher education. Now it's irrelevant. Basic computer skills are now relevant; in my earlier education days computers were legendary vacuum-tubed beasts in underground bunkers, accessable to elite scientists only.
The use of logarithm and trigonometric tables was once an essential part of mathematics education.
Continents didn't move. DNA wasn't known about. Noble gases didn't form compounds. You got your feet x-rayed when you bought shoes. . .
There were grammar distinctions made that no-one now seems to understand (modes {subjunctive, imperative}, rules against split infinitives . . .) or care about, as we seem to be able to get by without them, for the most part.
What was important then, is not so now; what is important now, either wasn't then, or didn't exist.
So . . . how can any meaningful comparison be made, even given a situation in which all the other variables (dropout rates, philosophies of education . . .) are controlled?
A better question is: are our educational institutions doing the best possible job of teaching what today's students need. Not a simple question, but one which needs to be addressed. :cool:

[quixotecoyote]

Saw an article today saying that the major educational problem is discipline due to a lack of administrative and community support. Apparently its common for half a class period to be spent on disciplinary issues, because the kids know the teachers are powerless without backing from the administrations. The administrations won't discipline the kids because it cuts into the attendance quotas for NCLB and other metrics.

Screaming obscenities, throwing furniture, and physical assault are apparently common.

http://www.cfpmidweek.com/weeks/IssuePDFs/vo5i24web.pdf

[Prometheus]

A better question is: are our educational institutions doing the best possible job of teaching what today's students need. Not a simple question, but one which needs to be addressed. :cool:

I agree with most of your post, but I'd argue that your final question is actually a simple question, with a simple answer: "Nope!"

Instead, how about: "What do students today need, and how can schools actually help them get it?"

[Flo]

It's not too far beyond me. The stakeholders in having a populace easily swayed by invalid argument, attractive-but-faulty logic, and other devious methods of persuasion are numerous and powerful. Business, politicians, religous leaders are some who come to mind. A clear-thinking populace who could arrive at valid logical conclusions is not in their best interest. Therefore, teaching clear thinking in the schools is not demanded by politicians, the business community, or institutional churches.
:eye-poppi


In the words of Jonathan Kozol

The first goal and primary function of [...] public school[s] is not to educate good people, but good citizens. It is the function which we call in enemy nations "state indoctrination."

[drkitten]

I agree with most of your post, but I'd argue that your final question is actually a simple question, with a simple answer: "Nope!"

An overly simple question. No human-built instutition has ever been able to deliver "the best possible job" at anything.


Instead, how about: "What do students today need, and how can schools actually help them get it?"

Both good questions, but the second may be premature. I submit that schools today are helping today's students get what they need. Improvements are certainly possible. But a partial success (which is what the current US school system delivers) should not be made into the enemy of the inaccessible and impossible complete success.

The basic problem is that the needs are outstripping the capacities of the existing system. FIfty years ago, universal basic literacy was a worthwhile goal within reach of achievable. Today that has been achieved, but it's no longer a worthwhile goal -- it's far too low a bar. But to abandon the promise of universal literacy would not be a step forward....

[Prometheus]

Recently, I've come across a lot of anecdotal accounts that suggest that getting accepted into U.S. colleges is more difficult now than it was even a decade ago--that colleges have been able to raise the bar for admissions because the pool of highly qualified applicants has increased in size and average qualification (anyone got any good data on this?). If this is true, that would seem to suggest that U.S. education is getting better, not worse, wouldn't it?

[Dancing David]

Unfortunately (and I know the scientifically geeked out JREF community won't like this), "hard data" isn't the be all/end all here, since that data can be misleading, only tell part of the story, etc. For example, higher test scores might mean the tests are easier, not that the kids are doing better - and don't even get me started on kids who are "pushed through" or otherwise given numerous and unbelievable breaks that do them no favors. Not saying such data shouldn't be counted though (I have to mention that or sure as sunshine some Einstein will go "oh so you don't think hard data should count at all!!" :rolleyes: ).




I would say there is more the issue of teaching to the test. If all that is taught is the test , well then that is what you learn.

NCLB was not a great idea but it has caused schools to pay attention, unfortunately schools boards and legislatures are what they are.

[Dancing David]

Saw an article today saying that the major educational problem is discipline due to a lack of administrative and community support. Apparently its common for half a class period to be spent on disciplinary issues, because the kids know the teachers are powerless without backing from the administrations. The administrations won't discipline the kids because it cuts into the attendance quotas for NCLB and other metrics.

Screaming obscenities, throwing furniture, and physical assault are apparently common.

http://www.cfpmidweek.com/weeks/IssuePDFs/vo5i24web.pdf

It probably varies from school district to schools district.

the main thing is to call the parents, the students usually get worse at home than they ever do at school. I work in a twin town of about 150,000.

Our problem is that we have large turn over in our population, children that come from urban districts usually spend quitre a bit of time in discipline before they figure out choices and consequences.

[drkitten]

Recently, I've come across a lot of anecdotal accounts that suggest that getting accepted into U.S. colleges is more difficult now than it was even a decade ago--that colleges have been able to raise the bar for admissions because the pool of highly qualified applicants has increased in size and average qualification (anyone got any good data on this?). If this is true, that would seem to suggest that U.S. education is getting better, not worse, wouldn't it?

Not really. "Getting accepted into US colleges" has never really been an issue except for the top, top flight of schools. Which are getting more selective, but also account for a tiny number of students. The vast majority of US schools practice essentially open admission, where the only criterion for admission is that your check clears.

What has happened is simply that more people are applying, and more people are applying to more schools over a wider area.

[Prometheus]

Not really. "Getting accepted into US colleges" has never really been an issue except for the top, top flight of schools. Which are getting more selective, but also account for a tiny number of students. The vast majority of US schools practice essentially open admission, where the only criterion for admission is that your check clears.

What has happened is simply that more people are applying, and more people are applying to more schools over a wider area.

I'm still trying to find some hard data, but, absent that, isn't the U.S. population aging. That is, aren't there fewer high school/college age people around than in the previous generation. If more people are applying isn't it plausible that it's at least partially because more people are well-qualified to apply?

And what's going on at all the lower echelon schools that are practicing open admission? If they're getting more applicants and it's also the case that primary/secondary education is declining in quality, then don't all those schools find it necessary to lower their curriculum standards?

[bigred]

I would say there is more the issue of teaching to the test. If all that is taught is the test , well then that is what you learn.yep.

NCLB was not a great idea but it has caused schools to pay attention, unfortunately schools boards and legislatures are what they are.I don't think it was a bad idea per se, except making it the "be all/end all" aspect. Standardized tests are good way to ensure a level playing field in many respects. But it has the failings you mention. As one criteria used, in fact, I think it's great. It just can't be "it."

[drkitten]

I'm still trying to find some hard data, but, absent that, isn't the U.S. population aging.

Yes in relative terms, but not as much in absolute terms -- the percentage of the population that is under 25 is going down, but because the population as a whole is still increasing, the number of bodies-in-seats is not decreasing as fast.


And what's going on at all the lower echelon schools that are practicing open admission? If they're getting more applicants and it's also the case that primary/secondary education is declining in quality, then don't all those schools find it necessary to lower their curriculum standards?

Yup. The "race to the bottom" is well-documented.

[bigred]

Saw an article today saying that the major educational problem is discipline due to a lack of administrative and community support. Apparently its common for half a class period to be spent on disciplinary issues, because the kids know the teachers are powerless without backing from the administrations. The administrations won't discipline the kids because it cuts into the attendance quotas for NCLB and other metrics.

Screaming obscenities, throwing furniture, and physical assault are apparently common.

http://www.cfpmidweek.com/weeks/IssuePDFs/vo5i24web.pdf
Yep. This is the biggest concern/complaint I hear from teachers - on an order of magnitude.



the main thing is to call the parents, the students usually get worse at home than they ever do at school. I work in a twin town of about 150,000.

Surely you don't mean in terms of discipline :boggled: Discipline has largely become passe, even shunned. Teachers can barely blink at students nowdays for fear of a lawsuit, and spineless/incompetent parents are all the rage. They think taking away one of Johnny's 50 video games is a legit punishment then wonder why it doesn't seem to help. Must be the system. :mgbanghead

[genesplicer]

Part of the difficulty we face is the fact that we have a very heterogeneous population. Moreso than almost any other country. In Japan, for example, where the population is more homogeneous, you can use limited methods with greater success. Here, we have to account for many variables that other, more monolithic cultures rarely have to deal with.

Secondly, many other countries track kids in a different way from us in the US. For example, they may begin a battery of tests early in the child's school career to determine if the kid is "College Bound" or not. Once tracked, the kid will go to college prep schools or to some sort of trade school. The testing in question in some of the posts here is usually limited to the college-bound kids, whereas in the US we test all the kids, so we are automatically at a disadvantage.

I'm not saying that our poor performance is strictly based on these two things, but they are factors to consider...

And discipline (Or lack thereof) can have a HUGE impact on class achievement. I can give you some war stories as evidence, if you like...

[Tippit]

I hear all the time that the U.S. public school system has deteriorated, and quality of education is worse now than XX years in the past. I am bombarded by damning anecdotes, and nearly swept away with the sincere and fervent emotions of those assaulting a "broken" system. But before I join the chorus of condemnation, I wish to verify my (and others') assumptions. I don't like singing in falsetto.

Here is what I've been able to find so far, plus my concerns about the quality of data.


U.S. Math scores rank very poorly compared to other industrialized countries.
apa.org/monitor/mar05/scores.html (sorry, still can't link)

Concerns: This study has not existed for a long period of time, so the only thing I can see from it is that we currently rank poorly. I cannot infer decreasing quality unless I am given other data to complete the picture. Also, the difference between U.S. and first place is about 10%. Could a dichotomy between low-performing inner-city schools and standard school districts lower our average scores?


Standardized tests - I wasn't able to find any of these that kept the same standards over the past 30 years. One person I know claims that tests are being dumbed down, teachers protesting any version that reveals them to be incompetent.

Concern: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I still need more.


Literacy comparisons are slightly more sophisticated anecdotes, at least when I encounter them. Usually they take an example of 19th century writing and compare it with current classroom creations. The difference is vast.

Concern: Isn't there a selection process for which 19th century letters and other works survive? A Civil War documentary would hardly choose an unintelligible letter over one that is poignant, insightful, and eloquent. I can't be sure that these are fair comparisons - not just their best against our worse.


Anecdotes. Yes, anecdotes. But there are so many of them! I have a friend who tells me of his school's multi-million-dollar football stadium, but molding science textbooks. I hear public school science teachers who complain of $200 budgets. My own mother tells me that she never would have learned of World War II had not her father been involved in it. There are so many stories, seemingly a different dozen from each new person I meet.

Concern: These are still just stories, perhaps modified by time, distance, and retelling. Many of these I hear close to source, but in the end I still have no data, no large-scale facts to make quantified judgments on and from.


Conclusion: I have a collection of impressions and data that doesn't tell the whole story. Is this enough to reasonably conclude a declining school system, or is it merely a tower of leaky buckets? Where do I go from here for hard data?

You might review Norman Dodd and the Reese Commission, an investigation into tax-exempt foundations during 1953 which attempted to determine if certain foundations wielded undue influence in the US, including apparent attempts to systematically dumb-down the US educational system.

[Prometheus]

You might review Norman Dodd and the Reese Commission, an investigation into tax-exempt foundations during 1953 which attempted to determine if certain foundations wielded undue influence in the US, including apparent attempts to systematically dumb-down the US educational system.

Wait. Is this still the Education forum, or have we switched over to CT now?

[Prometheus]

Yes in relative terms, but not as much in absolute terms -- the percentage of the population that is under 25 is going down, but because the population as a whole is still increasing, the number of bodies-in-seats is not decreasing as fast.

In the links below, though, show some interesting patterns. From 1970 to the present, enrollment rates for High Schools have remained relatively constant, while those for undergrad, graduate and professional schools have about doubled. Also, percentage of HS students completing advanced coursework in math and science has about doubled, and reading scores have steadily increased as well.

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=16
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=65
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=97
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=147



Yup. The "race to the bottom" is well-documented.

Documentation, please?

I've heard all sorts of anecdotal pessimism, but frankly, none of it accords with my personal experience teaching at the graduate and undergraduate levels in public and private colleges. I've only seen curricula and teaching methods improve, and students getting smarter. I don't believe there's any real, hard evidence suggesting that educational quality has declined. And the little that we can confidently infer from demographic data and somewhat less than perfectly valid test scores, such as those I linked to above, seems to me to point in the other direction.

[Dancing David]

Yep. This is the biggest concern/complaint I hear from teachers - on an order of magnitude.



Surely you don't mean in terms of discipline :boggled: Discipline has largely become passe, even shunned. Teachers can barely blink at students nowdays for fear of a lawsuit, and spineless/incompetent parents are all the rage. They think taking away one of Johnny's 50 video games is a legit punishment then wonder why it doesn't seem to help. Must be the system. :mgbanghead


The ones that cause the most problems are often the ones with the harshest discipline at home. They dred the call home more than the 'deiscipline refferal'.

Now arrogant little snot balls from the middle class are another issue. they usually aren't as much of a problem.

My kid knows he has to write an essay for my wife if he acts out. He dreds that.

Funny niether of my kids were ever spanked, yet they self regulate rather well.

It is the consistancy of the parent's boundaries that matters.

Most parents get in trouble because they say one thing and then do another.

warn the child, give them a chance, enforce the consequence works really well.

The main problem is when parents whine, moan and yell but never set a consequence.

let the kids knwo that the TV is an earned priviledge, you don't meet the expectations, you don't get your TV.

It never ceased to amaze me when i was doing assesment, a parent would complain about thier kids behavior, and they had new clothes and a new haicut and new whatever.

I told them, it is just like a job, if your kid meets the expectation they earn the privilege.

Tell them that they have to not swear to earn the TV, if they swear, then they haven't earned it. It goes away that day and the next.

They would get real upset by the idea that thier child might have nothing in their room but a mattress and some clothes.

But hey, if they like to get punched by a child, that was their problem.

[bigred]

Child rearing/discipline is a rather large topic in itself, dont' want to sidetrack too much.....bottom line being lacking/outright "lame" parents (in one way or other) are a huge part of the problem IMO.

[Jeff Corey]

Heard a Harvard Med School clinical psychologist on NPR talking about different parenting styles. Authoritive=caring, attentive,state rules and consequences. Authoritarian=rigid, rules, "Because I said so" and punishment. Permissive wimp=let the child express itself. whatever. Permissive absent =who cares?

[Paul W]

The ones that cause the most problems are often the ones with the harshest discipline at home. They dred the call home more than the 'deiscipline refferal'.

Now arrogant little snot balls from the middle class are another issue. they usually aren't as much of a problem.

My kid knows he has to write an essay for my wife if he acts out. He dreds that.

Funny niether of my kids were ever spanked, yet they self regulate rather well.

It is the consistancy of the parent's boundaries that matters.

Most parents get in trouble because they say one thing and then do another.

warn the child, give them a chance, enforce the consequence works really well.

The main problem is when parents whine, moan and yell but never set a consequence.

let the kids knwo that the TV is an earned priviledge, you don't meet the expectations, you don't get your TV.

It never ceased to amaze me when i was doing assesment, a parent would complain about thier kids behavior, and they had new clothes and a new haicut and new whatever.

I told them, it is just like a job, if your kid meets the expectation they earn the privilege.

Tell them that they have to not swear to earn the TV, if they swear, then they haven't earned it. It goes away that day and the next.

They would get real upset by the idea that thier child might have nothing in their room but a mattress and some clothes.

But hey, if they like to get punched by a child, that was their problem.


