PocoLoco wrote:
Wrong. I said no such thing.

(patiently) Yes you did.

... You immediately start with bull****.

What an intelligent and well-reasoned answer.

DSK

On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 19:36:46 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"PocoLoco" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 19:21:31 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..

... The
teachers should do whatever is necessary to accomplish those
objectives.

Well, one way to guarantee that is to shoot the students most likely to
fail. Is this what you recommend?

The whole initiative is a joke. Testing is useful for measurement and
ego-boosting, but it doesn't address the real issue as I see it. Kids
learn
because they have good examples in their lives. This can include
either/or/and:

- Parents who display a high level of regard for learning, and pay lots of
attention to what their kids are doing in school. Doesn't seem to matter
if
we're totally incapable of helping them with calculus - it's the attention
that matters.

- Friends who do I-don't-know-what, other than positive peer influence.
Last
spring, my son said he was already overloaded with AP courses, and didn't
want to add AP physics. I goaded him, his counselor poked him, and
finally,
he said two of his friends started acting like cheerleaders and he changed
his mind.

I don't think you can get lousy parents to step up to the plate, but
there's
probably an imaginative way to incentivize high achieving kids to help
others. Maybe small scholarships in return for tutoring, or something like
that. Or, something more valuable than gold to teenagers: Gift
certificates
good at more than one mall.


Each year the students here are required to perform a number of community
service hours. The math department has set up a peer tutoring program in
which
students can receive credit for their service hours. The program works
well, and
many students continue with the tutoring well past the service hour
requirement.

Testing isn't a joke. Often it's the only way to get a parent's attention.
If
the kids have the good examples, parental and peer support, then the tests
to
show minimum competency aren't necessary.

It's circular anyway. Kids who want to achieve will do so regardless of the
tests. And, sometimes (as I'm sure you know), lousy test results have no
impact on parents. So, we end up with a generation who listens to a certain
politician mangle the language, and they consider it normal.


Most of those kids aren't watching the news. They're doing MTV or the Simpsons.

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 16:02:48 -0400, DSK wrote:

PocoLoco wrote:
Wrong. I said no such thing.

(patiently) Yes you did.

... You immediately start with bull****.

What an intelligent and well-reasoned answer.

DSK

And accurate.

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

"DSK" wrote in message
...
So, it's those darn greedy teachers, isn't it? I guess they all becamse
teachers so they could get rich while sitting around on an easy job.


Jeff Rigby wrote:
The teachers I've talked to were in favor of testing, the union is the
only one that has been consistently against testing.

That depends on how you word the question, as always. Relatively few
teachers, including union ones, are against testing their students.
However most... more nearly all... teacher are against being handed an
extensive blueprint for material that they must teach the kids by rote,
enforced by frequent & exhaustive testing.

For one thing, giving tests every month or so uses up a lot of class time.

... The teachers are split about 50/50 on the current plan

Hmm, you must live in a really pro-Bush/Cheney area. The teacher I know
are about 80% against the current NCLB plan, with about half of those
against being very vocal & demonstrative... and about 10% of the pro-NCLB
teachers saying things like 'it's not as bad as they say' or 'it could be
worse.' What excellent praise, you can see why I hold the views I have.

Teachers views probably differ because of the efforts that have to be taken
to bring their class up to the MINIMUM standard that is required by the
federal test. In my area 50% of the class needed little remedial education
thus the 50/50 figure I quoted. In areas of Florida that are more rural or
in areas of the north (inner cities) the figures would shift to what you
were quoting because they have FAILED their students for years and there is
so much remedial education needed to pass the test that that's all they can
teach.

I can't stress this enough, the federal standard is a MINIMUM requirement
and our schools should be doing much more. The NCLB is like a spotlight
that shines on the regions that are not doing their job.

... the ones who voiced disfavor didn't like having to teach to the test.
It made the curriculm too narrow in their view.


Yep. And pretty much all the teachers I have discussed the issue with say
that this is *all* they have time to teach.



I have consistently said that we need a two party system. For any
organization to monolithic is to be inbred and without imagination.


Possibly so, but any organiztion that is consistantly attacked will unite
against it's attacker.

Yes and it started being attacked 20 years ago because it resisted testing.
Among the more enlightened, testing is a method to determine objectively how
well you are doing and to shift resources to those areas that need it.
Teachers uses test all the time in their class to do this but it's not
supposed to be used to determine how the whole school is doing??? This made
no sense to me and many others. Does it make sense to you? That's why the
union started being attacked, not because it was monolithicly democrat.
That it was monolithicly democrat insured it's short sighted and selfish
(protect the incompetent) policys at the expense of the students during the
years that democrats controlled congress (most of the last 60 years).



Since it is Republicans (and Libertarians, except that most of them are
too obviously nut-cases to get elected) that are threatening schools &
teachers, it seems pretty natural to me that teachers would gravitate to
the other side.


Threatining????? Withholding the carrot is threatining.

Is being fired, and losing your state license (with the very high
probability of being unable to get a license in any other of these United
States, since NCLB is Federal) "withholding the carrot?"

If they can't pass tests that are no more difficult than the tests that
their students have to take they shouldn't be accreditied to teach.

Again your "view" on Republican goals is 180 degrees out of true. We
LIKE small business as they can allow the small guy to get his share of
the pie.

Really? Like no-bid contracts? In cases where massive resources (trucks,
cranes, personel) are required and time is of the essence you give the
cotract to the best corp with a proven track record.

Most small buiness is started by individuals that were not born with a
silver spoon in their mouth. This is in stark contrast with most of the
inherrited wealth in this country belonging to the democrat party.


Interesting view of the Democrats... I suppose George W. Bush Jr was born
poor and fought his way to the top on his own merit? I suppose he worked
hard at a small business and made it a success?

Values again and the list of democrats with the spoon in their mouth is
several times longer.


Then there is the issue of whether it's a good thing to teach children
that they must constantly jump thru hoops set for them by the Federal
gov't, an attitude they will presumably carry forward into adult life.
This is a strange thing for "conservatives" (especially 'conservatives'
who express such disdain for the gummint) to approve.


I noticed you didn't have an answer for this one.


Didn't think I needed to. Big government and endless regulation is a
Democrat thing.


Except in cases where Republicans are pushing the agenda, like the
Homeland Security Dept and the NCLB and a few other examples.

Better wake up and smell the coffee, next thing you know you'll be saying
how the Democrats are fiscally irresponsible...

Yeah, I don't like the fiscal irresponsibility practiced by this congress.
In Bush we have a mini Reagan who is rubber stamping congress so that he
gets the money he needs for his projects (Iraq). I guess that's needed
since he has to fight on two fronts (a biased press being one of them).


And I hope the Democrats won't force me to vote for one as the lesser of
two evils either. That's no joke.
Agreed. I hope you take a close look at your principles and see which
party is following them more closely.

I constantly do and while many of those principles are only given lip
service by the republicans in power, the democrat party stand in opposition
to them. That's why it's very important that you guys choose a presidential
candidate that holds traditional values.

Possibly so, but any organiztion that is consistantly attacked will unite
against it's attacker.


Jeff Rigby wrote:
Yes and it started being attacked 20 years ago because it resisted testing.

And it's being attacked now for supporting Democrats.

It's alligator-chomp-style partisan politics, pure and simple.

Actually, I'm glad to hear that NCLB may be doing some good for the
nation's children although I'm still dubious. But you should open your
eyes to the fact that this is primarily a club to beat down the
political influence of teachers unions, and secondarily to gain a
strangelhold on public schools (for the purpose of strangling it, of
course, so that smart poor kids won't be elbowing the well-connected
children out of the way, later in life).



Among the more enlightened, testing is a method to determine objectively how
well you are doing and to shift resources to those areas that need it.

Really? How does NCLB "shift resources to those that need it?" All I've
heard is that those who flunk get fired & lose funding. Great way to
help them bootstrap up! Compassionate conservatism at it's finest...
yank the rug out from under, then kick 'em when they're down.



Is being fired, and losing your state license (with the very high
probability of being unable to get a license in any other of these United
States, since NCLB is Federal) "withholding the carrot?"


If they can't pass tests that are no more difficult than the tests that
their students have to take they shouldn't be accreditied to teach.

Agreed but that's not what's happening. A lot of good teachers are
getting booted, teacher/student ratios are higher than ever, and lots of
people who might have become teachers are giving up the idea. It's a
train wreck.

Here in NC, the governor gave a short speech the other day on the
effects of NCLB and how the state education system is trying to deal
with the worsening shortage of teachers. May not be a problem everywhere.



Again your "view" on Republican goals is 180 degrees out of true. We
LIKE small business as they can allow the small guy to get his share of
the pie.

Really? Like no-bid contracts?



... In cases where massive resources (trucks,
cranes, personel) are required and time is of the essence you give the
cotract to the best corp with a proven track record.

What about cases where the company has no assets in the field except
good political connections? What if the company words the contract such
that they can shrug it off, not do a damn thing, and still collect a
percentage? What about cases where the company is given charge of gov't
property, and "loses" it?

All these things are happening, to the tune of hundreds of millions of
our tax dollars. Next time you're watching C-Span, check the Halliburton
investigation. They're on the hook for about 1/2 billion (with a b) in
fraud, non-performance, kick-backs, "lost" inventory, etc etc. And
that's just one company, just what they've been caught at SO FAR. In
most cases, it was military personnel complaining about non-performance
that brought it up.

