more on teachers

T

Tnslim

New member
With the recent threads on teachers I thought I would post this. (Mods, if in wrong area feel free to move?

I run a flooring company and on a recent job I ran into this amazing teacher. This lady was a highschool math teacher and I was trying to explain to her how the job was to be done.One room was 14'6" X 22' and while explaining the carpet came in 12' width we would be making a seam for the extra width and then tried to explain how the seams would be made. Her reply was " I really want this carpet.....would it be possible to move the walls to make it fit?"

Another one, also a teacher. I was looking at a car this lady had for sale. It was an early GM that had the hidden wipers and under the rear of the hood was full of leaves. This lady did everything but stand on her head trying to get the leaves out and when I raised the hood and got them out she said, " I would never have thought of that." And these people teach our children.
 
While there are certainly brilliant teachers, it's an unfortunate fact that being a teacher nowadays does not guarantee or even necessarily imply either intelligence or competency.
 
Quote:That is the true in all professions, from the ditch digger to the rocket scientist.

Not true at all.

What percentage of rocket scientists, doctors, engineers, physicists, chemists, geologists, mathematicians, actuaries, CPAs, lawyers, etc, etc, etc, do you think are unintelligent, or incompetent (and stay in the job). What percentage graduated in the lowest academic quartile of whatever school they got their degree from? I only ask because most teachers do. It's such a problem that books have been written about how to solve the problem, because such a high percentage of the top education majors either change their majors before they graduate or change jobs after they see that they won't be paid for being better than than their peers.

Education majors are considered to be the bottom of the intellectual pile at any college (for good reason).

Here's what the folks at ACT say about the composite ACT scores of students working toward various professions.

(24.7) Letters
(24.3) Mathematics
(23.4) Foreign Languages
(23.3) Sciences (Bio & Physical)
(23.3) Cross-Disciplinary Studies
(22.6) Engineering
(22.5) Philosophy, Religion & Theology
(21.9) Social Sciences
(21.4) Engineer-Related Technology
(21.4) Communication & Comm Technology
(21.3) Computer and Information Science
(21.3) Visual/Performing Arts
(20.9) Health Science & Allied
(20.8) Architectural & Environmental Design
(20.6) Business & Management
(20.3) Teacher Education
(20.3) Education
 
Originally Posted By: dogcatcherThat is the true in all professions, from the ditch digger to the rocket scientist.
I fully agree with that statement. Leon, come to my work and change out a 3 way light switch or a 4 way light switch. Its very simple just 3 or 4 little wires. But I bet the majority of people out there couldn't do it. It would be the same as me going to NASA and filling up the space shuttle. And ACT scores dont prove a thing! Just because you have book smarts doesn't make you intelligent!
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Stumper4268And ACT scores dont prove a thing! Just because you have book smarts doesn't make you intelligent!

While I agree that a person's score on the ACT is not an absolute indicator of their intelligence, it does give a pretty good indication of their knowledge. The glaring issue is that the people who indicate they intend to pursue a career in education on the test have the lowest scores (relative to the others listed) when tested on their knowledge of the subject matter they want to teach.
 
Originally Posted By: Stumper4268
Just because you have book smarts doesn't make you intelligent!

I agree...

socialist-school.jpg
 
Yes because when a 17 or 18 year old kid takes the ACT he/she is at his/her peak intelligence or drive. So by your reasoning college teaches students nothing. What about on the job training? I think it was either Stu or Leon that said they had to constantly learn new software to stay relevant in their place of work.
 
Originally Posted By: Irish_80Yes because when a 17 or 18 year old kid takes the ACT he/she is at his/her peak intelligence or drive. So by your reasoning college teaches students nothing. What about on the job training? I think it was either Stu or Leon that said they had to constantly learn new software to stay relevant in their place of work.

Never said it did. But it does show how they stand relative to their college bound peers. As far as college, (been there, done that... got the engineering degree and loans to prove it) going to college does not bestow intelligence to a person, it does however offer the chance to expand your knowledge. So if the "education crowd" ranks at the bottom in knowledge after high school what makes you think it will change after college?
 
So tell me Stumper, how long would someone who wasn't intelligent enough to learn how to change a switch last in your job?

How long would someone who wasn't competent enough to be able to change out a light switch last?

Are you really telling me that you have licenced union electricians on the job that are incompetent and/or ignorant of how to change switches?

I was a contractor for years, and always hired licenced electrical subcontractors on my jobs, even though at the time it wasn't a legal requirement. The reason? By hiring licenced electricians I knew with absolute confidence that I was going to be getting work that was safe, met code, and would pass inspection.

Can you say the same when you send your kid off to a government school on the first day of the school year? Do you know with absolute confidence that your child's new teacher is going to be a good one?

Obviously not. A few years ago, 21% of teachers in NM couldn't even pass the same exams they were giving their students.


So tell me again Stumper, do you agree with this statement:

it's an unfortunate fact that being a teacher nowadays does not guarantee or even necessarily imply either intelligence or competency.

Or do you say that you have incompetent licenced electricians in your union, in which case I suppose it's rational to agree with this one:

That is the true in all professions, from the ditch digger to the rocket scientist.

Though if you do agree with it, you might want to go back and edit this statement:

I'll put MY SKILLS against any non union electrician out there!!!!!!!!!
And I can make it ANYWHERE. I have a skill that my UNION has taught me for life.







Quote:And ACT scores dont prove a thing! Just because you have book smarts doesn't make you intelligent!

Tell that to the hundreds of colleges that use those scores as placement tools for student admissions (and require minimum scores for admission). Many majors programs require a minimum SAT or ACT score above those required for general admission, because the courses are harder. Tell it also to the 10s of thousands of high schools who test their juniors and seniors. I'm sure they'll be happy to save the 10s of millions of dollars they currently spend on those tests now.
 
There is a very good argument against public unions having the right to collective bargaining. The public unions overwhelmingly support the Democratic party. The Democratic party has generally passed laws that are very much pro-union. This simple relationship illustates the conflict of interest with the unions and the Democrats.

I have a good buddy who is a union pipefitter. He is an unabashed Obama fan. I can't understand it...he's working on a coal-fired power plant despite the fact Obama opposes them.
 
Last edited:
So jeffo, your contention is that teachers union collective bargaining raises ACT/SAT scores?

Your second link (broken) might provide some evidence of that, but so far it's a complete non sequitur.

How about links to some in depth statistical analysis?

For instance, if we assume your proposition is correct, how would one explain the ACT/SAT scores of the private sector schools that are largely non union?

National SAT Test Scores

................Verbal.... Math
National ......508 ......520
Public ..........505 ......515
Religious ......539 ......534
Independent .553 ......577
 
NM Leon said:
So jeffo, your contention is that teachers union collective bargaining raises ACT/SAT scores?

Your second link (broken) might provide some evidence of that, but so far it's a complete non sequitur.

How about links to some in depth statistical analysis?

For instance, if we assume your proposition is correct, how would one explain the ACT/SAT scores of the private sector schools that are largely non union?




Public schools have to take everyone. Including those the private schools denied. And homeschooled dropouts.
Click to expand...
 
Some private schools take only "problem" kids, some take only "special needs", some take only "artsy", some take only "disadvantaged", some take only high IQ, some take only a particular religion, and some take only rich kids.

Again jeffo, since private schools take every demographic, how would one explain the superior ACT/SAT scores of the private sector schools when they are largely non union?

Is it really your contention that teachers union collective bargaining increases ACT/SAT scores? Explain to me how that would work please (and provide some proof in the form of a peer reviewed statistical analysis).
 
Can you show me the ACT/SAT scores of these schools that take only "problem" kids? Or "special needs" kids?

Private schools take every demographic, collectively, but each school has a specific type of student. They take the ones they want. The rest get sent to public school.
 
Quote:Can you show me the ACT/SAT scores of these schools that take only "problem" kids? Or "special needs" kids?

Private schools take every demographic, collectively, but each school has a specific type of student. They take the ones they want. The rest get sent to public school.

What a ridiculous question and statement. It's answered with basic fourth grade math (or maybe graduate level if you went to government schools
scared.gif
).

Can you show me the ACT/SAT scores of only the special needs students in public school? No? That's alright because their academic ratings are included in the totals of all students in public schools, even as the academic ratings of students attending private special needs schools are included in the totals of all students attending private schools.

Private schools only take the students they want and turn away the rest? That's the point jeffo, private schools CAN (and do) specialize, whether it's for athletics, deaf, behaviour, genius, artistic talent, whatever. They are in general able to do a better job because they can specialize.

I could point you towards say The Family Foundation School that only takes troubled teens (alcohol, drugs, violence, etc), and turns all others away(and has almost 100% of their students continue on to college). I could point out the Illinois Center for Autism where in choosing only the ones they want, they turn away any student that DOESN'T suffer from autism, pervasive developmental disorder, Asperger’s Syndrome, mental retardation, specific learning disabilities, speech and language impairment, emotional disturbance or developmental delay. I might also point anyone interested toward the National Association of Private Special Education Centers whose 100s of member schools turn away any students who do not meet their rigid criteria.
lol.gif


So again jeffo (for the third time), Is it really your contention that teachers union collective bargaining increases ACT/SAT scores?
 
Originally Posted By: NM LeonQuote:Can you show me the ACT/SAT scores of these schools that take only "problem" kids? Or "special needs" kids?

Private schools take every demographic, collectively, but each school has a specific type of student. They take the ones they want. The rest get sent to public school.