Somehow I get rather worried about those people who complain about standards in Education - but can't actually write grammatical English, or English with accurate spelling, themselves. Incidentally, it is usual form for sentences to start with an upper case letter.

Would someone like to go through this post and correct it. I'm not going to, because I want to see the variety of incorrect "corrections".

[bigred]

Somehow I get rather worried about those people who complain about standards in Education - but can't actually write grammatical English, or English with accurate spelling, themselves. Incidentally, it is usual form for sentences to start with an upper case letter.

Would someone like to go through this post and correct it. I'm not going to, because I want to see the variety of incorrect "corrections".

1 - This is a message board, where even those who know better don't always adhere to grammar as they otherwise would/should.

2 - er the whole glass houses/stones thing.

[Jeff Corey]

Somehow I get rather worried about those people who complain about standards in Education - but can't actually write grammatical English, or English with accurate spelling, themselves. Incidentally, it is usual form for sentences to start with an upper case letter.

Would someone like to go through this post and correct it. I'm not going to, because I want to see the variety of incorrect "corrections".
Okay. You should not have capitalized "Education".

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Somehow I get rather worried about those people who complain about standards in Education - but can't actually write grammatical English, or English with accurate spelling, themselves. Incidentally, it is usual form for sentences to start with an upper case letter.

Would someone like to go through this post and correct it. I'm not going to, because I want to see the variety of incorrect "corrections".

Um, you do know there are disorders out there that make writing a tad difficult?

Just saying, you might not want to seem like an ***.

[Dancing David]

Somehow I get rather worried about those people who complain about standards in Education - but can't actually write grammatical English, or English with accurate spelling, themselves. Incidentally, it is usual form for sentences to start with an upper case letter.

Would someone like to go through this post and correct it. I'm not going to, because I want to see the variety of incorrect "corrections".


Thank Dude!

WTFred, can you read? I am posting at work on my break at work. I am sorry I don't take the time to meet your high standards.

The fact that you can critique my grammar in a driveby posting means nothing. Your critical thinking skills are ZERO.

And for another DID I COMPLAIN ABOUT STANDARDS IN EDUCATION!

take your snotball straw man and go on a date, you need as life.


:p

[Dancing David]

Um, you do know there are disorders out there that make writing a tad difficult?

Just saying, you might not want to seem like an ***.

It wasn't my dyslexia, it was just lazy posting.

:)

[Paul W]

bigred:

1 The point about using grammar in its conventional manner is that it makes the author’s point clearer. I have marked enough undergraduate essays to know that an inadequate grasp of conventional English is a major barrier to communication.

2 What “glass houses” had you in mind – or was this a generalised swipe at me to see if I would bite?

Jeff Corey:

Either capitalisation would be acceptable. It depends on whether I meant “education” or “Education”. Can I point out that in Welsh the term Dysgu means both “teacher” and “student”. I cannot “teach” without learning from my “students”, and I cannot “study” without “teaching” my “teacher”.

Tsukasa Buddha:

I am well aware that “… there are disorders out there that make writing a tad difficult …”. My first degree was in psychology.

Dancing David:

Ad hominem arguments do nothing to enhance the reputation of those who use them. My original posting was a criticism of your use of language: if you can write acceptable conventional English please do so. It would enable the rest of us to understand the points you are trying to make.

By the way, I do have a life. It encompasses five sons/stepsons, several daughters-in-law and three grandsons. I don’t need “a date”.

Finally, try not being lazy.

[Jeff Corey]

...Jeff Corey:

Either capitalisation would be acceptable. It depends on whether I meant “education” or “Education”...

No, not in the last couple of centuries here. http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/capital.asp

[aries]

Interesting thread...

I just want to comment on the whole statistics things, but first let me tell that there's lies, damned lies, and then statistics. (as mr. Churchill said once, I believe?).

Next, I know that in country, Denmark, there have been several studies done on this. They allways turn out the same: Students, who have parents who have a higher education (e.g. college or higher education), will get higher grades than students who don't have parents with college degrees. Interestingly, enough, if you 'clear' the data
for the parents socio-economic status (basically the higher degrees+their higher incomes)
it shows that some students who have high status parents don't get as high grades in school as you would expect. One explanation for this could be that it really are the students whose parents take an interest in their education that do well in school --- and many people with high incomes have no interest in their children's education at all.

The thing with the splendourous new football stadium other things are this: A brand new football can be shown off to potential investors etc. etc. and can be used as a PR tool for the school. A bunsenburner or textbooks can't do that, me thinks - even if bunsenburners and textbooks will be better for the education as a whole...

[Kestrel]

The thing with the splendourous new football stadium other things are this: A brand new football can be shown off to potential investors etc. etc. and can be used as a PR tool for the school. A bunsenburner or textbooks can't do that, me thinks - even if bunsenburners and textbooks will be better for the education as a whole...

My favorite trivia question is "name a university that does not have a football team". Few of those asked can name even one.

[Jeff Corey]

U Cal Santa Barbara has a soccer team but no American football team.

[Dancing David]

bigred:

Dancing David:

Ad hominem arguments do nothing to enhance the reputation of those who use them. My original posting was a criticism of your use of language: if you can write acceptable conventional English please do so. It would enable the rest of us to understand the points you are trying to make.

By the way, I do have a life. It encompasses five sons/stepsons, several daughters-in-law and three grandsons. I don’t need “a date”.

Finally, try not being lazy.

The irony is overwhelming, you are the one who said i was knocking education. You need to learn to read before you speak. If you don't like my posts , ignore them.

While you advise me to not be lazy, maybe you should read before you post. If I want to write as pleases myself then you will just have to get over it. If you quote a poster then what you write after the quote is a criticism of that poster. Judge a person on thier thoughts and not thier grammar. We haven't seen your critical thinking, come to the Science forum or the R&P forum, show you can think as well as do driveby postings.

When you have something meaningful to add to the conversation i will be glad.

[Dancing David]

The thing with the splendourous new football stadium other things are this: A brand new football can be shown off to potential investors etc. etc. and can be used as a PR tool for the school. A bunsenburner or textbooks can't do that, me thinks - even if bunsenburners and textbooks will be better for the education as a whole...

there are many impacts that SES has on children's ability to learn and it is a huge force in children's lives. Teachers do also react to the different cultural norms that also go along with SES.

But football teams are a waste of money. Our local alumni group (my alma mater) generates huge amounts of moeny that could do a lot to improve scholarships and other aspects of the university. But nope, it goes to football. It makes other people happy, which is a good thing but in my view it is a huge waste of money.

[bigred]

I would bet a very healthy chunk of change that the money generated by football programs for most schools does not entirely go back into football by any means, esp for the larger/more successful ones. Therefore, it is far from a waste of money.

Plus there's the whole football thing. :cool:

[Jeff Corey]

Definitely not. At most schools - non NCAA -it's a loser, sucking money away from lab equipment, academic scholarships, salaries, etc. See http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/23/sports/ncaafootball/23college.html

[Dancing David]

I would bet a very healthy chunk of change that the money generated by football programs for most schools does not entirely go back into football by any means, esp for the larger/more successful ones. Therefore, it is far from a waste of money.

Plus there's the whole football thing. :cool:

:cool: I am not into it anymore. Seriously the money generated by the Alumni goes mainly to sports. Which is all right. Just something I think is not usefull.

And the state is very good at taking monet from the university, like half of all grants awarded to the staff and faculty at the university. Which does not go back to the university.

[Tokenconservative]

Somehow I get rather worried about those people who complain about standards in Education - but can't actually write grammatical English, or English with accurate spelling, themselves. Incidentally, it is usual form for sentences to start with an upper case letter.

Would someone like to go through this post and correct it. I'm not going to, because I want to see the variety of incorrect "corrections".

Not as worried as the rest of us get over pedantic net-nannies like you.

When you are engaging in a verbal discussion with someone do you stop them to correct a mispronounced word or suchlike?

Then YOU may just be a pedantic net-nanny!

Or ninny. I get the two confused.

Tokie

[bigred]

Definitely not. At most schools - non NCAA -it's a loser, sucking money away from lab equipment, academic scholarships, salaries, etc. See http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/23/sports/ncaafootball/23college.html

:confused:

From the article:

Football home games are typically the primary source of revenue for an entire athletic department. Other than football, the only college sport that makes consistent money is men’s basketball. The other men’s and women’s sports, except in rare cases, cost more to run than they generate.

[Jeff Corey]

That's NCAA schools. Not the majority. That's why I specified NCAA in my previous post.

[Checkmite]

NCLB was not a great idea but it has caused schools to pay attention, unfortunately schools boards and legislatures are what they are.

I categorically disagree with your statement. I believe NCLB was a good idea. I believe it has been sabotaged by state and municipal education boards.

In my opinion, the basic premise behind NCLB is that there are a few very, very BASIC, essential skills that children need, before they graduate from school. The implication is that students need to be literate at the very least, and need to be able to do some basic math - adding, subtracting, dividing, and the like. The problem is that NCLB has no teeth - no one in Washington was masculine enough to actually enumerate those standards. Instead, the actual standards were left to the states to set for themselves, individually. Most states responded in bad faith. Some, for instance, responded by setting artificially low standards, so they wouldn't have to make any effort towards improving anything. Some states responded by manipulating results and playing fast-and-loose with facts, figures, numbers, and classifications of students in their yearly reports. Those were the choices they made. They then blamed the results on the federal act, as if they didn't have a choice, after all, but to respond the way they did.

Bollocks. The state of education in this country does indeed suck mightily; however, your local school board, and your state's education board, are perfectly happy to let it stay that way. Mostly out of laziness. This has nothing to do with some "conspiracy" to "dumb down" American kids, and everything to do with people just not caring.

[anticonspiracy911]

I love this sort of "teacher reasoning"

So, because things were bad 30 years ago and because those in control of this data have learned how to make it look like it's not getting worse, what we have today is, ipso facto, "good."

Wow.

Tokie

Just provide us your evidence that concludes our education system is at an all-time low.

[Tokenconservative]

Just provide us your evidence that concludes our education system is at an all-time low.

Sure, no problem...I can deliver it to you personally...this morning, go outside and look to the east.

The sun should rise in that direction.

No link--LIIIINNNNNKKKKKKKKK!!!!--needed!

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

I categorically disagree with your statement. I believe NCLB was a good idea. I believe it has been sabotaged by state and municipal education boards.

In my opinion, the basic premise behind NCLB is that there are a few very, very BASIC, essential skills that children need, before they graduate from school. The implication is that students need to be literate at the very least, and need to be able to do some basic math - adding, subtracting, dividing, and the like. The problem is that NCLB has no teeth - no one in Washington was masculine enough to actually enumerate those standards. Instead, the actual standards were left to the states to set for themselves, individually. Most states responded in bad faith. Some, for instance, responded by setting artificially low standards, so they wouldn't have to make any effort towards improving anything. Some states responded by manipulating results and playing fast-and-loose with facts, figures, numbers, and classifications of students in their yearly reports. Those were the choices they made. They then blamed the results on the federal act, as if they didn't have a choice, after all, but to respond the way they did.

Bollocks. The state of education in this country does indeed suck mightily; however, your local school board, and your state's education board, are perfectly happy to let it stay that way. Mostly out of laziness. This has nothing to do with some "conspiracy" to "dumb down" American kids, and everything to do with people just not caring.

Bullocks, indeed.

NCLB, like much else in "education" in America is lip-service. Look at any school curriculum....fabulous stuff!

Now see what's actually being TAUGHT....very different.

But the school will CLAIM the curriculum is being followed to the letter!

NCLB has been used by the teachers to stop teaching at all, as they bleat "but in order to meet NCLB, we must 'teach to the test (only)!"

It's been wonderful for teachers who do even less now, than they did before (which wasn't much, usually).

As for proof--PROOOOOOFFFFFFFF!!!!--of how poorly our schools do, just look to international testing where we typically come in behind even most 3rd world nations in math, history, even English!

Tokie

[volatile]

Sure, no problem...I can deliver it to you personally...this morning, go outside and look to the east.

The sun should rise in that direction.

No link--LIIIINNNNNKKKKKKKKK!!!!--needed!

Tokie

It is actually possible to back up the claim that the sun rises in the east. See? (http://galileo.rice.edu/sci/theories/copernican_system.html)

Come on, play the game, Tokie. If the tragic state of America's education system is as manifest as the rising of the Sun, it wouldn't take you more than 30 seconds to actually back up what you're saying.

Or are you just making stuff up again?

[volatile]

As for proof--PROOOOOOFFFFFFFF!!!!--of how poorly our schools do, just look to international testing where we typically come in behind even most 3rd world nations in math, history, even English!


Back it up?

In any case, how can you measure whether the US system is getting worse by measuring the progress of others? Maybe they're just getting better, quicker?

You need to show that the US system is worse than it was in previous decades. You have manifestly failed to do that, as usual.

[Tokenconservative]

Back it up?

In any case, how can you measure whether the US system is getting worse by measuring the progress of others? Maybe they're just getting better, quicker?

You need to show that the US system is worse than it was in previous decades. You have manifestly failed to do that, as usual.

This is the only means by which we can measure this today, and if you want a link to it, go find one.

The reason is the same as how we can no longer trust the NASA/GISS temperature chart that people like you look to as the stone tablets from the mount regarding Global Warming.

The books have been cooked.

You can't compare an "A" in 1960 to one today. They are two entirely diffrent things.

In 1960, that A was most likely earned through hard work.

We cannot say that today.

And this works in the schools and the teachers' unions best intersts if they (you) can say "prove it!! Show how fewer kids got As in 1960 than they do today!!!" The fact that more kids get As today, when we know that the curriculum is at best worthless and that kids come out of high school unable to tell you in which century the American Civil War was fought or unable to determine whether the change they got back at the Starbuck's is accurate, or unable to fill out an application for employment at that Starbuck's, tells us that in fact, something is seriously wrong.

You don't see it that way.

You shriek "links!? LIIINKKKKKSSSSSSS!!!' because it is in your self-interest to continue to believe that by cooking the books, this somehow makes the truth go away.

Tokie

[anticonspiracy911]

Sure, no problem...I can deliver it to you personally...this morning, go outside and look to the east.

The sun should rise in that direction.

No link--LIIIINNNNNKKKKKKKKK!!!!--needed!

Tokie

So the kids today think the sun rises in the west, south or north?

You obviously have nothing to say judging by this reply. I ask a simple question and you get all anal about it. I have my doubts about the education system being at an all-time low. People have always been stupid. In fact people from the baby boom generation that I see are just about as dumb as the people of today.

[anticonspiracy911]

In fact people from the Great Depression era are quite dumb themselves. Thinking every single colored person in the world are really murderers out to pick pocket you. Or that all forms of music outside of polka are about sex, drugs or violence. Or that electric instruments aren't real instruments playing real notes. Such genius we've got going from other eras. :rolleyes:

[technoextreme]

In fact people from the Great Depression era are quite dumb themselves. Thinking every single colored person in the world are really murderers out to pick pocket you. Or that all forms of music outside of polka are about sex, drugs or violence. Or that electric instruments aren't real instruments playing real notes. Such genius we've got going from other eras. :rolleyes:
Is this sarcasm? I really hope it's sarcasm. Otherwise it makes you look just as dumb as your stereotype.

[Kestrel]

And this works in the schools and the teachers' unions best intersts if they (you) can say "prove it!! Show how fewer kids got As in 1960 than they do today!!!" The fact that more kids get As today, when we know that the curriculum is at best worthless and that kids come out of high school unable to tell you in which century the American Civil War was fought or unable to determine whether the change they got back at the Starbuck's is accurate, or unable to fill out an application for employment at that Starbuck's, tells us that in fact, something is seriously wrong.

