Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 84

Thread: National Teacher of the Year: 'The revolution begins with us'

  1. #61
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,566
    Quote Originally Posted by OCCH View Post
    Just checking -- if school was lengthened to 12 months, would that imply a pay raise for educators, or would that be their "reasonable service" for what they already receive?

    I've heard a lot of extrapolating teacher's pay over 12 months, and it's not usually mentioned in a positive light so I was wondering what the jury thought . . .
    As a supporter of year-round schooling, I would expect base pay (and base pay only) to increase for teachers, as a natural effect of the policy. That IMO would be extra tax worth paying.

    As it currently stands, the demand for teachers is far less than the supply. I would expect that you'd see less people enter (or stay) in the profession without the benefit of summers off. And that's just another positive side effect: you'd keep the teachers in circulation that do the job for the right reasons, and weed out the ones who do it for the wrong ones. No one can honestly tell me there isn't a percentage of people who got into that profession first and foremost for the 9 month work schedule.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by JetPotato View Post
    As a supporter of year-round schooling, I would expect base pay (and base pay only) to increase for teachers, as a natural effect of the policy. That IMO would be extra tax worth paying.

    As it currently stands, the demand for teachers is far less than the supply. I would expect that you'd see less people enter (or stay) in the profession without the benefit of summers off. And that's just another positive side effect: you'd keep the teachers in circulation that do the job for the right reasons, and weed out the ones who do it for the wrong ones. No one can honestly tell me there isn't a percentage of people who got into that profession first and foremost for the 9 month work schedule.
    I've advocated year-round schooling for years. It's a practical step in improving the quality of education through increased exposure. However, I disagree that there is some significant percentage of folks who entered the profession of teaching to have summers off. If increasing the school year had a negative effect on teacher recruitment, I would assume it to be a negligible one.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by JetPotato View Post
    As a supporter of year-round schooling, I would expect base pay (and base pay only) to increase for teachers, as a natural effect of the policy. That IMO would be extra tax worth paying.

    As it currently stands, the demand for teachers is far less than the supply. I would expect that you'd see less people enter (or stay) in the profession without the benefit of summers off. And that's just another positive side effect: you'd keep the teachers in circulation that do the job for the right reasons, and weed out the ones who do it for the wrong ones. No one can honestly tell me there isn't a percentage of people who got into that profession first and foremost for the 9 month work schedule.
    Agree across the board.

  4. #64
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,566
    Quote Originally Posted by finlee17 View Post
    I've advocated year-round schooling for years. It's a practical step in improving the quality of education through increased exposure. However, I disagree that there is some significant percentage of folks who entered the profession of teaching to have summers off. If increasing the school year had a negative effect on teacher recruitment, I would assume it to be a negligible one.
    I don't know what that percentage is, but given the small sample size of those I know personally, it's not insignificant. That said, if it prevents even one person from entering this important field for the wrong reason, it's a win.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    You continue to reinforce why tax payers should have less say in how to run classrooms. Have you ever observed kids behaviors when they have too much on their plate? They act out, they are violent, they give up, they sleep, they bother others who want to learn, etc. DO you realize that these are kids we are talking about? Year round school for them? They would be burned out by June and eventually drop out. Most kids are burned out way before then. You are not a professional (thankfully), we already have kids under NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND dropping out in record numbers. Typical right winged response, more, more, and more when it comes to school. Please leave it to the professionals
    Hmmm . . . seems like the data disagrees:

    Effects on Students

    Attitudes

    Several different studies have been conducted to learn more about the attitudes of students who attend year-round schools. The majority of these studies show that students’ attitudes towards school did significantly increase as they spent more time on a year-round schedule[8]. Students who attend year-round school say that their calendar is more balanced than their peers who have a typical school calendar[9]
    Academic Performance

