On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:06:15 -0500, HK wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H.
The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim
that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because
if the amount of education were increased across the country the
number of people supporting the D's would decrease.
Which, by the way, was a valid claim.
--
Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of
Republicans will be those states with the most successful and
comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with
the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the
Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and
thereby protecting their base.

Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be
sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception.


Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a county
or city function normally.

Unbelievable.

And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart?


Herring worked as a substitute teacher. The qualifications for a
substitute teacher in Alexandra, Virginia, where Herring lives, are minimal:

* at least 60 hours of college coursework
* evidence of a negative tuberculin test (or chest x-ray)
* a completed online application
* attend an orientation session (see below)
* criminal background check — at the orientation session, you will
schedule an appointment to return for fingerprinting (the cost to the
applicant is $42)

That's it. No certification. Any idiot can sub teach. That would include
Herring.

The Virginia Department of Education is intimately involved in
educational programming and standards in that state.

You may recall that while he worked as a sub, Herring whined extensively
and repeatedly about the students placed in his charge. These were
mainly minority kids, if memory serves. He was unable to motivate them,
as a properly trained teacher might. Perhaps they didn't respond to his
"Army" ways.

Herring has also had problems with the Latinos living down the street
from him.

Such vitriol!

Harry, I taught for ten years before my first day as a sub.
--
John H

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:25:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:


Subs here in CT are required to have a four year degree, have to pass
a teaching methods course and the usual fingerprint checks, etc.

Teacher Aides have to have a two year degree Middle school and up
unless - at the Elementary level it's not required.

With a few exceptions, right?

"Substitute Teaching
Substitute positions are ideal for college students since they offer the
flexibility to accept assignments that do not conflict with your schedule
of classes. You gain the opportunity to network with professionals in the
field of education and learn valuable job skills as you supplement your
income. The current rates of pay for substitute teachers are $62.00 per day
for the first 15 days assigned as a sub teacher with an increase in rate to
$70.00 per day after 15 days of teacher subbing in the district. The hourly
rate for substitute teacher aides is $7.25 and for cafeteria workers is
$8.25. Substitute crossing guards earn $7.25 per hour.

The Connecticut State Department of Educations now issues authorizations
for college students who do not yet hold a Bachelor's degree to serve as
substitute teachers? The request for such authorization must be initiated
by the school district. Windham Public Schools encourages ECSU, UCONN, and
QVCC students, particularly education majors interested in gaining valuable
classroom experience, to pursue this option. To apply for authorization to
work as a substitute teacher, the applicant must complete an ED-174 form,
"Application for Substitute Teacher Authorization for Candidates who have
not completed a Bachelor's degree". The application packet must be returned
to the Personnel Office and must be submitted by the school district on
behalf of the applicant. Processing by the Bureau of Certification takes an
average of 2-6 weeks. In the interim, applicants who are awaiting this
special authorization may serve in the capacity of a substitute teacher
aide. This allows a period of time to observe normal classroom activities
under the direction of a certified teacher prior to accepting an assignment
as a substitute teacher who must assume full charge of a classroom."

http://www.windham.k12.ct.us/DSS_Web...l/Policies.htm

Note that I didn't look very hard to find this.

If a teacher calls in sick, and a sub is needed for that class, is that
one-day sub required to have a four year degree and pass the teaching
course? Or, is it a requirement for a 'long term' sub?

I can see that CT would have a big problem getting subs for teachers who
get sick for a day.
--
John H

JimH wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 07:57:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:52:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H.
The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a
claim
that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because
if the amount of education were increased across the country the
number of people supporting the D's would decrease.
Which, by the way, was a valid claim.
--
Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of
Republicans will be those states with the most successful and
comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with
the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the
Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and
thereby protecting their base.

Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be
sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception.


Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a
county
or city function normally.
Unbelievable.

And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart?
JimH's argument methods...cut what you don't like and make comments about
the rest.


Go foch yourself John. What the hell do *I* have to do with this
discussion?