Quoting a song from the movie "Bye, Bye Birdie", released in 1963:

Why can't they be like we were?
Perfect in every way.
What's the matter with kids today?
:D

[bigred]

That's NCAA schools. Not the majority. That's why I specified NCAA in my previous post.
?? Could be wrong but I'm betting the vast majority of U.S. schools ARE NCAA schools, by far. Certainly all or nearly all "major" schools, and quite a few smaller ones as well - so at the very least, going by # students impacted, a very very small percentage are not "NCAA students."

See? Football good. Tiny artsy fartsy schools bad.

;)


Is this sarcasm? I really hope it's sarcasm. Otherwise it makes you look just as dumb as your stereotype.
Or provides more evidence for another troll. Very tedious regardless.

There was a thread elsewhere about who/why to put people on ignore. People who consistently troll or otherwise don't appear able and/or willing to discuss or debate rationally make my list (PS no I am not referring to the person above FYI - that's an isolated comment as far as I know; don't know them to be like that all the time).

Amazingly, most other people who are able/willing yet I disagree with a lot haven't made it, yet. ;)

[Jeff Corey]

...Football good. Tiny artsy fartsy schools bad....
Like UC Santa Barbara?

[technoextreme]

Or provides more evidence for another troll. Very tedious regardless.

There was a thread elsewhere about who/why to put people on ignore. People who consistently troll or otherwise don't appear able and/or willing to discuss or debate rationally make my list (PS no I am not referring to the person above FYI - that's an isolated comment as far as I know; don't know them to be like that all the time).

Amazingly, most other people who are able/willing yet I disagree with a lot haven't made it, yet. ;)
To be honest I doubt he was really trolling either. I just sort of got irked because all of my granparents who lived through the great depression, and probably listened to Polka music (Im Polish/German). The last thing I would ever consider them is stupid. In fact my Grandma operated machine tools during WWII.

[anticonspiracy911]

Is this sarcasm? I really hope it's sarcasm. Otherwise it makes you look just as dumb as your stereotype.

How so?

To be honest I doubt he was really trolling either. I just sort of got irked because all of my granparents who lived through the great depression, and probably listened to Polka music (Im Polish/German). The last thing I would ever consider them is stupid. In fact my Grandma operated machine tools during WWII.

Are you *********** serious right now?! What?!....No, nevermind. I'm not even going to comment on this inane ********. Forget it. Everyone who lived in the Great Depression era were geniuses. Racism is an intellectual idea. Electric instruments are pseudoinstruments. Polka is the only form of music that speaks outside the realms of sex, drugs and violence. This is just a new level of dumb, and because of this I will no longer discuss on this topic since another moron couldn't even answer a simple question without getting all anal about it. Forget it. You guys obviously have no clue.

Keep in mind the Membership Agreement and do not use personal attacks or insults to argue your point.

[LostAngeles]

...

In 1960, that A was most likely earned through hard work.

...

It's true, you know. My B's last quarter were the result of sitting on my ass, drooling at the boob tube.

...At least, I assume so. My memories are still a bit jumbled. I remember doing lots of calculations... proofs... Simpson's rule... Gauss Quadrature... was that distribution Poisson?...

[technoextreme]

This is just a new level of dumb, and because of this I will no longer discuss on this topic since another moron couldn't even answer a simple question without getting all anal about it. Forget it. You guys obviously have no clue.
The problem is that denoting stupidity and racism is really stupid, ignorant, and shows a lack of understanding in history.

[Tokenconservative]

It's true, you know. My B's last quarter were the result of sitting on my ass, drooling at the boob tube.

...At least, I assume so. My memories are still a bit jumbled. I remember doing lots of calculations... proofs... Simpson's rule... Gauss Quadrature... was that distribution Poisson?...


Not sure if you are so stupid (oops! I guess I can look for 'nother "complaint" from a mod in my PMs!! Yay!!! Is THIS the one that'll get Tokie banned again!? We can all hope!) that you don't understand what I was saying, or are you just stupid?

The point is, and this has been shown in any number of studies, that it is "easier" to get an "A" (and therefore a "B") today than it was in say, 1960. This is called grade inflation and no...I don't have a link--LIIIINNNKKKKKKKKKKKK!!!! What I do have is a collection of old textbooks (nope...no link--LIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNKKKKKK!!!--to those, either!). I have a 'Standard Text' from 1924, for example that was intended for the middle schools. I've taught from and read current middle school texts from all subject areas, and this thing (the 1924) reads more like something you'd find in the first year of college.

And it was (note the term) standard to kids in grades 7-9 in rural Kansas in 1924.

You can (and will) disbelieve me if you want. Knock yourself out. Likely, though, your "B" in calculus this year would've been at best, a low C in 1960, and that C in 1960 would've come from carrying twice the workload in that class.

Tokie

[digithead]

The point is, and this has been shown in any number of studies, that it is "easier" to get an "A" (and therefore a "B") today than it was in say, 1960. This is called grade inflation and no...I don't have a link--LIIIINNNKKKKKKKKKKKK!!!!
Just wondering if you've been a victim of this "grade inflation"...

What I do have is a collection of old textbooks (nope...no link--LIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNKKKKKK!!!--to those, either!). I have a 'Standard Text' from 1924, for example that was intended for the middle schools. I've taught from and read current middle school texts from all subject areas, and this thing (the 1924) reads more like something you'd find in the first year of college.
Do you have a citation for this wonderful textbook written in the roaring 20s? I'm a sucker for good literature...

And it was (note the term) standard to kids in grades 7-9 in rural Kansas in 1924.
What proportion of kids in rural Kansas actually went to school in 1924? What percentage actually finished middle school let alone high school in 1924?

You can (and will) disbelieve me if you want. Knock yourself out. Likely, though, your "B" in calculus this year would've been at best, a low C in 1960, and that C in 1960 would've come from carrying twice the workload in that class.

Tokie
Have you taken calculus? Given that it has changed little since Leibniz/Newton developed it in the 17th century, could you explain in more detail how a low C in 1960 would be a B in 2007? More partial credit?

Again, have you pondered what your GPA would've been if you had went to school in 1960? Have you suffered because of this supposed "grade inflation" and light workload?

I don't understand this atavistic belief that education was somehow better 30, 40, or 80 years ago. We live in an age of unparalled access to information and our educational system has had to adapt to it. Why should it be the same as 30, 40, or 80 years ago? I envy kids who go to school today; they have access to technology and information that I only wish I had when I went to school in the 70s and 80s. The only thing I would want to change with our education system is that I wish it would place more emphasis on critical thinking rather than rote memorization and regurgitation of fact...

[Prometheus]

....The point is, and this has been shown in any number of studies, that it is "easier" to get an "A" (and therefore a "B") today than it was in say, 1960....


Of course. This is exactly what we should expect, given that students today have far better access to much larger, more diverse, and better organized information resources than did those in 1960. Not to mention advances in actual education technique, and a lot of other beneficial factors. It's easier for students today to get A's than it was for students in the 60's because students today are smarter and better equipped; they don't have to work as hard to produce the same, or even better quality work. Then of course there's the detrimental effect of all those drugs back in the 60's....



I have a 'Standard Text' from 1924, for example that was intended for the middle schools. I've taught from and read current middle school texts from all subject areas, and this thing (the 1924) reads more like something you'd find in the first year of college.

And it was (note the term) standard to kids in grades 7-9 in rural Kansas in 1924.


So what? In the 1920's, only the top of the curve made it into school at all. In terms of absolute numbers, and even probably as a percentage of the overall population (not just the enrolled student population), there could be more kids in middle school in Kansas today who could handle that same level of work than there were total middle school students in the 1920's. The average of today's far larger, more diverse and more inclusive student population can be lower, even though the aggregate educational gain may be far, far more.

[LostAngeles]

Not sure if you are so stupid (oops! I guess I can look for 'nother "complaint" from a mod in my PMs!! Yay!!! Is THIS the one that'll get Tokie banned again!? We can all hope!) that you don't understand what I was saying, or are you just stupid?

The point is, and this has been shown in any number of studies, that it is "easier" to get an "A" (and therefore a "B") today than it was in say, 1960. This is called grade inflation and no...I don't have a link--LIIIINNNKKKKKKKKKKKK!!!! What I do have is a collection of old textbooks (nope...no link--LIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNKKKKKK!!!--to those, either!). I have a 'Standard Text' from 1924, for example that was intended for the middle schools. I've taught from and read current middle school texts from all subject areas, and this thing (the 1924) reads more like something you'd find in the first year of college.

And it was (note the term) standard to kids in grades 7-9 in rural Kansas in 1924.

You can (and will) disbelieve me if you want. Knock yourself out. Likely, though, your "B" in calculus this year would've been at best, a low C in 1960, and that C in 1960 would've come from carrying twice the workload in that class.

Tokie

I don't generally don't report posts.

I'm also smart enough to not take some random person's word on something. Do you expect that we'll automatically agree with everything you claim without any kind of corroborating evidence? Wouldn't that be... stupid?

Also, I didn't take Calculus this quarter. Thanks for playing.

You're smart, perhaps you can tell me what this (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3202394#post3202394) says?

[Chris Haynes]

,,,You can (and will) disbelieve me if you want. Knock yourself out. Likely, though, your "B" in calculus this year would've been at best, a low C in 1960, and that C in 1960 would've come from carrying twice the workload in that class.

Tokie


What high school in 1960 offered calculus?

I know that the high school I went to in my sophomore year did offer calculus to certain seniors (Balboa High School in Balboa, Canal Zone --- it is now closed but was once a Department of Defense school). I would have been one of them if I had been allowed to continue there, but due to being an Army brat I had to leave that district and go to another. One did not offer calculus (it started to the next year or so, Killeen High School which was next to one of the largest military bases in the USA, that town now has more than one high school).

What was really bad was someone I met in college whose high school in a rural area near Minot, ND where her father worked for the Bureau for Indian Affairs did not even offer trigonometry in 1975. (I did graduate from high school a year early, so I did have trig and took calculus in college).

How can you compare those schools to the one my son goes to now? He is in 11th grade and taking AP Calculus A/B. Next year he will take AP Calculus C/D. This means he will have equivalent of a full year of college calculus before graduating from high school. Even Advanced Placement Calculus goes half as fast as college Calculus (AP being a specified curriculum with a nationally administered test in the early Spring).

So tell me, what high school in 1960 offered calculus? How many high schools offered calculus that would allow a student to test out of the first year of college calculus?

Edit to add: Give some real references.

[Jeff Corey]

References? Tokie don't need no steenkin' references! He is the Federalist. Tokie is content to flatly state his biased opinion as fact and then squeal LLLLIIIIINNNNNNNNKKKKKKKKSSSSS as his mantra when challenged to offer a shed of data to support his opinion. Too bad. I would prefer to be able to access the data that others use to form their opinions. I just might learn something new.

[Tokenconservative]

Of course. This is exactly what we should expect, given that students today have far better access to much larger, more diverse, and better organized information resources than did those in 1960. Not to mention advances in actual education technique, and a lot of other beneficial factors. It's easier for students today to get A's than it was for students in the 60's because students today are smarter and better equipped; they don't have to work as hard to produce the same, or even better quality work. Then of course there's the detrimental effect of all those drugs back in the 60's....


So what? In the 1920's, only the top of the curve made it into school at all. In terms of absolute numbers, and even probably as a percentage of the overall population (not just the enrolled student population), there could be more kids in middle school in Kansas today who could handle that same level of work than there were total middle school students in the 1920's. The average of today's far larger, more diverse and more inclusive student population can be lower, even though the aggregate educational gain may be far, far more.


Ah...more "diverse"...the key. Rainforest math, right?

If Juan has 6 quavas, and the military junta supported by the US forces him to give 3 of them to the soldiers illegally billeted in his mud hut...

And "better organized." Yeah, okay.

Sheesh.

And by cooking the books and saying "there were fewer kids IN middle school so um, they were self-selected to be the brightest!!!"

So what you are saying here is agreeing with me: the curriculum has been dumbed down. Dun't matter WHY, the point is it has.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

What high school in 1960 offered calculus?

I know that the high school I went to in my sophomore year did offer calculus to certain seniors (Balboa High School in Balboa, Canal Zone --- it is now closed but was once a Department of Defense school). I would have been one of them if I had been allowed to continue there, but due to being an Army brat I had to leave that district and go to another. One did not offer calculus (it started to the next year or so, Killeen High School which was next to one of the largest military bases in the USA, that town now has more than one high school).

What was really bad was someone I met in college whose high school in a rural area near Minot, ND where her father worked for the Bureau for Indian Affairs did not even offer trigonometry in 1975. (I did graduate from high school a year early, so I did have trig and took calculus in college).

How can you compare those schools to the one my son goes to now? He is in 11th grade and taking AP Calculus A/B. Next year he will take AP Calculus C/D. This means he will have equivalent of a full year of college calculus before graduating from high school. Even Advanced Placement Calculus goes half as fast as college Calculus (AP being a specified curriculum with a nationally administered test in the early Spring).

So tell me, what high school in 1960 offered calculus? How many high schools offered calculus that would allow a student to test out of the first year of college calculus?

Edit to add: Give some real references.

Most, I would assume since textbooks I have from the 20s and 30s offered it. If you are asking me for a link--LLIIIIIINNNKKKKK!!!--to a list of high schools that offered calculus in 1960, sorry...can't help you there...and that's a stupid request, anyway.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Just wondering if you've been a victim of this "grade inflation"...

Do you have a citation for this wonderful textbook written in the roaring 20s? I'm a sucker for good literature...

What proportion of kids in rural Kansas actually went to school in 1924? What percentage actually finished middle school let alone high school in 1924?

Have you taken calculus? Given that it has changed little since Leibniz/Newton developed it in the 17th century, could you explain in more detail how a low C in 1960 would be a B in 2007? More partial credit?

Again, have you pondered what your GPA would've been if you had went to school in 1960? Have you suffered because of this supposed "grade inflation" and light workload?

I don't understand this atavistic belief that education was somehow better 30, 40, or 80 years ago. We live in an age of unparalled access to information and our educational system has had to adapt to it. Why should it be the same as 30, 40, or 80 years ago? I envy kids who go to school today; they have access to technology and information that I only wish I had when I went to school in the 70s and 80s. The only thing I would want to change with our education system is that I wish it would place more emphasis on critical thinking rather than rote memorization and regurgitation of fact...

1. Not sure you'd term me a "victim" of it, but yes...in the last two math classes I took, I did NOTHING. Not one bit of in-class work, and no HW. I read throughout both classes for the entire year. I passed each with a "D."

2. Nope, sorry. Sure don't.

3. Um...no idea. So you are saying that because more kids attend school today they are stupider and therefore the curriculum needs to be dumbed down? Hmm...innerestin theory...more = stupider. Do you have some studies to back that up? So, when more kids took harder math and science in the 60s, the kids who eventually went on to help put a man on the moon, because there were more of them, they were stupider? Am I following your reasoning here?

4. I haven't been in a Nazi (Godwin!!!! GODWIN!!!!!) concentration camp either, but I can guess that it was not a nice place. I don't even know what calculus is, but since a physicist I know, and another guy with a math major, told me that "math cannot be taught that way" when I showed them some current texts, I am gonna go with their assessments.

5. Have I suffered? LOL. That's the litmus? No, it permitted me to graduate high school when I should not have. I did far better in college, but the problem there was that employers or grad schools looking at my 3.85 GPA, and someone else's have (if it were today) no way of knowing how much of that GPA is inflated. This is HUGE problem that all the top universities have admitted is a problem (not for them, of course...would never happen there!) but for kids coming in, who have 4.50 GPAs littered with Honors and even AP courses, but need remedial math and English classes.

