tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post1710431803162677771..comments2023-10-23T09:23:22.051-04:00Comments on Your Schools: Standardized tests: Opt out or buckle down?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger114125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-88923717088671951652014-04-21T23:49:21.085-04:002014-04-21T23:49:21.085-04:00Mitchell is a geniuses, she taught for a few years...Mitchell is a geniuses, she taught for a few years, got both the Bushes and Obama's to support her. She ducked a cheating scandal. Was put in a movie support by bill gates foundation. Was on Oprah and all the talk shows. She left her children's father and married an x basketball star turned politicians. She is now it the great position of critic. Refer to Teddy Roosevelt on critics. She does the talking circuit for 45k a speech. That's more then a 13yr teacher in NC makes... Foe one speech. Say what you want, she works it. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-25550522782593341662014-04-13T22:53:01.260-04:002014-04-13T22:53:01.260-04:00China will collapse under it's own weight.. Re...China will collapse under it's own weight.. Remember we were all turning Japanese in the 80's? The Japanese are way more disciplined as the Chinese. If America goes, it will not be from the Chinese. It will be from our slow turn to socialism. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-90967358681617005502014-04-13T18:57:46.564-04:002014-04-13T18:57:46.564-04:00Larry, I think it's because I didn't post ...Larry, I think it's because I didn't post anything else all week so the regulars just "hung out" here to continue their discussion. I may have gotten slack the last few days about making sure everything got posted, but glad everyone had so much to talk about.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-55960634292841414092014-04-13T11:02:13.502-04:002014-04-13T11:02:13.502-04:00Congratulations, this has been the most discussed ...Congratulations, this has been the most discussed article written by Ann. <br /><br />Thanks to those who want to lower the lake so everyone can swim.<br /><br />And thanks to those who understand what it takes to compete in the world today.<br /><br />You both have made great points. <br /><br />Larryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07977808657926308272noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-22458914736744350992014-04-13T09:06:54.907-04:002014-04-13T09:06:54.907-04:00Friday was my last day student teaching. I welcom...Friday was my last day student teaching. I welcome the insanity. <br /><br />The Courage to Teach.<br /><br />Alicia Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-6779579539443699512014-04-12T00:06:49.375-04:002014-04-12T00:06:49.375-04:00"Rather than just sit back and cry "woe ..."Rather than just sit back and cry "woe are we" because we have the "highest" child "poverty" rate in the "developed" world.<br /><br />That's just an excuse for not performing better."<br /><br />No it is reality.<br /><br />Here is some more stark reality - all school factors account for only about 20% of student outcomes, including 9% for teachers. About 60% of students' outcomes are explained by out-of-school factors (see Goldhaber)<br /><br />In concur with what was said above - this is an external issue first and foremost. We are spinning our wheels with 'school reform' when we need economic policy reform.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-9480519830901781662014-04-11T21:36:46.424-04:002014-04-11T21:36:46.424-04:00"You're still doing the typical liberal m..."You're still doing the typical liberal move by deflecting."<br /><br />I'm not a liberal.<br /><br />"CMS sampled 3% of applicants in a widely publicized audit a few years ago and found those they DID check, 60%, did NOT qualify for the program based on the responses given."<br /><br />And just how did they "check"? If they followed the USDA protocol, it is weak. Sending out a survey, and counting those that did not return the survey as being given "improper payments", does not lead to sound conclusions.<br /><br />"Those stats are repeated constantly across the US each year in many LEAs.<br /><br />Also, it is a FACT that school districts do everything they can to get kids to sign up, knowing full well only 3% of students can be audited or they forfeit tens of millions in government money if they try to do a full audit.<br /><br />The more signed up, the more money LEAs get from Title I and other buckets of money.<br /><br />You can spin it anyway you want, but the fact of the matter is there IS widespread fraud and those committing the fraud should be prosecuted and all applicants vetted for the benefit."<br /><br />You know in Finland every kid gets a free lunch. But you're probably not interested in what they do. They have about 5% of their children in poverty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-17518920757202680662014-04-11T21:19:18.314-04:002014-04-11T21:19:18.314-04:00"Rather than just sit back and cry "woe ..."Rather than just sit back and cry "woe are we" because we have the "highest" child "poverty" rate in the "developed" world.<br /><br />That's just an excuse for not performing better.<br /><br />And we don't have to "fix" poverty before kids can learn.