You really are an asshole.



JimH,
You are Harry are screwing up big time, you keep forgetting who you have
in your bozo bin (or is it septic tank) and responding directly to their
post. You are suppossed to pretend you have JohnH filtered and then
you, Harry and Don can make juvenile insults without responding directly
to JohnH.

But to the point, you do like to cut and paste and then rewrite the post
you are responding so you can change the meaning of the original
person's post. It was a trick you learned from Skipper and Harry.

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:46:06 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:28:36 -0500, John H.
wrote:

If the tests are developed and administered properly, the teachers don't
know what's on the test anyway. They know what the standards of learning
are, and they try to ensure the students can meet the standards.

Unfortunately, you are out of touch. That may be how it used to work,
but not under the new NCLB "Standard".

The reason? They have to teach across a broad population from the
slowest to the brightest including those who can't/won't learn. They
have to up the high end as far as possible to raise the average to
acceptable levels for continued funding or the dreaded take over by
the State.

So, are you saying that the teachers in CT know what the test questions
will be and actually use those questions to design their curriculum?

Then your school system has big problems.

Why does it work in Virginia, but not in your school district? We've been
using the Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL) test for years and it meets
all the requirements of the NCLB.
--
John H

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:42:18 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:29:59 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 01:20:49 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:33:34 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Feb 10, 12:25?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing

Talk to middle and high school teachers about NCLB and see what they
say about the system.

It's a total disaster. ?And in states that require mainstreaming of
those children who are developmentally, physically, mentally or
emotionally "challenged", it's almost impossible to achieve the
standards required by NCLB.


Both of my kids are teaching in the classroom. My son (HS Social
Studies) as a career and my daughter (MS Science) as a step toward
eventually becoming a school administrator.

The have been some positive aspects of the NCLB. For instance,
teachers must demonstrate a level of expertise in the subjec they
teach. The schools can't simply hire a guy because he's a great
football coach and then say, "Oh, yeah...and you'll be teaching two
periods of astronomy every morning so better read a chapter or two
ahead of the students in the text book. Oh, and next semester you'll
be teaching advanced trig, but don't worry about that- nobody will
understand the subject well enought to realize you have no facility
what-so-ever for math."

Well, I would think that's a slight exaggeration. In CT, MA, RI and
NY you have to be certified to teach both subject and grade level.
Maybe it's different out there in the Great Northwest, but it's been
that way here for at least 30 years and longer as Mrs. Wave will be
finishing her 38th year this June. As far as I know, the only thing
that the NCLB act did was formalize that practice nationally - I can't
speak to areas outside of NE.

But in general, the system is not so good. Far too many districts are
strictly "teaching to the test". My son has several classes of HS
freshmen who are spending the entire 9th grade simply studying to pas
the 10th grade NCLB test- it's that critical to the district that
nearly all the 10th graders pass so that the district will continue to
get federal school dollars.

That's about the size of it ok.

Horse****.

Not at all - it's a fact.

Ask the next question - do the teachers know the test questions?

What do you think they teach to?

If so, then the whole thing's been compromised anyway.

That's the point.

That's the point where *you* live. That's not the point where standards are
established, used for curriculum design, taught, and tested. Here the
teachers have no idea of the test questions on the tests. In fact, the
testing room is proctored to ensure the teachers don't give help to the
kids taking the test.

What I see is a state which doesn't want to use standards (CT) being
compared to a state which uses them successfully.

I suppose it's another way to put down Bush - keep whining that NCLB won't
work.
--
John H

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 20:58:53 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:29:59 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 01:20:49 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:33:34 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Feb 10, 12:25?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing

Talk to middle and high school teachers about NCLB and see what they
say about the system.

It's a total disaster. ?And in states that require mainstreaming of
those children who are developmentally, physically, mentally or
emotionally "challenged", it's almost impossible to achieve the
standards required by NCLB.


