another aspect is kids see everyone at their school, the kids who try and the ones who don't, and they mainly end up in the same situation after graduation. Dead end jobs and continued low wages without much hope for advancement. It's not hard to see why kids don't take school seriously.
only way to escape that is to already have money. unfortunately
I think having a role model and seeing getting out is possible is a big part of it.
“The plight of teachers” is a meme. Comparatively speaking, teachers have higher incomes than the average American (and it’s not even close), they have significantly more time off than almost any other profession (teachers only work +/- 180 days a year) and have some of the strongest unions in the country. The average teacher’s salary in the United States is $65K, and we’re not talking about professors - we’re talking about public elementary school teachers. Couple that with a state pension (in some states average, in others absolutely exceptional) and you have yourself an excellent gig. If anything, since results are slipping, they deserve less, not more.
So you want to force inner city kids, many black and hispanic, to continue going to failing schools, graduating with a 3rd grade reading level and reward those same schools with more funds. That makes about as much sense as providing drug addicts with more drugs and places to shoot up.
Define projection, person who wants to allow kids to watch men dance around in women's lingerie telling adult jokes about gay sex.
meanwhile the funding for the school itself is based on proper tax from nearby houses for the school, rather than say, all households within the state. causing inequality to be worse due to consequences of red lining.
Oh please. The decline in quality far preceded any noticeable decline in funding. Moreover, K-12 spending per pupil per year has increased, not decreased, but your chart conveniently cuts off at 2015.
1.I'm not @osaka35 , we don't share the same mind or thoughts, or overall political position . I can make my own separate arguments if I so choose to do so. Mine's a separate but related topic.
2. https://edworkingpapers.com/sites/default/files/ai19-25.pdf
SAT's have been realized as a extremely flawed scoring system. Primarily because often the SAT's require very specific answers, to general problems. As in a problem that can be solved in multiple ways, but the scoring system only expects two methods of answering it. Meaning people who get the right answer, sound on every level, but didn't do the "correct" method would be dinged on the test pretty commonly. They're also attached to the very same problem.
Asians and white people generally make up the upper margin of income. While other races generally don't. The reason Asians and white people do better, isn't because "They're just doing better"
So you’re having a conversation with yourself then? About something that nobody else was talking about besides you? I see.
You can stop right there. You can’t simultaneously claim that students are doing better on tests *while* they’re bombing their SAT’s. It’s one or the other. It’s the only test that actually matters - that’s what gets them into higher education, that’s what improves their chances of employment and has a direct relation to future income. *Nobody* cares about how they did on Mrs. Hufflefluff’s math quiz, they care about the standardised test, and the scores for those have been progressively dropping as I’ve indicated. If the current curriculum isn’t tailored towards preparing students for the one test that will help them get a leg up on the educational and labour market then they are failing at their stated mission.
A mock exam is not a pair of pants you get to try on, I assure you that the questions on the mock exam and the real test are different. The best thing you could say about mock exams is that they prepare a student for how the testing environment is going to look like and work. They should already know how to answer the questions, that’s what they’re in school for.
Can you not see the graph? The scores of Asians are increasing whereas the scores of white students are decreasing. Your whole colour = disposable income for education nonsense falls flat when you look at the statistics - in 2017 the National Center for Education Statistics conducted a survey in regards to private school enrolment. 67% of new private primary and secondary school students were white (predictable in a predominantly white country), followed by 11% Hispanics, 9% Black and only 6% Asian. Asians, who are doing the best on SAT’s, have the lowest private school enrolment rate in that age group, so no, they’re not “spending extra” on the pupils, at least not to the extent of foregoing public schools in favour of private schools (admittedly there’s a stereotype of Asian parents hiring tutors, but I’d have to find a statistic to represent that anecdote as a number in order to draw any meaningful conclusions). Either disposable income does not translate to higher scores in a linear fashion that you suggest or you have failed to demonstrate that it does, because the data does not bear out what you’re saying.
It’s a money furnace. Everybody knows that, but nobody’s going to say it because they don’t want teachers to go on strike over and over because they need their glorified baby sitters.
Stop. Just stop. All you are doing is race baiting and you're not even very good at it.
you don't know many teachers, do you? the world does not work how you think it works. on paper, in somemplaces, seems great. and probably is for a few lucky where all the other variables shake out favourably. but you should actually get out, talk to people. the picture you paint is not an accurate one. or rather, it's accurate for some, but not for most. there are many many more aspect whoch make teaching a living hell. making 65k a year average doesn't make a shit job a good or cushy job.
Like I said, I used to teach. I’m very familiar with how the education system works, and I find the demands of teacher’s unions, as well as teachers themselves, unrealistic when you account for their actual performance. Flooding the public school system flush with money is not going to close the educational gap, there are bigger societal issues, particularly in the inner cities, and teachers are not equipped, or even meant to solve them. I’m a numbers guy - I look at the numbers and I make an estimation based on that. Anecdotes are not a good basis for policy. Funny you mention Simpson’s paradox, because we *have* subdivided pupils into smaller groups and we have demonstrated a difference in performance in spite of operating within the same public school system. That tells me that some groups are approaching education differently than others, and that has a more measurable effect on their scores.
Collages have been dropping the SATS. It's no longer the most important test.
which is what I've been arguing. the money isn't being used as it should be. there are shit teachers, and I'm sure you could name quite a few, which translates for a need for higher degrees and hiring standards. And I've met many many good teachers who use their paychecks to provide tools for students, experiences, books, etc. because their area pays teachers poorly and expects them to do the job of 2 or 3 teachers. the bad students make the job hell, but usually their parents are 10x worse. which shouldn't be the teacher's job to fix or even deal with, but the parents aren't doing it.
colleges have been getting less and less funding from state and federal, and are being forced to operate more like businesses than a service. the students are both the product and the buyers. lowering standards across the board is definitely a thing that's happening in higher education so more money can be made off the backs of students.
lolol that's literally my thoughts during statstics. basically, some relationship of numbers look like it's definitely saying one thing (40% vs 60% is pretty clear, right?). but then you break them down differently or more precisely, and suddenly the numbers say something incredibly different (oh, it's 90% vs 10% if you remove this unnecessary bit). basically, you've got to really know the context and potential variables, or whatever numbers you come up with are fairly useless. or, to be overly simplistic:
Private schools wasn't my argument. I was talking about additional tutoring or at least having the financies to provide additional study resources. Additionally again, your using the SATS as a metric.
Private school enrollment != disposable income.
I can shake on that, and I absolutely agree. My problem is adding more money into the fire pit when we know ahead of time that it’s going to be squandered. Education reform can’t be boiled down to throwing money at the problem, there are serious administrative issues that are wasting money intended for children on pencil pushers. There’s a distinct lack of efficiency there that needs to be addressed. If my car is burning, I’m not going to the dealership to get it replaced just to park it inside a garage that’s on fire - that’s counterproductive.
Of course they’re slowly phasing SAT out and opt for other testing methodology - they have to, given the declining state of both education and testing standards. The plan is to get rid of the requirement entirely by 2025, but as you may have noticed, it’s not 2025. They’ll come up with a different method of separating the wheat from the chaff.
Private school = disposable income for the purposes of education, by definition. Asians earn the most out of all ethnic groups in America, you would expect them to flood private schools, but they don’t. There’s an unresolved disconnect here that you’re trying to dodge, hiding behind an anecdote.
AncientBoi
Xdqwerty
a_username_that_is_cool
@
Psionic Roshambo:
@
Xdqwerty:
