Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, April 24, 2008
George Will :: Townhall.com Columnist
A Nation Held Back By (Lack of) Education
by George Will
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


If an unfriendly power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war.

-- "A Nation At Risk" (1983)

WASHINGTON -- Let us limp down memory lane to mark this week's melancholy 25th anniversary of a national commission's report that galvanized Americans to vow to do better. Today the nation still ignores what had been learned years before 1983.

Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan once puckishly said that data indicated that the leading determinant of the quality of public schools, measured by standardized tests, was the schools' proximity to Canada. He meant that the geographic correlation was stronger than the correlation between high test scores and high per pupil expenditures.

Moynihan also knew that schools cannot compensate for the disintegration of families, and hence communities -- the primary transmitters of social capital. No reform can enable schools to cope with the 36.9 percent of all children and 69.9 percent of black children today born out of wedlock, which means, among many other things, a continually renewed cohort of unruly adolescent males.

Chester Finn, a former Moynihan aide, notes in his splendid new memoir ("Troublemaker: A Personal History of School Reform Since Sputnik") that during the Depression-era job scarcity, high schools were used to keep students out of the job market, shunting many into nonacademic classes. By 1961, those classes had risen to 43 percent of all those taken by students. After 1962, when New York City signed the nation's first collective bargaining contract with teachers, teachers began changing from members of a respected profession into just another muscular faction fighting for more government money. Between 1975 and 1980 there were a thousand strikes involving a million teachers whose salaries rose as students' scores on standardized tests declined.

In 1964, SAT scores among college-bound students peaked. In 1965, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) codified confidence in the correlation between financial inputs and cognitive outputs in education. But in 1966, the Coleman report, the result of the largest social science project in history, reached a conclusion so "seismic" -- Moynihan's description -- that the government almost refused to publish it.

Released quietly on the Fourth of July weekend, the report concluded that the qualities of the families from which children come to school matter much more than money as predictors of schools' effectiveness. The crucial common denominator of problems of race and class -- fractured families -- would have to be faced.

But it wasn't. Instead, shopworn panaceas -- larger teacher salaries, smaller class sizes -- were pursued as colleges were reduced to offering remediation to freshmen.

In 1976, for the first time in its 119-year history, the National Education Association, the teachers union, endorsed a presidential candidate, Jimmy Carter, who repaid it by creating the Education Department, a monument to the premise that money and government programs matter most. At the NEA's behest, the nation has expanded the number of teachers much faster than the number of students has grown. Hiring more, rather than more competent, teachers meant more dues-paying union members. For decades, schools have been treated as laboratories for various equity experiments. Fads incubated in education schools gave us "open" classrooms, teachers as "facilitators of learning" rather than transmitters of knowledge, abandonment of a literary canon in the name of "multiculturalism," and so on, producing a majority of high school juniors who could not locate the Civil War in the proper half-century.

In 1994, Congress grandly decreed that by 2000 the high school graduation rate would be "at least" 90 percent and that American students would be "first in the world in mathematics and science achievement." Moynihan, likening such goals to Soviet grain quotas -- solemnly avowed, never fulfilled -- said: "That will not happen." It did not.

Moynihan was a neoconservative before neoconservatism became a doctrine of foreign policy hubris. Originally, it taught domestic policy humility. Moynihan, a social scientist, understood that social science tells us not what to do but what is not working, which today includes No Child Left Behind. Finn thinks NCLB got things backward: "The law should have set uniform standards and measures for the nation, then freed states, districts and schools to produce those results as they think best." Instead, it left standards up to the states, which have an incentive to dumb them down to make compliance easier.

A nation at risk? Now more than ever.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
George F. Will is a 1976 Pulitzer Prize winner whose columns are syndicated in more than 400 magazines and newspapers worldwide.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read George Will's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
As a retired teacher....
I can state that this analysis is right on.