And another thing, isn't it funny how the "liberal biased media" doesn't
seem to be paying much attention to this.

Yep, it's a meritocracy all right. Work hard, be honest, try to get
ahead... and lose the pie to man who schmoozes with the politicians...
it's the new American way.



Better wake up and smell the coffee, next thing you know you'll be saying
how the Democrats are fiscally irresponsible...


Yeah, I don't like the fiscal irresponsibility practiced by this congress.

Guess what, it's not Democrats. And the signs were there all along. This
bunch thnks that "providing good gov't" is a bad joke, they are out for
the money and of course the perks of power.



In Bush we have a mini Reagan

Reagan was ten times the man and 50X the President that Bush Jr is.
He genuinely cared about the good of the country, even though he thought
trees cause air pollution. He often consulted with Democrats, and even
non-Washington non-politicians, to get the straight word. GWB doesn't
care about any of that, all he wants is to get his own way, to enrich
his cronies, and to sell the package to his 'base' (meaning YOU).



Agreed. I hope you take a close look at your principles and see which
party is following them more closely.


I constantly do and while many of those principles are only given lip
service by the republicans in power, the democrat party stand in opposition
to them.

Umm, it looks very much to me like the Democrats are opposing the abuse,
fraud, bad governance, greed, and poor policy more than they're opposing
good principles.

But hey, the Bush-Cheney crowd have spent hndreds of millions of
dollars... including our tax money... to convince you that President
Bush and his allies in Congress are good hearted people. It would be a
shame if all that money was wasted, wouldn't it??

... That's why it's very important that you guys choose a presidential
candidate that holds traditional values.


"We"? I just have one vote. Kerry would not have been my first pick, but
there is no doubt in my mind (and probably not much in yours, by now)
that Kerry would have been a better President. Too late now.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Possibly so, but any organiztion that is consistantly attacked will unite
against it's attacker.


Jeff Rigby wrote:
Yes and it started being attacked 20 years ago because it resisted
testing.

And it's being attacked now for supporting Democrats.

It's alligator-chomp-style partisan politics, pure and simple.

Actually, I'm glad to hear that NCLB may be doing some good for the
nation's children although I'm still dubious. But you should open your
eyes to the fact that this is primarily a club to beat down the political
influence of teachers unions, and secondarily to gain a strangelhold on
public schools (for the purpose of strangling it, of course, so that smart
poor kids won't be elbowing the well-connected children out of the way,
later in life).

Gesh, all they would have to do was nothing, the system in place would
insure it. Wow, you need to see a councelor, your thought processes are
seriously bent.



Among the more enlightened, testing is a method to determine objectively
how well you are doing and to shift resources to those areas that need
it.

Really? How does NCLB "shift resources to those that need it?" All I've
heard is that those who flunk get fired & lose funding. Great way to help
them bootstrap up! Compassionate conservatism at it's finest... yank the
rug out from under, then kick 'em when they're down.

That's always accomplished on the local level. Money is provided as a
reward for success. There are provisions to punish (by withholding rewards)
the district if schools in the district don't measure up. This forces the
district to shift resources (teachers) to bring up poorly performing
schools.

Kick them when they are down. It can seem that way but that's the way we
are built. Rewards and punishment work. Just giving the money to districts
that don't perform will do little.

Is being fired, and losing your state license (with the very high
probability of being unable to get a license in any other of these United
States, since NCLB is Federal) "withholding the carrot?"


If they can't pass tests that are no more difficult than the tests that
their students have to take they shouldn't be accreditied to teach.

Agreed but that's not what's happening. A lot of good teachers are getting
booted, teacher/student ratios are higher than ever, and lots of people
who might have become teachers are giving up the idea. It's a train wreck.

Here in NC, the governor gave a short speech the other day on the effects
of NCLB and how the state education system is trying to deal with the
worsening shortage of teachers. May not be a problem everywhere.



Again your "view" on Republican goals is 180 degrees out of true. We
LIKE small business as they can allow the small guy to get his share of
the pie.

Really? Like no-bid contracts?

... In cases where massive resources (trucks, cranes, personel) are
required and time is of the essence you give the cotract to the best corp
with a proven track record.

What about cases where the company has no assets in the field except good
political connections? What if the company words the contract such that
they can shrug it off, not do a damn thing, and still collect a
percentage? What about cases where the company is given charge of gov't
property, and "loses" it?

