more on teachers

Don't make the common error of confusing numbers with statistical analyses.

Numbers are often used to mislead and are often incorrectly presented as statistics.

In fact numbers are not statistics until they are put through scientifically valid formulae and then double checked (peer reviewed) by other mathematicians. Statistical analysis is even more complicated.

55% + 20% + 25 + 95%/4 = 48.75% mean (average) or 40% median. Fair enough, but let's say those numbers represent Martians who vote the green party in 4 different states. Is it accurate to say that 48.75% of Martians are likely to vote green?

NO!! Absolutely NOT.

To determine the likely percentage of Martians that will vote green you would have to control for any number of variables, including the age, economic strata, education, etc, etc, etc. The mathematical formula would look more like this (just to start):

statisticalformula.png


You can generally tell if particular a statistical analysis is valid or not, even without being a mathemetician. If the authors say "this is what we found", be very skeptical. If the authors say, "This what we found, this is all the data we used, these are the formulae we used, these are the variables we controlled for and this is how we did it.", you are almost certainly looking at objective fact as well as it can be determined within whatever the confidence rate is (which will also be given).

Though many folks tend to just throw numbers out there without basis (or maybe just "calling them like they see them"), make no mistake about it, statistical analysis is one of the hard sciences.
 
This members account was accessed WITHOUT his consent by a banned member:

HYPERWRX

As per KODIAK61's request, the contents of this post have been deleted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quote:Leon you should go hunt more.
Boy howdy do I ever agree with that!! Unfortunately "life responsibilities" have kept me from doing nearly as much hunting as I'd like in the last couple of months.




Quote:Let's see some statistics concerning predator taken during the 2010-2011 season!

I haven't kept precise records in years, but 22 coyotes killed in 40ish days of hunting is pretty close.

However Andrew, if you had been paying attention, you would understand that those are just numbers, and can in no way be considered statistics.

To make any kind of meaningfull statistical evaluation of my hunting success/failure, you'd need a larger (multi year?) data set, as well as the details of all these variables (and more).

Some days I made 4 stands, some 12-15.

I was in Iraq for 7 months of the year

I hunted in three different states, AZ, NM, and TX.

I hunted in desert, plains, mountain pines, and Texas hill country.

(Almost) all the stands I made were "blind" with zero pre-scouting (by anybody), but several days I hunted old favorites from before I went to Iraq (that I hadn't set on in several years).

Many stands were solo, but some were with as many as four people.

Some stands, both solo and with others, focused downwind, some upwind, and some covered 270 or 360deg

100% of the time I wore a ghillie suit, but sometimes others were cameoed, and sometimes there was at least one person on the stand in regular clothes.

Most were made using e-callers, but some were hand calls exclusively and others used both.

A few stands used a decoy and IIRC I think I killed at least one coyote on a "decoy" stand.

On almost all the stands I was standing up, on some of the stands made with others there was at least one other person standing up as well.

I used ARs almost exclusively in .243 WSSM, .204, and .223, but killed one long range "target of opportunity" with a Rem 700 .308.

I shot coyotes at ranges from about 10yds to 700ish.

To make a really valid analysis of any usefulness, you should probably know the mix of male/female, ages, sizes etc too, but maybe this further explanation will provide some illumination of the difference between numbers and statistics.



So, once again Andrew, do you have a valid source/link for your assertion of fact that,
"85% of parent on a whole have absolutely no clue what is being taught to their children. They're either too busy with work or plain and simple, their interests lie elsewhere."?

Or is it the case that though you expressed it as a statement of fact, you were just "calling em like you see em" and just blowing smoke without anything to back it up?


 
This members account was accessed WITHOUT his consent by a banned member:

HYPERWRX

As per KODIAK61's request, the contents of this post have been deleted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Numbers, stats, data - none impress me much. You can scew data to suit your purposes. Yes, Leon, it happens. Both sides can use the same data/stats to "prove" their point. Save it. We're talking about educating teenagers. That's something real that I know something about. If you think you can walk into a classroom day after day and teach based on data, you don't know teenagers today. And if you have teens who are perfect, you might be surprised at how they act at school. Leon, I have a feeling if you ever spent any time in a public school classroom as a teacher, they'd either run you into the ground or you'd end up in prison for killing one of them. Show them the data.
 
Quote:Numbers, stats, data - none impress me much. You can scew data to suit your purposes. Yes, Leon, it happens. Both sides can use the same data/stats to "prove" their point. Save it.
Do you not read the posts at all jeffo?

Yes indeed, data (numbers) can be (and often are) skewed to influence the ignorant. Statistical analysis is the process of using the data in a scientifically rigorous methodology to reach conclusions of fact.

Once again, data (numbers) don't say anything conclusive. Statistics are the facts found after using that scientific testing on data (numbers), and statistical analysis does reach scientifically valid conclusions of fact.






Quote:We're talking about educating teenagers. That's something real that I know something about.
What do you teach them jeffo? I sincerely hope it's not any of the maths or sciences.

Your lack of knowledge, not to mention your apparent willful ignorance of even the basics of statistical science is frankly appalling, especially considering that you are entrusted with teaching other folk's children.




Quote:Leon, I have a feeling if you ever spent any time in a public school classroom as a teacher, they'd either run you into the ground or you'd end up in prison for killing one of them.
Aww, now you've gone and hurt my feelings, and after you said earlier that you had little doubt that if I tried teaching I would produce top notch students.
 
I understand statistical science. I also understand teaching. What you fail to understand is that knowing it and being able to teach it are two very different things. Think I'm wrong? Go sub for a few months.
 
Quote:I understand statistical science.
I can only hope that you are just blowing smoke.

It would be truly scary if you actually believe that you even have an accurate concept of what statistical science IS.

These quotes are just a few from this thread. They show pretty conclusively that you have no conception of statistics or statistical analysis.


Originally Posted By: jeffoOnly 5 states do not have collective bargaining for educators and have deemed it illegal:
Those states and their ranking on ACT/SAT scores are as follows. South Carolina -50th, North Carolina -49th, Georgia -48th, Texas -47th, Virginia -44th (By the way, Wisconsin is #2.)


Quote:Originally Posted By: NM Leon askedFor 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?

Originally Posted By: jeffo answeredPublic schools have to take everyone. Including those the private schools denied. And homeschooled dropouts.

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.

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




Quote:What you fail to understand is that knowing it and being able to teach it are two very different things. Think I'm wrong?
On the contrary jeffo, I understand very well that being knowledgeable in any subject does not mean that a person would necessarily be competent to teach that subject. BUT...

The concept that anybody can competently teach a subject they AREN'T knowledgeable in is ridiculous on the face of it.

What subject do you teach jeffo?
 
Definitely not any Maths or Sciences, so probably not Shop or even Ag (maybe FFA or 4H). Those both would require at least some math and science skills.

Maybe a foreign language, but probably not English as he does not write concisely or well, and copies and pastes quotes from others with terrible composition skills. Most English teachers I have known are picky about composition, sentence structure, etc.

Maybe English Lit, Social Studies, Band, P.E.,

If I had to make a guess, I'd say English Lit. He's got the progressive mindset/worldview that seems to pervade the English Lit/elite faculties nowadays.
 
Back
Top