Both of my kids are teaching in the classroom. My son (HS Social
Studies) as a career and my daughter (MS Science) as a step toward
eventually becoming a school administrator.

The have been some positive aspects of the NCLB. For instance,
teachers must demonstrate a level of expertise in the subjec they
teach. The schools can't simply hire a guy because he's a great
football coach and then say, "Oh, yeah...and you'll be teaching two
periods of astronomy every morning so better read a chapter or two
ahead of the students in the text book. Oh, and next semester you'll
be teaching advanced trig, but don't worry about that- nobody will
understand the subject well enought to realize you have no facility
what-so-ever for math."

Well, I would think that's a slight exaggeration. In CT, MA, RI and
NY you have to be certified to teach both subject and grade level.
Maybe it's different out there in the Great Northwest, but it's been
that way here for at least 30 years and longer as Mrs. Wave will be
finishing her 38th year this June. As far as I know, the only thing
that the NCLB act did was formalize that practice nationally - I can't
speak to areas outside of NE.

But in general, the system is not so good. Far too many districts are
strictly "teaching to the test". My son has several classes of HS
freshmen who are spending the entire 9th grade simply studying to pas
the 10th grade NCLB test- it's that critical to the district that
nearly all the 10th graders pass so that the district will continue to
get federal school dollars.

That's about the size of it ok.

Horse****.

Not at all - it's a fact.

Ask the next question - do the teachers know the test questions?

What do you think they teach to?

If so, then the whole thing's been compromised anyway.

That's the point.

True. Have been complaints out here of the teaching to the test. No cures,
they still teach to the test.


Easily fixed, if so desired. Don't let the teachers see the test.
--
John H

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 19:39:53 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:


Using the challenged as an example of why NCLB doesn't work makes very
little sense. In states with a very strong teachers' union, NCLB doesn't
work. Why? Because the unions don't like their teachers having to meet
standards.

To say that standards shouldn't be used to judge the educational process
makes absolutely no sense. To say that children shouldn't be taught a
curriculum which enables them to meet the standards makes even less sense.
To say that children shouldn't be tested to ensure they meet the standards
makes the least sense of all.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One of the risks of rigidly enforced "national cirriculum standards"
is the potential for the federal government to manipulate too many of
the details of public education.

Did I say something about 'national curriculum standards'. There is always
the potential for the federal government to do as you say. You are simply
coming up with another excuse here. The establishment of minimal standards
for various subjects should not *have* to be a federal government job.
Sadly, too many states don't or didn't have standards.


For example: What if, in order to qualify for federal aid, a school
district were *required* to teach the "theory of intelligent design"
enough hours to equal any time spent on the "theory of evolution"?
Once we are to that step, how remote would it be to have a very
progressive or very conservative government then dictate that the
theory of intelligent design
was to be the *only* theory discussed in the classroom- (or,
conversely, that it could not be mentioned at all).


What if, what if, what if. "If" is for children building daydreams. What if
the federal government forced all 13 year-olds to join the Hitler Youth
Group?

Shall we teach as a matter of science, rather than faith, that the
human embryo has a soul at the moment of conception and that abortion
is therefore a "sin"? Shall we teach that responsible teenagers take
precautions to avoid STD's and pregnancy- or shall we teach that
responsible teenagers just say "no" to sex, drugs, and alcohol?


Another 'what if'. Even more liberal!

At the moment of conception a life is formed. Abortion then becomes the
taking of a life. In most civil areas of the world, taking a life is
considered wrong, although maybe not defined as 'sin'.

Point is, that some of these decisions should be made at the local
level and reflect the values of the communities in which the schools
are located. If some district in the Bible Belt wants to concentrate
on Intelligent Design as the best available theory explaining the
origin and modification of species, then that district should be
accountable first to the local taxpayers supporting the school rather
than first accountable to a national standard that (might possibly)
mandate Evolution as the preferred explanation..