I didn't say the system was better in the 70s and 80s. It went south begining (esp.) in the mid 60s when leftists began to infiltrate the upper-tiers of it's administration.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

References? Tokie don't need no steenkin' references! He is the Federalist. Tokie is content to flatly state his biased opinion as fact and then squeal LLLLIIIIINNNNNNNNKKKKKKKKSSSSS as his mantra when challenged to offer a shed of data to support his opinion. Too bad. I would prefer to be able to access the data that others use to form their opinions. I just might learn something new.

I only offer sources (never links--LIIIIINKKKSSSSSS!!!--sorry, I read, instead) when it's not common knoweldge.

Grade inflation is common, if unadmitted to, knowledge at all levels of education in America, today. Universities have admitted that they cannot believe the GPAs of incoming freshmen from public (and some private, mostly of the "day school" variety) schools and that it's a huge problem.

Hell, even Doonesbury did a long series about it.

If a lefty like that guy knows it's happening in our universities....

But you believe that if some guy on the 'net doesn't give you a link--LIIIIIINKKKKKKKKK!!!--that then a fact of life must be a lie, if you wish.

Up to you to peel back the moldy layers of ignorance that envelop your mind, not me.

Tokie

[Prometheus]

So what you are saying here is agreeing with me: the curriculum has been dumbed down. Dun't matter WHY, the point is it has.

Tokie

Nope. The point is, it's serving more people to greater overall effect. It matters very little how much the top few percentiles are doing because they've got more than enough advantages to get by on their own.

[Chris Haynes]

Most, I would assume since textbooks I have from the 20s and 30s offered it. If you are asking me for a link--LLIIIIIINNNKKKKK!!!--to a list of high schools that offered calculus in 1960, sorry...can't help you there...and that's a stupid request, anyway.

Tokie

High school or college textbooks?

By the way the Pre-Calculus textbook my son used last year is available online: http://www.math.washington.edu/~m120/TheBook/TB2006-7.pdf

By the way, did you take Calculus in high school or college?

[Kestrel]

High school or college textbooks?

By the way the Pre-Calculus textbook my son used last year is available online: http://www.math.washington.edu/~m120/TheBook/TB2006-7.pdf

By the way, did you take Calculus in high school or college?

My Grandmother taught high school math and science in rural Kansas during the 1930s. Calculus wasn't part of the high school curriculum at that time. It was offered by a few high schools, but still rather uncommon in the late 1960s. Today it's rather common for advanced high school students to take a calculus class.

[Chris Haynes]

With a little looking I found this book:
http://books.google.com/books?id=l8kV1sB1t6UC&pg=PA167&lpg=PA167&dq=calculus+instruction+high+school+%22history+of+ education%22&source=web&ots=jkrBP-wPUu&sig=VP_KQ3wNsMfyh5rUbO30ykHITd4#PPA167,M1 ... with this quote: In response to a request from the deans of education and engineering to lead a committee to investigate how secondary school mathematics instruction could be changed to guarentee that entering freshman would be able to master calculus, Bebeman became director of the University of Illinois Committee on School Mathematics (UICSM) in 1951.

This tells me that calculus was usually considered to be a college level course in the mid-20th century.

Then there is the existence of this: http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/ap/about.html with several testing sites all over the country. These tests are only for high school students, and were not available in the mid-20th century.

There now seem to be more opportunities for students with high math abilities than there were half a century ago, and even thirty years ago when I was in high school (where Killeen High School had to add a Trig and Intro to Analysis class because of increased demand).

[digithead]

1. Not sure you'd term me a "victim" of it, but yes...in the last two math classes I took, I did NOTHING. Not one bit of in-class work, and no HW. I read throughout both classes for the entire year. I passed each with a "D."
You did NOTHING but read throughout both classes for the entire year. Hmm, doesn't sound like you did NOTHING...

2. Nope, sorry. Sure don't.
So you say you have a textbook from 1924 that's better than anything published today but you can't give me the author, title, and publisher (i.e. citation) of said textbook, why?

3. Um...no idea. So you are saying that because more kids attend school today they are stupider and therefore the curriculum needs to be dumbed down? Hmm...innerestin theory...more = stupider. Do you have some studies to back that up? So, when more kids took harder math and science in the 60s, the kids who eventually went on to help put a man on the moon, because there were more of them, they were stupider? Am I following your reasoning here?
No, I said no such thing. I don't believe that the curriculum has been dumbed down nor do I believe that today's children are any dumber than children from 30, 40 or 80 years ago...

Additionally, Few children in rural America in the first half of last century went beyond grammar school. Especially during the depression...

Harder math and more science in the 60s? Really? Yes, I'd like proof rather than a declarative statement on your part. I actually require my students to back up their declarative statements, otherwise I fail them regardless of the grade inflation cabal you speak of...

You do know that the single biggest school entitlement program, the GI bill, occurred prior to 1960 and that a lot these veterans became school teachers and administrators in the 50s, 60s, and 70s, right? Does this mean that the greatest generation is part of your leftist conspiracy to destroy the educational system?

4. I haven't been in a Nazi (Godwin!!!! GODWIN!!!!!) concentration camp either, but I can guess that it was not a nice place. I don't even know what calculus is, but since a physicist I know, and another guy with a math major, told me that "math cannot be taught that way" when I showed them some current texts, I am gonna go with their assessments.
So they're experts in assessing pedagogical methods, too?

And you say you taught math but you don't know calculus? How 'bout algebra or geometry? Arithmetic?

5. Have I suffered? LOL. That's the litmus? No, it permitted me to graduate high school when I should not have. I did far better in college, but the problem there was that employers or grad schools looking at my 3.85 GPA, and someone else's have (if it were today) no way of knowing how much of that GPA is inflated. This is HUGE problem that all the top universities have admitted is a problem (not for them, of course...would never happen there!) but for kids coming in, who have 4.50 GPAs littered with Honors and even AP courses, but need remedial math and English classes.
Which is why universities have placement testing in the first place...

As for huge problems with remedial math and english, where I teach and go to school in Washington state, about 11,000 recent high school grads in 2005-2006 enrolled in baccalaureate institutions. Of these, about 4% needed to take remedial english and a little less than 10% needed to take remedial math. I guess you and I have a different opinion about what constitutes "huge"...

Oh, and here's the link:

http://www.sesrc.wsu.edu/remedial/document/Council_of_Presidents_Letter_05-06.doc

As for junior colleges, it's a little bleaker but that's expected. About 10% of recent Washington state high school grads who enrolled in junior college needed to take remedial reading classes, 17% needed to take remedial writing, and a whopping 46% needed take remedial math. But then these schools have open enrollments and students who start at these schools typically could not get into a baccalaureate institution in the first place...

Oh, and here's the link:

http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/docs/data/research_reports/resh_06_5_systemsumm.doc

I didn't say the system was better in the 70s and 80s. It went south begining (esp.) in the mid 60s when leftists began to infiltrate the upper-tiers of it's administration.
I'm assuming that when the leftists (whoever this mysterious and evil cadre is) infiltrated the upper tiers of educational administration that it took time for their policies and propaganda to seep fully into the rest of the system. Ergo, the 70s and early 80s should have been better than today based on teacher attrition and turnover...

[Chris Haynes]

...And you say you taught math but you don't know calculus? How 'bout algebra or geometry? Arithmetic?
...

Well, I guess that answers my question on whether he took calculus in high school or college: neither. He has never taken calculus.

[joobie]

i find it hard to believe anyone who has never taken calculus would teach math* at any but the most backwards of private schools on the planet.



*he has indeed claimed such - in fact he was fired for teaching at too high a level. or so he says.

[LostAngeles]

Well, I guess that answers my question on whether he took calculus in high school or college: neither. He has never taken calculus.

i find it hard to believe anyone who has never taken calculus would teach math* at any but the most backwards of private schools on the planet.



*he has indeed claimed such - in fact he was fired for teaching at too high a level. or so he says.

I pointed this out in a thread that was AAHed. He claims he stopped taking math in 8th grade to which I listed a bunch of things that he should know in order to teach math, considering that the Republic of California requires that either you take classes in those areas or be able to answer questions on them on the CSET.

I will also note that I mentioned doing Simpson's Rule and he recognized it as being part of a calculus. Of course, I wasn't actually taking a calculus class (first part of Numerical Analysis) and mentioned Poisson distributions (something he should recognize if he does the stats he claimed in the AAHed thread). I also mentioned Gauss quadrature, but I can't recall doing them in any straight Calculus class. In fact, I checked my text from my college Calc classes (James Stewart 5th edition) and they're optional little bits at the end of some sections.

[Jeff Corey]

... No, it permitted me to graduate high school when I should not have...
And you claim to have taught English? It's a good thing that they fired your touchis for your egregious error. It's "graduate from high school", you maroon.

[Tokenconservative]

High school or college textbooks?

By the way the Pre-Calculus textbook my son used last year is available online: http://www.math.washington.edu/~m120/TheBook/TB2006-7.pdf

By the way, did you take Calculus in high school or college?

High school...oddly enough, textbooks from the 20s and 30s are not available online...so sorry, no link--LIIIIINNKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK!!!!

I am sure someone in the districts where they used to use those books is working on this oversight, as we key.

Sheesh.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

i find it hard to believe anyone who has never taken calculus would teach math* at any but the most backwards of private schools on the planet.



*he has indeed claimed such - in fact he was fired for teaching at too high a level. or so he says.

LOL.

Then you are not very smart or well-informed.

You don't need to have taken ANY higher math to teach grade school math. I have a hard time believing anyone can be this ignorant.

But I guess you are.

I'll just sit here now and wait for you to run to the mods and file your complaint.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

And you claim to have taught English? It's a good thing that they fired your touchis for your egregious error. It's "graduate from high school", you maroon.

Is "touchis" a word? In English? I had to read that three times...I thought you were accusing me of "touching" a kid or something.

Sheesh.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

I pointed this out in a thread that was AAHed. He claims he stopped taking math in 8th grade to which I listed a bunch of things that he should know in order to teach math, considering that the Republic of California requires that either you take classes in those areas or be able to answer questions on them on the CSET.

I will also note that I mentioned doing Simpson's Rule and he recognized it as being part of a calculus. Of course, I wasn't actually taking a calculus class (first part of Numerical Analysis) and mentioned Poisson distributions (something he should recognize if he does the stats he claimed in the AAHed thread). I also mentioned Gauss quadrature, but I can't recall doing them in any straight Calculus class. In fact, I checked my text from my college Calc classes (James Stewart 5th edition) and they're optional little bits at the end of some sections.

Actually, that's the last math class I really remembered. Lately I've been going through some old documents and it appears I took one in 10th grade, too. The docs reminded me that one of the major projects in this 10th grade math class (mid-1970s) was to produce a drawing/collage some such of what we thought "alien" (as in space alien...I think Skylab was in the news at the time) numbers would look like.

I was a big SF reader, and figured they'd just be symbols, like ours...I mean, how could a race using hashmarks for numbers get very far?

The teacher gave me an "F" for the probject.

I don't live in CA, but in my state I had to take a test for math that I think probably went up to early middle school level. I tanked it, but still got the teaching cert!

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

i find it hard to believe anyone who has never taken calculus would teach math* at any but the most backwards of private schools on the planet.

*he has indeed claimed such - in fact he was fired for teaching at too high a level. or so he says.

I both claim that AND say that, as a matter of fact. Are you a government employee? In the Department of Redundacy Dept.?

I was tasked with teaching these 5th graders to adding and subtracting fractions. I went beyond that with as many of them (which was most) who could handle it. Many of them could not even "borrow and carry" (they called it something else that was terribly confusing...I refused to call it that, tho now, no...sorry, I don't remember how my Rainforest Math Teacher's guide termed it...it's been a while).

By the way, one of the biggest problems the district had with me was my telling the "math guru" that two people I showed the required text to, one holding a math degree of some kind, the other a fairly noted physicist, both, independently, agreed "you can't teach math that way," and that, therefore, I would not be using the text. I showed her the homeschool/private school stuff I WOULD be using. I was worried I'd have to perform the Heimlich (sp?...should we make a whole new thread about it if I spelled it wrong?) on her after she swallowed her tongue.

When the 6th grade teachers found out that some of my kids were doing math at the low 7th grade level (according to district standards...this was low 5th grade level by MY standards) they were furious and complained that these kids would be a "problem" in their classes the next year.

The parents of these kids had a ....different view, but who cares what they think, right?

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Well, I guess that answers my question on whether he took calculus in high school or college: neither. He has never taken calculus.

Yeah, that's right. I was facing a real problem with a half-doze of those 5th graders, too. I'd never passed (not really) an algebra class...so of course I'd never had geometry or calculus.

You know, I'm not really as obtuse as I am playing here. I realize that you--and several others--believe that you are pointing and laughing at me because I must be "stoopid" since I never had these classes.

I wonder if, however, you realize how stupid (to say nothing of petty) you yourselves appear by doing this, and quite nicely pointing up that just exactly what I am saying about the public screwels is correct, and that I am living proof of it?

Do you have any clue at all that that's what you are doing, or are you so intent on this petty campaign to say "look how stoopid thet thar Tokie feller is!! He ain't never even TOOK a calculus class!! Har, har, haw!" that you can't see that?

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

I don't generally don't report posts.

I'm also smart enough to not take some random person's word on something. Do you expect that we'll automatically agree with everything you claim without any kind of corroborating evidence? Wouldn't that be... stupid?

Also, I didn't take Calculus this quarter. Thanks for playing.

You're smart, perhaps you can tell me what this (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3202394#post3202394) says?

That's a difference 'twixt thee and me.. I never engage in "reporting." Otherise I'd report all those in here calling me "stoopid!!"

Like you.

Just because I cannot (and I won't anyway...EVER look at a link like that one!) tell you what something says (I am presuming it's some calculous...thingy?) it means...what, exactly, in your mind?

And I really don't care if you agree with me or not. Typically, in such discussions, there are couple or three kinds of people: those who know that what I am saying is accurate, those who are themselves "educators" or apologists for same (typically children or spouses of "educators") and those who are parents with kids in the public screwels who are desperate to convince themselves that this HAS to be inaccurate, because of what that would mean they are doing to their own kids.

Each of these is as emotional and vehement (sometimes to the point of threats, always to the point of petty, small-minded insult--"you ain't never took calculus, you dummy!?") as the next and for good reason: the "educators" know full well that they themselves are, by and large (there are exceptions, and this self-selecting site probably attracts its share of those) incompetent at both their subject AND in teaching, the spouses/children of same are simply protective--forgivable, but not very rational--and the parents are, as I said, desperate. Agian, forgivable--I've done the same rationalizations myself when my kids have been in the public system--but just as irrational.

Tokie

[JoeEllison]

My understanding was that one of the big problems in education is that the books are too tough for the grade levels they are assigned to. If a child is barely keeping up in 3rd grade, and then their 4th grade text is really meant for 5th graders, that book will be almost 2 years ahead of what they can reasonably handle. If they pass 4th grade, and get stuck with a 6th or 7th grade book in 5th grade, they'll never catch up. Parents will blame the teachers, teachers will blame the parents, everyone will blame the student, and no one notices that the book is written in a way that literally cannot be understood by an average 8 year old.

[Tokenconservative]

My understanding was that one of the big problems in education is that the books are too tough for the grade levels they are assigned to. If a child is barely keeping up in 3rd grade, and then their 4th grade text is really meant for 5th graders, that book will be almost 2 years ahead of what they can reasonably handle. If they pass 4th grade, and get stuck with a 6th or 7th grade book in 5th grade, they'll never catch up. Parents will blame the teachers, teachers will blame the parents, everyone will blame the student, and no one notices that the book is written in a way that literally cannot be understood by an average 8 year old.

