CBD. My problem is that I have to totally take your word for whatever support you have for your arguments. Your link just goes to a page that lists publications by Dr. Flinn. There is no readible information on that page, nor anything that supports what you are saying.
Since you apparently are completely positive how these tests were done, how about you actually link a page that details that methodology? If you can't, then you aren't actually proving anything. You're just posting what you believe to be true. For all I know, you just heard that somewhere, assume that's the methodology used, and assume that by just linking to that page, I'll accept that you know something I don't.
Provide a real source for your claims, or don't make them.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- jeb bush on education.......
jeb bush on education.......Follow
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
CBD. My problem is that I have to totally take your word for whatever support you have for your arguments. Your link just goes to a page that lists publications by Dr. Flinn. There is no readible information on that page, nor anything that supports what you are saying.
Since you apparently are completely positive how these tests were done, how about you actually link a page that details that methodology? If you can't, then you aren't actually proving anything. You're just posting what you believe to be true. For all I know, you just heard that somewhere, assume that's the methodology used, and assume that by just linking to that page, I'll accept that you know something I don't.
Provide a real source for your claims, or don't make them.
Since you apparently are completely positive how these tests were done, how about you actually link a page that details that methodology? If you can't, then you aren't actually proving anything. You're just posting what you believe to be true. For all I know, you just heard that somewhere, assume that's the methodology used, and assume that by just linking to that page, I'll accept that you know something I don't.
Provide a real source for your claims, or don't make them.
My mom is a graduate assistant for Dr. Finn, and has repeatedly discussed the topic with me. Unless we have had a conspiracy against you for two years beforehand, I fail to see how anything she's said about the study could be a lie.
I'm going to give you an "Idiot" rundown of the last few posts, beginning with a quote in one of mine, and the a summary of this post. I'd love to see you debunk your inability to read, and your own hypocrisy.
Quote:
EDIT: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/RP/Finn.html
You can take the title of his papers, many of which are on that subject. You probably have better access to that information then me.
I'm too lazy to look it up.
You can take the title of his papers, many of which are on that subject. You probably have better access to that information then me.
I'm too lazy to look it up.
<insert you continually making claims that require a lot of evidence that one can only receive through telepathy or by guesswork>
Your last post: Well... you have no proof of your facts! It doesn't matter that I just claimed sh[b][/b]itloads of information on something I clearly don't know much about! You have no evidence!
If you're going to run out of topics to try to use to prove me wrong, at least admit taht you are wrong with dignity instead of looking like a 3 year old having a temper tantrum.
First off. I never said anything about the study was a lie. I simply believe that the study itself may have been flawed, and/or the results are being interpreted in a manner not consisten with the study itself.
Since you have provided absolutely *zero* information about the studies themselves or how they were conducted, I'm kinda left with nothing to work with except your insistence that smaller class sizes are the magic bullet that'll fix our education system.
I've at least provided a link to a page, written by someone who apparently agrees with my position that smaller class sizes is just the "education thought dejour", and really isn't a fix when applied on a large scale.
You can agree or disagree with that assessment, but at least I've provided actual text written by someone other then myself that supports my statements.
You've provided absolutely nothing. You say that smaller class sizes are needed. You say that your mom took part in those studies. You say that she said that the studies were conducted in a correct manner. You say that the results of those small scale studies will work when applied on a large scale.
It's all things you are saying yourself. The one link is next to useless since there's no information on the topic. You may just have well have just named the guy with no link and stated yourself what Dr. Finn's results were. It's still just you making a claim with no support.
Now, if you wanted to make an argument, you'd actually spend 30 seconds with a search engine and find something like this
Interestingly enough, Finn's own words support (to a degree) what I've been saying. The studies were only conducted for the first few primary grades. We have no evidence that smaller class sizes in say middle and high schools will produce any benefit. He also *specifically* states that smaller class sizes at the cost of other programs is a poor idea (didn't I say that what we're seeing is schools cutting art and music classes to allow for smaller class sizes?). He also talks about the issue of needing an increased number of *qualified* teachers.
