What The Left Has Done To Our Schools...

[guacamole]

Don’t understand why this is hard to get...

[lilpixieofterror]

Sanders wasn't talking about vice principal positions.

I wasn’t aware a school’s non teaching staff was simply vice principals. Non teaching staff has increased by a far greater percentage than teaching staff has.

Why wouldn't schools be primarily ran by whatever political affiliation is most represented in the district? Is there evidence otherwise?

Did you not read the links Seer provided? I suggest you go and look at the National teaching unions at what political party they give to. Almost all of them are democrats at the national level with around 50,000 to Republicans and millions to Democrats. The teaching unions are heavy democrat supporters. Just follow the money and see where it goes if you don’t believe me.

[Psychic Missile]

I wasn’t aware a school’s non teaching staff was simply vice principals. Non teaching staff has increased by a far greater percentage than teaching staff has.

Your first sentence misses my point, your second sentence is something we have already established. The plan is simply not relevant unless you have any evidence that Sanders specifically mentioned jobs at schools.

Did you not read the links Seer provided? I suggest you go and look at the National teaching unions at what political party they give to. Almost all of them are democrats at the national level with around 50,000 to Republicans and millions to Democrats. The teaching unions are heavy democrat supporters. Just follow the money and see where it goes if you don’t believe me.

Does a minority group of teachers have much of a say in how dues are used for political donations?

[lilpixieofterror]

Your first sentence misses my point, your second sentence is something we have already established. The plan is simply not relevant unless you have any evidence that Sanders specifically mentioned jobs at schools.

So the government isn’t running schools? Interesting...

Does a minority group of teachers have much of a say in how dues are used for political donations?

Doesn’t matter. What matters is who is in charge and the decisions they make. They mainly choose to support democrats and choose to listen to democrats.

[Sparko]

People taking the test in the beginning would be self-selecting. Then, after taking the test becomes normalized and expected, people who wouldn't take it otherwise do so because of social convention. In other words, the test becoming more popular means more average and low-achieving students take it.

So you are saying that more students who take it now are uneducated?

[rogue06]

While it is true that schools have been pushing all students to take the SAT -- including those who have no intention of attending college or couldn't make it if they did, this was true several decades ago when I was in school. And yet the scores keep dropping.

[Sparko]

While it is true that schools have been pushing all students to take the SAT -- including those who have no intention of attending college or couldn't make it if they did, this was true several decades ago when I was in school. And yet the scores keep dropping.

yep. everyone in my class took the SAT or ACT (forget which but I think it was the ACT) and that was in 1979.

And if students are all getting a quality education from the government run schools then the scores should not have dropped.

[guacamole]

While it is true that schools have been pushing all students to take the SAT -- including those who have no intention of attending college or couldn't make it if they did, this was true several decades ago when I was in school. And yet the scores keep dropping.

yep. everyone in my class took the SAT or ACT (forget which but I think it was the ACT) and that was in 1979.

And if students are all getting a quality education from the government run schools then the scores should not have dropped.

SAT scores have been statistically flat since 1976. See page 3. https://reports.collegeboard.org/pdf...group-2016.pdf

As have the NAEP scores, since 1971. See pages 1 and 2. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_cnj.pdf

And the ACT scores, since 1971. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d98/d98t135.asp

Relative ranking compared to other industrialized nations is another thing entirely.

[rogue06]

SAT scores have been statistically flat since 1976. See page 3. https://reports.collegeboard.org/pdf...group-2016.pdf

As have the NAEP scores, since 1971. See pages 1 and 2. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_cnj.pdf

And the ACT scores, since 1971. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d98/d98t135.asp

Relative ranking compared to other industrialized nations is another thing entirely.

Does that take into account their "re-norming" (downward) that took place back in 1996?

00000000000000ars7.jpg

Could it be that they have fallen back to what the numbers were back before they were artificially raised and therefore gives an illusion of being "statistically flat since 1976"?

[guacamole]

Does that take into account their "re-norming" (downward) that took place back in 1996?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]27638[/ATTACH]

Could it be that they have fallen back to what the numbers were back before they were artificially raised and therefore gives an illusion of being "statistically flat since 1976"?

The were flat before the re-norming--the scores dropped from the early days when it was a test for college bound kids going to elite universities. The big "bounce" there with the "re-norming" isn't flat. I'd be willing to hear specific ideas what was changed in the "re-norming" and explaining how it affected scores. "They dumbed it down" isn't a specific idea.

In any case, the flatness of NAEP and ACT scores tend to support the idea that much hasn't changed.

[Super Cow]

Your twisted way of seeing things is always amusing, Starlight.

He has a cool cat though.

[Psychic Missile]

So the government isn’t running schools? Interesting...

Even if you don't intend to do it, your posting is indistinguishable from trolling. If aren't trying to troll, you should not be making bad-faith assumptions about opinions you are opposed to, otherwise you are just arguing against your own imagination.

Doesn’t matter. What matters is who is in charge and the decisions they make. They mainly choose to support democrats and choose to listen to democrats.

Teacher unions are certainly a strong force, but I don't see how they have most of the power in matters of curriculum. They are only strong in the face of employment issues like firings or salary. Curriculum change tends to come from elected government officials.

[Psychic Missile]

So you are saying that more students who take it now are uneducated?

Yes, compared to the 60s. The change happened mostly in the 70s.

[Sparko]

Yes, compared to the 60s. The change happened mostly in the 70s.

Then you just agreed with Seer.

[Psychic Missile]

Then you just agreed with Seer.

Seer's argument is that the score decline is caused by a general scholastic decline, whereas my argument is that the score decline was caused by the inclusion of lower-performing students, so no.