I'm no expert. I can only rely on stuff I've experienced, read, etc.

My kids have found even their high school AP texts to be moronic. Me too.

According to the kid who is a math whiz, her math text is "stupid." My brother who has a math degree, agrees.

The math text at least gets the job done.

I can't imagine where you heard that the texts are "too tough" for the grade level, although this may speak to the larger problem of the purposeful dumbing down of our kids by the public schools: it's working so well that the textbook writers can't keep up with the downward trend.

My daughters have nothing but contempt for their textbooks which they say teach them nothing they don't already know, are poorly composed (English...they sit around laughing at the mistakes they find) and in their words talk to them like they are "idiots."

You are making a classic error in logic here, called the post hoc, ergo propter hoc (after this, [therefore] because of this) or "false cause" assertion. The kids are being dumbed down, that much we know (tho many in here will vehemently deny it, refuse to accept any proof outside the narrow confines of the edu. industry, which says this is not happening). So you are looking at it backward: they can't read/understand the text for their grade because they have not been educated to that level. It's not because the book is too advanced, it's because their education is being purposefully retarded.

Tokie

[Jeff Corey]

Is "touchis" a word? In English? I had to read that three times...I thought you were accusing me of "touching" a kid or something.

Sheesh.

Tokie
I do apologize, my spell check doesn't handle Yiddish very well. The word is "toochis".

[Tokenconservative]

I do apologize, my spell check doesn't handle Yiddish very well. The word is "toochis".

LOL.

What a goof.

Tokie

[bigred]

Once more: pls do not feed the trolls. TIA.

[kev]

And I really don't care if you agree with me or not. Typically, in such discussions, there are couple or three kinds of people: those who know that what I am saying is accurate, those who are themselves "educators" or apologists for same (typically children or spouses of "educators") and those who are parents with kids in the public screwels who are desperate to convince themselves that this HAS to be inaccurate, because of what that would mean they are doing to their own kids.

Tokie

So, basically, of the three "categories" of people, the group that is "right" is the one who "knows" what you say is "accurate." In regard to "know", would that be in the biblical sense of faith? You make many proclamations, but you offer no support - just opinion. So, in essence, your contention is that an intelligent person should simply take your side, believe your opinions and condemn the entire educational system as an absolute failure - with no real factual proof. By the way, your use of the word "screwel" would lead me to believe that most of your information may be obtained by listening to the Rush Limbaugh show - as that is the one place I have heard the term repeatedly used.

All of that said, I don't necessarily disagree with the entire premise. Our education system has plenty of problems, but it is far more complex than lazy, undereducated teachers purposely "dumbing down" the youth of America, letting them run wild, handing out "A's" to everyone - all the while just sitting back and waiting for that "Big", fat pension to start rolling in.

Are there bad teachers? You bet. I would never say there are not. But, the problem starts a lot farther up the food chain and gets help from so many other areas. Ultimately, politicians are "in charge" of education. From the national spotlight, to the state level, to local school boards - there are several critical tiers of decision making that are not always conducted by educational experts. When you put a noneducator in charge of education, is it really surprising that the end result is something less than perfection? When the state of Texas dismisses an educational leader because of his "promotion of evolution," that says a lot about our educational system. Our national values are a sad representation of our value in regard to education - as mentioned earlier, sports "success" is a far greater prize than educational success. The social culture our kids grow up in is sad and pathetic - as displayed by the popularity of "reality" shows on MTV, VH1, E, etc. There may well be "grade inflation" in schools, but there is the same thing going on in the american home - kids being rewarded for doing less and less. As a Biology teacher, I have been allowed to spend a TOTAL of about $500-1000 over the past 5 years (not per year, total) for classroom supplies. The demand for "better accountability" (something I am fine with) has also led to an environment in schools that values "learning" stuff, rather than improving skills.

Another issue, which others have mentioned at various points, is the overall purpose and measure of our educational system. It is irrelavent to compare our educational system with the educational systems of other countries when they are not set up with the same goal in mind. Our system gaurantees the exact same education to all citizens ( and noncitizens for that matter.) On a student for student basis, we spend a disproportionate amount of time, money and resources attempting to educate the 10-20% of the population with the lowest level of ability and the lowest chance of success. Which other country does that? Every core subject in our HS has specific sections of classes that are "Team Taught", with a resource teacher and regular content teacher, for students who are low achieving. Where are the classes with two teachers trying to provide more opporunity for the high achieving? I am not saying this is right or wrong, just saying that it is a regulation that our schools are FORCED to follow. It is not my decision as a teacher. The goal of American Education is to provide services to EVERYONE, and the more unlikely it is you will succeed, the more services you will be provided with. Not saying it is good or bad - just saying that is where we are at. So, if we are going to compare ourselves accurately, we should do so in the context of other systems trying to accomplish the same thing.

Ultimately, a sad truth is that a very large portion of our society does not adequately value education. As long as NASCAR, Cage Fighting, Poker, Reality TV, Hollywood, Psychics, Alternative Medicines, etc. etc. etc. are the things that are of greatest priority to our nation, it should be little surprise that our educational system struggles. If anything, it is probably somewhat amazing it works as well as it does.

[Tokenconservative]

Once more: pls do not feed the trolls. TIA.

And a troll is anyone who fails to toe the pro-public screwels line, right?

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

So, basically, of the three "categories" of people, the group that is "right" is the one who "knows" what you say is "accurate." In regard to "know", would that be in the biblical sense of faith? You make many proclamations, but you offer no support - just opinion. So, in essence, your contention is that an intelligent person should simply take your side, believe your opinions and condemn the entire educational system as an absolute failure - with no real factual proof. By the way, your use of the word "screwel" would lead me to believe that most of your information may be obtained by listening to the Rush Limbaugh show - as that is the one place I have heard the term repeatedly used.

All of that said, I don't necessarily disagree with the entire premise. Our education system has plenty of problems, but it is far more complex than lazy, undereducated teachers purposely "dumbing down" the youth of America, letting them run wild, handing out "A's" to everyone - all the while just sitting back and waiting for that "Big", fat pension to start rolling in.

Are there bad teachers? You bet. I would never say there are not. But, the problem starts a lot farther up the food chain and gets help from so many other areas. Ultimately, politicians are "in charge" of education. From the national spotlight, to the state level, to local school boards - there are several critical tiers of decision making that are not always conducted by educational experts. When you put a noneducator in charge of education, is it really surprising that the end result is something less than perfection? When the state of Texas dismisses an educational leader because of his "promotion of evolution," that says a lot about our educational system. Our national values are a sad representation of our value in regard to education - as mentioned earlier, sports "success" is a far greater prize than educational success. The social culture our kids grow up in is sad and pathetic - as displayed by the popularity of "reality" shows on MTV, VH1, E, etc. There may well be "grade inflation" in schools, but there is the same thing going on in the american home - kids being rewarded for doing less and less. As a Biology teacher, I have been allowed to spend a TOTAL of about $500-1000 over the past 5 years (not per year, total) for classroom supplies. The demand for "better accountability" (something I am fine with) has also led to an environment in schools that values "learning" stuff, rather than improving skills.

Another issue, which others have mentioned at various points, is the overall purpose and measure of our educational system. It is irrelavent to compare our educational system with the educational systems of other countries when they are not set up with the same goal in mind. Our system gaurantees the exact same education to all citizens ( and noncitizens for that matter.) On a student for student basis, we spend a disproportionate amount of time, money and resources attempting to educate the 10-20% of the population with the lowest level of ability and the lowest chance of success. Which other country does that? Every core subject in our HS has specific sections of classes that are "Team Taught", with a resource teacher and regular content teacher, for students who are low achieving. Where are the classes with two teachers trying to provide more opporunity for the high achieving? I am not saying this is right or wrong, just saying that it is a regulation that our schools are FORCED to follow. It is not my decision as a teacher. The goal of American Education is to provide services to EVERYONE, and the more unlikely it is you will succeed, the more services you will be provided with. Not saying it is good or bad - just saying that is where we are at. So, if we are going to compare ourselves accurately, we should do so in the context of other systems trying to accomplish the same thing.

Ultimately, a sad truth is that a very large portion of our society does not adequately value education. As long as NASCAR, Cage Fighting, Poker, Reality TV, Hollywood, Psychics, Alternative Medicines, etc. etc. etc. are the things that are of greatest priority to our nation, it should be little surprise that our educational system struggles. If anything, it is probably somewhat amazing it works as well as it does.

Some good points. Too bad you had to fall into the educationalist cant of blaming it all on them dumby redneckers and their NASCAR in the end, but let's give 'er a look-see.

You are free to believe what you will. I listen to Limbaugh occasionally, and admit to heisting "screwel" from him. To you, that means I am a "dittohead" who every day, gets his every thought from Limbaugh...as I said, you are free to believe what ever erroneous thing you wish to. By the way, this blankent condemnation of Limbaugh as a source for data...can you name something he's said that he was wrong about?

No, I do not expect you to take my word for it that the screwels are um, screweled because I say so. Go find out for yourself. The insistence that I provide some source from within the schools agreeing that they suck, is pretty stupid.

Indeed, the problems with the screwels are more complex than that, and more complex than your belief that it's stoopid, ig'nant, racist, rednecks who spend all their time watching NASCAR...too.

However, were I to look at the two parties: educated professionals who claim that they know how to educate kids, compared to stoopid, ig'nant, racist rednecks who watch NASCAR, I'd at least HOPE that the former is better equipped to educate kids than the latter.

Turns out ... not so much, by the evidence.

In fact, it also turns out that the majority of teachers in the US come from the bottom quintile of all graduating college students. What does this mean? Well, I don't have any NEA-santioned studies to back it up, but what any reasonably intelligent person can derive from that news is that those who can go into other fields do so, and those who cannot say "well, I can always teach!"

And that's just what they do.

There has been, since the time of Dewey and his crowd in the 30s, a desire by socialists and communist to use the schools to inculcate young Americans in soclialism. That was put on ice in WWII and the early Cold War years until the mid 60s when socialists began filling the higher-level positions in state and federal education agencies and in the education colleges. Today, in many if not most teacher colleges, you have to pass a board exam that essentially identifies whether you think-left good enough to be a teacher. Again, you can believe this or not...it just is what it is, and even in those colleges where they don't have such a board, profs and administrators work hard to weed out anyone who doesn't toe the leftist line.

So while every teacher is not a bomb-throwing lefty, most lean left, and the majority HARD left. Of course you will now scream "how do you teach leftist calculus!!?? Huh!!??? HUUUUHHHH!!!!?" I expect that level of shrill, rearguard stupidity, so it's okay. You know that virtually across the board in every discipline BUT math, and yes, that includes the sciences, leftisim is taught as a matter of course.

And then you say: we cannot compare our schools to anything else! Well, that's handy. Yeah, why should we compare the product of our schools to that of other nations, the product of which our product has been competing for the past 20 years? We compare ourselves in every other way to other countries, but in this way, sure...we shouldn't.

That only makes sense. Next you'll admit that no, we shouldn't compare US child mortality rates to other countries, or poverty rates, or obesity rates, or...well, any of those favorites of the left that they (you) so love to point at and say "see how tuuuurrrriiibbbllle is America in comparison!?"

And as a union teacher of course you despise any sort of accountability. You think this beneath you. Besides, it's not your fault students don't learn anything in your class. It's the administration's, TVs, music, the kids, the parents...anyone, really...save you. Anyone in the private sector (outside other union jobs) who were to tell their boss, "I should not be held accountable for the results of my work!" would be instantly permitted to market their valuable skills elsewhere.

Not so in the schools, for some reason. There, in fact, the worse a teacher you are, the more you are protected. And then there's the "money issue." If you don't like the reasonably good pay and exorbitant bennies that come with the job, then YOU are free to market your skills elsewhere. America enjoys a 96%employment rate right now. There are employers desperately seeking your unique and extensive skills as someone who has a 4 yr bio degree and an additional 2 years of "education theory"! Surely they are beating down your door, even as we key!

Look, I've always said there are some damned good teachers out there, and I agree that many if not most kids come to school today prepared NOT to learn and that the administration of schools is primarily there for self-serving purposes and they don't give a damn if kids learn or not.

Good teachers who really want to teach don't have an easy job, and your presence here and your words suggest you may be one of those rarest of teachers. The reality is, and denying this is something you will do--you feel you have to to be loyal--most teachers don't know their subject, can't teach, don't like kids anyway, and are in teaching because they can't do anything else.

If you've been a teacher longer than a year or so, you know this. You've seen the dance of lemons, and you deal with other teachers who are like this every day.

But you also belong to and support a union that protects such teachers come hell or high water. That's why where I live it costs $250k to get rid of teachers who are, everyone agrees (save the union) bad teachers. So nobody bothers, do they?

When an "education" system has become an employment system for a self-serving union and its members, it's no longer doing what it is supposed to do, and no number of links--LIIIIINNKKKKKSSSSSS!!!!--posted by me on an internet forum is going to chage that....and you know it as well as I.

Tokie

[joobie]

Then you are not very smart or well-informed.

perhaps, yet i i did take a few education classes in a former lifetime, so i at least have a general idea what i'm talking about.

You don't need to have taken ANY higher math to teach grade school math. I have a hard time believing anyone can be this ignorant.

who said you did? i also have trouble believing someone with such poor reading comprehension could have an english degree.

I'll just sit here now and wait for you to run to the mods and file your complaint.

hopefully you'll hold your breath waiting.

I both claim that AND say that, as a matter of fact. Are you a government employee? In the Department of Redundacy Dept.?

says the guy who responds twice to the same post. i'll snip the rest of your drivel, except to note that i learned all of that stuff long before fifth grade, taught by the regular teacher, and somehow no one complained about her nor did she get fired. and she was a terrible teacher, and i wasn't really any good at math.

[kev]

]Some good points. Too bad you had to fall into the educationalist cant of blaming it all on them dumby redneckers and their NASCAR in the end, but let's give 'er a look-see.

No, that is not what I said. Sorry if the NASCAR sports reference offended you. How about NFL or MLB? Our society cares more about sports, spends more on it, encourages our youth to participate in it, and in general, rewards it to a greater degree than it does education. If you invest more in sport than education, is it a surprise that education suffers?

No, I do not expect you to take my word for it that the screwels are um, screweled because I say so. Go find out for yourself. The insistence that I provide some source from within the schools agreeing that they suck, is pretty stupid.

Uh . . .actually it is not pretty stupid. If you assert something, it is really up to you to support your argument - something that I (and other teachers in my school) teach HS students. Apparently this would be one example of how education has improved in the time since you attended HS.



In fact, it also turns out that the majority of teachers in the US come from the bottom quintile of all graduating college students. What does this mean? Well, I don't have any NEA-santioned studies to back it up,

How about just any source, even one that is nonNEA-sanctioned?

Today, in many if not most teacher colleges, you have to pass a board exam that essentially identifies whether you think-left good enough to be a teacher.

I must have missed this when I went to college. Even voted republican on many occassions. Hope no one finds out and they take my teaching license.


And then you say: we cannot compare our schools to anything else! Well, that's handy. Yeah, why should we compare the product of our schools to that of other nations, the product of which our product has been competing for the past 20 years? We compare ourselves in every other way to other countries, but in this way, sure...we shouldn't.

I am not saying we should not compare ourselves to anything else. Just that we need to compare apples to apples. How many countries put the greatest amount of money, time and resources into educating the 20% of students which are LEAST likely to succeed? We do. If we provided that group with no money, resources or time, (and quit testing them as well)and instead utilized those resources for the average to above average students, I think we would compete at a higher level. I am simply saying that we should measure ourselves against the goal we have set for our education system. (not that we are by any means perfect there either, but at least it would provide a more realistic assessment.)


