Is U.S. education truly getting worse?

[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)

* 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]

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)

* 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)

* 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?

 

[tracer]

Well, from my dealings with some transexual friends, I DO know that there's this one little doo-dad in the human brain, snuggled into a region of the Corpus Callosum called the BSTC if I recall, that tends to be present in females and absent in males.

This was significant to the transexual community, because one study found that most M->F transexuals had said doo-dad in their brain, which would give them a brain structure more similar to the average female than to the average male.

 

[volatile]

Well, from my dealings with some transexual friends, I DO know that there's this one little doo-dad in the human brain, snuggled into a region of the Corpus Callosum called the BSTC if I recall, that tends to be present in females and absent in males.

This was significant to the transexual community, because one study found that most M->F transexuals had said doo-dad in their brain, which would give them a brain structure more similar to the average female than to the average male.

Indeed (see http://www.symposion.com/ijt/ijtc0106.htm) - this was a stuy done by the University of Amsterdam, although it's not a doo-dad, just a different sized Stria Terminalis. It's a very small sample (only six patients - as you might expect, transsexual brains are hard to come by for the purposes of scientific study) and far from conclusive. Furthermore, the only conclusions they were able to draw was that this pituitary gland difference was indicative only of the feeling of transsexuality, not the sexual behaviour or other behavioural characteristics of the individuals concerned.

The study tells us virtually nothing about infant development, nor is it indicative of any fundamental and inalienable behavioural differences between males and females, and is thus entirely unrelated to the point Tokie was trying to make (that is that little boys and little girls are fundamentally different behaviourally ).

See, I have read this stuff.

 

[Prometheus]

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.

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."

How is it that you infer any discrepancy at all between my two statements? There's certainly none logically implied nor directly stated.

My mom, shrink and parole officer don't make sure I don't get a raw deal. Why should your profession be any different?

I didn't say it was necessary to make sure teachers don't get a raw deal, I said that if they felt as if they weren't then the union might be less powerful. And even that's only a guess (notice the word "might").

Don't get me wrong, I think your union does a great job at what a union is supposed to do,

From my perspective, not so much.

all the while, screwing the education of millions of Americans over several generations.

This is the sort of statement that I just won't accept without data, but it's certainly possible.

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.

My school has had unfilled teaching positions open since I started working there 8 years ago. There isn't anybody applying for my job.

That said, I agree that in most cases a "free market" model is often the most efficient way of bringing quality products/services to consumers, but it would be phenomenally difficult, if not impossible, to implement one where the product is education (BTW private schools are not an example of free market education. Their primary product is reputation, not education.), and even if it could be done, I'm not sure it would be in the State's best interest to do so. From the State's perspective, the reason we have public education in the first place is that an educated populace is a prerequisite to a functioning democracy (hence our nation's failure in that arena as well!). Leaving it up to the whims of the marketplace might not provide the consistency we need to achieve.

 

[Dancing David]

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 will have to read more on this, it seems to me that text books are over produced now and that they are over simplitic and gaudy to the extreme.

The real issue as I see it is that federal and state law makes no provision for the 'slow learners', these are the children whose intelligence is low enough to impact thier learning but still have an IQ above 70. They recieve no support services unless they have an LD.

 

[Tokenconservative]

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?

Good for you. I've read much, too.

Difference is, I read people who are simply "doing the science" and not worried whether it will get them fired from their university position if they happen to mention that in general male brains develop at a different rate, than do females, that males physically see (interpret) colors differently, even that males, because their actual physical nerve endings are further apart, don't feel pain as intensely (oops! There goes that old saw about, "men couldn't stand the pain of childbirth!") as do females but they DO, because of the differences in the way our sinuses funtion actually DO feel a head cold more than do females, that there are real, evolutionary reasons men tend to be less adept at multi-tasking, while women are less adept at single-minded focus, that women really can't read maps as well as men and that there are real evolutionary reasons men don't stop to ask for directions (no matter how many uproariously funny comediennes take shots at that) that men really CAN drive better for the very simple reasons of that focus ability and better reflexes, but that women are far better at fine motor skills such as brain surgery.