In short. Simply legistlatively mandating a smaller classroom size without actually having a plan for implementing it (as Florida would seem to be doing) is a horrible idea. Who's funding it? Where's that money coming from? Did the voters of Florida also vote to increase their taxes to pay for this? If not, aren't you just ensuring that education resources will be stripped from other areas to meet the constitutional requirement?
I'm not particularly opposed to the idea that smaller class sizes in the first few grades is of benefit. In fact, I'd expect it, since those are the formative years in terms of students and how they view education in general. What I disagree is the manner in which those initiatives are usually pushed forth. There's a whole political step between the studies and recommendations, and the laws that get passed, and then the actual policies that result. That's why I mentioned the Teachers Union. They are probably the largest single factor in determining how those principles end up being enacted into policy, and for the most part, they use studies like this as excuses to line their own pockets and increase their political power.
Finn's studies (actually studies he's reporting on in addition to his own) provide absolutely zero evidence that reducing class sizes at the Middle and High School levels will have any effect at all. Especially for students who didn't come up through a system with smaller class sizes. In fact, his data would suggest the opposite. The students in small classes had small but measurable gains against those in larger classes for the first two years, and then leveled off. They maintained the gains, but did not continue to gain more ground after that point. This would indicate that small class sizes during those first two years are critical in that they form the student's attitudes towards learning in general and are more likely to result in a postitive outlook which they'll carry on throughout their school career. Tossing a student that's spent the last 8 years in large classrooms into a small one isn't likely to change those views at all, or have any real measurable positive effect. Even just keeping them in smaller classes through their entire K-12 school term isn't indicated by the study.
But that's not what ends up on your ballot. And that's not what ends up being pushed as school policy. See. It would be relatively cheap for us to just make grades K-2 smaller class sizes. It requires less education to be a teacher at those levels, and the requirements in terms of books and materials are lower. The salary difference between a Kindergarden teacher and a High School teacher is pretty significant. We could certainly manage the first few years in small classes, and then gradually increase class sizes as students move up in grades until we reached large sizes in High School (heck. in college it's no uncommon to be in an auditorium sized classroom, but since you've presumably already learned how to learn by then, it doesn't really have any impact, right?). Why then do we end up with pushes at the High School level to decrease class sizes dramatically? Heck. I've hardly even heard about pushes to decrease sizes in the early grade levels. It's all Middle and High School that I hear being buzzed around.
That's what I'm talking about. It's not just about the raw data, it's about how you apply that data to the real world. Largely, we find that political concerns get in the way of actually doing what's right. And in this case, that is *definately* the case...
Edited, Wed Feb 16 22:33:37 2005 by gbaji
Since you have provided absolutely *zero* information about the studies themselves or how they were conducted, I'm kinda left with nothing to work with except your insistence that smaller class sizes are the magic bullet that'll fix our education system.
I've at least provided a link to a page, written by someone who apparently agrees with my position that smaller class sizes is just the "education thought dejour", and really isn't a fix when applied on a large scale.
You can agree or disagree with that assessment, but at least I've provided actual text written by someone other then myself that supports my statements.
You've provided absolutely nothing. You say that smaller class sizes are needed. You say that your mom took part in those studies. You say that she said that the studies were conducted in a correct manner. You say that the results of those small scale studies will work when applied on a large scale.
It's all things you are saying yourself. The one link is next to useless since there's no information on the topic. You may just have well have just named the guy with no link and stated yourself what Dr. Finn's results were. It's still just you making a claim with no support.
Now, if you wanted to make an argument, you'd actually spend 30 seconds with a search engine and find something like this
Interestingly enough, Finn's own words support (to a degree) what I've been saying. The studies were only conducted for the first few primary grades. We have no evidence that smaller class sizes in say middle and high schools will produce any benefit. He also *specifically* states that smaller class sizes at the cost of other programs is a poor idea (didn't I say that what we're seeing is schools cutting art and music classes to allow for smaller class sizes?). He also talks about the issue of needing an increased number of *qualified* teachers.