Yes, some of those decisions should be made locally. You are confusing
standards and curriculum. Standards determine how well a student should
understand a given subject. Not all subjects are subject to meeting
'standards'. Photography, for example, is taught locally but not testable
by the state.

If some Nazi-like group somehow ascended to federal power 100 years
from now, of what would the "official national cirriculum" be likely
to consist? Scary to contemplate.

If it's scary, don't vote for Hillary or Obama. They'll just get us one
step closer.
--
John H

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:12:42 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 07:57:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:



And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart?

JimH's argument methods...cut what you don't like and make comments about
the rest.

I was certified by the state of Virginia, Tom.

Sorry - that was tounge and cheek. My apologies.

What I meant to say was that, at least in this state, you have to be
certified to teach. That certification is set to state standards and
you have to pass a core curriculum, pass a subject area knowledge
test, be mentored for a minimum of one year as a teacher then pass the
BEST program which is a whole 'nother story.

Very similar to the certification requirements in Virginia. Here the test
is called the Praxis. To teach high school math, a teacher must pass two of
them, one general and one math specific.


No offense meant.

With respect to the state and standards - it is true that the state
sets standards. However your interpretation of "standards" and their
interpretation of "standards" is very different.

I can't address that. Here, a standard may be:

"The student will solve multistep linear equations and inequalities in one
variable, solve literal equations (formulas) for a given variable, and
apply these skills to solve practical problems. Graphing calculators will
be used to confirm algebraic solutions." http://tinyurl.com/2b784r

Here, every Mastery Test is written, ordered and controlled by the
state. It is corrected by the state and the statistics developed from
the test are controlled by the state. Much like the SAT/GAT prep
pre-testing program and "pass/fail" classes, the test is taught
directly to the students.

You mean to say that the tests are given to the teachers early enough in
the year for them to teach only the test questions? If that's the case,
then it's simple fraud. You've got a right to complain, but not about NCLB.

There is a whole industry, Kaplan's comes to mind, that practically
teaches the SAT, test taking concepts, essay prompts, logical
progression of answer plots - it's teaching the test. A lot of the
Mastery Test prep program is based on Kaplan's techniques I believe.
I'd have to ask Mrs. Wave to be exact.

Yes, there are many 'tricks' to taking a multiple choice test, just as
there are many 'tricks' to the design of detractors and solutions to the
questions on the test. Students should have a general understanding of how
to take a multiple choice test, how to figure the odds, and when to guess
and not guess. Teaching that is *not* 'teaching THE test', but teaching
'test taking'.

Be that as it may, I don't see how you can look at it any other way
than teaching the test.

--
John H

On Feb 11, 8:19*am, "JimH" wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 07:57:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:52:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H.

The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a
claim
that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because
if the amount of education were increased across the country the
number of people supporting the D's would decrease.

Which, by the way, was a valid claim.
--

Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of
Republicans will be those states with the most successful and
comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with
the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the
Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and
thereby protecting their base.

Care to offer some examples? Half *a dozen or so of each would be
sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception.

Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a
county
or city function normally.

Unbelievable.

And you used to teach? *Who certified you - Wal-Mart?

JimH's argument methods...cut what you don't like and make comments about
the rest.

Go foch yourself John. *What the hell do *I* have to do with this
discussion?

You really are an asshole.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Does your priest know you act like that, Jim?

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 08:19:34 -0500, "JimH" wrote:



On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 07:57:04 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:52:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H.

The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a
claim
that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because
if the amount of education were increased across the country the
number of people supporting the D's would decrease.

Which, by the way, was a valid claim.
--

Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of
Republicans will be those states with the most successful and
comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with
the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the
Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and
thereby protecting their base.

Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be
sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception.



Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a
county
or city function normally.

Unbelievable.

And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart?

JimH's argument methods...cut what you don't like and make comments about
the rest.


Go foch yourself John. What the hell do *I* have to do with this
discussion?

You really are an asshole.


Facts are facts, Jimh. If you don't like seeing your acts in public, don't
perform them.
--
John H