Oh, also...there are real reasons more men go into sci. and math teaching than do women, and it has nothing to do with Barbara Billingsly telling you in 1952, that "girls are better at ..other things." I think we saw what happens to men in certain positions in academia who dare utter such truths to the feminist power.

Din't we?

Tokie

 

[Tokenconservative]

Wrong on one of those counts.

Men are also better and clarifying things up front. Women tend to edge around things. For example, here, a man would just say (to me): you are a dumbass. I have three kids.

Or: wrong, moron...I have been a teacher for 36 years!

Instead, you do it this way, forcing your audience to ask more questions.

This is very typical female communication style. It's like when you get home from a hard day at work and tell your husband about all the problems, and he offers suggestions how to go about fixing them and you become infuriated because "why can't he just listen!!??"

Well, because men are NATURALLY problem solvers, not problem listeners-to. We see a nail sticking up, but don't have a hammer handy, we go about devising some means of "fixing" the problem without the proper tool, hopefully damaging ourselves in the process!

Women phone three friends and talk it out.

Tokie

 

[Jeff Corey]

... in general male brains develop at a different rate, than do females, that males physically see (interpret) colors differently, even that males, because their actual physical nerve endings are further apart, don't feel pain as intensely (oops! There goes that old saw about, "men couldn't stand the pain of childbirth!") as do females but they DO, because of the differences in the way our sinuses funtion actually DO feel a head cold more than do females, that there are real, evolutionary reasons men tend to be less adept at multi-tasking, while women are less adept at single-minded focus, that women really can't read maps as well as men and that there are real evolutionary reasons men don't stop to ask for directions (no matter how many uproariously funny comediennes take shots at that) that men really CAN drive better for the very simple reasons of that focus ability and better reflexes, but that women are far better at fine motor skills such as brain surgery.

Oh, also...there are real reasons more men go into sci. and math teaching than do women...

Well, one close factoid out of about ten. Males are much more likely to be red-green color blind than females.

 

[Tokenconservative]

Well, one close factoid out of about ten. Males are much more likely to be red-green color blind than females.

LOL.

Your ignorance and bigotry do not negate reality.

Yes. And males actually have fewer of the cones necessary to see color at all. We simply did not evolve the need for it, as women did.

Of course, whipped feminist "men" will say this proves wymyn are "better" than us. Rational people say that no, it proves that men and women are (shocker!) different from one another.

Funnily enough, we know that male and female animals of many sorts are fifferent (sexual dimorphism, for example) but it's ONLY humans who are utterly the same save for differences created by the Western patriarchal system.

Very odd.


Tokie

 

[Tokenconservative]

Incidentally, this is yet another of the many ways in which American "education" is a flop: girls and boys learn differently, too.

We KNOW this...but we don't like it, especially in a deeply feminized culture that has turned being male into a pathology. Which is what ADD/ADHD is all about .

Yeah..yeah, I know.. "but some girls are diagnosed with it...what 'bout that, huh?! HUUUUHHHHHH!!!?"

Sheesh.

It's like I'm the only adult in here sometimes.

Tokie

 

[volatile]

Men are also better and clarifying things up front. Women tend to edge around things. For example, here, a man would just say (to me): you are a dumbass. I have three kids.

Or: wrong, moron...I have been a teacher for 36 years!

Instead, you do it this way, forcing your audience to ask more questions.

This is very typical female communication style. It's like when you get home from a hard day at work and tell your husband about all the problems, and he offers suggestions how to go about fixing them and you become infuriated because "why can't he just listen!!??"

Well, because men are NATURALLY problem solvers, not problem listeners-to. We see a nail sticking up, but don't have a hammer handy, we go about devising some means of "fixing" the problem without the proper tool, hopefully damaging ourselves in the process!

Women phone three friends and talk it out.

Tokie

I'm not a woman.