Education in this country

jcandy

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Care to interpret this data Jcandy?

Yeah, you have built-up aggression that you can't really express in person so you do it via the internet.

steveinaz

Better money=better neighborhood=more revenue=better paid, higher quality teachers=better educated kids.

You could probably show similar chart/curve in the justice system. More money = better lawyer. Sad, but nonetheless the reality of things.

These are the elements that should "spark" someone into wanting a better life, and working hard to get it.

LessisNevermore

jcandy wrote: »

Yeah, you have built-up aggression that you can't really express in person so you do it via the internet.

{snicker}

drselect

jcandy wrote: »

My bad. I should stop talking about climate. Here's some data that shows how parent's income affects school performance:



Anyone care to interpret the data?

Finally back on topic

Ok here are a couple of interpretations of the data:

Companies should be forced to pay all employs at least $200,000 and if someone isn't working than the government should pay them $200,000 so that children get a better test score.

No one getting paid less than $200,000 should be allowed to have children.

jcandy

drselect wrote: »

Finally back on topic

Ok here are a couple of interpretations of the data:

Companies should be forced to pay all employs at least $200,000 and if someone isn't working than the government should pay them $200,000 so that children get a better test score.

No one getting paid less than $200,000 should be allowed to have children.

I'll give a further interpretation: its bogus. I have a feeling (unproven speculation) that the actual data do not look like this. From a probabilistic POV, it seems unlikely that the data would be monotonic and non-intersecting like that. I'll look more closely at the source.

mrbigbluelight

inspiredsports wrote: »

Not to start a big argument, BUT . . . my wife has been teaching since 1980 and I have been to hundreds of events, get-togethers, partys, weddings, funerals, baptisms, etc. with her co-teachers.

The NUMBER ONE REASON teachers join the union is THEY ARE STRONG-ARMED, RIDICULED, TIRE SLASHED, THREATENED, ABUSED, UNDERMINED IN THE CLASSROOM, etc., etc. and TREATED LIKE LEPERS if they don't join the union on DAY ONE of starting a new teaching job.

If I may inquire, for which of those reasons did your wife join the Union ?

mrbigbluelight

Demiurge wrote: »

Finally, teachers in Wisconsin will rise through the ranks based on the merits of their work, not the length of time they've spent at their job. Finally, students in Wisconsin will get an education from the most effective teachers and won't have to put up with the worst.

Ah, what a great day!

Yes, Plato and the "gennaion pseudos", or "Noble Lie", shall spring forth and unite the people of the United States ! We shall all revel in the implimentation of the Virtuos Right !!


.... guess there might be a little commotion, though, as The Golds determine who shall get to designated as Silvers, and who shall be designated as Bronze/Irons. I, and teachers everywhere, bow down to the Wisdom of our Lords and Masters who shall wisely determine our status.


Well, being as I'm entertaining myself (and seemingly off-topic), here's a link for a book ("Dante's Equation) that one might read while waiting to be designated:

http://books.google.com/books?id=q9GTYY0tlikC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Dante's+Equation&hl=en&src=bmrr&ei=boF5Ta6CH4SArQHF6fiRBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

nooshinjohn

jcandy wrote: »

Yeah, you have built-up aggression that you can't really express in person so you do it via the internet.

How can a person with a PHd get it so wrong? No anger or agression in my post whatsoever. It was meant as a joke, admittedly at your expense, given your propensity for using charts and graphs to make your point. Ross Perot has nothing on you in that department...

My point was that all the fancy charts and data you point to is all fine and good in your world of pointy headed elitist snobs, but in the real world where most of us live, we use something called common sense. Those with advanced degrees and no social skills may not comprehend common sense until it bites them in the a$$.

jcandy

nooshinjohn wrote: »

How can a person with a PHd get it so wrong? No anger or agression in my post whatsoever. It was meant as a joke, admittedly at your expense, given your propensity for using charts and graphs to make your point. Ross Perot has nothing on you in that department...

My point was that all the fancy charts and data you point to is all fine and good in your world of pointy headed elitist snobs, but in the real world where most of us live, we use something called common sense. Those with advanced degrees and no social skills may not comprehend common sense until it bites them in the a$$.

Just keep telling yourself that.

Pycroft

steveinaz wrote: »

Better money=better neighborhood=more revenue=better paid, higher quality teachers=better educated kids.

You could probably show similar chart/curve in the justice system. More money = better lawyer. Sad, but nonetheless the reality of things.

These are the elements that should "spark" someone into wanting a better life, and working hard to get it.

I don't believe this at all. I'm not convinced that there are better teachers in these schools, just better students. What makes the students better? Support from home. Money helps (Tutors, more personal educational tools such as books for pleasure, learning games, etc.). But, I think if you took every student from a disadvantaged school and move them to a "Better school" and vice versa, you would have relatively the same results. I said it like 6 pages ago - parents have more of an affect on education, and teachers can't do everything.

Pycroft

Demiurge wrote: »

Finally, teachers in Wisconsin will rise through the ranks based on the merits of their work, not the length of time they've spent at their job. Finally, students in Wisconsin will get an education from the most effective teachers and won't have to put up with the worst.

Ah, what a great day!

I'm not going to go back to what I said many pages ago, but if you care to read, you may discover that there is no way (That I or anyone here has thought of) to pay teachers based on the merits of their work. How do you determine that? Same question with no answer...but of course, it will be ignored by those in Wisconsin and others that believe that education is a business.

James

inspiredsports

markmarc wrote: »

Then I feel honestly very sorry for your wife, Inspired. Your example is just as anecdotal as mine. Maybe it's the part of the country you live in as compared to me. Out west, maybe unions don't seem to have the kind of ridiculous bully tactics where I've taught. It's fair to say that Ohio, being a part of the industrialized rust belt has a long history of heavy-handed union activism. Unfortunately, it has spilled over, that is a pathetic commentary on the organization your wife deals with.

As for accessing the professional liability insurance, actually it's getting very difficult, and the rates are quite obscene compared to what the NEA charges.

Maybe Ohio isn't that different from most states when it comes to union activity, whereas many parts of "out west" (especially California), are basically la-la land. Do teachers with medical marijuana prescriptions in Cally even realize they are in a union?

inspiredsports

jcandy wrote: »

No, but powering hydrogen fuel cells with energy generated by fusion reactors will. You could finance the design and contruction of these reactors by adding a penny to the cost of a gallon of gas.

Just use the dollar per gallon they are already taking then.

Federal tax revenues over the past 30 years have exceeded the profits made by the oil compamies themselves. Who's gouging who? and why haven't those dollars already funded the alternate sources if it only required the 1%portion of this you cite?

nooshinjohn

inspiredsports wrote: »

Just use the dollar per gallon they are already taking then.

Federal tax revenues over the past 30 years have exceeded the profits made by the oil compamies themselves. Who's gouging who? and why haven't those dollars already funded the alternate sources if it only required the 1%portion of this you cite?

...This is 100% accurate. Thanks for bringing that up. I would also ask why these funds aren't being used for their intended purpose, which was to build and then maintain the roadways. It is just another scam fed to the American people under the guise of allowing the government to take care of something for us, just give us a little bit of your spare change.

Epic FAIL on us for trusting that same old line of BS..... Not another penny in taxes am I willing to pay for ANY REASON, until the gov figures out a way to live well within it's means. By that, I mean paying off, not down or interest, OFF the nation's debt. Maybe Jcandy can interpret this chart for us, and tell us how we aren't spending enough already....

Demiurge

Pycroft wrote: »

I'm not going to go back to what I said many pages ago, but if you care to read, you may discover that there is no way (That I or anyone here has thought of) to pay teachers based on the merits of their work. How do you determine that? Same question with no answer...but of course, it will be ignored by those in Wisconsin and others that believe that education is a business.

James

How many times do we have to answer your question? If you don't like the answer I gave you on numerous occasions -- fine, but please don't act like I haven't indulged you with an answer, because I have.

The entities known as schools are a business. They are a business that provides a crucial service paid for by the community or its members, depending on the circumstance. With the service they are providing, poor conduits of the service to the students are a detriment to the consumer (students) and the shareholder (parents/community). They're a negative reflection on the business. Running a business and not having a mechanism in place to remove to underperforming or detrimental parts of the operation is an exercise in insanity.

You can keep asking questions and ignoring the answer, but one thing is for certain -- the status quo isn't producing good results. I don't see you offering solutions.

jcandy

nooshinjohn wrote: »

...This is 100% accurate. Thanks for bringing that up. I would also ask why these funds aren't being used for their intended purpose, which was to build and then maintain the roadways. It is just another scam fed to the American people under the guise of allowing the government to take care of something for us, just give us a little bit of your spare change.

Epic FAIL on us for trusting that same old line of BS..... Not another penny in taxes am I willing to pay for ANY REASON, until the gov figures out a way to live well within it's means. By that, I mean paying off, not down or interest, OFF the nation's debt. Maybe Jcandy can interpret this chart for us, and tell us how we aren't spending enough already....

ROTFLMOA!!!

Exactly what time machine was used to gather data from 2011 to 2035?

How about a plot of actual EXISTING data:

schwarcw

You forgot Barack Obama who has increased the debt by 30% in his first year.

nooshinjohn

jcandy wrote: »

ROTFLMOA!!!

Exactly what time machine was used to gather data from 2011 to 2035?

How about a plot of actual EXISTING data:

Why then is it ok to extrapolate the future with your favorite subject, Global Warming? Data does not exist for that yet either now does it, so you use other means to make calculations, like past indicators to predict future events. The same logic applies with the chart I posted. Interesting how your choice injects politics into the matter. Since you did so, do you not find it at all troubling that there is no data shown for the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? I guess that would ring too close to being "Inconveniant Truth"...:rolleyes:

inspiredsports

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Why then is it ok to extrapolate the future with your favorite subject, Global Warming? Data does not exist for that yet either now does it, so you use other means to make calculations, like past indicators to predict future events. The same logic applies with the chart I posted. Interesting how your choice injects politics into the matter. Since you did so, do you not find it at all troubling that there is no data shown for the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? I guess that would ring too close to being "Inconveniant Truth"...:rolleyes:

:biggrin:

tonyb

Pycroft wrote: »

I'm not going to go back to what I said many pages ago, but if you care to read, you may discover that there is no way (That I or anyone here has thought of) to pay teachers based on the merits of their work. How do you determine that? Same question with no answer...but of course, it will be ignored by those in Wisconsin and others that believe that education is a business.

James

If you believe there is no way to pay teachers based on the merit of their work....fine, then we shall pay them all the same then ? And who gets to decide that ? The teachers ? Or the taxpayers who's money it is ?

Sounds more like an excuse for having to be held accountable for some kind of results. So if I get this right, let me re-cap.
Teachers, not all mind you, want a gauranteed job with no worries of being fired, gauranteed pay and benefits, with no accountability as to job performance. Is that pretty much it ? If so, the rest of America is telling you the party's over.
As a teacher, I'm giving you an opportunity to come up with a plan to gage your own industry on merit, and all I hear is it can't be done. Would you rather have someone with no experience as a teacher decide pay scales ? Because that will happen if teachers refuse to give any alternatives.

jcandy

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Why then is it ok to extrapolate the future with your favorite subject, Global Warming?

For the same reason it is OK to extrapolate the positions of the planets into the future -- because they satisfy deterministic (differential) equations of motion. The evolution of the climate satisfies a set of equations.

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Data does not exist for that yet either now does it, so you use other means to make calculations, like past indicators to predict future events. The same logic applies with the chart I posted

Except that you cannot reliably predict this sort of thing because its based on variables which we have no deterministic model for.