And as a union teacher of course you despise any sort of accountability.

Actually, in my original post I said I am fine with being held accountable.

Besides, it's not your fault students don't learn anything in your class. It's the administration's, TVs, music, the kids, the parents...anyone, really...save you.

I would say the vast majority of students do learn in my class. And, as you are a big fan of "testing" their scores even prove it. I would also say that for many of the students who do not learn in my class, it is their own fault. There are a certain number of kids who simply don't put forth the effort - despite encouragement, punishment, threat or promise. As they say, you can lead a horse to water. . . .

If you don't like the reasonably good pay and exorbitant bennies that come with the job, then YOU are free to market your skills elsewhere. America enjoys a 96%employment rate right now. There are employers desperately seeking your unique and extensive skills as someone who has a 4 yr bio degree and an additional 2 years of "education theory"!

I never said I was underpaid. I know I could make more money elsewhere - I have every confidence in that. I make a good living as a teacher. Not great, not terrible. I did not choose to be a teacher because I could not do anything else - I chose to be a science teacher when I was a sophomore in HS because I enjoy science and I was good at it. The same can be said for all of those who talk about how great teachers have it. There is a shortage - if it takes so little ability, effort and skill, there are all kinds of openings. Just jump through the hoops and start down that road to "easy street."


Look, I've always said there are some damned good teachers out there, and I agree that many if not most kids come to school today prepared NOT to learn and that the administration of schools is primarily there for self-serving purposes and they don't give a damn if kids learn or not.

Good teachers who really want to teach don't have an easy job,


AGREED!


you feel you have to to be loyal--most teachers don't know their subject, can't teach, don't like kids anyway, and are in teaching because they can't do anything else.

In my experience (15 years) this simply is not true. I will be the first to agree that there are some BAD teachers - I have NO loyalty to them. But, in my exerience most do know their subject, most do far more than their job "requires" and most could certainly have chosen to do something else if they desired. If anything, I know FAR more individuals who started out as teachers and quit, to pursue something easier and more rewarding. Didn't you say you used to teach?? Now that I think of it, I cannot think of a SINGLE example of a person who quit another job to go be a teacher. Why do you think that is??

By the way, I despise the NEA as a self-serving, money making, politically minded entity that has little real interest in making things better for teachers. So, please don't lump that on me.

[Prometheus]

Back when I was in college, my leftist, commie, pinko, secular progressive, atheist, traitor, hippie drinking buddies and I used to ditch class to play our own unique version of co-ed soccer, with the unique handicapping feature that anyone who was actually good at soccer was required to play with a perpetually refilled cup of beer in one hand, and a rule that anyone, at anytime, could switch teams without warning. In that ignoble tradition, I will now declare that Tokie is actually correct about a lot of what he say's here (and I'm one of those apologists in the system that he keeps complaining about).

Most textbooks do, in fact, suck. My favorite little snippet of unsubstantiated anecdotal evidence in this regard is my fond memory of a 6th grade Social Studies book I was required to "learn" from which included such useful bits of wisdom as the "fact" that in Mexico one of the most popular dishes is guacamole, a type of sauce made from mashed up green caterpillars (yes, the book really did say that!).

Grade inflation is rife (Though I do have a hard time caring about this, since no grading system ever used en masse has ever successfully measured anything meaningful anyway).

The public schools are chock ful of incompetence, beaurocracy, and foul-smelling lunchmeat.

Kids today are all dumber than their counterparts were 40 years ago--except the ones who know more about how my computer works than I do, and can easily skirt any security measures we try to use to keep them from looking at internet porn.

And, OMG, Yes! The teacher's union is a cabal of self-serving beaurocrats intent on doing nothing other than protecting teachers' jobs and pay scales (I know this is what all labor unions are supposed to do for their members, but dammit these are teachers we're talking about! The very same people who tortured us with homework and books and other unimportant stuff when we were growing up--they just don't deserve the same treatment as normal people).

The U.S. education system is far, far below where it could be if even a decent percentage of voting Americans actually gave a damn. It's full of all sorts of problems, and it does a disservice to a great many of the children that are churned through it.

But the big picture is that none of this really matters. It's always been the case that most people get most of what they know about the world from outside of school. Schools are not places where we should be learning everything we need to know, they're places to warehouse our children (and hopefully turn some of them into something other than criminals) while we do other stuff. That, and they provide the Right with a handy dead horse to flog whenever things aren't going their way.

The upshot is that all the problems people like Tokie are on about really do exist, but it's just not the life-threatening catastrophe they make it out to be. By and large, schools do what we need them to do, and the kids learn stuff anyway. Believing otherwise is just falling into the same trap as those lefties who think Global Warming is gonna end the world sometime next month. If you don't fall for one group of nutjobs' wildly overhyped gloom-and-doom BS, then why tumble bass-ackwards right into the hands of another?

[Tokenconservative]

perhaps, yet i i did take a few education classes in a former lifetime, so i at least have a general idea what i'm talking about.

who said you did? i also have trouble believing someone with such poor reading comprehension could have an english degree.

hopefully you'll hold your breath waiting.

says the guy who responds twice to the same post. i'll snip the rest of your drivel, except to note that i learned all of that stuff long before fifth grade, taught by the regular teacher, and somehow no one complained about her nor did she get fired. and she was a terrible teacher, and i wasn't really any good at math.

Actually, one of the biggest problems with teachers (today, since again, about the mid-60s) is that they take Edu classes. So no, that doesn't qualify you for anything save an ability to parrot diversity drivel.

You and others said I did. That's who.

And I've never really been able to use my English degree for much. Instead, I make great big piles of money.

I always hold my breath waiting. I am all the way up to 15 seconds!

I don't believe I did...but then, if I did, it's okay...I work for me, and am not wasting the taxpayer's dollars. Are you?

You learned algebra, geometry and calc "long before" the 5th grade?

Wow.

That's pretty cool

Tokie

[joobie]

Actually, one of the biggest problems with teachers (today, since again, about the mid-60s) is that they take Edu classes. So no, that doesn't qualify you for anything save an ability to parrot diversity drivel.

didn't learn anything about diversity in them. try again.

You and others said I did. That's who.

i did not. the truth and you are not well acquanted, are they? if others said you did, respond to their posts and not mine.

And I've never really been able to use my English degree for much. Instead, I make great big piles of money.

uh-huh.

I always hold my breath waiting. I am all the way up to 15 seconds!

why'd you stop?

I don't believe I did...but then, if I did, it's okay...I work for me, and am not wasting the taxpayer's dollars. Are you?

not sure what you're on about here. i do not have a taxpayer funded job, however.

You learned algebra, geometry and calc "long before" the 5th grade?

that is not what i said. now, while it is pretty obvious that you don't read what others here write, now i have to wonder if you even read what you write.

[Tokenconservative]

Back when I was in college, my leftist, commie, pinko, secular progressive, atheist, traitor, hippie drinking buddies and I used to ditch class to play our own unique version of co-ed soccer, with the unique handicapping feature that anyone who was actually good at soccer was required to play with a perpetually refilled cup of beer in one hand, and a rule that anyone, at anytime, could switch teams without warning. In that ignoble tradition, I will now declare that Tokie is actually correct about a lot of what he say's here (and I'm one of those apologists in the system that he keeps complaining about).

Most textbooks do, in fact, suck. My favorite little snippet of unsubstantiated anecdotal evidence in this regard is my fond memory of a 6th grade Social Studies book I was required to "learn" from which included such useful bits of wisdom as the "fact" that in Mexico one of the most popular dishes is guacamole, a type of sauce made from mashed up green caterpillars (yes, the book really did say that!).

Grade inflation is rife (Though I do have a hard time caring about this, since no grading system ever used en masse has ever successfully measured anything meaningful anyway).

The public schools are chock ful of incompetence, beaurocracy, and foul-smelling lunchmeat.

Kids today are all dumber than their counterparts were 40 years ago--except the ones who know more about how my computer works than I do, and can easily skirt any security measures we try to use to keep them from looking at internet porn.

And, OMG, Yes! The teacher's union is a cabal of self-serving beaurocrats intent on doing nothing other than protecting teachers' jobs and pay scales (I know this is what all labor unions are supposed to do for their members, but dammit these are teachers we're talking about! The very same people who tortured us with homework and books and other unimportant stuff when we were growing up--they just don't deserve the same treatment as normal people).

The U.S. education system is far, far below where it could be if even a decent percentage of voting Americans actually gave a damn. It's full of all sorts of problems, and it does a disservice to a great many of the children that are churned through it.

But the big picture is that none of this really matters. It's always been the case that most people get most of what they know about the world from outside of school. Schools are not places where we should be learning everything we need to know, they're places to warehouse our children (and hopefully turn some of them into something other than criminals) while we do other stuff. That, and they provide the Right with a handy dead horse to flog whenever things aren't going their way.

The upshot is that all the problems people like Tokie are on about really do exist, but it's just not the life-threatening catastrophe they make it out to be. By and large, schools do what we need them to do, and the kids learn stuff anyway. Believing otherwise is just falling into the same trap as those lefties who think Global Warming is gonna end the world sometime next month. If you don't fall for one group of nutjobs' wildly overhyped gloom-and-doom BS, then why tumble bass-ackwards right into the hands of another?

There. And you din't even splll your beer! Purty good on New Year's Eve! Sounds like a typical college sport: stupid, senseless, and involving much beer.

By the way, it's not that kids are "dumber," it's that they are being kept ignorant and dumbed down to the lowest common denominator for several reasons, one being that it is far easier for a mediocre teacher who was him or herself a solid C-average student in college to teach dumb stuff than smart stuff. And sorry, but most teachers come from that lowest quintile of college graduates, and most don't really want to teach, they do it because they have a degree, they can't get hired to do anything else in our hypercompetitive work markets today, and teaching pays relatively well for the work required and you get all those great vacations and a bennies package that would make a Teamsters negotiator blush.

This level of teacher "education" is why, when subbing an AP English course some weeks ago, I found myself puzzled as to why these kids knew NOTHING about the history surrounding the WWI-era poetry they were reading...how in hell can we expect them to wander Flanders Field without knowing what's fertilizing the beautiful poppies?

They had NO clue in hell what I was talking about. More than one came up to me after the classes and said they wished I was their regular teacher since it was clear I knew far more about poetery (I hate poetry, I suck at it, it makes no sense to me, usually) than their regular Advanced Placement teacher.

This kind of thing BREAKS MY HEART.

Which is why I rail against "teachers" such as the many in here who claim to be some sort of junior Einsteins doing what they do for the "love of the children!"

Hogwash. Most teachers despise kids. Many with an barely-controlled desire to do them violence. Anyone who is an HONEST teacher knows this either about themself, or about other teachers. But teacher like to pretend this and all the other issues with schools aren't so, because afterall, they are "professionals!"

And it isn't about redneck, rightwing haters beating up on teachers. It's about reality. If not, then tell me why so many teachers send their OWN kids to private schools?

The difference between the problems with the schools is that they could be fixed, whereas since AGW is not real it can neither be fixed nor should we be pumping money into fixing something that if it is happening, is not something we can or should control.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

didn't learn anything about diversity in them. try again.

i did not. the truth and you are not well acquanted, are they? if others said you did, respond to their posts and not mine.

uh-huh.

why'd you stop?

not sure what you're on about here. i do not have a taxpayer funded job, however.

that is not what i said. now, while it is pretty obvious that you don't read what others here write, now i have to wonder if you even read what you write.


1. Then you either took them prior to about 1985, or you didn't take very many.

2. Sorry, the posts come at Tokie so fast and furious and usually with typical (yawn), indistinguishable libbie fury and hatred, it's hard to tell them apart.

3. Nuh, uh. (?)

4. Stop what? A bullet? A speeding train? Dating that girl with the big wart on her chin? What?

5. I don't often have to read the parroted platitudes, slogans, screed and cant of the lefties in here. It's all boilerplate by now.

Tokie

[Prometheus]

By the way, it's not that kids are "dumber," it's that they are being kept ignorant and dumbed down to the lowest common denominator for several reasons, one being that it is far easier for a mediocre teacher who was him or herself a solid C-average student in college to teach dumb stuff than smart stuff. And sorry, but most teachers come from that lowest quintile of college graduates, and most don't really want to teach, they do it because they have a degree, they can't get hired to do anything else in our hypercompetitive work markets today, and teaching pays relatively well for the work required and you get all those great vacations and a bennies package that would make a Teamsters negotiator blush.


That might all be true, but we'll never know without some actual data to examine. For my part, I scored in the 99th percentile on every standardized test I ever took, graduated with honors from top-tier schools for both my graduate and undergrad degrees. I even quit a different job to become a teacher. My pay sucks compared to what I did before teaching, my "bennies" aren't all that great (I get to pay half-price for some crappy health insurance, and I get a total of 10 days paid vacation per year, plus around 9 weeks of forced, unpaid "vacation" during which time I work other jobs. I do it because I'm good at it, and it's not all that hard, so I can put most of my energy into other things, like my family.


This kind of thing BREAKS MY HEART.


Mine too. It's just that I've never witnessed such a thing, myself.


Hogwash. Most teachers despise kids. Many with an barely-controlled desire to do them violence. Anyone who is an HONEST teacher knows this either about themself, or about other teachers. But teacher like to pretend this and all the other issues with schools aren't so, because afterall, they are "professionals!"


I'll give you that. I know I despise most other people's kids. Just makes the "tough love" part of the job that much easier.



And it isn't about redneck, rightwing haters beating up on teachers. It's about reality. If not, then tell me why so many teachers send their OWN kids to private schools?


Because private schools are better, silly. Plus, when I was a kid we used to beat up the teachers' kids whenever we could get away with it, and certainly never let them play our reindeer games.


The difference between the problems with the schools is that they could be fixed, whereas since AGW is not real it can neither be fixed nor should we be pumping money into fixing something that if it is happening, is not something we can or should control.

Tokie

Okay, so how would you go about fixing them? Try to stay within the realm of the politically possible.

[joobie]

1. Then you either took them prior to about 1985, or you didn't take very many.

no, and i never said i took 'many.' hence the operative word 'few.' hopefully you can see the difference.

2. Sorry, the posts come at Tokie so fast and furious and usually with typical (yawn), indistinguishable libbie fury and hatred, it's hard to tell them apart.

well, at least you can admit you're not smart enough to keep up. next try working on the narcissism.

3. Nuh, uh. (?)

exactly.

4. Stop what? A bullet? A speeding train? Dating that girl with the big wart on her chin? What?

holding your breath, obviously. if you're not going to read it, don't bother responding to it.

5. I don't often have to read the parroted platitudes, slogans, screed and cant of the lefties in here. It's all boilerplate by now.

you really need some new material.

[LostAngeles]

High school...oddly enough, textbooks from the 20s and 30s are not available online...so sorry, no link--LIIIIINNKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK!!!!

I am sure someone in the districts where they used to use those books is working on this oversight, as we key.

Sheesh.

Tokie

So you can't provide the title, author, publishing company, and/or Library of Congress information so that interested parties can go and find copies of them?

Actually, that's the last math class I really remembered. Lately I've been going through some old documents and it appears I took one in 10th grade, too. The docs reminded me that one of the major projects in this 10th grade math class (mid-1970s) was to produce a drawing/collage some such of what we thought "alien" (as in space alien...I think Skylab was in the news at the time) numbers would look like.

I was a big SF reader, and figured they'd just be symbols, like ours...I mean, how could a race using hashmarks for numbers get very far?

The teacher gave me an "F" for the probject.

I don't live in CA, but in my state I had to take a test for math that I think probably went up to early middle school level. I tanked it, but still got the teaching cert!

