A home for the weary.
https://www.wwtbambored.com/
Spock, although the Texas Board of Education has tried gutting various science standards, I don't believe they've gotten around to physics and calculus, yet. But give them time.The Science and Engineering Readiness Index (SERI) measures how high school students are performing in physics and calculus -- based on publicly available data, including Advanced Placement scores, National Assessment of Educational Progress reports, teacher certification requirements by state and physics class enrollment data.
Like this one?BackInTex wrote:Unfortunately the metrics are simply statistics. The pools for both Texas and California are polluted with under-achieving students from under-achieving families with under-achieving cultures. Not something more money can fix. Until there is a desire to learn and achieve, we should spend our money elsewhere (or save it for later).
He means it's easier to just kick them out of the schools rather than try to teach them?Bob78164 wrote:Like this one?BackInTex wrote:Unfortunately the metrics are simply statistics. The pools for both Texas and California are polluted with under-achieving students from under-achieving families with under-achieving cultures. Not something more money can fix. Until there is a desire to learn and achieve, we should spend our money elsewhere (or save it for later).
More seriously, I'm afraid that I know the answer to this, but just what do you mean by "polluted with under-achieving students from under-achieving families with under-achieving cultures"? --Bob
mrkelley23 wrote:Texas is one of the few states that is actually requiring most college-bound students to take physics in high school, so it's no surprise that a physics-leaning measure would show up well for them. Strangely enough, requiring kids to take a course in a subject can actually improve scores in that subject!
With that requirement, however, has come an increased need for physics teachers. And while the larger metro areas are able to stay pretty competitive, luring new physics teachers to other parts of Texas, given their recent cuts to education, is proving somewhat problematic. I have my resume on file with the American Association of Physics Teachers, mostly as a way to dream about retirement (I keep hoping someone will be able to offer me so much money that I'll be able to move to a warmer, beachier place) but the number of offers I'm getting now from Texas and Arizona are about to rival the ones from Hawaii. TX and AZ are offering about half of what I make now, and Hawaii is competitive salary-wise, but their cost of living is so high, I couldn't support my family.
If the math is correct, that is a brilliant avatar. It will win.littlebeast13 wrote:mrkelley23 wrote:Texas is one of the few states that is actually requiring most college-bound students to take physics in high school, so it's no surprise that a physics-leaning measure would show up well for them. Strangely enough, requiring kids to take a course in a subject can actually improve scores in that subject!
With that requirement, however, has come an increased need for physics teachers. And while the larger metro areas are able to stay pretty competitive, luring new physics teachers to other parts of Texas, given their recent cuts to education, is proving somewhat problematic. I have my resume on file with the American Association of Physics Teachers, mostly as a way to dream about retirement (I keep hoping someone will be able to offer me so much money that I'll be able to move to a warmer, beachier place) but the number of offers I'm getting now from Texas and Arizona are about to rival the ones from Hawaii. TX and AZ are offering about half of what I make now, and Hawaii is competitive salary-wise, but their cost of living is so high, I couldn't support my family.
Humans demand too much compensation. Squirrels will work cheap...
lb13
SportsFan68 wrote:If the math is correct, that is a brilliant avatar. It will win.littlebeast13 wrote:mrkelley23 wrote:Texas is one of the few states that is actually requiring most college-bound students to take physics in high school, so it's no surprise that a physics-leaning measure would show up well for them. Strangely enough, requiring kids to take a course in a subject can actually improve scores in that subject!
With that requirement, however, has come an increased need for physics teachers. And while the larger metro areas are able to stay pretty competitive, luring new physics teachers to other parts of Texas, given their recent cuts to education, is proving somewhat problematic. I have my resume on file with the American Association of Physics Teachers, mostly as a way to dream about retirement (I keep hoping someone will be able to offer me so much money that I'll be able to move to a warmer, beachier place) but the number of offers I'm getting now from Texas and Arizona are about to rival the ones from Hawaii. TX and AZ are offering about half of what I make now, and Hawaii is competitive salary-wise, but their cost of living is so high, I couldn't support my family.
Humans demand too much compensation. Squirrels will work cheap...
lb13
I need to figure out how to make it into something for Casey. Sir Isaac Newton is her favorite scientist, along with all the yummies that fall to the floor or ground because of the marvelous force he identified.