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Interesting how your choice injects politics into the matter. Since you did so, do you not find it at all troubling that there is no data shown for the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? I guess that would ring too close to being "Inconveniant Truth"...:rolleyes:

If you can find a plot with that data I'd be fine with it and in fact much prefer it to the current plot. I am neither Republican nor Democrat, and know that Obama is in fact a friend of Wall Street.

jcandy

schwarcw wrote: »

You forgot Barack Obama who has increased the debt by 30% in his first year.

I know. If you can find the plot please post it. And then tell me what part of these massive debts are driven by education costs.

tonyb

jcandy wrote: »

Except that you cannot reliably predict this sort of thing because its based on variables which we have no deterministic model for.

Really ?? God knows, climate has no variables eh ?
Do you have climate data for the year 1380 ? How about 1776 ?
You cannot reliably predict the climate decades out when we can't reliably predict it one week out. And why is that ? Too many variables that can change it. Most of which are beyond our control. But you would have us laypeople believe if we just sent you more of our money, just gave you more control over our economy, that somehow we would all be saved from a terrible fate ? LOL !! Talk about snake oil....:biggrin:

Here's a quote from one of your favorite organizations, the IPCC,

(EDENHOFER): First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore,

jcandy

As a fraction of GDP (or in US dollars) teacher salaries are reasonable-to-low:



Actual costs on the other hand are rather high (comparable to Switzerland, where schools are extremely good):

jcandy

tonyb wrote: »

Really ?? God knows, climate has no variables eh ?
Do you have climate data for the year 1380 ? How about 1776 ?
You cannot reliably predict the climate decades out when we can't reliably predict it one week out.

Your absolutely profound ignorance about how climate modeling works does not have any bearing on its validity. We can predict climate, and those predictions all show mean temperature increasing with anthropogenic CO2. What other physics calculations, in your expert opinion, can't we do?

F1nut

It never ceases to amaze me how some supposedly intelligent people can be so completely and utterly clueless.

jcandy

F1nut wrote: »

It never ceases to amaze me how some supposedly intelligent people can be so completely and utterly clueless.

What amazes me is your post count.

nooshinjohn

jcandy wrote: »

For the same reason it is OK to extrapolate the positions of the planets into the future -- because they satisfy deterministic (differential) equations of motion. The evolution of the climate satisfies a set of equations...

If that's the case, tell me what the climate will be like on my birthday 5 years from now... I was born on July 15th.:rolleyes:

jcandy wrote: »

Except that you cannot reliably predict this sort of thing because its based on variables which we have no deterministic model for....

It's called following the money. If the current path is followed, climate change will be the least of our worries....BTW, was it not called global warming before. I guess when the scientists figured out GW was a complete sham, they changed the name... another "Inconveniant Truth" for ya!

jcandy wrote: »

If you can find a plot with that data I'd be fine with it and in fact much prefer it to the current plot. I am neither Republican nor Democrat, and know that Obama is in fact a friend of Wall Street
....

I am a Constitutionalist and have no agenda but the truth. Mr O is a friend of whomever will put major money in his pocket, just like every other politician. The difference with this guy is that if you don't give him the cash, he will bribe, extort and steal it from you, just ask BP. And before you go there citing all the environmental damage done, I agree it was a mess and BP is responsible for it. It is the way they went about seizing assets of the company I have trouble with. Not to mention that the planet cleaned up most of the spill all by herself.

mdaudioguy

nooshinjohn wrote: »

If that's the case, tell me what the climate will be like on my birthday 5 years from now... I was born on July 15th.:rolleyes:

The climate? In 5 years, I'm hoping not significantly different than today's! Now, the weather, I'm not so sure about that...

BlueFox

It never ceases to amaze me how some supposedly intelligent people can be so completely and utterly clueless.

Yes, and it never ceases to amaze me how the stupid people know everything about politics, economics, science, etc., and always have a simple Tom Clancy answer for the most complex of issues. :eek: