I wholeheartily agree Steve...<br><br>that's why it makes my skin crawl when politicians want to lay all or most of the blame for kid's failure on the teacher. What can a teacher do if the parent does a shtty job raising their kids... teachers are not miracle workers. And they just get stuck in bad positions many times and are trying to do their best with little to no parent support, and less support from the Administration because the Administration is covering their arse and will throw the teacher to the wolves to save their own skin.<br><br>The politicians blame teachers instead of the parents because the parents are voters and they don't want to alienate them. ... it psses me off !<br>One of the many reasons for the filing public education system is the teachers get no backing.. they're more isolated and vulnerable than ever before.<br><br><br>David (OFI)<br>
Little lesson on why Tom Cruise is an idiot and why relying on his testimony reflects poorly on you.<br><br>http://www.collegeboard.com/press/article/0,,11752,00.html<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Consistent with a decade-long trend, SAT math scores have continued to rise. In 2002, the average SAT math score rose two points to 516, the highest level in 32 years. Of particular import is the result for female test-takers: a 35-year high score of 500. While the average SAT math score of 534 for male test-takers remains higher than the average score for females, the gap is closing. The narrowing gap may be attributed to the fact that an increasing number of females are taking rigorous math and science courses in high school. Forty-four percent of female college-bound seniors reported taking precalculus, up from 31 percent a decade ago. It currently refers to female high-school students.<br><br><br>Verbal scores declined in 2002 to an average of 504 for the entire test-taking population (with an average score of 507 for males and 502 for females). The average verbal score for 2002 is just 4 points higher than that of 1992. By way of contrast, the 2002 average math score is a full 15 points higher than its 1992 counterpart.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Math scores up over the past decade. Verbal scores not up, but they are higher than 1992 levels. Plus the box at the bottom reveals the following information.<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Forty-six percent of this year's high school graduates took the SAT - the highest percentage ever.<br>The percentage of minority students taking the SAT is also at an all-time high of 35 percent.<br>Thirty-seven (37%) percent of SAT takers will be first-generation college students.<p><hr></blockquote><p>I guessed more people were taking it and that would probably cause lower scores. Math scores are up so that's sweet.<br><br>Editing here- I hate when forums don't automatically convert links to hotlinks. Anywho this article explains better at how scores have actually increased greatly over time. <a href="http://www.america-tomorrow.com/bracey/EDDRA/EDDRA30.htm">http://www.america-tomorrow.com/bracey/EDDRA/EDDRA30.htm</a><br><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Dissenter on 06/01/05 01:01 AM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>
It's no wonder you get jumped so often. Can you possibly be more pompous? Can you possibly make any more misguided assumptions? Could you possibly be more judgmental?<br><br>Someone refers to a statement made by someone else and voices agreement, and because you site opinions to the contrary, the original poster's comment "reflect badly" on him? To begin with, I'm willing to bet that Bryan's agreement had more to do with this portion of the quote: <blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>"The parents are blaming the teachers. The teachers are blaming the parents. OK? And the psychs are putting everyone on drugs."<p><hr></blockquote><p>But because you pick up on a much narrower -- and clearly less supportable -- claim, you strut like a peacock and throw criticism around like some kind of self-anointed prince.<br><br>But I'm guessing you know a lot about reflections. How many times a day do you run to the restroom and say "Mirror, mirror, on the wall..."?<br><br>[mashugeh]<br><br>
DLC, you are so right on the mark. <br><br>Teachers are not the parents. And putting the responsibility for raising kids on them is wrong, wrong, wrong. <br><br>Lousy parents who are complete failures try to dodge their responsibility and lay it on teachers. <br>Others complain that kids are getting dumber and dumber. Well DUH! They force the schools to lower the difficulty of the tests, the same ones we studied our butts off for and passed. But these people come whining and complaining that the tests are unfair and slanted against black kids or brown kids or what ever! And once again, it's not the parents fault, no, it's the teachers fault. <br>When you think about how important our teachers are in the educationly quality for each generation that is released in to our world, it boggles the mind why teachers aren't reveared. <br><br>
Link - I did find a news site that listed the same story, but required giving personal details/subscription.<br><br>And we have legislature believing that 200 page text books are too big? I've heard it claimed on the premise that 200 pages is just too much material for kids to learn.<br><br>So I guess the complete work of shakespeare, most of my schools Chemisty, Physics and Biology books would be banned in California (admittedly all three books covered a 2 year curricullum).<br><br><br><br>We all do what we do for the same reason: because it seems like a good idea at the time.
_________________________ I used to think it was terrible that life was unfair. Then I thought what if life were fair and all of the terrible things that happen came because we really deserved them? Now I take comfort in the general unfairness and hostility of the universe.
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> And we have legislature believing that 200 page text books are too big? I've heard it claimed on the premise that 200 pages is just too much material for kids to learn. <p><hr></blockquote><p>well Llewelyn... guess we'll just have to give them the "Reader's Digest" version of quantum mechanics !! <br><br><br><br>Cliff Notes for Biology:<br> Disecting the Frog <br>1. cut<br>2. observe<br>3. toss !!<br>4. go directly to fetal pig <br><br><br>(redneck voice)<br>yep we gonna raise us sum aw-sum roket sci-tists with them thar books !!<br> <br><br>David (OFI)<br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.