Bob78164 wrote:It's no secret in California that we have neglected our public schools for far too long. Unfortunately, the Republicans still have just more than one third of each house of the Legislature, and that is enough (if they vote in lockstep, which they do) to prevent us from raising taxes in order to get more money to the schools. They wouldn't even vote to put a tax increase on the ballot, forcing us to use the cumbersome initiative route. As someone whose son is currently in the California public school system, I don't find it the least bit funny. --Bob
Absolutely NOT the girl in the linked story, but it does point to a huge issue in public eductation. As indirectly pointed out in the story, school systems' priorities do not properly prioritize the education of the students as much as it does to receive the funding or credits for the students' attendance. Keep them in class, not to educate them, but to get paid for them.Bob78164 wrote:Like this one?BackInTex wrote:Unfortunately the metrics are simply statistics. The pools for both Texas and California are polluted with under-achieving students from under-achieving families with under-achieving cultures. Not something more money can fix. Until there is a desire to learn and achieve, we should spend our money elsewhere (or save it for later).
More seriously, I'm afraid that I know the answer to this, but just what do you mean by "polluted with under-achieving students from under-achieving families with under-achieving cultures"? --Bob
My sister didn't flee California--she moved there. Kicking and screaming, railing against liberals and taxes (yeah, there's one in every family--ask Flock.Flybrick wrote:Bob78164 wrote:It's no secret in California that we have neglected our public schools for far too long. Unfortunately, the Republicans still have just more than one third of each house of the Legislature, and that is enough (if they vote in lockstep, which they do) to prevent us from raising taxes in order to get more money to the schools. They wouldn't even vote to put a tax increase on the ballot, forcing us to use the cumbersome initiative route. As someone whose son is currently in the California public school system, I don't find it the least bit funny. --Bob
But the thread irony is delicious anyway.
And those danged ol' GOP'ers, doing what they said they'd do. Stupid voters...
As to taxes, perhaps the high, and according to you, needs to be higher, taxes might explain why so many corporations and high-income folks are fleeing California, thus depleting that vital tax pool even faster, which means you, and the Democrats, think that the only solution is to raise taxes which leads to even more businesses and people escaping...
One thought, radical I know, is to reprioritize who California spends its money. Put more of into schools and less into a lot of other programs.
And do you, Bob#s, send a bit extra in with your state taxes or only your share?
) She was so pleased with the schools and how clean everything was compared to the Atlanta area. Of course, she lives within walking distance of a casino (which she'd never patronize because they're Ungodly. Yeah, we're related, but you'd have to double-check those birth certificates to be sure...)Just in case people are thinking this is just BiT being his proudly disagreeable self, I'll back up everything he said there. And not only is it not a racial thing, but the Mexican/Latino population that I have personally encountered is more focused and better disciplined than the other racial populations. If you're wondering why I'm separating students into racial groups, it's because NCLB forces us to. And there is the growing concern about a so-called "achievement gap" which attempts to force a racial explanation onto something which is, and always has been, a socioeconomic issue. But the Hispanics and Latino populations are making bigger strides than any other group in closing the achievement gap.BackInTex wrote:Absolutely NOT the girl in the linked story, but it does point to a huge issue in public eductation. As indirectly pointed out in the story, school systems' priorities do not properly prioritize the education of the students as much as it does to receive the funding or credits for the students' attendance. Keep them in class, not to educate them, but to get paid for them.Bob78164 wrote:Like this one?BackInTex wrote:Unfortunately the metrics are simply statistics. The pools for both Texas and California are polluted with under-achieving students from under-achieving families with under-achieving cultures. Not something more money can fix. Until there is a desire to learn and achieve, we should spend our money elsewhere (or save it for later).
More seriously, I'm afraid that I know the answer to this, but just what do you mean by "polluted with under-achieving students from under-achieving families with under-achieving cultures"? --Bob
As far as what I meant by my comment? Because of No Child Left Behind and other well meaning but unrealistic programs and policies, schools can not get rid of "students" who will never learn what is being taught (or should be taught) because they don't care and their parents don't care. The parents bring the kids to school so they can get fed and they (the parents) can be free to do what they want during the day while the schools house their kids for them. You have schools (such as one my wife works at) where a relatvie few (but growing number) of students refuse to participate in the education process and are severe disruptions such as cusssing the teacher, walking in and out of the classrooms, etc. and the schools are powerless to get rid of them. There are specific rules around when you can send them to "alternativer learning" campuses, but they still get to return. These kids require an inordinant amount of monitoring and in many cases make it impossible for a single teacher to maintain control of his/her classroom. The parents are no help. When they do come to the school for meetings with the administration they pull out the discrimination & lawsuit cards. Schools can not discipline the kids, and their parents won't. Yet, they get counted and included in the testing results bringing the school scores down, and worse, bringing the effectiveness of the educational efforts by the staff down.
It is not a race thing, but a cultural thing. The culture of "I don't give a ****" and "the government owes me". Its a growing culture.
Which programs would you like to (further) cut? Under the current plan, it now takes roughly forever to get a trial date because the courts don't have enough staff. State offices (bread-and-butter offices such as the DMV) will be closing one day per week in order to reduce state employees' work weeks. We're closing a couple of hundred state parks.Flybrick wrote:One thought, radical I know, is to reprioritize who California spends its money. Put more of into schools and less into a lot of other programs.
But a review by The Associated Press of the $15 million collected since lawmakers approved the “California Memorial Scholarship Program” shows only a small fraction of the money went to scholarships. …
Millions more have been spent on budget items with little relation to direct threats of terrorism, including livestock diseases and workplace safety.
Moreover, the California Department of Motor Vehicles has been advertising the plates as helping the children of Sept. 11 victims, even though the state stopped funding the scholarship program seven years ago. The specialty plate fund continues to take in $1.5 million a year. …
If disruptive students can't be thrown out of class that's the fault of your local school district or Texas state law or both. So when are you running for school board?BackInTex wrote:Absolutely NOT the girl in the linked story, but it does point to a huge issue in public eductation. As indirectly pointed out in the story, school systems' priorities do not properly prioritize the education of the students as much as it does to receive the funding or credits for the students' attendance. Keep them in class, not to educate them, but to get paid for them.Bob78164 wrote:Like this one?BackInTex wrote:Unfortunately the metrics are simply statistics. The pools for both Texas and California are polluted with under-achieving students from under-achieving families with under-achieving cultures. Not something more money can fix. Until there is a desire to learn and achieve, we should spend our money elsewhere (or save it for later).
More seriously, I'm afraid that I know the answer to this, but just what do you mean by "polluted with under-achieving students from under-achieving families with under-achieving cultures"? --Bob
As far as what I meant by my comment? Because of No Child Left Behind and other well meaning but unrealistic programs and policies, schools can not get rid of "students" who will never learn what is being taught (or should be taught) because they don't care and their parents don't care. The parents bring the kids to school so they can get fed and they (the parents) can be free to do what they want during the day while the schools house their kids for them. You have schools (such as one my wife works at) where a relatvie few (but growing number) of students refuse to participate in the education process and are severe disruptions such as cusssing the teacher, walking in and out of the classrooms, etc. and the schools are powerless to get rid of them. There are specific rules around when you can send them to "alternativer learning" campuses, but they still get to return. These kids require an inordinant amount of monitoring and in many cases make it impossible for a single teacher to maintain control of his/her classroom. The parents are no help. When they do come to the school for meetings with the administration they pull out the discrimination & lawsuit cards. Schools can not discipline the kids, and their parents won't. Yet, they get counted and included in the testing results bringing the school scores down, and worse, bringing the effectiveness of the educational efforts by the staff down.
It is not a race thing, but a cultural thing. The culture of "I don't give a ****" and "the government owes me". Its a growing culture.
First, it's not my place as a non-Californian to state what should or shouldn't be cut. If enough of you WANT higher taxes, go for it. But your taxes are already pretty high, hence the flight of capital from the state.Bob78164 wrote:Which programs would you like to (further) cut?Flybrick wrote:One thought, radical I know, is to reprioritize who California spends its money. Put more of into schools and less into a lot of other programs.
My kids haven't had a terrible education. It was quite good. What they did not get at school, they got at home.Bob Juch wrote:It's too bad your children have had such a terrible education.
If Californians don't want their high-speed train system, why haven't they voted to cut-off funding to it?Flybrick wrote:First, it's not my place as a non-Californian to state what should or shouldn't be cut. If enough of you WANT higher taxes, go for it. But your taxes are already pretty high, hence the flight of capital from the state.Bob78164 wrote:Which programs would you like to (further) cut?Flybrick wrote:One thought, radical I know, is to reprioritize who California spends its money. Put more of into schools and less into a lot of other programs.
But, if you want a suggestion, start with the high-speed rail thing that you've dedicated how many millions of local and state dollars to? Not to mention my federal tax dollars.
A train system not wanted and not likely to be used or better schools.
Not a tough choice for me.
It always amazed me when people think that it is up to only the school system to make sure their kids get a good education.BackInTex wrote:My kids haven't had a terrible education. It was quite good. What they did not get at school, they got at home.Bob Juch wrote:It's too bad your children have had such a terrible education.
Unfortunately, for many, that's all there is, because mom and dad (if around) can't read themselves and don't care about education. Again, its a culture. One created by well meaning but wrong-headed policies that have created a permanent dependent, ignorant and apathetic demographic within the once great nation we were. Before those failed ideas came about, many of the underclass were ingnorant and under-educated, but they at least valued education and worked to ensure their offspring have greater access and opportunity.christie1111 wrote:It always amazed me when people think that it is up to only the school system to make sure their kids get a good education.BackInTex wrote:My kids haven't had a terrible education. It was quite good. What they did not get at school, they got at home.Bob Juch wrote:It's too bad your children have had such a terrible education.