Tokie

This makes your mocking of the diorama HILARIOUS.

[Chris Haynes]

High school...oddly enough, textbooks from the 20s and 30s are not available online...so sorry, no link--LIIIIINNKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK!!!!...

Still it is up to you to prove it. Do something, scan the title pages and post them on JREF (a decent scanner costs about $100). Can you do that simple task?

[Tokenconservative]

Still it is up to you to prove it. Do something, scan the title pages and post them on JREF (a decent scanner costs about $100). Can you do that simple task?

Hmm...since there are (hold on)...3 scanners, any one of which cost 5 x that at least (part of multifunction machines) around me, not sure why I'd need some cheapy scanner like that....

I'm sorry, what were you muttering about?

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

So you can't provide the title, author, publishing company, and/or Library of Congress information so that interested parties can go and find copies of them?

This makes your mocking of the diorama HILARIOUS.


No, I can't. That's because they are on the bookshelves in my storage area and I am not going to go get them.


RE: mockery. Indeed it does. I believe, though, that we were also offered the alternate of making a diorama, and since I made scale model dioramas all the time when I was prolly 12-14, I believe I made one of those for xtra credit.

This, by the way, was probably the ONLY thing I did in that class as the math would've been far beyong my ability.

And your presenting this is this way--you believe you are mokcing...me?--makes you out to be a fool. Not because you are mocking me (I later taught myself math) but because you are making my argument FOR me...your own ignorant, public school-bred inability to recognize that that is what you are doing (others in here who would rather open a vein than agree with Tokie see this, it's just too bad they are too cowardly to say something) speaks...poorly of both your public screwels edjamakashun AND your current standing as an "educator."

This, folks...is what we are dealing with.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

no, and i never said i took 'many.' hence the operative word 'few.' hopefully you can see the difference.

well, at least you can admit you're not smart enough to keep up. next try working on the narcissism.

exactly.

holding your breath, obviously. if you're not going to read it, don't bother responding to it.

you really need some new material.

Hmmm...did you take "few" or "a few." There's a distinction. I guess you dint' know that!

It's not a matter of smarts, tho unlike others in here, I'd be about the last person on the planet to say ol' Tokie's very smart! It's a matter of time. There'd have to be 6 Tokies (my, what a pleasure that would offer the world!) to handle all the mean, nasty, vituperative, vitriolic, venomous (I sure like v words!), puling, hysterical anti-Tokie rants that take place in here.

But at least then I'd have time to respond to the 2 rational ones I saw.

Holding my breath in what? Stasis...like the climate before AGW? A bottle? Like a message? Your heart, for all time?

Actually, no...I don't. You see, libbies like you have been throwing out the same tired old platitudes, slogans, bromides screed and cant for decades. My accurately, and reapeatedly describing those platitudes, slogans, bromides, screed and cant as the platitudes, slogans, bromides, screed and cant these platitudinous, sloganeering bromides, screeds and cant are, is quite in keeping with those who speak in platitudes, slogans, bromides, screed and cant.

Like um, well...you.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

That might all be true, but we'll never know without some actual data to examine. For my part, I scored in the 99th percentile on every standardized test I ever took, graduated with honors from top-tier schools for both my graduate and undergrad degrees. I even quit a different job to become a teacher. My pay sucks compared to what I did before teaching, my "bennies" aren't all that great (I get to pay half-price for some crappy health insurance, and I get a total of 10 days paid vacation per year, plus around 9 weeks of forced, unpaid "vacation" during which time I work other jobs. I do it because I'm good at it, and it's not all that hard, so I can put most of my energy into other things, like my family.


Let's break this up.

Actually, no...we don't need any numbers in here, because the problems are not going to be fixed in here. We can see that by the simple absolutist denial that there ARE any problems by professional "educators" in here. I think, so far, one, has admitted that the problems even exist, without shrieking for a link--LIIIIINKKKKKKK!!! He padded that with lots of "um..yeah, but I still hate Tokie!!!" stuff, so hopefully if anyone is able to identify him (he's a teacher I guess) that will somehow save his career.

Your bennies are wonderful and your job is secure for life, and you know it. Most people would cut off a limb to have your lifetime medical, dental, mental health and vision coverage and your retirement package is fabulous.

Teachers alway seem to forget this when talking about their pay package. People in the real world understand it's all part of the same package. Your pay, by the way, is calculated on a 12-month period, which is why (if you are under contract) you get paid during the summer.

The last statement is the most important one. Most teachers do what they do because yes, it's not that hard (after the first year or two--or shouldn't be...if it is, you are an idiot) and because yes, they can then put most of their energies elsewhere...and do. If I did that at MY job, I would go out of business inside 3 months.

See the difference? And yet you consider yourself a "good" teacher, don't you?

[Tokenconservative]

Mine too. It's just that I've never witnessed such a thing, myself.

I'll give you that. I know I despise most other people's kids. Just makes the "tough love" part of the job that much easier.

Because private schools are better, silly. Plus, when I was a kid we used to beat up the teachers' kids whenever we could get away with it, and certainly never let them play our reindeer games.

Okay, so how would you go about fixing them? Try to stay within the realm of the politically possible.

Not sure what you are saying ...that I am LYING about my experience? Kids are not stupid. They are unlikely to tell you to your face that you suck as a teacher. I encouraged my kids to tell their "teachers" who sucked that they sucked and told them, no worries...I will back you up, with money, guns and lawyers if necessary...but kids are kids, and most won't do this, and mine are far too polite and far more concerned with others' feelings than is the old man, so they didn't do it.

And that is what I see a LOT of when subbing: teachers who truly HATE the kids they are teaching. I despised one of the kids in my 5th grade class of 25. All the others I wanted to bring home with me when I was "asked to resign." I connect with a lot of kids just in one day of subbing, and they've told me similar things many times. Given, and I know this, a sub has a lot more freedom, frankly, than does a contract teacher. Yes, I know of all the things--admin, parents, curriculum--that tie your hands. That's why I was fired: I refused to use most of the nonsensical district curriculum..I chose to TEACH instead and my reward for bringing up 20 kids's (sorry, you can't reach them all) math and reading and writing was...a pink slip.

Nice. My kids' private operates on a shoestring, which does, periodially, impact teaching, which is one reason we took them out (the sci and math teachers that were any good, left).

Fixing: nothing will get fixed until the unions are outlawed. That's not going to happen.

So that leave school choice. Of course that's not going to happen as long as the NEA is able to pump MILLIONS into defeating such attempts every time they pop up on a state-by-state basis.

That leaves one possible fix: someone in Congress with the balls to tell the NEA to piss off and introduce fed. legislation making school choice a federal law.

If we don't do it that way, it won't happen and our schools will continue to fail our children.

Tokie

[Chris Haynes]

Hmm...since there are (hold on)...3 scanners, any one of which cost 5 x that at least (part of multifunction machines) around me, not sure why I'd need some cheapy scanner like that....

I'm sorry, what were you muttering about?

Tokie

Scan the title page and post it on here of the old math book that you think is better than the ones today.

Is there something wrong with your reading comprehension?

[Prometheus]

Let's break this up.

Actually, no...we don't need any numbers in here, because the problems are not going to be fixed in here. We can see that by the simple absolutist denial that there ARE any problems by professional "educators" in here. I think, so far, one, has admitted that the problems even exist, without shrieking for a link--LIIIIINKKKKKKK!!! He padded that with lots of "um..yeah, but I still hate Tokie!!!" stuff, so hopefully if anyone is able to identify him (he's a teacher I guess) that will somehow save his career.

Your bennies are wonderful and your job is secure for life, and you know it. Most people would cut off a limb to have your lifetime medical, dental, mental health and vision coverage and your retirement package is fabulous.

Teachers alway seem to forget this when talking about their pay package. People in the real world understand it's all part of the same package. Your pay, by the way, is calculated on a 12-month period, which is why (if you are under contract) you get paid during the summer.

The last statement is the most important one. Most teachers do what they do because yes, it's not that hard (after the first year or two--or shouldn't be...if it is, you are an idiot) and because yes, they can then put most of their energies elsewhere...and do. If I did that at MY job, I would go out of business inside 3 months.

See the difference? And yet you consider yourself a "good" teacher, don't you?

Could I hire you to come over and explain to our human resources department about all these perks and bennies I'm supposed to have? As I said, I get half-priced health insurance, which does NOT continue if I leave my job. It does not include dental. Vision care is included but with exhorbitant co-pays. My pay is figured hourly, based on classroom hours. I don't get paid for meetings, training sessions, test-scoring, homework grading, lesson-planning, or anything else that my job requires me to do outside of class. When I figure all the time I spend doing this into the picture, including the 50% of my health insurance premiums that are paid for, and my 10 days vacation, my pay-rate averages out to $11/hour.

I do NOT get paid during the summer, nor do I get paid for school-vacation periods during the rest of the year (unless I use my 10-days vacation allowance, or my 7-days sick time. My retirement package consists of a mutual fund which I'm required to pay into and which is partially matched. If I rely on that for my retirement then I'd better not live more than a few months after I stop working. Because of this glorious retirement package I am rendered inelligible to collect Social Security. The "Job security" line just made me laugh. I am a contract employee, and I have a 9-month contract. Every September I have to sign a paper acknowledging that my employment is contingent upon continued funding from the State, that my employment could end at any time without notice, and that, in any case, it's only for 9 months. I have to re-apply for my own position with an updated resume every year.

I don't know why *most* teachers put up with this kind of crap. I only know why I do. And, no, I'm not a "good" teacher; I'm an excellent teacher, and I consider that my job is easy for me precisely because I'm so good at it. Many of my colleagues seem to consider the job a lot more difficult than I do. Also, most of them do not have the advantage of having had a previous, lucrative career that allowed me to build up some savings, and that I can easily go back to if I get sick of being underpaid.

[joobie]

Hmmm...did you take "few" or "a few." There's a distinction.

as it says in the first post, 'a few.' try and keep up in the future. i know this reading bit is tough, but...

Holding my breath in what?

here's a tip. go back and read the post you're responding to. then you might actually have an idea what you're talking about.

Like um, well...you.

maybe you'd like me to call the waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaambulence for you?

[joobie]

Scan the title page and post it on here of the old math book that you think is better than the ones today.

Is there something wrong with your reading comprehension?

alternatively he could just tell us the name and publisher of the book. that is, if it actually existed.

[Prometheus]

Not sure what you are saying ...that I am LYING about my experience?

I'm not accusing you of anything. I just have not had the type of experience you're describing, and without data, I don't know how prevalent such experience may be.

And, BTW, I don't hate you--don't know what ever gave you that idea. I'm at least as frustrated by some of the problems in education as you seem to be. Some of my opinions are even in substantial agreement with yours. But they are just that--opinions. The single biggest problem with all education is a lack of good data (you may have noticed that I've not included any in my posts here). Anecdotes are everywhere, but the truth is that nobody can even begin to understand and fix the problems now because we don't even really know what the problems are beyond vague assertions that seem to follow political lines rather than scientific ones.

As I mentioned near the beginning of this thread, I take issue with the sort of test comparisons in the OP, not because I think our education system is fantastic, but because the tests themselves, and the methods of administering, scoring, interpreting, and rendering policy based on them are all severely flawed. I've not yet found any source of data on education that I consider trustworthy.
So perhaps our schools really do suck compared to other countries, or perhaps not. I can readily find a wealth of anecdote going both ways, and my own experience has been mixed.

[LostAngeles]

No, I can't. That's because they are on the bookshelves in my storage area and I am not going to go get them.


RE: mockery. Indeed it does. I believe, though, that we were also offered the alternate of making a diorama, and since I made scale model dioramas all the time when I was prolly 12-14, I believe I made one of those for xtra credit.

This, by the way, was probably the ONLY thing I did in that class as the math would've been far beyong my ability.

And your presenting this is this way--you believe you are mokcing...me?--makes you out to be a fool. Not because you are mocking me (I later taught myself math) but because you are making my argument FOR me...your own ignorant, public school-bred inability to recognize that that is what you are doing (others in here who would rather open a vein than agree with Tokie see this, it's just too bad they are too cowardly to say something) speaks...poorly of both your public screwels edjamakashun AND your current standing as an "educator."

This, folks...is what we are dealing with.

Tokie

And yet, you, "passed," with a D. A D may be a passing grade, but not by much. It's certainly no grade I would ever boast of. Such as my B+ in high school Calculus in which I did no homework and never cracked the textbook? Those were the days. Now my professors make homework anywhere from 10-75% of the grade and actually working with the material is necessary.

So let's see, you make assertions you don't feel you need to justify because they're, "obvious," like the textbooks from the 1920s and 1930s. You mock someone else for having made a diorama for history class in high school and boast of your incredibly awesome drawing/collage in high school and can't see your own double standard?

There are numerous problems in education today. A lot of which is due to some really bad attempts to explain the material to kids and the fact that people who don't have enough of a solid foundation in the material are attempting to teach it. Much is being done, at least in CA, to correct the latter.

Tokie, aside from kicking out all the ILLLEEEEGGGGGAAAALLLLLLSSSSS, what's your suggestion for improving education, particularly math and science? What do you think could be done to retain students' interest in these subjects? How can we increase the student retention rate?

I look forward to your thoughts on the matter.

I expect I'll get them around the time you address my post in another thread with regards to Chinese Poetry and World History.

[Dancing David]

I categorically disagree with your statement. I believe NCLB was a good idea. I believe it has been sabotaged by state and municipal education boards.

Sorry I have not checked this in a while, I was off in Science mainly.

My statement was in reference that NCLB was not implemented to improve the schools, it was implemented as a way to shuffle public funding to private schools. So while on the surface the goal was to improve test scores (a good thing) the reason for it was to suck money out of public schools and benefit the upper middle class. My statement about local and state education was in line with yours. Local and state bodies make crazy decisions that often have lttle to do with the actual education of the student. For example, the Illinois state lottery, implemeted ti increase school funding. Great idea, but for every dollar it has earned the state has decreased it's revenues to education



In my opinion, the basic premise behind NCLB is that there are a few very, very BASIC, essential skills that children need, before they graduate from school. The implication is that students need to be literate at the very least, and need to be able to do some basic math - adding, subtracting, dividing, and the like.

Agree.

The problem is that NCLB has no teeth - no one in Washington was masculine enough to actually enumerate those standards. Instead, the actual standards were left to the states to set for themselves, individually. Most states responded in bad faith. Some, for instance, responded by setting artificially low standards, so they wouldn't have to make any effort towards improving anything. Some states responded by manipulating results and playing fast-and-loose with facts, figures, numbers, and classifications of students in their yearly reports. Those were the choices they made. They then blamed the results on the federal act, as if they didn't have a choice, after all, but to respond the way they did.

Very likely, however it has certainly lit a fire in some schools. The real problem here in Illinois is that verybody talks about improvong education, but nobody wants to spend money on it. We have a local property tax based system as well, which creates huge problems. And then there is local politics, you cant replace the hundred year old school falling down in the 'bad' neighborhood without having to cater to the wealthy neighborhood and give them a new school as well.


Bollocks. The state of education in this country does indeed suck mightily; however, your local school board, and your state's education board, are perfectly happy to let it stay that way. Mostly out of laziness. This has nothing to do with some "conspiracy" to "dumb down" American kids, and everything to do with people just not caring.

Agreed.

[Prometheus]

My state is one in which the DOE has bent over backwards trying to make NCLB work; they've produced a rigorous set of tests, curriculum standards that should allow those tests to be passed, and they've followed through and taken over a number of schools from local school boards for non-performance.

