Are our children learning?

[Drachmar]

I'm a sophomore in high school, and I don't know if this is just Florida, or other states too, but in Florida, school grades are based upon how well the sophomore class does on the FCAT. That past week, we had a class meeting in the auditorium, where they tried to encourage us to do well on the test this year, and these were the numbers they threw out.
Last year, roughly 25% of last years sophomores, this years juniors, passed the reading FCAT. My class passed it last year with roughly 40%, and they called that a good passing rate. That about knocked me out right there. I fear that the day our generation takes over, this country is well and truly fucked.

To much intertoobs, nawt enuff cheezburgers...Srsly. Reeding skillz r necessry, nawt lolcat speak.

No seriously, that shit is bad! I mean, if you can't read effectively by the time you're out of high school, how the hell are you going to survive college?

[Takaram]

I'm a sophomore in high school, and I don't know if this is just Florida, or other states too, but in Florida, school grades are based upon how well the sophomore class does on the FCAT. That past week, we had a class meeting in the auditorium, where they tried to encourage us to do well on the test this year, and these were the numbers they threw out.
Last year, roughly 25% of last years sophomores, this years juniors, passed the reading FCAT. My class passed it last year with roughly 40%, and they called that a good passing rate. That about knocked me out right there. I fear that the day our generation takes over, this country is well and truly fucked.

I think it's all years, not just sophomores, as elementary and middle schools are also graded.

No, when grading high schools, the sophomore class is the one that they look at. You either have to make a three or higher, or at least improve your score from last year in order to positively affect the schools grade. Having a grade lower than three and not improving from your freshman year's grade takes points away. Right now, my school is a D school, as are many in my county. Like I said, I'm afraid.

[Linux and the X]

I'm a sophomore in high school, and I don't know if this is just Florida, or other states too, but in Florida, school grades are based upon how well the sophomore class does on the FCAT. That past week, we had a class meeting in the auditorium, where they tried to encourage us to do well on the test this year, and these were the numbers they threw out.
Last year, roughly 25% of last years sophomores, this years juniors, passed the reading FCAT. My class passed it last year with roughly 40%, and they called that a good passing rate. That about knocked me out right there. I fear that the day our generation takes over, this country is well and truly fucked.

I think it's all years, not just sophomores, as elementary and middle schools are also graded.

No, when grading high schools, the sophomore class is the one that they look at. You either have to make a three or higher, or at least improve your score from last year in order to positively affect the schools grade. Having a grade lower than three and not improving from your freshman year's grade takes points away. Right now, my school is a D school, as are many in my county. Like I said, I'm afraid.

All I know is my last high school gave the previous year's freshmen credit for bringing up the grade last year.

[Takaram]

I'm a sophomore in high school, and I don't know if this is just Florida, or other states too, but in Florida, school grades are based upon how well the sophomore class does on the FCAT. That past week, we had a class meeting in the auditorium, where they tried to encourage us to do well on the test this year, and these were the numbers they threw out.
Last year, roughly 25% of last years sophomores, this years juniors, passed the reading FCAT. My class passed it last year with roughly 40%, and they called that a good passing rate. That about knocked me out right there. I fear that the day our generation takes over, this country is well and truly fucked.

I think it's all years, not just sophomores, as elementary and middle schools are also graded.

No, when grading high schools, the sophomore class is the one that they look at. You either have to make a three or higher, or at least improve your score from last year in order to positively affect the schools grade. Having a grade lower than three and not improving from your freshman year's grade takes points away. Right now, my school is a D school, as are many in my county. Like I said, I'm afraid.

All I know is my last high school gave the previous year's freshmen credit for bringing up the grade last year.

Where is that school?

[Czardas]

You can't make that comparison because there is no established voucher system with a track record to compare with. Therefore, your argument amounts to "Let's not fix the system we have. Instead let's replace it with some made up stuff that has never been tested and run it along a business model that we know has an extensive record of finacial malfeasance, waste and failure. We'll just claim that THIS TIME it'll work. No, really."

Meanwhile, by the way, you ignore the reason why we have a public education system in the first place, which is because the privately funded schools in days of yore did not get the job done. Education was striated by class, with the poor left with less or no service while the rich benefitted freely.

Um, you realize that that's exactly what's going on now, right?

Because public education sucks so much, almost everyone who can afford it uses the much higher quality private education. Hence, only the lower classes use public schools, while higher quality education is available only to the upper classes. Except for a small number of public schools with "gifted" or "advanced placement" programs, there's not really any way for the poor to better themselves -- especially in poorer school districts where people are too economically depressed to move elsewhere.

In a public school system, a neglected school district will remain neglected indefinitely, until a state legislator starts throwing money at it (and even that may not solve the problem). Private industry will avoid the district because the inhabitants will generally be unable to pay for a private education. Without the public school system, in a system of private schools and government vouchers + loans, private schools can open even in economically depressed areas, because they will still be able to make a profit from students attending; create jobs (due to competition); et cetera.

In this country, as in most other modern nations, this was considered an undesirable condition for both practical and moral reasons. Unless you are willing to abandon the idea of education as a universal benefit to society, then your argument in favor of private education is weak.

Education is a universal benefit to society; but good education is only available in school districts that receive a lot of money from the government -- private and public schools alike, since no private school will open in a neglected school district because those districts tend to be home to the poorest people, the ones not capable of paying for a private education.

Yes, I anticipate that you will claim that vouchers would make such a system egalitarian, but you have no evidence that this would be true, while we do have a history of unequal private education to compare public education with.

You seem to be missing the point. Private education is unequal to public education because of the public education system itself, as I explained. (USA only, I'm not sure about elsewhere.)

[Greed and Death]

Let us adopt the Finnish model of education.

[NERVUN]

You know, of course, the reason why these schools are rubbish is because they're run by the government, and no amount of funding will solve this problem; they'll keep functioning no matter how badly they perform, because they don't have worry about things like bankruptcy like the private sector does.

Yeah, because the private sector contains no examples of people not having to worry about bankruptcy or failure just because they run their businesses like shit, drive them into the ground, and/or loot the coffers of their own companies like a bunch of pirates, but still get to go on to their next ransacking with multi-million dollar bonuses.

Well, yeah. Since there's a chance something could go wrong with private sector schools, we should dismiss the idea outright, while continuing to advocate for public sector schools even though they could go wrong just as badly. Makes perfect sense, by my standards.

Well, yeah. Since there's a chance something could go wrong with public sector schools, we should dismiss the idea outright, while continuing to advocate for private sector schools even though they could go wrong just as badly. Makes perfect sense, by your standards.

Well, no. Something is wrong with public schools. Compare the quality of your average public school with that of your average private school in the USA. Getting rid of the public school system altogether, and replacing the money spent on it with money spent on giving vouchers for poor students to attend private schools, would be obviously beneficial. Unless you're trying to argue that reality isn't really happening or something.

Is that what you're calling your argument?

I always love the whole private schools are teh better because it ignores a number of issues including the selectiveness of private schools (Meaning ESL, IEP, Sec 504, and other undesirable children can be written off and just not accepted, unlike public schools who have to take everyone), the issue of parental involvement (Which has been shown to have profound impact on student achievement, and of course most parents who are paying for their child's education are the kind to be more actively involved), plus the fact that current studies have shown that once in college there is very little difference between a private schooled student and a public schooled one in long term performance at university, and of course reach. When you can show me that going private will cover all the kids currently covered and solve the problem of Gerlach, Nevada, then we can talk. Otherwise YOU are the one ignoring reality.

[NERVUN]

In a public school system, a neglected school district will remain neglected indefinitely, until a state legislator starts throwing money at it (and even that may not solve the problem). Private industry will avoid the district because the inhabitants will generally be unable to pay for a private education. Without the public school system, in a system of private schools and government vouchers + loans, private schools can open even in economically depressed areas, because they will still be able to make a profit from students attending; create jobs (due to competition); et cetera.

ah yes, the magic free market fairy that will make these schools magically appear, even though, as we've seen with, say, supermarkets, that's not the case at all. And again, how do you solve Gerlach, Nevada?

[Czardas]

Is that what you're calling your argument?

I always love the whole private schools are teh better because it ignores a number of issues including the selectiveness of private schools (Meaning ESL, IEP, Sec 504, and other undesirable children can be written off and just not accepted, unlike public schools who have to take everyone),

Yes, that is part of the reason why private schools are better. One could force private schools to accept anyone who has a government voucher, of course, so that even the "undesirable" students would get an education.

the issue of parental involvement (Which has been shown to have profound impact on student achievement, and of course most parents who are paying for their child's education are the kind to be more actively involved),

Not particularly relevant.

plus the fact that current studies have shown that once in college there is very little difference between a private schooled student and a public schooled one in long term performance at university, and of course reach.

Yes, but private schooled students perform better than public schooled students in all levels of schooling up to university.

When you can show me that going private will cover all the kids currently covered and solve the problem of Gerlach, Nevada, then we can talk. Otherwise YOU are the one ignoring reality.

I don't know what's happening in Gerlach, Nevada. I do, however, see no reason why a nationwide system of private schools (with no government intervention except for sponsorship of poorer students) would not be capable of covering everyone. After all, private schools want to have more students, since they'll make more money from it. Doesn't matter much to them whether that money comes from the families or from the government.

In a public school system, a neglected school district will remain neglected indefinitely, until a state legislator starts throwing money at it (and even that may not solve the problem). Private industry will avoid the district because the inhabitants will generally be unable to pay for a private education. Without the public school system, in a system of private schools and government vouchers + loans, private schools can open even in economically depressed areas, because they will still be able to make a profit from students attending; create jobs (due to competition); et cetera.

ah yes, the magic free market fairy that will make these schools magically appear, even though, as we've seen with, say, supermarkets, that's not the case at all. And again, how do you solve Gerlach, Nevada?

There already are schools in neglected school districts. Just sell those schools to private companies. This isn't hard.

[NERVUN]

Is that what you're calling your argument?

I always love the whole private schools are teh better because it ignores a number of issues including the selectiveness of private schools (Meaning ESL, IEP, Sec 504, and other undesirable children can be written off and just not accepted, unlike public schools who have to take everyone),

Yes, that is part of the reason why private schools are better. One could force private schools to accept anyone who has a government voucher, of course, so that even the "undesirable" students would get an education.

Oh good. So you're going to make a private company conform to public rules, which does what then? Oh yeah, make the "private schools" public.

the issue of parental involvement (Which has been shown to have profound impact on student achievement, and of course most parents who are paying for their child's education are the kind to be more actively involved),

Not particularly relevant.

Very, very relevant. You're stating that private schools out perform public ones. The issue of parental involvement is one of the reasons that they do. Again, if you made private schools take everyone with the different levels of parental involvement, they turn into public schools. so, in other words, you don't actually fix anything.

plus the fact that current studies have shown that once in college there is very little difference between a private schooled student and a public schooled one in long term performance at university, and of course reach.

Yes, but private schooled students perform better than public schooled students in all levels of schooling up to university.

On standardized tests, yes. In terms of performance of those students when they get into university, there is no real difference between a privately educated student and a publicly educated one. So, what, exactly, are you measuring and why? We're already agreed that part of the reason why private schools perform so well is because they can pick and choose which students to admit while public schools cannot. So in terms of a standardized test arrangement, you have a race between the US Olympic track team and everyone else. Apples or oranges in other words. In terms of actual performance by students who have then gone into higher ed, there is no real difference at the end, so... what?

When you can show me that going private will cover all the kids currently covered and solve the problem of Gerlach, Nevada, then we can talk. Otherwise YOU are the one ignoring reality.

I don't know what's happening in Gerlach, Nevada. I do, however, see no reason why a nationwide system of private schools (with no government intervention except for sponsorship of poorer students) would not be capable of covering everyone. After all, private schools want to have more students, since they'll make more money from it. Doesn't matter much to them whether that money comes from the families or from the government.

Gerlach, Nevada is a mining town in Northern Nevada on the edge of the Black Rock Desert. The nearest city is Reno, about 4 or so hours away, on a good day (You wouldn't want to drive that road on a bad day). It has no grocery store, just a gas station with a small convenience store, a casino (This is Nevada), a post office, and a rail junction. It, however, also has a school because Gerlach serves the surrounding mines and ranches. Said school has about 50 kids, it's a combined school going from elementary to high school and graduates less than 10 students each year. You want to seriously tell me that a town with nothing else in it is going to attract a national chain of schools (Given that there is NO other national ANYTHING beyond Union Pacific in that town) to set up shop?

Please do so, because I could use a nice laugh.