In short. Simply legistlatively mandating a smaller classroom size without actually having a plan for implementing it (as Florida would seem to be doing) is a horrible idea. Who's funding it? Where's that money coming from? Did the voters of Florida also vote to increase their taxes to pay for this? If not, aren't you just ensuring that education resources will be stripped from other areas to meet the constitutional requirement?
I'm not particularly opposed to the idea that smaller class sizes in the first few grades is of benefit. In fact, I'd expect it, since those are the formative years in terms of students and how they view education in general. What I disagree is the manner in which those initiatives are usually pushed forth. There's a whole political step between the studies and recommendations, and the laws that get passed, and then the actual policies that result. That's why I mentioned the Teachers Union. They are probably the largest single factor in determining how those principles end up being enacted into policy, and for the most part, they use studies like this as excuses to line their own pockets and increase their political power.
Finn's studies (actually studies he's reporting on in addition to his own) provide absolutely zero evidence that reducing class sizes at the Middle and High School levels will have any effect at all. Especially for students who didn't come up through a system with smaller class sizes. In fact, his data would suggest the opposite. The students in small classes had small but measurable gains against those in larger classes for the first two years, and then leveled off. They maintained the gains, but did not continue to gain more ground after that point. This would indicate that small class sizes during those first two years are critical in that they form the student's attitudes towards learning in general and are more likely to result in a postitive outlook which they'll carry on throughout their school career. Tossing a student that's spent the last 8 years in large classrooms into a small one isn't likely to change those views at all, or have any real measurable positive effect. Even just keeping them in smaller classes through their entire K-12 school term isn't indicated by the study.
But that's not what ends up on your ballot. And that's not what ends up being pushed as school policy. See. It would be relatively cheap for us to just make grades K-2 smaller class sizes. It requires less education to be a teacher at those levels, and the requirements in terms of books and materials are lower. The salary difference between a Kindergarden teacher and a High School teacher is pretty significant. We could certainly manage the first few years in small classes, and then gradually increase class sizes as students move up in grades until we reached large sizes in High School (heck. in college it's no uncommon to be in an auditorium sized classroom, but since you've presumably already learned how to learn by then, it doesn't really have any impact, right?). Why then do we end up with pushes at the High School level to decrease class sizes dramatically? Heck. I've hardly even heard about pushes to decrease sizes in the early grade levels. It's all Middle and High School that I hear being buzzed around.
That's what I'm talking about. It's not just about the raw data, it's about how you apply that data to the real world. Largely, we find that political concerns get in the way of actually doing what's right. And in this case, that is *definately* the case...
Edited, Wed Feb 16 22:33:37 2005 by gbaji
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
http://www.wtgrantfoundation.org/info-url_nocat3026/info-url_nocat.htm
-------------------------------------------------------------
CBD took a small piece of this mans work to paint the picture they wanted painted.
most effective propaganda has small veins of truth in it.
W.T. grant has done alot of good work in the field, not just for education, but for the development of children and young adults in general.
NOWHERE in his reseach does he advocate class sizes as they are today. in south florida, the average class size is over 30 kids per teacher. this is in elementary school.
and thos after school activities W.T. Grant is so big on? most have been eliminated due to a lack of funding...read lack of political will to support......and would make W.T. Grant turn over in his grave.
to take a small reseach project, on a particularly narrow age band, and to use it as a flag to waive to say it doesnt matter how many kids are in a class room.....is just plain republican.
they slanderd the integrity of W.T. Grant by using his work for their agenda pushing website.
-------------------------------------------------------------
CBD took a small piece of this mans work to paint the picture they wanted painted.
most effective propaganda has small veins of truth in it.
W.T. grant has done alot of good work in the field, not just for education, but for the development of children and young adults in general.