Teachers deserve...
Mr. Will, how dare you even hint at blaming the "dedicated’, everything "for the children" teachers for the problems of Amerikan education. Just because they are all greedy, ungrateful, arrogant, ultra left-wing, over-pampered, overpaid, over-perked, over-pensioned, under-worked parasites, enemies of children and parents, you should not disparage them. They deserve to live on fantasy inland inside the magic kingdom - all paid for by the sucker taxpayer. They deserve a five or six hour "work" day, sixteen weeks off every year and a list of other goodies too numerous to mention. They deserve executive benefits and CEO pensions and salaries here in the public worker’s paradise of NJ that are near, at and over $100K for tens of thousands of them. I am happy to pay $9,000.00 in property taxes for a modest three bedroom split, up at least $500.00 in August, so they can live the life I can only dream of as a graduate engineer. God bless them and their equally overcompensated brothers the "hero" cops.

Standards
Methinks perhaps NCLB should have demanded standards for the teachers instead of the pupils.

Actually it is a real conundrum. Since the governments insist on subsidizing b@st@rds, we will get more, a notorious bunch to teach or civilize. Since pregnant girls are no longer removed from schools, teen pregnancy is normalized, more b@st@rds. Since mandates require ALL children be "mainstreamed" we get all sorts of youngsters totally unable to keep up with classwork and keeping average and gifted children from performing at their best.

Previous posters have clearly pointed out the role of unions in this mess. I remember when teaching fell from a respected profession to a level enjoyed by longshoremen. Incredibly sad.

Liberal policies have failed and will continue to.

The morale of the story . . ?
Send your kid to private school.

Send your kids to private school
And here's a good list to begin your research:

http://www.optimates.us/BestHighSchoolsinAmerica.htm

affording a private education
There is a myth in our culture that we live in a two income economy. Millions of people around the country earning average incomes are living proof this is not true. They are able to homeschool their larger than average number of children on one income.

Others have mom working during school hours to cover the cost of tuition at a private institution (many of which have a tuition at the same or lower cost than the state's average per pupil funding.)

To insure educational options on a modest income do the following:

1. Ladies, marry a man with a marketable skill and an excellent work ethic who shares your views on finances, child rearing, religious/philosophical beliefs, and lifestyle choices.

If you are not practically compatible in addition to romantically attracted you will probably get divorced. Single parenthood almost always eliminates financial freedom to choose educational options unless you earn a lot of money.

2. While you are a "Dual Income No Kids" couple make every single financial decision on the husband's income. NO EXCEPTIONS! Put the wife's income in savings.

3. Avoid debt like the plague. Debt is the enemy.

4. Mom stays home and raises the infant-prechool kids herself careful to instill nurture and discipline. Badly behaved children are difficult to teach and will not make it in a homeschool or private school setting. Look into private and home options in these years so you don't make any impulsive decisions.

5. If you choose private school over homeschooling, mom returns to the workforce during school hours and her income covers tuition.

6. If you like your local charter or public school and prefer it to the other options, save that money for college.

Way too many couples marry for the wrong reasons and make financial decisions based on the moment rather than the long term. They eliminate choices in their futures by making bad choices in the present.

The solution
As I have said many times this will never be fixed until you get big government out of the school systems. The first thing that needs to happen is the State constitutions changed to remove a “right” to an education. The ALL public support for schools should then be ended. Once that happens all schools become private and would have to compete for customers. If a country wished to subsidize low income students for education they could do that based on ability and desire.

A student who has ability and desire for serious study could be subsidized through 12 grades while those who only attend to because mom needs a baby sitter would get enough to read and do simple math. Those would then be directed to a new system of apprenticeships in trades such as construction, plumbing, etc.

Yes, obviously I went to public school
I meant "moral" not "morale".

To Vic
We all know what should happen: the Federal government, and maybe even State governments, abandon the illusion that they can provide adequate educations.

But the Republicans have demonstrated that they are complicit in defrauding taxpayers in the name of the public good; for instance, "No Child Left Behind." So the two political parties that control the governmental institutions throughout the nation are willing to carry on the education charade. And while you, Vic, are exactly right, "oughts" and "shoulds" do not help current crop of parents because no reform is in sight.