That is the value of public schools, they DO educate EVERYONE EVERYWHERE. McDonald's, which is probably the most widespread chain in the world doesn't have a store in every town in America, but there's a school.

In a public school system, a neglected school district will remain neglected indefinitely, until a state legislator starts throwing money at it (and even that may not solve the problem). Private industry will avoid the district because the inhabitants will generally be unable to pay for a private education. Without the public school system, in a system of private schools and government vouchers + loans, private schools can open even in economically depressed areas, because they will still be able to make a profit from students attending; create jobs (due to competition); et cetera.

ah yes, the magic free market fairy that will make these schools magically appear, even though, as we've seen with, say, supermarkets, that's not the case at all. And again, how do you solve Gerlach, Nevada?

There already are schools in neglected school districts. Just sell those schools to private companies. This isn't hard.

Do you have any buyers? There are already buildings for those supermarkets in those towns, other chains are not moving in either. The magical free market fairy won't just suddenly make buyers appear.

[RRichland]

Only one in four public high school students can name the first President of the United States according to a new study commissioned by the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs.

I bet they all can tell you the name of the guy that rode the dinosaur to work every day.

[Taeshan]

Only one in four public high school students can name the first President of the United States according to a new study commissioned by the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs.

I bet they all can tell you the name of the guy that rode the dinosaur to work every day.

Washington, WTF?

[Almajoya]

I've seen the citizenship test. I doubt that *I* could pass it.

My mom passed it.

Just FYI, they only ask about 30 questions.

[New Manvir]

Here's a immigration test with the tougher questions:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13442226/

I would have to study for most of them (is not an American).

60% correct.

Not an American with 90%

[Chrobalta]

100% on the MSNBC test

[Conserative Morality]

Here's a immigration test with the tougher questions:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13442226/

I would have to study for most of them (is not an American).

60% correct.

90% correct, and I'm an American. Should have been 95 if not for a stupid mistake.

[Smunkeeville]

I would really like to know which school district they tested in Oklahoma. It really differs. Our schools are funded primarily by property taxes. In an inner city school you get like 3% of the students testing "on grade level or above" while in a boutique district (one of the many school districts within the city that are basically community districts) you can get upwards to 98% testing "on grade level or above".

The fact is probably 90% of the students that graduated with me in high school are functionally illiterate or worse. Like I said it depends on the district. The high school I graduated from no longer seeks or receives federal funding due to their inability to turn out good test scores. The students there have no other school choice and most of them (over 80%) live below the poverty level. There isn't money for the school, if there were it probably still wouldn't matter as these kids are so ruined by the time they make it to high school success is nearly impossible.

FWIW, my kid can answer all the questions they talked about in the video, and she got 85% on the msnbc test (she was unclear about who can declare war, how many supreme court justices we have and what form you're supposed to fill out to immigrate.....she's 6)

[Zizies]

I personally believe our children are the stupid peoples because they say poopoos like such as the Iraq kids with no maps and South Africa.
-Miss Teen USA South Carolina 2007.

[Muravyets]

Failing a citizenship test doesn't necessarily mean that children are stupid overall. Many of them could be more inclined to math or science, and find history to be merely detestful memory practices (although I couldn't disagree more). Although I think it would be best if children were well-rounded in all subject areas to at least have a general idea.

I'm sorry but there is absolutely no excuse for more than 70% of the polled high schoolers being unable to name the first US president.

[Muravyets]

And what do they have to do with your claim that companies generally only fail if the government interferes with them? And how did the government cause the failure of AIG?

While I certainly believe that government intervention in companies causes far more problems than it solves, that's not actually what I was talking about. If you'd read my post carefully, my point was that without government intervention, companies would have nothing between them and bankruptcy but sound financial decisions. In a world of government intervention, even companies loaded with corruption and rubbish financial advisers can continue operating if they can get enough sympathy from the government to give them a bailout.

Certainly companies are quite capable of failing without the government's help, but in the case of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG, it was government policies which created an environment in which they could operate recklessly (indeed, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were both directly sponsored by the Federal government), and when the Fed finally realized they were failing they decided the only solution was nationalization.

And as I pointed out in my first post responding to you, reality says that bankruptcy does not necessarily follow outrageously bad business decisions, and even more so, the risk of failure is no deterrent to bad business decisions in world where the executives get their bonuses regardless.

But you carry on telling me what WOULD be true if it were true. I'm going to choose to stick with what really exists, however.

[Tunizcha]

Failing a citizenship test doesn't necessarily mean that children are stupid overall. Many of them could be more inclined to math or science, and find history to be merely detestful memory practices (although I couldn't disagree more). Although I think it would be best if children were well-rounded in all subject areas to at least have a general idea.

I'm sorry but there is absolutely no excuse for more than 70% of the polled high schoolers being unable to name the first US president.

And only 3% of them getting 6/10. The questions are so ridiculously easy that you would probably learn then by just living here.

[Muravyets]

I'm a sophomore in high school, and I don't know if this is just Florida, or other states too, but in Florida, school grades are based upon how well the sophomore class does on the FCAT. That past week, we had a class meeting in the auditorium, where they tried to encourage us to do well on the test this year, and these were the numbers they threw out.
Last year, roughly 25% of last years sophomores, this years juniors, passed the reading FCAT. My class passed it last year with roughly 40%, and they called that a good passing rate. That about knocked me out right there. I fear that the day our generation takes over, this country is well and truly fucked.

I'm glad to see that us old fogies are not the only ones saying that. It seems so unkind to look down on the young people and say "may the gods help us when those idiots are in charge." But it becomes much easier to say it when the SMART young people are saying the same thing.

[Muravyets]

You can't make that comparison because there is no established voucher system with a track record to compare with. Therefore, your argument amounts to "Let's not fix the system we have. Instead let's replace it with some made up stuff that has never been tested and run it along a business model that we know has an extensive record of finacial malfeasance, waste and failure. We'll just claim that THIS TIME it'll work. No, really."

Meanwhile, by the way, you ignore the reason why we have a public education system in the first place, which is because the privately funded schools in days of yore did not get the job done. Education was striated by class, with the poor left with less or no service while the rich benefitted freely.

Um, you realize that that's exactly what's going on now, right?

Because public education sucks so much, almost everyone who can afford it uses the much higher quality private education. Hence, only the lower classes use public schools, while higher quality education is available only to the upper classes. Except for a small number of public schools with "gifted" or "advanced placement" programs, there's not really any way for the poor to better themselves -- especially in poorer school districts where people are too economically depressed to move elsewhere.

In a public school system, a neglected school district will remain neglected indefinitely, until a state legislator starts throwing money at it (and even that may not solve the problem). Private industry will avoid the district because the inhabitants will generally be unable to pay for a private education. Without the public school system, in a system of private schools and government vouchers + loans, private schools can open even in economically depressed areas, because they will still be able to make a profit from students attending; create jobs (due to competition); et cetera.

In this country, as in most other modern nations, this was considered an undesirable condition for both practical and moral reasons. Unless you are willing to abandon the idea of education as a universal benefit to society, then your argument in favor of private education is weak.

Education is a universal benefit to society; but good education is only available in school districts that receive a lot of money from the government -- private and public schools alike, since no private school will open in a neglected school district because those districts tend to be home to the poorest people, the ones not capable of paying for a private education.

Yes, I anticipate that you will claim that vouchers would make such a system egalitarian, but you have no evidence that this would be true, while we do have a history of unequal private education to compare public education with.

You seem to be missing the point. Private education is unequal to public education because of the public education system itself, as I explained. (USA only, I'm not sure about elsewhere.)

I realize that, as I said, there is no voucher or other system of private schooling that has a track record of success or failure that you can point to for the comparison your argument depends on.

As flawed as reality is, I will take what exists over what some random net people imagine any day of the week. I would much rather try to fix public education than fart around with your private sector utopian dreams.

[SaintB]

From when that ******* bastard atheist of Murray O'Hair sought to ban prayer in public schools the test result dropped

prayers help student to keep God on their side

about creationism: last time i checked the great majority of Americans believe in creationism...Why should teachers teach theory that the greater majority of Americans don't want their children to learn? or at least teach BOTH theories

The United States is Constitutionally a Secular Nation and such things as prayer in school and religious beliefs such as Creationism can not and should not be taught in public schools. If you don't like it move to a more theocratic nation like Iran.

EDIT: Falling asleep at the keyboard while typing = bad.

[Buffett and Colbert]

I got 90% on that MSNBC quiz. Hey, if I score the same as 900, that's pretty good, eh?