Among the results have been: Lot's of lawsuits instigated by parents who think the tests are unfair; lot's of HS guidance counselors advising low-scoring students to drop out of school and try to get a GED instead--especially stupid since the GED exams are considerably more difficult than the NCLB inspired exams required to graduate HS, but getting rid of the low-scorers helps prevent the school's from being taken over by the state; lot's of kids stuck in limbo because of various cracks in the system; lot's and LOT'S of kids suddenly being diagnosed with all sorts of learning disabilities because this allows them to squeak through the loopholes; lot's of teachers complaining that the new requirements prevent them from doing anything other than "teaching to the test"; lot's of HS graduates that are not doing well on college entrance tests, because they don't cover the same material as the new NCLB tests that are now just about the sole focus of the HS curriculum.

Don't get me wrong; I like testing, and lot's of it, but it needs to be done in the spirit of science--in a genuine attempt to find out what really works and what doesn't--not as a policy mandate that causes everybody to work against the best interests of children out of fear for their jobs.

[Tokenconservative]

And yet, you, "passed," with a D. A D may be a passing grade, but not by much. It's certainly no grade I would ever boast of. Such as my B+ in high school Calculus in which I did no homework and never cracked the textbook? Those were the days. Now my professors make homework anywhere from 10-75% of the grade and actually working with the material is necessary.

So let's see, you make assertions you don't feel you need to justify because they're, "obvious," like the textbooks from the 1920s and 1930s. You mock someone else for having made a diorama for history class in high school and boast of your incredibly awesome drawing/collage in high school and can't see your own double standard?

There are numerous problems in education today. A lot of which is due to some really bad attempts to explain the material to kids and the fact that people who don't have enough of a solid foundation in the material are attempting to teach it. Much is being done, at least in CA, to correct the latter.

Tokie, aside from kicking out all the ILLLEEEEGGGGGAAAALLLLLLSSSSS, what's your suggestion for improving education, particularly math and science? What do you think could be done to retain students' interest in these subjects? How can we increase the student retention rate?

I look forward to your thoughts on the matter.

I expect I'll get them around the time you address my post in another thread with regards to Chinese Poetry and World History.

It's really sort of irritating to talk to you.

You realize (I guess not) that even my D was unearned and that I'm not boasting about it, it's a terrible grade. In my house today "D" stands for "don't bother coming home" and "A" is "eh, acceptable." I realize you think you are showing how stupid Tokie is for that bad grade, but what you don't realize is that you are essentially making my case for me.

It's hard for me to deal with the sort of blind stupidity you represent. The schools were bad when I was in them in the 70s...they are worse now. The collage or whatever the hell it was I did in math in 9th grade was just as bad as the guy who did a diarama. I subbed in a Lit class last year where the final project was to drawr a purty pitcher of a scene from Romeo & Juliet or do a Hip Hop version of it performed in front of the class. This was a 10th grade class. My kids found such nonsense at their public high school to be childish and not to be something that would particularly prepare them for college. I went to a lousy little city college but I never did a collage or Hip Hop version of Milton or Steinbeck for a term project.

Do you even know what the term "double standard" means? It does not appear so.

You really need to read what is being written, not what you HOPE is being written. I think you'd find it a marvelously refreshing approach.

Fixing the problem:
1. Rid the schools of the union
2. School choice.
3. Yeah...kick out the illegals. Few of them want to be there and cause the majority of distractions, and besides they have no right to be there, even if each of their heads means x-$ to the district.

Problem fixed

[Tokenconservative]

I'm not accusing you of anything. I just have not had the type of experience you're describing, and without data, I don't know how prevalent such experience may be.

And, BTW, I don't hate you--don't know what ever gave you that idea. I'm at least as frustrated by some of the problems in education as you seem to be. Some of my opinions are even in substantial agreement with yours. But they are just that--opinions. The single biggest problem with all education is a lack of good data (you may have noticed that I've not included any in my posts here). Anecdotes are everywhere, but the truth is that nobody can even begin to understand and fix the problems now because we don't even really know what the problems are beyond vague assertions that seem to follow political lines rather than scientific ones.

As I mentioned near the beginning of this thread, I take issue with the sort of test comparisons in the OP, not because I think our education system is fantastic, but because the tests themselves, and the methods of administering, scoring, interpreting, and rendering policy based on them are all severely flawed. I've not yet found any source of data on education that I consider trustworthy.
So perhaps our schools really do suck compared to other countries, or perhaps not. I can readily find a wealth of anecdote going both ways, and my own experience has been mixed.

You have the audacity to question my veracity and suggest that I would prevaricate!?

Man up, dude. If you think I am lying, just say so.

I don't have "the numbers" to verify how prevalent my experience might be. It was an anecdote...those don't require "the numbers," unless I am talking about winning Lotto.

We can't look into a crystal ball. All we can do is use what's available to us. Is that perfect? No...I'm perfect, but that's just what the ladies say....there's no such thing as the perfection you seek before rendering an opinion (since when is an opinion the bane of all critical thought?). The FACT is, and you know this, we score very high when it comes to "self esteem" compared to most other countries, industrialized, emerging, and 3rd world, and abysmally when comparing math and science and even English scores.

We can say, harrumph...it's all academic at this point, because ah, haruumph, we just don't have perfect data as yet, and so I recommend, ahem, doing nothing unti the data can be perfected!

I'm glad Salk didn't look at things that way. Or Colombus. Or Ford. Or hell, even Disney.

If you are, as you present, a liberal, there's very little about your ideologies that is not rooted in hate and anger. I am a conservative, ergo, as a liberal you hate me. It's nothing personal, it's just a foundational bulwark of your ideology.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

My state is one in which the DOE has bent over backwards trying to make NCLB work; they've produced a rigorous set of tests, curriculum standards that should allow those tests to be passed, and they've followed through and taken over a number of schools from local school boards for non-performance.

Among the results have been: Lot's of lawsuits instigated by parents who think the tests are unfair; lot's of HS guidance counselors advising low-scoring students to drop out of school and try to get a GED instead--especially stupid since the GED exams are considerably more difficult than the NCLB inspired exams required to graduate HS, but getting rid of the low-scorers helps prevent the school's from being taken over by the state; lot's of kids stuck in limbo because of various cracks in the system; lot's and LOT'S of kids suddenly being diagnosed with all sorts of learning disabilities because this allows them to squeak through the loopholes; lot's of teachers complaining that the new requirements prevent them from doing anything other than "teaching to the test"; lot's of HS graduates that are not doing well on college entrance tests, because they don't cover the same material as the new NCLB tests that are now just about the sole focus of the HS curriculum.

Don't get me wrong; I like testing, and lot's of it, but it needs to be done in the spirit of science--in a genuine attempt to find out what really works and what doesn't--not as a policy mandate that causes everybody to work against the best interests of children out of fear for their jobs.

So what you are saying is same ol same ol?

Sounds a lot like schools BEFORE NCLB to me....

The problems with your approach (aside from the requirement for perfection) are:
1. We can't sit around forever arguing over the best approach and allowing the NEA or even the DOE to waffle and piddle around while protecting their own rice bowls while generation after generation of Americans are "educated" to be morons.
2. The only way we are ever going to see any real change is by getting the unions out of there.

Tokie

[Prometheus]

So what you are saying is same ol same ol?

To some degree, yes, NCLB has utterly failed to address quite a few very important problems.

Sounds a lot like schools BEFORE NCLB to me....

Some of the problems are the same as before, but NCLB has certainly created new ones, and there are a few new ones that may or may not be wholly related to NCLB. I'm not sure about all of the recent increase in learning disability diagnoses, for instance. That could be something like the fake autism epidemic that woo woo's have been blaming on vaccines, when it's really just an accounting error.


The problems with your approach (aside from the requirement for perfection) are:
1. We can't sit around forever arguing over the best approach and allowing the NEA or even the DOE to waffle and piddle around while protecting their own rice bowls while generation after generation of Americans are "educated" to be morons.


Where did I require perfection? I just want some actual science.


2. The only way we are ever going to see any real change is by getting the unions out of there.

Tokie

I tend to agree that the teachers' unions suck. I know they haven't done much for me, other than getting me a tiny pay increase once every 5 or 6 years, that usually comes with an equivalent hike in union dues. On the other hand, I'm certain that they're far from the only thing preventing change, and they'd be a lot less powerful if we had some other standard way of making teachers feel like they're not getting a raw deal.

[Mister Agenda]

One comparison with today's schools and yesterday's: what's with all the freakin' homework? Has it ever been verified that it is even that useful?

In my spare time I would like to tutor Bantu refugee children from Somalia. Instead I spend all my time walking them through their homework. Time I could have spent on the basics they've missed (typical situation: 11-yr-old girl with a 2nd-grade education who is in the process of learning English is placed in 6th grade...because she's 11, and we can't have any 11-yr-olds in 4th or even 5th grade now can we?), I spend on fractions with decimals and variables or nitty-gritty of SC history. I didn't have THAT much HW when I was coming up in the 70s. What gives?

[Tsukasa Buddha]

It's really sort of irritating to talk to you.

:dl:

[Tokenconservative]

To some degree, yes, NCLB has utterly failed to address quite a few very important problems.

Some of the problems are the same as before, but NCLB has certainly created new ones, and there are a few new ones that may or may not be wholly related to NCLB. I'm not sure about all of the recent increase in learning disability diagnoses, for instance. That could be something like the fake autism epidemic that woo woo's have been blaming on vaccines, when it's really just an accounting error.

Where did I require perfection? I just want some actual science.

I tend to agree that the teachers' unions suck. I know they haven't done much for me, other than getting me a tiny pay increase once every 5 or 6 years, that usually comes with an equivalent hike in union dues. On the other hand, I'm certain that they're far from the only thing preventing change, and they'd be a lot less powerful if we had some other standard way of making teachers feel like they're not getting a raw deal.

The problem with the NCLB failure is this: it's BUSH's FAAAUUULLLTTTTTTTT!!! Rather than working to fix the problems. There's nothing wrong with the ideals, it's the implementation.

The learning disabilities sound like the ADD "epidemic" of a few years ago when every fourth boy in every school would dutifully trot down to the nurses office once a day for his 'ludes.

This was a bit more insidious, I think: single mothers who could not understand that no, it's not just a difference in plumbing, boys and girls are wired differently, female teachers and admins. happy to drug boys if it would get them to act more like girls, and the underlying radical feminist agenda that permeates our schools and has for decades (yes, yes...I know: woo...but real woo, nonetheless). Eventually enough mothers either talked to dads or brothers or got married and came to realize that duh, boys are not supposed to act like girls and that seems to have tapered off...

No, you want perfection. Sometimes, especially in something as politically charged as public education, owned lock, stock and barrel by the NEA since at least the late 1960s, you just have to use a little common sense. How can you get good science when anyone who dares utter the tiniest peep against the NEA can kiss his or her career goodbye?

I'm sorry...explain to me why professional teachers need a union? I am a license professional. I don't have a union. I bid for jobs. I either get them or I don't. Why can't good teachers bid for good jobs, maybe with long-term contracts even (let's face it, that's what the union is all about: getting and keeping members), like anyone else? Oh, that's right..because some meany principal might fire you?

Welcome to the adult world. And maybe it would allow some "meany" principal (manager) to get rid of the deadwood, too?

Tokie

[volatile]

What exactly are the hard-wired cognitive and behavioural differences between girls and boys? Care to share what you think they are, and, oh, I dunno, back it up with some evidence*? This is a legitimate question, by the way, as as far as I was aware, the issue is far from as clear-cut as you claim (see: Gender, Nature, and Nurture by Richard A. Lippa)

* :rolleyes: I'm either a masochist or an optimist asking that, aren't I?

[Prometheus]

I'm sorry...explain to me why professional teachers need a union?
Tokie

I don't think we do need one. I didn't say we need one. I wouldn't have joined if I'd had a choice. I only suggested that it might be easier to get rid of the union if you had a way of convincing most teachers (I am something of an anomaly) that they don't need it.

BTW I have voiced my negative opinion of the union, to union officials, years ago (when I opted out of paying the optional portion of union dues that goes to political operations), and they've not sent anyone to beat me up or had me fired yet

[LostAngeles]

:dl:

Don't laugh. Imagine how you'd feel if you strutted onto a message board, full of piss, vinegar, and truth and when you, graciously, bestowed it to the people in a golden shower of knowledge, they asked you to support it? You too would hide from actual responses and only respond to their amused mocking. It's even worse when they leap on your broad characterizations of an entire group and call them for the ******** that they are. After having had your education abused by the public school system and the evil cabal that every single teacher belongs to and overcoming that hardship...

...you'd be irritated too...

[Tokenconservative]

What exactly are the hard-wired cognitive and behavioural differences between girls and boys? Care to share what you think they are, and, oh, I dunno, back it up with some evidence*? This is a legitimate question, by the way, as as far as I was aware, the issue is far from as clear-cut as you claim (see: Gender, Nature, and Nurture by Richard A. Lippa)

* :rolleyes: I'm either a masochist or an optimist asking that, aren't I?


You are certainly not a parent or a teacher.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Don't laugh. Imagine how you'd feel if you strutted onto a message board, full of piss, vinegar, and truth and when you, graciously, bestowed it to the people in a golden shower of knowledge, they asked you to support it? You too would hide from actual responses and only respond to their amused mocking. It's even worse when they leap on your broad characterizations of an entire group and call them for the ******** that they are. After having had your education abused by the public school system and the evil cabal that every single teacher belongs to and overcoming that hardship...

...you'd be irritated too...

Yep.

Chaffs my ass, too.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

I don't think we do need one. I didn't say we need one. I wouldn't have joined if I'd had a choice. I only suggested that it might be easier to get rid of the union if you had a way of convincing most teachers (I am something of an anomaly) that they don't need it.

BTW I have voiced my negative opinion of the union, to union officials, years ago (when I opted out of paying the optional portion of union dues that goes to political operations), and they've not sent anyone to beat me up or had me fired yet

But this is what you said: "On the other hand, I'm certain that they're far from the only thing preventing change, and they'd be a lot less powerful if we had some other standard way of making teachers feel like they're not getting a raw deal."

My mom, shrink and parole officer don't make sure I don't get a raw deal. Why should your profession be any different?

Don't get me wrong, I think your union does a great job at what a union is supposed to do, all the while, screwing the education of millions of Americans over several generations.

Without a union, you'd make sure you don't get a "raw deal"(not really sure what that is in a free market) by being a better teacher than the other 12 people applying for the job.

Seems simple enough. That's how I compete in MY profession...many I am better than, some I am not as good as. That's a free market without artificial nonsense like unions provide.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

What exactly are the hard-wired cognitive and behavioural differences between girls and boys? Care to share what you think they are, and, oh, I dunno, back it up with some evidence*? This is a legitimate question, by the way, as as far as I was aware, the issue is far from as clear-cut as you claim (see: Gender, Nature, and Nurture by Richard A. Lippa)

* :rolleyes: I'm either a masochist or an optimist asking that, aren't I?


I'm not going to educate you on this. If you want to believe some radical feminist, go right ahead. That's your choice.

Or, you can go out and learn the truth, one that no, is not PC (as you demand) but is still the truth.

Tokie

[volatile]

You are certainly not a parent or a teacher.

Tokie

Wrong on one of those counts.

[volatile]

I'm not going to educate you on this. If you want to believe some radical feminist, go right ahead. That's your choice.

Or, you can go out and learn the truth, one that no, is not PC (as you demand) but is still the truth.

Tokie

Well, surprisingly enough, Tokie, I've actually read some of the literature on this subject, and, well, none of it says that there is a fundamentally biological basis that separate males and females. As usual, it's a lot more complex than that, according to the sources I've read.

On the other hand, if you know something I don't, please do share it. I'd actually like to know, and learn. What, in your opinion, are the fundamental, inalienable differences between boys and girls?