All these things are happening, to the tune of hundreds of millions of our
tax dollars. Next time you're watching C-Span, check the Halliburton
investigation. They're on the hook for about 1/2 billion (with a b) in
fraud, non-performance, kick-backs, "lost" inventory, etc etc. And that's
just one company, just what they've been caught at SO FAR. In most cases,
it was military personnel complaining about non-performance that brought
it up.

And another thing, isn't it funny how the "liberal biased media" doesn't
seem to be paying much attention to this.

Yep, it's a meritocracy all right. Work hard, be honest, try to get
ahead... and lose the pie to man who schmoozes with the politicians...
it's the new American way.

Better wake up and smell the coffee, next thing you know you'll be saying
how the Democrats are fiscally irresponsible...


Yeah, I don't like the fiscal irresponsibility practiced by this
congress.

Guess what, it's not Democrats. And the signs were there all along. This
bunch thnks that "providing good gov't" is a bad joke, they are out for
the money and of course the perks of power.

In Bush we have a mini Reagan

Reagan was ten times the man and 50X the President that Bush Jr is.
He genuinely cared about the good of the country, even though he thought
trees cause air pollution. He often consulted with Democrats, and even
non-Washington non-politicians, to get the straight word. GWB doesn't care
about any of that, all he wants is to get his own way, to enrich his
cronies, and to sell the package to his 'base' (meaning YOU).

Agreed. I hope you take a close look at your principles and see which
party is following them more closely.


I constantly do and while many of those principles are only given lip
service by the republicans in power, the democrat party stand in
opposition to them.

Umm, it looks very much to me like the Democrats are opposing the abuse,
fraud, bad governance, greed, and poor policy more than they're opposing
good principles.

But hey, the Bush-Cheney crowd have spent hndreds of millions of
dollars... including our tax money... to convince you that President Bush
and his allies in Congress are good hearted people. It would be a shame if
all that money was wasted, wouldn't it??

... That's why it's very important that you guys choose a presidential
candidate that holds traditional values.

"We"? I just have one vote. Kerry would not have been my first pick, but
there is no doubt in my mind (and probably not much in yours, by now) that
Kerry would have been a better President. Too late now.

There I'd take exception, If Reagan is 50X the man that Bush is then Bush
is 100 times the man Kerry is. Lieberman on the other had would I think
have been a better choice if only to unite us and stop the political
bickering that we now have.

Jeff Rigby wrote:
... Wow, you need to see a councelor, your thought processes are
seriously bent.

Coming from a man who wishes he could torture helpless wounded Arabs,
this is a compliment.



... Kerry would not have been my first pick, but
there is no doubt in my mind (and probably not much in yours, by now) that
Kerry would have been a better President. Too late now.


There I'd take exception, If Reagan is 50X the man that Bush is then Bush
is 100 times the man Kerry is.

Glad to see that the hundred million dollar smear campaign against Kerry
worked. It would be a shame if that money were wasted.

The funny thing, you probably say that with a straight face, when
Kerry's family were not millionaires and his daddy was never President,
and you probably join in the clamor for Kerry to "release" his records
when Bush's are conveniently lost, etc etc.


... Lieberman on the other had would I think
have been a better choice if only to unite us and stop the political
bickering that we now have.


Uh huh. You would eagerly join in any attack on any Democrat, or even
any sensible Republican. Frankly, you're part of the problem... but hey,
at least you've got a good little support group here in this newsgroup,
hope you like the company.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Jeff Rigby wrote:
... Wow, you need to see a councelor, your thought processes are
seriously bent.

Coming from a man who wishes he could torture helpless wounded Arabs, this
is a compliment.

Helpless wounded arabs, I'd for sure help him or her. Perform first aid and
call 911.

A Terrorist is another story. In the Democrat, Republican or Southern
Republican post you read, there was NO doubt that the Terrorist was a
terrorist. He posed a continuing threat to my family and my extended family
(americans). The only course of action open to me was as I stated. To do
any other would be irresponsible. Killing him outright before getting that
information would be irresponsible. If I could be sure that the authorities
would vigorusly question him I'd turn him in rather than bungle it.


... Lieberman on the other hand would I think have been a better choice
if only to unite us and stop the political bickering that we now have.


Uh huh. You would eagerly join in any attack on any Democrat, or even any
sensible Republican. Frankly, you're part of the problem... but hey, at
least you've got a good little support group here in this newsgroup, hope
you like the company.

I said I'd vote for a DEMOCRAT if he were the right choice, my example
Lieberman. In fact I'd go one further and say that Lieberman would have won
the election. I'm not responding as a chearleader or to insite a mob. But
HONESTLY voicing my views. I rairly get to "see" your views though that is
more of a problem with Harry than with you. You both are practiced a
debating style which is not what i'm trying to do. Debate to win at any
cost even the truth.


DSK