What a ridiculous question and statement. It's answered with basic fourth grade math (or maybe graduate level if you went to government schools
scared.gif
).

Can you show me the ACT/SAT scores of only the special needs students in public school? No? That's alright because their academic ratings are included in the totals of all students in public schools, even as the academic ratings of students attending private special needs schools are included in the totals of all students attending private schools.

Private schools only take the students they want and turn away the rest? That's the point jeffo, private schools CAN (and do) specialize, whether it's for athletics, deaf, behaviour, genius, artistic talent, whatever. They are in general able to do a better job because they can specialize.

I could point you towards say The Family Foundation School that only takes troubled teens (alcohol, drugs, violence, etc), and turns all others away(and has almost 100% of their students continue on to college). I could point out the Illinois Center for Autism where in choosing only the ones they want, they turn away any student that DOESN'T suffer from autism, pervasive developmental disorder, Asperger’s Syndrome, mental retardation, specific learning disabilities, speech and language impairment, emotional disturbance or developmental delay. I might also point anyone interested toward the National Association of Private Special Education Centers whose 100s of member schools turn away any students who do not meet their rigid criteria.
lol.gif


So again jeffo (for the third time), Is it really your contention that teachers union collective bargaining increases ACT/SAT scores?


That is what the data shows.
 
Originally Posted By: jeffoOriginally Posted By: NM LeonQuote:Can you show me the ACT/SAT scores of these schools that take only "problem" kids? Or "special needs" kids?

Private schools take every demographic, collectively, but each school has a specific type of student. They take the ones they want. The rest get sent to public school.

What a ridiculous question and statement. It's answered with basic fourth grade math (or maybe graduate level if you went to government schools
scared.gif
).

Can you show me the ACT/SAT scores of only the special needs students in public school? No? That's alright because their academic ratings are included in the totals of all students in public schools, even as the academic ratings of students attending private special needs schools are included in the totals of all students attending private schools.

Private schools only take the students they want and turn away the rest? That's the point jeffo, private schools CAN (and do) specialize, whether it's for athletics, deaf, behaviour, genius, artistic talent, whatever. They are in general able to do a better job because they can specialize.

I could point you towards say The Family Foundation School that only takes troubled teens (alcohol, drugs, violence, etc), and turns all others away(and has almost 100% of their students continue on to college). I could point out the Illinois Center for Autism where in choosing only the ones they want, they turn away any student that DOESN'T suffer from autism, pervasive developmental disorder, Asperger’s Syndrome, mental retardation, specific learning disabilities, speech and language impairment, emotional disturbance or developmental delay. I might also point anyone interested toward the National Association of Private Special Education Centers whose 100s of member schools turn away any students who do not meet their rigid criteria.
lol.gif



Where do these kids go?










So again jeffo (for the third time), Is it really your contention that teachers union collective bargaining increases ACT/SAT scores?


That is what the data shows.
 
Originally Posted By: NM LeonSo again jeffo (for the third time), Is it really your contention that teachers union collective bargaining increases ACT/SAT scores?
Originally Posted By: jeffoThat is what the data shows.

Uh, no jeffo, that's NOT what the data shows (and why I asked the question). How did you manage to get a baccalaureate without any understanding of statistical analysis at all? You are confusing correlation with causation.

Coyotes have four legs, two eyes, and long snouts, so any animal you see with four legs, two eyes, and a long snout must be a coyote right?





Originally Posted By: NM LeonI might also point anyone interested toward the National Association of Private Special Education Centers whose 100s of member schools turn away any students who do not meet their rigid criteria.
Quote:Where do these kids go?

You're kidding right? No? Pay attention here jeffo, this gets real complicated.

If a school for the blind turns away your kid because he can see just fine, where does he go? Maybe to a school that teaches kids who can see?

If your honor roll little angel is rejected by The Family Foundation School because she isn't a drug addict/violent/problem child, where does she go? Maybe to a school that specializes in teaching gifted students?

If your "just average normal" kid is rejected by the Illinois Center for Autism because he DOESN'T have autism, pervasive developmental disorder, Asperger’s Syndrome, mental retardation, specific learning disabilities, speech and language impairment, emotional disturbance, or developmental delay, where might YOU consider sending him as a second choice?

If money were no object in any of those cases, would you prefer to send your kid to a public school or would you do as so many of your fellow public school teacher brothers and sisters do and send your kid to a private school?

In Philadelphia, 44% of the public school teachers put their children in private schools. in Cincinnati 41%, Chicago 39%, Rochester, N.Y. 38%, San Francisco-Oakland area 34%, New York City 33%, 33% in the New Jersey suburbs, and 29% in Milwaukee and New Orleans.”

Nationwide, a public school teacher is twice as likely as a member of the general population to send their child to a private school. How about it jeffo, think maybe they have good reason?
 
Back
Top