    Students who attend year-round schools typically do as well as or slightly better in school than their peers who attend a traditionally scheduled school[8] .
    At-risk students are those who come from a low-income family, have a disability, are of an ethnic minority, or are influenced by something else that may cause them to perform poorly in school. In 1994, a study of three year-round schools showed a substantial gain in academic achievement for at-risk, low performing students. More frequent, short breaks provide struggling students more time for help[10]. These breaks can be used for remedial courses, tutoring, and enrichment, if needed[9].
    The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction researched the achievement differences between year-round and traditional-calendar using data from more than 345,000 North public schools. It was found that student achievement in year-round schools was statistically the same as it was in traditional schools. Another study compared the mathematics performance of 44 students in 5th and 6th grades on a year-round track with that of 40 students on a traditional track in the same school, which found no achievement gap.[1]
    A study conducted by the Ohio State University found that, over the course of a full year, students showed no significant improvement in reading and math scores in year-round schools compared to those students whose were in schools that followed the traditional academic calendar. Year-round schools do not add more school days to the 180 standard academic calendar. The total number of school days and vacation days remains unchanged, but instead is distributed throughout the year. Thus, students are not gaining more instructional days. [1]
    The state of California’s Department of Education claims that year-round schools’ third-graders had an average increase of 9.5% on standardized tests and 13.3% in reading scores[9] .
    Smarter students would have the ability to graduate faster by being enrolled during their vacation times to allow for lessons [7] . Class sizes are reduced, creating better learning environments [7] . Another plus for students is that instead of failing an entire year of school, a student would only fail 45 days on a 45-15 plan, making it so that the student doesn’t fall behind as much as a traditional school calendar [4].
    Effect on Teachers and Administration

    Studies show that even though around 50% of parents are in favor of the year-round schedule before it is implemented, almost 80% are in favor of it after the first year[8]. Parents and families are able to still arrange daycare as well as vacations. The year round schedule provides more opportunities for family vacations. This schedule can also save families money because they are able to take vacations during off-peak times[9] . Teachers would also be able to increase their income by teaching days of class on their vacations [4] [3] [11] . Some teachers also favor Year-Round School, because they can have flexible contracts, as in different vacation times [7] .
    Costs

    Communities would save on costs since buildings that normally go unused for 2-3 months of the year would be put to use and old buildings would be closed to save costs [7] . Less text books and equipment would be required, since fewer students would be attending at any point in time [7] . The same idea applies to teachers, being that with fewer students in school fewer teachers are needed for the smaller student population [7] .
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year-round_school

    BTW, has the professional who posted the claims about the impact of year-round schooling actually researched the issue, or were you shooting from the hip? Because "I'm a professional" is only a useful qualification if that means you actually put your professional skills to use in connection with the particular question. "I have a teaching degree and experience in a non-year round classroom" doesn't give you any particular automatic insight into this issue (as the depth of your wrongness on it demonstrates quite emphatically).

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by OCCH View Post
    Just checking -- if school was lengthened to 12 months, would that imply a pay raise for educators, or would that be their "reasonable service" for what they already receive?

    I've heard a lot of extrapolating teacher's pay over 12 months, and it's not usually mentioned in a positive light so I was wondering what the jury thought . . .
    Depends on whether the number of teaching days increased, or whether the breaks were simply spread out more. I'd expect a combination of both - meaning salaries would increase proportionally to the increase in teaching days

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    Depends on whether the number of teaching days increased, or whether the breaks were simply spread out more. I'd expect a combination of both - meaning salaries would increase proportionally to the increase in teaching days
    Not if some taxpayers get any say in the matter. They are already compensated quite well for a full year's worth of labor, despite have almost 3 full months off at current. This is a core portion of the argument on education, that a teacher paid $65,000/year isn't, because he's not working a year, he's working 9 months.

    Moving to year-round would correct this problem, this overcompensation, and bring teachign in line with almost every other professional job. Would also make comparative analysis of total compensation much easier to correctly gauge the value (to the taxpayers) of teachers and their compensation packages.

  8. #68
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,336
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...nd-fatter.html

    How Summer Is Making U.S. Kids Dumber and Fatter

    It’s July, and for many of us, that brings back fond childhood memories of family vacations, summer camp or long, happy days spent playing with friends. But this quaint notion of summers as a kids’ paradise is dangerously misleading, evidence from social research suggests.

    After spending the summer away from the classroom, children return to school one month or more, on average, behind where they were when the previous year ended. Kids also tend to put on weight in the summer two to three times faster than they do during the school year.

    To put it unkindly, the average child becomes dumber and fatter during the vacation. And although there’s no need to declare war on summer, there’s plenty we could do to combat the seasonal learning loss and weight gain.

    Consider, first, the evidence for the summer fade effect. Taken together, a variety of studies indicate that students’ academic skills atrophy during the summer months by an amount equivalent to what they learn in a third of a school year, according to a review by Harris Cooper, a professor of education at Duke University, and several co-authors.

    This deterioration, furthermore, varies substantially by income and race, and its impact persists even past childhood. Barbara Heyns, a sociologist at New York University who studied Atlanta schoolchildren in the late 1970s, found that although academic gains during the school year were not substantially correlated with income, summer decline was.

    Subsequent studies have replicated the finding. Karl Alexander, Doris Entwisle and Linda Olson of Johns Hopkins University, for example, found that the summer fade can largely explain why the gap in skills between children on either side of the socioeconomic divide widens as students progress through elementary school. Children from all backgrounds learn at similar rates during the school year, but each summer students of high socioeconomic status continue to learn while those of low socioeconomic status fall behind.

    The impact is felt even years later. The learning differences that begin in grade school “substantially account” for differences by socioeconomic status in high-school graduation rates and in four-year college attendance, Alexander and his co-authors report.

    The summer increase in children’s body-mass index has also been measured. In one study, Paul T. von Hippel, a sociologist then at Ohio State University, and his co-authors found that the average monthly gain in BMI for students moving from kindergarten to first grade was two to three times as fast during the summer as during either of the adjoining academic years. And the children most prone to obesity were most likely to put on additional weight during the summer.

    So what can we do to fight summer learning loss and weight gain and restore the season’s halcyon reputation?

    Let’s start with the most ambitious option: lengthening the school year. I have written previously about the benefit of extending the hours of the school day. A similar argument applies to extending the academic year: More time at task helps children learn, and it would be worth the extra expense involved.

    (I can already hear the groans from some teachers -- even if the prospect of a longer school year would mean higher salaries. Having grown up in an academic family, I appreciate the benefits of the summer break, but in fairness few other professions get three months off.)

    The second option is an idea proposed several years ago by Alan Krueger, now the chairman of President Barack Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, and Molly Fifer, then a graduate student in economics at Princeton University: Offer students in kindergarten through fifth grade who qualify for free meals through the National School Lunch Program the opportunity to participate in a six-week summer enrichment program that would be focused on small-group instruction. Krueger and Fifer estimated that such a program would cost less than $2,000 per student. If the federal government paid half, the cost to U.S. taxpayers would be about $2 billion a year, and the benefits would be worth much more.

    Some educators are not waiting for the federal government to act -- which appears to be wise, given the inertia in a polarized Washington. For example, the National Summer Learning Association, with private funding, recently began a three-year “Smarter Summers” initiative in 10 cities, aimed at providing high-quality summer instruction for 20,000 students.

    The third and least ambitious option is to provide voluntary summer reading programs for students of low socioeconomic status. A randomized experiment conducted by James Kim of Harvard University and Thomas White of the University of Virginia showed that students developed better reading skills when they were provided with books during the summer and encouragement from teachers before the break began.

    A voluntary summer reading program need not be expensive. Yet it’s not enough to merely give children books; encouragement from teachers and parents is also crucial. And for some students, even that may not be sufficient; in another study, Kim and Jonathan Guryan, then at the University of Chicago, found that a reading program for low-income, Spanish-speaking Latino children provided no measurable benefit in reading comprehension or vocabulary.

    July should be a time of activity -- for children and for lawmakers. When Congress finally gets around to considering the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, it should include an aggressive program to reverse summer learning loss. Don’t bet on Congress fulfilling that assignment this year, but we should hold them to it before school is out for the summer of 2013.


    (Peter Orszag is vice chairman of global banking at Citigroup Inc. and a former director of the Office of Management and Budget in the Obama administration. The opinions expressed are his own.)
    Read more opinion online from Bloomberg View. Subscribe to receive a daily e-mail highlighting new View editorials, columns and op-ed articles.
    Today’s highlights: the editors on the amorality of banks and ineffectual regulators, on the need for a tougher Syria policy and on Republicans’ campaign-finance betrayal; Margaret Carlson on politics as class warfare; Clive Crook on destructive capitalism-bashing; Nell Minow on why letting CEOs lead their own boards is like letting students grade their own exams.

  9. #69
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,566
    And the evidence keeps pouring in...

    LOL

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by JetPotato View Post
    And the evidence keeps pouring in...

    LOL
    Yes it does...........

    http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012...dardized-tests
    New report casts doubt on school improvement
    BEN CHAPMAN
    Thursday, July 12, 2012

    Mayor Bloomberg often boasts that his administration has boosted student scores on state exams, but a new analysis from the Independent Budget Office shows that the vast majority of kids - 70% - haven’t improved at all.

    In its bombshell report, the IBO, for the first time, is zeroing in on the scores of individual students to see how they progressed over time.

    This is in contrast to the traditional method of looking at test scores, which measures how all the kids in a grade perform on a test compared to the previous year.

    The budget office analysts looked at reading scores for 46,400 students who started third grade in 2005 and found that, three years later, nearly 62% were at the same proficiency level in sixth grade as they had been in third.

    That means kids who got low scores in third grade — a 1 or a 2 on the test — were still getting a 1 or 2 in later years.

    Another 8% of kids lost ground, dropping down at least one level.

    Just over 30% of the students tracked by the IBO showed improvement.

    The study is a slap at the Bloomberg administration, which claims that ten years of reforms have improved city schools.

    City officials disputed the findings of the report because the state’s standardized tests are not designed to be compared from one year to the next.

    “As we explained to the IBO, their research is invalid,” said schools spokeswoman Jessica Scaperotti. “Testing experts know that performance levels on New York State tests cannot be compared from grade to grade without additional analysis, which this study failed to complete or consider. We are surprised the IBO would issue results with this fundamental flaw.”

    The state uses a different scale for each exam and says progress cannot be measured from year to year without additional controls.

    The report, authored by testing consultant Fred Smith, acknowledged the shortcomings of its approach.

    Smith conceded that students who earn the same score from one grade to the next may have “actually improved, declined, or stayed the same.”

    But Smith says his report can provide a “context to the public” in the debate about student scores.

    Smith looked at 2005-2008 in part because it’s impossible to compare older scores to more recent ones. The state raised the bar for passing the exams in 2010 after years of rising scores.

    bchapman@nydailynews.com
    Teacher's are forced to comply to BLOOMBERG's teaching polices. Forced to teach HIS way or be threatened with an UNSATISFACTORY grade. This included students teaching each other in groups ONLY where the teacher acts as a "facilitator" and as we all know, tons and tons of testing at the expense of phys ed, music, social studies, science, and art.

    Where is HIS accountability?

  11. #71
    Real unbiased website you got this from..........

    I would add that school is currently run year round. My school and many other PS in NYC currently opened for students who want to learn. There are free summer programs for kids in PS all throughout summer. It already exists.

    But we know that this is not the real issue. Its not about kids. It is an attack on the teachers from the group that caused this current economic downfall to deflect the real issue.

    Lets also agree that school should be all year round in the classroom setting with little regards for kids being burnt out and all but eliminate children having quality time with family. Lets try to convince kids that there is no reward for their work during the school year. That there is no end to the school year. See how that goes over for students who struggle. See how little they will cooperate. Lets try and convince students that can no longer be kids. I'm sure it will work just fine Lets stress them out even more with so much evidence that standardized tests are not improving at all.

    Are tax payers ready to put more money into school budgets? Pay for more resources? Purchase air conditioning units for every single classroom for July and August's dangerous heat? Pay for the electric in classrooms in August and July? Pay all those kids breakfast and lunch? Increase principal, assistant principal, dean, teacher pay for added month's of work?

  12. #72
    I am not for year round school.
    Why? Burnout. Plus, children have a long life ahead of them. Why beat them up from age 5-18. They will have enough on their shoulders from 18-67+.