NOWHERE in his reseach does he advocate class sizes as they are today. in south florida, the average class size is over 30 kids per teacher. this is in elementary school.
and thos after school activities W.T. Grant is so big on? most have been eliminated due to a lack of funding...read lack of political will to support......and would make W.T. Grant turn over in his grave.
to take a small reseach project, on a particularly narrow age band, and to use it as a flag to waive to say it doesnt matter how many kids are in a class room.....is just plain republican.
they slanderd the integrity of W.T. Grant by using his work for their agenda pushing website.
Quote:
jeb bush announced today his plan for honoring the amendment ot the Florida constitution limmitting class sizes by 2010.
his plan? change the amendment.
he pitted the teachers union against parents by delcaring he would raise the minimum sallery for teachers to 35,000 dollars a year if the restriction on class sizes, voted into the constitution, if voters would vote it OUT of the constitution.
he is submitting a voter referendum in 2006 to get rid of the mandatory cap on class sizes, with support from the teachers union.
but, like the snake to eve, in a single sentance at the end of the press release, he said the sallery increase would not be included in the voter referendum, and would also be subject to legislature approval........
just like his brother, wave the education flag for the votes, and skuttle anything related to education when its time to ponie up.
his plan? change the amendment.
he pitted the teachers union against parents by delcaring he would raise the minimum sallery for teachers to 35,000 dollars a year if the restriction on class sizes, voted into the constitution, if voters would vote it OUT of the constitution.
he is submitting a voter referendum in 2006 to get rid of the mandatory cap on class sizes, with support from the teachers union.
but, like the snake to eve, in a single sentance at the end of the press release, he said the sallery increase would not be included in the voter referendum, and would also be subject to legislature approval........
just like his brother, wave the education flag for the votes, and skuttle anything related to education when its time to ponie up.
Ok here we go.
Limiting.
Salary
Scuttle
Pony
I'm not even going to go into capitilazation or puncuation. I could point out other mis-spellings, but I'm not that bored. If one is going to whine about "edumakation"(LOL) one really should do so in an educated manner.
Real good job dude, of proving why the Dumbocratic Party Line is full of Horse Hockey.
I mean, heck, a guy who can't spell Showdow REALM should really be taken seriously.
Quote:
What every single study (and simple logic) has shown is that student performance is most directly related to teacher quality. That's it. No magic bullets here folks. If you've got a bunch of crappy teachers, their students wont learn much.
Rut Roh. Warning to the dumbocratic party, I'm not the only person who can think for themselves.
Test the ****ing teachers. If they fail, they dont' teach. Then, offer salaries commensurate with teaching ability.
( whoa, Logic, what a concept.)
ABombiNation wrote:
Quote:
What every single study (and simple logic) has shown is that student performance is most directly related to teacher quality. That's it. No magic bullets here folks. If you've got a bunch of crappy teachers, their students wont learn much.
Rut Roh. Warning to the dumbocratic party, I'm not the only person who can think for themselves.
Test the ****ing teachers. If they fail, they dont' teach. Then, offer salaries commensurate with teaching ability.
( whoa, Logic, what a concept.)
hahah! Funny story actually.
Since Ahnold took office as the Governator here in California, he's gotten pretty much glowing press. Yeah. There's been the occasional concern, and he's certainly ruffled a few feathers, but I'd not seen a single negative advertisement against him, or even any serious negative press. Not one.
Not until the day after he mentioned in a speach that he'd like to make teacher salaries a function of teacher quality regardless of tenure. Seems reasonable, right? Seems logical, right? The very next day. Not two days. The very next day I saw a negative political ad aimed against him. It didn't mention the teaching thing at all (It was something decrying his poor economic plan or something). Think that was a coincidence? Maybe I'm paranoid, but I doubt it. Whether you know it or not the Teachers Union has an amazing amount of pull in most states, and certainly play the political game to get what they want. And what they want is more teachers with higher salaries. Period.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Recent Visitors: 276
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (276)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- jeb bush on education.......
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC