"William" wrote in message
...
On 5/5/2010 1:58 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

Gay is certainly higher up on the evolutionary scale than conservative
republican.

We will have to leave this to you Harry the expert in gayness.




You and the other rightwing nuts are sure afraid of gays.


This is really shocking news.
Is that why you keep saying we're afraid of you?


I'm not gay, but if I were, I'm sure that would be their primary excuse.

On 5/5/2010 4:44 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 5/5/2010 1:58 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

Gay is certainly higher up on the evolutionary scale than conservative
republican.

We will have to leave this to you Harry the expert in gayness.




You and the other rightwing nuts are sure afraid of gays.


This is really shocking news.
Is that why you keep saying we're afraid of you?


I'm not gay, but

Not even a little bit? You should at least give it a try.

On 5/5/10 4:58 PM, William wrote:
On 5/5/2010 4:44 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 5/5/2010 1:58 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

Gay is certainly higher up on the evolutionary scale than
conservative
republican.

We will have to leave this to you Harry the expert in gayness.




You and the other rightwing nuts are sure afraid of gays.


This is really shocking news.
Is that why you keep saying we're afraid of you?


I'm not gay, but

Not even a little bit? You should at least give it a try.



It works for you, eh?

--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

On 5/5/2010 6:36 PM, hk wrote:
On 5/5/10 4:58 PM, William wrote:
On 5/5/2010 4:44 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 5/5/2010 1:58 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

Gay is certainly higher up on the evolutionary scale than
conservative
republican.

We will have to leave this to you Harry the expert in gayness.




You and the other rightwing nuts are sure afraid of gays.


This is really shocking news.
Is that why you keep saying we're afraid of you?


I'm not gay, but

Not even a little bit? You should at least give it a try.



It works for you, eh?

Shhhh.

"William" wrote in message
...
On 5/5/2010 4:44 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 5/5/2010 1:58 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

Gay is certainly higher up on the evolutionary scale than
conservative
republican.

We will have to leave this to you Harry the expert in gayness.




You and the other rightwing nuts are sure afraid of gays.


This is really shocking news.
Is that why you keep saying we're afraid of you?


I'm not gay, but

Not even a little bit? You should at least give it a try.

Is it something you've tried? If so, do tell - NOT

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 May 2010 11:52:07 -0400, "mmc" wrote:

There are also a lot of people who wanted SB6 that Crist originally
supported, then vetoed. That was the one that made teacher pay
coincide with teacher performance and limited tenure. There are a lot
of parents here who are ****ed that the school board spends $17,661
per student ($1.4B/80400 students) and our graduation rate is 53%.
They think something is dreadfully wrong with the school system.

This thing is like FCAT where the better off schools, with parents at home
to help the kids and make sure they did thier home work got better scores
and funding was tied to those scores.


There is a lot of hype from the teachers saying tests don't matter but
the reality is, if you can't do well on tests, you will never be able
to get a decent job.


Well.... some people just don't test well. I have an attorney friend who
tried the Cal Bar three times before he passed. He's a heck of a lot smarter
than I, and he makes a heck of a lot more money. I've known a couple of
biologists who are quite bright, but never did well on test and never got
advanced degrees.

I think tests can be an indication of future success, but I don't think
they're the last word on the subject.

On 5/5/10 8:05 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 5 May 2010 16:38:45 -0700,
wrote:

There is a lot of hype from the teachers saying tests don't matter but
the reality is, if you can't do well on tests, you will never be able
to get a decent job.


Well.... some people just don't test well. I have an attorney friend who
tried the Cal Bar three times before he passed. He's a heck of a lot smarter
than I, and he makes a heck of a lot more money. I've known a couple of
biologists who are quite bright, but never did well on test and never got
advanced degrees.

I think tests can be an indication of future success, but I don't think
they're the last word on the subject.


Unfortunately they are a fact of life and the sooner kids learn how to
take a test the sooner they will succeed in the 21st century society.
In Florida you can't even cut hair or do fingernails without passing a
standardized test. Obviously, as you pointed out, all "professions"
use tests for a benchmark. It is also the key to getting into a decent
college, getting a decent job in the military or even things as
mundane as a driver's license.
Without test skills your only paths to success are as a rock star,
athlete or drug dealer.


The problem with putting the onus on classroom teachers for the
performance of their charges is that the teachers have no control over
the kids' environments outside of school. Educated adults who take exams
in order to practice a profession can take virtually all the time they
need to prep, and they can, within reason, control their environment.
Lots of kids who do not "achieve" have a lousy home life and that
diminishes the ability for many to prep for standardized tests.

"Without test skills your only paths to success are as a rock star,
athlete or drug dealer." Or half-term governor of Alaska.




--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

In article ,
says...

On 5/5/10 8:05 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 5 May 2010 16:38:45 -0700,
wrote:

There is a lot of hype from the teachers saying tests don't matter but
the reality is, if you can't do well on tests, you will never be able
to get a decent job.