<br /><br />Because that means kids will NEVER learn because we'll NEVER fix "poverty".<br /><br />So Plan B better be good."<br /><br />Sheesh. If poor kids can learn so easily, then we wouldn't be having this argument.<br /><br />We've waited for two decades now for the internal solution...it isn't there, meanwhile child poverty has skyrocketed (it approached 10% in the 90's). And that's because it is not an internal problem, it is an external problem. It is a problem correlated with every indicator showing our middle class being demolished. Unions busted, jobs sent away with no prerequisite regulations, and service sector jobs prevalent. It is taking two working people at home just to maintain a static REAL median household income regardless of the fact that productivity has more than doubled since the 1970's.<br /><br />http://stateofworkingamerica.org/charts/productivity-and-real-median-family-income-growth-1947-2009/<br /><br />And we will continue to have this argument until America commits to taxing the rich (who have more money than ever since the Great Depression) for the benefit of us all...schools, roads, hospitals, etc...<br /><br />Yours is an excuse to ramrod our schools with a new 'fix' every decade, with nothing really getting fixed and a whole bunch of people profiting other than students. Although the way we are going now, there will be no public education in another decade...it will be owned by the very people we should be taxing the hound out of. They own everything else now, including our government - for their benefit. They own our jails, our 'public' works, our airports, and now they're after our schools.<br /><br />The billionaires owe America - since the 1980's they have stolen OUR money that should have been spent to educate, heal, and help the less fortunate, and most importantly, create middle class jobs for middle class communities with middle class families that send middle class kids to middle class schools that fare very well on every measure. See the Percentage Distribution of U.S. Aggregate Household Income by Income Tier, 1970 - 2010.<br /><br />http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/08/22/the-lost-decade-of-the-middle-class/<br /><br />You're one of those education reformers, and you don't speak truth. You are here to convince the public that they are not getting robbed. I am here to make sure they know you are lying.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-25336682371680439072014-04-11T20:59:05.115-04:002014-04-11T20:59:05.115-04:00"The Chinese claim it's 79.2% for academi..."The Chinese claim it's 79.2% for academic and vocational HS with 59% going to academic HS"<br /><br />That's not too good.<br /><br />Enough to surely screw with outcomes on PISA.<br /><br />And who knows if it is true anyways.<br /><br />One thing that nobody has talked about on this thread is the approach of the Asian nations...and the Chinese in particular. This is a test prep heavy approach. America has never had such an approach, and we've done just fine without it thank you very much.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-32451999989375815452014-04-11T08:04:24.187-04:002014-04-11T08:04:24.187-04:00Anon 4:22pm.
"There's other reasons why ...Anon 4:22pm.<br /><br />"There's other reasons why Shanghai is disqualified by researchers not mentioned so far here."<br /><br />Again, I don't see tons of researchers "disqualifying" Shanghai, either.<br /><br />Now, it is useful to understand the limitations of their data, and use it accordingly.<br /><br />But it doesn't make sense to "disqualify" all their data simply because you disagree with the public policy (or whatever) of a country.<br /><br />You WILL NOT find an exact mirror of the US to compare students.<br /><br />ALL countries can be "disqualified" for comparison due to some reason or the other.<br /><br />When Finland was at the top, people wanted to "disqualify" THEM because they were mostly white, middle-class, socialist kids who only had six hours of daylight in the winter.<br /><br />That was ridiculous, too.<br /><br />What you do is work with and adjust the data you have for your comparisons.<br /><br />So if you don't like the fact that Shanghai doesn't include their "immigrants", then disaggregate the data to exclude our "immigrants" (or ALL HISPANICS) and measure against our whites, blacks, and Asians.<br /><br />If you think they exclude the "poor", then exclude OUR "poor".<br /><br />If you think the country is too small, or cherrypicks its students, then compare it to one of our "best" states such as Massachusetts.<br /><br />I think the difference between the "true believers" with an agenda and ACTUAL researchers is that the researchers know how to do this.<br /><br />Whereas "true believers" just want to "discredit" what they do not agree with and learn nothing from it.<br /><br />So, anyway, have at it.<br /><br />Shamashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06886687970259841873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-56308168124598578512014-04-10T20:42:16.224-04:002014-04-10T20:42:16.224-04:00Honestly, I barely looked at the document you prov...Honestly, I barely looked at the document you provided. I have little time. For that I apologize. When I have time I will look at this more. Feel free to friend me on Facebook for better communication - or not - that is your choice.<br /><br />I will say quickly and superficially that black families have historically had much less wealth/income than white families. This wealth/income discrepancy may/may not explain why white families that qualify for f/r lunch would outscore all black students.<br /><br />http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/07/26/wealth-gaps-rise-to-record-highs-between-whites-blacks-hispanics/<br /><br />Is it possible that white students, although qualifying for f/r lunch, have more wealth and thereby more resources and wherewithal? I don't know...but just a thought.<br /><br />I will say this, you may be able to find exceptions to the golden rule in education (I have seen some exceptions at the local level analyzing state tests [in context of school versus school]), but overall it is seemingly ironclad. I call it ironclad regardless of "exceptions" because I wonder if explanations for some of those "exceptions" could explain them away if we had a fuller and more complete picture of all the variables involved.<br /><br />The bottom line is that in analyzing any standardized testing outcomes, a family's income/wealth is the most important predictor of success/failure. Other factors play a role and show correlation, but none more than income/wealth. Daniel Wydohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11694483835081529792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-60153829131712395952014-04-10T19:15:25.414-04:002014-04-10T19:15:25.414-04:00The problem with multiple-choice tests is that its...The problem with multiple-choice tests is that its impossible to accurately measure growth. I teach 3rd grade, and here's an example. Student A took the beginning of grade test and got about 25% correct (chance). Her reading level testing showed she came in around a kindergarten level. She has made OVER TWO YEARS of growth with me this year, and is now reading at an end of 2nd/beginning of 3rd grade level. However, the EOG is still going to be at a level that's too high for her, and while we may see some growth, I don't expect her to do much beyond 25% (chance guessing) again. Her MAP testing shows amazing growth, but I doubt that will be reflected on the EOG because it is nowhere near as sensitive as the MAP. What I love about MAP testing is that if the kids get a question wrong, they get an easier one, and if they get a question right, they get a harder one. Makes so much sense for kids who are starting the year way below (or way above) grade level.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-48932494270829695892014-04-10T18:28:46.831-04:002014-04-10T18:28:46.831-04:00Daniel Wydo,
Have you looked at NAEP scores using...Daniel Wydo,<br /><br />Have you looked at NAEP scores using both FRL and ethnicity?<br /><br />I've noticed that the 8th grade math scores do not fit the "poverty" explanation in that even whites who receive FRL score higher than all blacks.<br /><br />Including those who are too "rich" for FRL.<br /><br />Have you seen that?<br /><br />http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2009455.pdf<br /><br />See Figure 8., page 11.<br /><br />It's one of the reasons I say that I doubt that "poverty" is the problem.<br /><br />At least not as far as the black/ white "performance gap" goes.<br /><br />Of course, they don't come right out and say this in the paper, but it's rather obvious from the graphs....<br /><br /><br />Shamashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06886687970259841873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-66816767815173413482014-04-10T17:27:20.039-04:002014-04-10T17:27:20.039-04:00Daniel Wydo,
Yeah, the ESCS is just another way o...Daniel Wydo,<br /><br />Yeah, the ESCS is just another way of measuring poverty. <br /><br />There are probably hundreds out there, making the whole "poverty" issue murky as people can pick and choose how they want to present their poverty claims.<br /><br />The post I put out showing Singapore's high level of "relative" poverty, even higher than the US is an example.<br /><br />I've been to Singapore, too, and you don't see people starving in the streets or lepers begging because they don't have the kind of "poverty" that even Thailand or Vietnam does.<br /><br />And, yet, by "relative" poverty measures, Thailand and Vietnam look better than Singapore.<br /><br />(I know where I'd rather be living as "poor", though, given a choice.)<br /><br />This is mostly due to income inequality (such as what the gini index measures).<br /><br />The income inequity issue is a slightly different one from poverty.<br /><br />People seem to forget we are talking about statistical measures where things like income distribution matter and can skew the impressions.<br /><br />Put a millionaire in a room full of billionaires and by "relative" poverty measures, he is disadvantaged and considered "poor".<br /><br />Put someone who makes $1500 a year in a room full of people where the median income is $1000 a year and he's "rich".<br /><br />Shamashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06886687970259841873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-28695925828067877582014-04-10T17:10:36.011-04:002014-04-10T17:10:36.011-04:00Anon 4:22pm.
Well, I did mention the hukou and im...Anon 4:22pm.<br /><br />Well, I did mention the hukou and immigrant issues in Beijing and Shanghai several times to account for the "missing kids" in that erroneous claim of only 30% of Shanghai or Chinese kids going to high school.<br /><br />Here's more up to date info:<br /><br />Hacking at the hukou:<br /><br />http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/796880.shtml#.U0cIAM_D-70<br /><br />I don't really think the Shanghai issue makes a real difference in the point I was trying to make about "resilience"., anyway.<br /><br />It is only one datapoint.<br /><br />And there are a dozen or more other examples.<br /><br />(Including some non-Asian countries like Poland.)<br /><br />But I think Shanghai is trying to clean up their act and is one place where China is trying to implement a lot of education reform. China tends to try to get things right in one place before spreading to other areas.<br /><br />Regardless of PISA and what they (or pretty much anyone else) say about China, China is going to do what they think is best anyway.<br /><br />(Plenty of articles on that, too, that I won't bother to reference.)<br /><br />One thing I have noticed in my 15 years or so of watching China develop (since my first visit) is that they often do amazing things once they set their minds to it.<br /><br />Something we could learn from as well.<br /><br />One thing is for certain, though.<br /><br />Shanghai will not become another Detroit anytime soon.<br /><br />And you cannot use data from 2, 5 or 10 years ago (much less 30, as some Ravitch blog readers have done) to analyze Shanghai or China today.<br /><br /><br />Shamashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06886687970259841873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-39270805300882190892014-04-10T16:22:59.204-04:002014-04-10T16:22:59.204-04:00There's other reasons why Shanghai is disquali...There's other reasons why Shanghai is disqualified by researchers not mentioned so far here.<br /><br />http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/brown-center-chalkboard/posts/2014/01/08-shanghai-pisa-loveless<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-29938098129550033052014-04-10T15:54:33.063-04:002014-04-10T15:54:33.063-04:00Somebody commented that the ECSC is absolutely mea...Somebody commented that the ECSC is absolutely meaningless.<br /><br />I disagree, at least to some extent.<br /><br />In fact, I think that the ECSC within the PISA, contains parallel information about SES as does the other standardized tests mentioned and argued about in this thread (NAEP, TIMSS, PISA, etc...)<br /><br />http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/series/2543/PISA_2006/29012/8<br /><br />The outcomes of using the PISA index is very similar to what we see universally on any standardized test.<br /><br />Another interesting ECSC feature is that you can look at different SES within the same country. You can see me do that in the work I posted on Ravitch's site that I linked to above. In the U.S., based on the PISA ECSC scale, our poor kids performed horribly while our middle and upper class did well.<br /><br />Some (like Amanda Ripley) argue that our middle class and upper class kids don't do as well in the U.S. compared to other countries based on the ECSC. The problem with this approach is that the U.S. has a very high wage inequality index (Gini coefficient), and other negative economic attributes not shared proportionally (or at all) by other countries), that can make this analysis difficult to accept.<br /><br />There are some in this thread that are completely excusing the ECSC as a source of trustworthy data compared to UNICEF or other poverty related measurements.<br /><br />If it's up to me, relative poverty from UNICEF, or otherwise, is probably going to be more trustworthy, BUT that doesn't completely discount PISA ECSC data.<br /><br />And as far as saying that researchers avoid it like the plague...I find that to not be true in the research I carry out.Daniel Wydohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11694483835081529792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-11227702051715109862014-04-10T12:45:19.807-04:002014-04-10T12:45:19.807-04:00Anon 1:22am...
"This is utterly sickening!&q...Anon 1:22am...<br /><br />"This is utterly sickening!"<br /><br />It's also Wikipedia and a bit out of date.<br /><br />BTW I found a claim about only 30 percent of Chinese going to HS from a comment in Diane Ravitch's blog, maybe that's where you saw it.<br /><br />So, when in doubt, go to the source of the misinformation I always say...<br /><br />Whatever.<br /><br />The Chinese claim it's 79.2% for academic and vocational HS with 59% going to academic HS (according to this OECD report):<br /><br />http://www.oecd.org/countries/hongkongchina/46581016.pdf<br /><br />"Official statistics (for 2009) show<br />a net enrolment of 99.4% at the primary school level, the envy of many countries. The gross enrolment ratio for<br />junior secondary school was 99%.7 In the same year, gross enrolment at senior secondary level, both general and<br />vocational, was 79.2%. The general (i.e. academic) senior secondary schools enroll 52.5% of students at this level,<br />putting about half of senior high school students in the academic stream (Figure 3.1)."<br /><br />The above report is the comparison between HK and Shanghai I mentioned before.<br /><br />Worth a quick read, I think.Shamashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06886687970259841873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-52344773086922100492014-04-10T10:53:49.115-04:002014-04-10T10:53:49.115-04:00Anon 8:17pm.
"Of course we know that the po...Anon 8:17pm.<br /><br /> "Of course we know that the poorest kids in the USA perform at the lowest level."<br /><br />Yep. In the US, that's largely true (there are exceptions among various racial/ethnic groups, but I'll spare everyone THAT for now...)<br /><br />I largely agree with what you're saying. Maybe you're saying it in a nicer way than I do, though.<br /><br />Our "relative poverty" is not the same as the "relative poverty" in other countries.<br /><br />And many countries do not have as serious of a problem with low academic performance from their "poor" (however measured, and whatever percentage of their population).<br /><br />I think we can and should learn from them.<br /><br />Rather than just sit back and cry "woe are we" because we have the "highest" child "poverty" rate in the "developed" world.<br /><br />That's just an excuse for not performing better. <br /><br />And we don't have to "fix" poverty before kids can learn.<br /><br />Because that means kids will NEVER learn because we'll NEVER fix "poverty".<br /><br />So Plan B better be good.<br /><br /><br />Shamashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06886687970259841873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-65159924255150410992014-04-10T10:46:34.274-04:002014-04-10T10:46:34.274-04:00OECD 'debunks myth' that poor will fail at...OECD 'debunks myth' that poor will fail at school<br /><br />http://www.bbc.com/news/education-26015532<br /><br />"Mr Schleicher, who runs the tests, says the high results of deprived pupils in some Asian countries shows what poor pupils in the UK could achieve."<br /><br />--------------<br /><br />Actually, I think this would be seen as good news for the "poor".<br /><br />That zipcode and SES is NOT destiny.<br /><br />Yet, I seem to get so much resistance from the "poverty excuse" crowd.<br /><br />And they probably aren't going to fix "poverty" anyway, so why not just fix the schools?<br /><br />Or the parents and students?<br /><br />Shamashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06886687970259841873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-81272153340083893742014-04-10T10:33:40.877-04:002014-04-10T10:33:40.877-04:00Yes, even more information on "poverty"....Yes, even more information on "poverty"...<br /><br />Comparing "relative" poverty between countries can result in some very interesting results because of the definition.<br /><br />For example:<br /><br />Singapore's relative poverty rate is HIGHER than the US.<br /><br />http://thehearttruths.com/2013/10/28/poverty-in-singapore-grew-from-16-in-2002-to-28-in-2013/<br /><br />See Chart 10 showing Singapore with higher "relative" poverty than the US.<br /><br />But, they're also one of those countries whose students do well.<br /><br />(And Singapore is not Shanghai or even part of China).<br /><br /><br />See Chart 9 showing Singapore with higher "relative" poverty than even Vietnam and Indonesia.<br /><br />H'mm. <br /><br />LOWER POVERTY IN VIETNAM AND INDONESIA THAN IN SINGAPORE AND THE US?<br /><br />Yes, in "relative" terms because both Vietnam and Indonesia are much poorer ON AVERAGE and have a lower median income (and less disparity between their "rich" and "poor"...)<br /><br />Because they're almost ALL mostly poor.<br />Shamashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06886687970259841873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-40660867521919546062014-04-10T10:22:44.841-04:002014-04-10T10:22:44.841-04:00Anon 1:22am.
Ah, now I see. The zhongkao test.
...Anon 1:22am.<br /><br />Ah, now I see. The zhongkao test.<br /><br />OK, my bad for not reading this before the other post.<br /><br />Yep. China only guarantees nine years as I said earlier. <br /><br />What you posted there makes sense and is a good reason to skewer the Shanghai PISA test results.<br /><br />But, as you (or someone noted), Shanghai isn't China and it's their first foray into PISA and China is noted for trying to put their best foot forward on such things.<br /><br />But I'm aware of most of those problems, including the migrant children education (hukou issues), etc., etc., etc.<br /><br />However, Shanghai is only one example out of the list of 15 places with higher resilience among their poor than the US.<br /><br />(So exclude Shanghai, even though they are doing some GOOD things regarding their allocation of teachers there.)<br /><br />The other dozen or more resilient countries not all Asian, either.<br /><br />Poland is another example where poverty doesn't mean poor performance as much as in the US.<br /><br />And here's that list again.<br /><br />http://www.ncee.org/2013/12/statistic-of-the-month-resilient-students-in-pisa-2012/<br /><br /><br /><br /> <br /><br />Shamashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06886687970259841873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-18978055245430394492014-04-10T09:53:55.374-04:002014-04-10T09:53:55.374-04:00Anon 1:29am.
"Yeah, I'll say - like losi...Anon 1:29am.<br /><br />"Yeah, I'll say - like losing 60% of their students between middle and high school based on ONE test."<br /><br />I see you keep switching your problems (and focus) regarding China.<br /><br />Again, sources would be nice.<br /><br />(And a bit less of the ridiculous gratuitous insults which don't substitute for facts.)<br /><br />Which one test are you talking about?<br /><br />Is it the Gaokao? If not, then be more specific.<br /><br />If so, do you know when the kids take the Gaokao?<br /><br />(Since you seem to have problems keeping track of your links...)<br /><br />One thing is true, though. China does only claim to educate the majority of their children 9 years, not 12.<br /><br />However, I'd be willing to bet that a Chinese student in Shanghai with 9 years education learns more than the typical CMS graduate with 12 years.<br /><br />So, it's not just seat-time that matters.<br /><br />Though that is likely to get you a HS diploma in CMS and accepted into a local community college, it's not likely to get you into any college in China.Shamashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06886687970259841873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-9359226956507697632014-04-10T09:46:43.753-04:002014-04-10T09:46:43.753-04:00Anon 1:20-ish am...
I said...
"In absolute ...Anon 1:20-ish am...<br /><br />I said...<br /><br />"In absolute terms, poverty in the US is not as bad as it is in most other parts of the world."<br /><br />You said:<br /><br />"Wrong again. You are on a roll. You are talking in terms of absolute poverty."<br /><br />You REALLY have your head up a dark and smelly place, don't you?<br /><br />Helsinki is NOT "most other parts of the world"<br /><br />Try reading what I wrote again. <br /><br />Very carefully. During daylight.<br /><br />The rest of the world also includes Africa. Surely you know how poor Africa can get. <br /><br />Think Ethiopia. Flies, extended bellies on small children, etc., etc.<br /><br /><br /><br />------------<br /><br /><br />I don't think you've ever been outside the US much, so have no idea what you're talking about when comparing "poverty".<br /><br />Relative "poverty" is defined as 1/2 the median income for a country.<br /><br />That's a huge difference between a place like Vietnam and the US.<br /><br />Vietnam has LESS "relative" poverty than the US, but that's because Vietnam as a whole is much poorer than the US.<br /><br />So, there simply aren't as many people living BELOW their ALREADY LOW MEDIAN INCOME.<br /><br />It's simple math.<br /><br />On a more personal level.<br /><br />Poverty in the US means riding the bus to a properly heated and air-conditioned school and getting a Free or Reduced Lunch for the most part.<br /><br />Poverty in places like Thailand or Vietnam means attending a school for leper children to learn how to paint village scenes for tourists using a pen attached to your stubby hand with tape because you have no fingers.<br /><br />Poverty in Ethiopia means much worse.<br /><br />Of course, Diane Ravitch wants to compare "poverty" in DEVELOPED (and mostly Western) countries because it's really not so bad.<br /><br />And safely excludes all the Asian countries which do better with much less than we do.<br /><br />The poor in the vast majority of Asian countries (which do take the PISA) are more "resilient" than in the US.<br /><br />And even countries with higher relative poverty do better than we do in that regard.<br /><br />Their "poor" even by their own countries terms do not let "poverty" prevent them from doing better in school.<br /><br />(I'll post the info on Singapore next...)<br /><br />Much better than in the US.<br /><br />So, "relative" poverty aside, our kids just don't cut it.<br /><br />Shamashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06886687970259841873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4020455191286536580.post-51392960240400301592014-04-10T09:29:37.061-04:002014-04-10T09:29:37.061-04:0012:36
You're still doing the typical liberal ...12:36<br /><br />You're still doing the typical liberal move by deflecting.<br /><br />CMS sampled 3% of applicants in a widely publicized audit a few years ago and found those they DID check, 60%, did NOT qualify for the program based on the responses given.<br /><br />Those stats are repeated constantly across the US each year in many LEAs.<br /><br />Also, it is a FACT that school districts do everything they can to get kids to sign up, knowing full well only 3% of students can be audited or they forfeit tens of millions in government money if they try to do a full audit.<br /><br />The more signed up, the more money LEAs get from Title I and other buckets of money.<br /><br />You can spin it anyway you want, but the fact of the matter is there IS widespread fraud and those committing the fraud should be prosecuted and all applicants vetted for the benefit.Wiley Coyotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16966764080565903720noreply@blogger.com