    The education environment needs to change. Perhaps school goes 9 1/2 months rather than 9. Why were I and my contempoaries successful with the system? Why were my children? System. Plus parents.
    Separate good students from the losers. Totally different curriculum. Basic skills for all. Winner curriculum for winners. And winners only. The lesser group get good basic ad life skills.
    Art, music and phys ed for all. If it all could be fit in once it can all be fit in now.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    Yes it does...........

    http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012...dardized-tests


    Teacher's are forced to comply to BLOOMBERG's teaching polices. Forced to teach HIS way or be threatened with an UNSATISFACTORY grade. This included students teaching each other in groups ONLY where the teacher acts as a "facilitator" and as we all know, tons and tons of testing at the expense of phys ed, music, social studies, science, and art.

    Where is HIS accountability?

    Seems to me you may want to change districts.
    Perhaps consider South Carolina. Good weather plus we don't have unions. That's not a problem is it?

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    I am not for year round school.
    Why? Burnout. Plus, children have a long life ahead of them. Why beat them up from age 5-18. They will have enough on their shoulders from 18-67+.

    The education environment needs to change. Perhaps school goes 9 1/2 months rather than 9. Why were I and my contempoaries successful with the system? Why were my children? System. Plus parents.
    Separate good students from the losers. Totally different curriculum. Basic skills for all. Winner curriculum for winners. And winners only. The lesser group get good basic ad life skills.
    Art, music and phys ed for all. If it all could be fit in once it can all be fit in now.
    How would you argue the examples of kids that do not shine immediately?

    Albert Einstien did not speak until he was nine years old and Bill Gates dropped out of college.

    In your school system they would be "losers."

    Also, what determines whether or not a child is a "loser" in your book? What criteria would you use? Do you honestly believe that parents would accept a score from an exam determining whether or not their child will sent to a school for "losers?"...........

  15. #75
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,566
    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    Real unbiased website you got this from..........

    I would add that school is currently run year round. My school and many other PS in NYC currently opened for students who want to learn. There are free summer programs for kids in PS all throughout summer. It already exists.
    First of all, you keep talking about NYC schools as if those are the only ones that exist in this country.

    Second, get a clue. Optional summer programs in no way equate to the mandatory regular school year.

    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    But we know that this is not the real issue. Its not about kids. It is an attack on the teachers from the group that caused this current economic downfall to deflect the real issue.
    It is about kids. The overwhelming body of evidence shows it helps kids. How is this an attack on teachers? Unless you obviously see that your time off is a big priority?

    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    Lets also agree that school should be all year round in the classroom setting with little regards for kids being burnt out and all but eliminate children having quality time with family.
    This is laughable. You're willing to ignore all evidence that year round schooling would benefit a majority of students, but hang your hat on your own speculation that it might hurt a handful. Can you just be honest for a second and admit you can't bear to see a disturbance of your sitting on the beach for 13 weeks?

    Tell me, what quality time would my kids lose with me in summer, when I'm at work the same amount of time during that season that I am the rest of the year?

    If anything, this gives us more flexibility in planning time off. Besides, didn't your buddy Pelosi recently say we need to provide working families more opportunity for child care?

    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    Lets try to convince kids that there is no reward for their work during the school year.
    Sure. I'd rather my kids learn that their reward is an education base that they'll need for employment later in life like I did. Summers off is not a reward. I again encourage you to actually learn something about your own profession. Historically, summers off were originally granted so that children could be put to work on their farm.

    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    That there is no end to the school year.
    Good life lesson. There's no end to the work year either. Unless you're a teacher of course.

    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    See how that goes over for students who struggle. See how little they will cooperate. Lets try and convince students that can no longer be kids. I'm sure it will work just fine Lets stress them out even more with so much evidence that standardized tests are not improving at all.
    LOL.

    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    Are tax payers ready to put more money into school budgets? Pay for more resources? Purchase air conditioning units for every single classroom for July and August's dangerous heat? Pay for the electric in classrooms in August and July? Pay all those kids breakfast and lunch? Increase principal, assistant principal, dean, teacher pay for added month's of work?
    I'm ready. I'll pony up more cash to improve my kids' education. Hell, I'll throw even more in, knowing that union schills like yourself will probably get out of the business altogether once we revoke your yearly beach pass. We need teachers that care about our kids, not their vacations.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    Seems to me you may want to change districts.
    Perhaps consider South Carolina. Good weather plus we don't have unions. That's not a problem is it?
    Change districts? Oh, so you mean "run away" from an existing problem in our school system? Run away from the children who need it the most? Why doesnt every educators who teaches in challenging areas do the same? Just run away! If every educator took your advice, who will teach the children in challenging areas? Who will teach the less fortunate? Who would have taught people like Albert Einstien who didnt speak until he was nine years old? Or students like Bill Gates who struggled in school and even dropped out? But I forgot, the right doesnt care about those people at first. Only after they are wealthy.

    Yeah, there's a mature way to deal with a problem that faces our nation, just run away, quick fix. Typical of the response to our school system by many who are on the outside looking in.

    Wouldn't I be considered one of those teachers who doesnt care about their students, you know, the ones the right is so desperately trying to fire if I took your advice?

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    Teacher's are forced to comply to BLOOMBERG's teaching polices. Forced to teach HIS way or be threatened with an UNSATISFACTORY grade.
    Wait.

    What?????

    Employees are forced to comply to their EMPLOYERS work polices?

    Forced to teach their EMPLOYERS WAY or be threatened with an UNSATISFACTORY grade????

    UNHEARD OF UNPOSSIBILLITY!!!!!!!

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    Yes it does...........

    http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012...dardized-tests


    Teacher's are forced to comply to BLOOMBERG's teaching polices. Forced to teach HIS way or be threatened with an UNSATISFACTORY grade. This included students teaching each other in groups ONLY where the teacher acts as a "facilitator" and as we all know, tons and tons of testing at the expense of phys ed, music, social studies, science, and art.

    Where is HIS accountability?
    Did you even read the report you are quoting?

    “As we explained to the IBO, their research is invalid,” said schools spokeswoman Jessica Scaperotti. “Testing experts know that performance levels on New York State tests cannot be compared from grade to grade without additional analysis, which this study failed to complete or consider. We are surprised the IBO would issue results with this fundamental flaw.”

    The state uses a different scale for each exam and says progress cannot be measured from year to year without additional controls.

    The report, authored by testing consultant Fred Smith, acknowledged the shortcomings of its approach.

    Smith conceded that students who earn the same score from one grade to the next may have “actually improved, declined, or stayed the same.”
    So . . .

    They checked to see how many kids got the same, better, or worse scores from year to year;

    They acknowledge that getting the same score from year to year doesn't tell you anything at all about whether the students have "actually improved, declined, or stayed the same";

    They report that 62% of kids "got the same score";

    And you conclude that meant they "stayed the same"?

    I hope you don't teach reading comprehension or logic.

  19. #79
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,071
    Schooling is pointless as long as stupid people are still allowed to procreate.

    Stop the dumb from f*cking.

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    How would you argue the examples of kids that do not shine immediately?

    Albert Einstien did not speak until he was nine years old and Bill Gates dropped out of college.

    In your school system they would be "losers."

    Also, what determines whether or not a child is a "loser" in your book? What criteria would you use? Do you honestly believe that parents would accept a score from an exam determining whether or not their child will sent to a school for "losers?"...........

    Work hard and CLAW your way back into the system. Sort of puts a little pressure on mommy and daddy. That's a good thing.
    So Gates dropped oit. Did that hurt him? Sort of makes my point doesn't it. Same with Albert. They WANTED to get it done and DID.
    What I just demonstrated is the use of LOGIC. I find too many fancy eductors do not have the ability to use logic. Too much time being liberal shills.
    As to determining who has it and who doesn't. Tests.
    And BTW, poor performance by too many kids = bye bye inferior teacher.

    And yes parents will accept test scores putting their kids in a specific program. Worked well in my day. And my kids.
    What do you think they do in Europe? And before you try to use BS, I have a fairly good understanding of how it works over there since I worked with international business people in a couple of my companies.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us