Well.... some people just don't test well. I have an attorney friend who
tried the Cal Bar three times before he passed. He's a heck of a lot smarter
than I, and he makes a heck of a lot more money. I've known a couple of
biologists who are quite bright, but never did well on test and never got
advanced degrees.

I think tests can be an indication of future success, but I don't think
they're the last word on the subject.


Unfortunately they are a fact of life and the sooner kids learn how to
take a test the sooner they will succeed in the 21st century society.
In Florida you can't even cut hair or do fingernails without passing a
standardized test. Obviously, as you pointed out, all "professions"
use tests for a benchmark. It is also the key to getting into a decent
college, getting a decent job in the military or even things as
mundane as a driver's license.
Without test skills your only paths to success are as a rock star,
athlete or drug dealer.


The problem with putting the onus on classroom teachers for the
performance of their charges is that the teachers have no control over
the kids' environments outside of school. Educated adults who take exams
in order to practice a profession can take virtually all the time they
need to prep, and they can, within reason, control their environment.
Lots of kids who do not "achieve" have a lousy home life and that
diminishes the ability for many to prep for standardized tests.

"Without test skills your only paths to success are as a rock star,
athlete or drug dealer." Or half-term governor of Alaska.

When society takes away the tools of parenting from the parents you
can't put the blame for the failings of the chidren/students upon the
parents.

Hillary's book "It Takes a Village" is proof that the
liberal/progressives/Democrat's don't want the parents to be the final
authority for their own childrens upbringing.

On 5/5/10 8:38 PM, BAR wrote:
In articleVLadncq_EJKhlH_WnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d@earthlink .com,
says...

On 5/5/10 8:05 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 5 May 2010 16:38:45 -0700,
wrote:

There is a lot of hype from the teachers saying tests don't matter but
the reality is, if you can't do well on tests, you will never be able
to get a decent job.


Well.... some people just don't test well. I have an attorney friend who
tried the Cal Bar three times before he passed. He's a heck of a lot smarter
than I, and he makes a heck of a lot more money. I've known a couple of
biologists who are quite bright, but never did well on test and never got
advanced degrees.

I think tests can be an indication of future success, but I don't think
they're the last word on the subject.


Unfortunately they are a fact of life and the sooner kids learn how to
take a test the sooner they will succeed in the 21st century society.
In Florida you can't even cut hair or do fingernails without passing a
standardized test. Obviously, as you pointed out, all "professions"
use tests for a benchmark. It is also the key to getting into a decent
college, getting a decent job in the military or even things as
mundane as a driver's license.
Without test skills your only paths to success are as a rock star,
athlete or drug dealer.


The problem with putting the onus on classroom teachers for the
performance of their charges is that the teachers have no control over
the kids' environments outside of school. Educated adults who take exams
in order to practice a profession can take virtually all the time they
need to prep, and they can, within reason, control their environment.
Lots of kids who do not "achieve" have a lousy home life and that
diminishes the ability for many to prep for standardized tests.

"Without test skills your only paths to success are as a rock star,
athlete or drug dealer." Or half-term governor of Alaska.

When society takes away the tools of parenting from the parents you
can't put the blame for the failings of the chidren/students upon the
parents.

Hillary's book "It Takes a Village" is proof that the
liberal/progressives/Democrat's don't want the parents to be the final
authority for their own childrens upbringing.


You don't have the knowledge, experience, or background to make such a
judgment.


--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 May 2010 16:38:45 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

There is a lot of hype from the teachers saying tests don't matter but
the reality is, if you can't do well on tests, you will never be able
to get a decent job.


Well.... some people just don't test well. I have an attorney friend who
tried the Cal Bar three times before he passed. He's a heck of a lot
smarter
than I, and he makes a heck of a lot more money. I've known a couple of
biologists who are quite bright, but never did well on test and never got
advanced degrees.

I think tests can be an indication of future success, but I don't think
they're the last word on the subject.


Unfortunately they are a fact of life and the sooner kids learn how to
take a test the sooner they will succeed in the 21st century society.
In Florida you can't even cut hair or do fingernails without passing a
standardized test. Obviously, as you pointed out, all "professions"
use tests for a benchmark. It is also the key to getting into a decent
college, getting a decent job in the military or even things as
mundane as a driver's license.
Without test skills your only paths to success are as a rock star,
athlete or drug dealer.


Well... there are certainly other choices, but I get your point. So, the
question is to what should teachers teach? If they teach for knowledge, then
there'll be some who can't cut it on tests. If they teach for test taking,
then the kids aren't necessarily learning. Seems like a combination is what
I had and what should be done. I think that's mostly happening, but far too
many teachers are teaching test passing. There's got to be a coherent way to
evaluate teachers, based on knowledge.