Therefore, the only practical solution for parents is to privately educate their children.

povidus
While true that both the Commiecrats and the Republicrats are the same I think we have a better chance of attacking this from the local level. The feds use the 14th amendment to get inbvolved in the school system through "equal protection". IN order to eliminate that it will have to come out of State control.

Boutte
During the days of mass immigration from Europe at the beginning of the last century IQ tests wer administered to many of those entering. The average for Jews was under 100. They took it on themselves to push education. Blacks have relied on government and the numbers tell the tale. Culture matters more than anything and the Black community has allowed itself to be destroyed by those professing to help.

the state taketh away
It truly is stunning to see what we spend per capita on public education:

http://www2.census.gov/govs/school/04f33pub.pdf

Don't bother to read thru that screed, but let me sum it up for you-- per the federal govt., we were spending $6-13,000 per student in 2003-4 for public education. A truly sad reality is that as Will points out, there is no correlation between spending and results, but as some posters have noted here, you can count on the unions to jack up costs to pay these "professionals," while resisting merit pay and accountability like the plague.

You can send a child to a damm good private school for $10,000 a year, and lord knows what homeschoolers could do with a small fraction of those resources given their amazing success now (85th percentile on standardized tests) paying for themselves AND paying their taxes for the public education system. Furthermore, if vouchers were more common, good private schools would spring up like mushrooms to answer the demand. The black middle class likes vouchers because concerned parents know that the system has failed us.

I spent 25 years fairly high up in the corporate world (banking), and now teach business and econ at a community college. It is AMAZING how the bureaucracy protects and perpetuates itself. The product of public education is pitiful. Paying bad teachers more will do nothing but make it worse. And PC social engineering is enervating/crippling.

Racial Reality
Boutte, I agree with your analysis, but wanted to add something. In my experience – and the statistics back me up – the white intelligentsia (mostly liberal) is not replacing itself. In my large group of friends, alone (of which I am the lone conservative), there is only one other couple with a child (one child) and the rest are middle aged and childless, and very content to be so. They are college professors, journalists, writers, artists... you know the type. And they are not procreating. This just adds another wrinkle to your theory about intelligence dying out...

Unmarried does not equal Stupid
I reared two boys without benefit of even one husband, far less the current allocation of two, three or even five. One dropped out of high school because he was bored to death, worked his way up in a strong, blue-collar job that now takes about 60 hours a week and he could do more if he wanted to, and at the age of 25 he has bought his own home which he is committed to paying off over seven years (hence the long working hours.) He has a steady girl and a good life.

The other is on full scholarship to Georgia Tech in physics and math, is working part time at Starbucks *to keep in touch with the community*, and is determined to invent time travel in his spare time. If he knows there are such things as girls, that is pretty much all he knows about them, but he is popular, well liked and speaks in addition to English, Spanish and Japanese.

Both boys are well behaved, respectful and respectable, and the youngest one is frequently liked better by the parents of his friends than are their own children. Both have IQs well above average. Both could order from room service and figure a tip by the time they were seven. Neither curses in the presence of his Mama.

I have not noticed that the absence of a series of husbands or regular sex with a series of men in their mothers life has handicapped them in any way.

There must be some other reason Black kids are stupid.

Audir10
Perhaps some day we, as a nation, will come to realize the extent of the harm done to blacks by the War on Poverty. By subsidizing illegitimacy, it has guaranteed a steady supply of losers, even through the generations. This is not neocon rambling but the principles of economic law at work. This is what happens when Marxist ideas are put into action.

Another factor is the involvement of the federal government. There is NO Constitutional authority for the feds to control education, because the Founding Fathers knew well that a powerful central government can't find its a$$ with both hands, as they have proven over and over Education, health care, social security, etc.). Remember how well our education system worked before the feds "fixed" it? But you may not be old enough. I'm 60, went through gov't school before they started the downhill slide.

reply to: Boutte
Hey, don't mince words-- tell us what you REALLY believe! ;~)

Your I.Q. data sound like those from the book "The Bell Curve," which caused such a stir a few years back because it proffered inconvenient truths which the educated know privately must be so. You cannot much coach smarts, anymore than you can coach speed or jumping ability. AA will be required for minority representation forever, but can work against Jews and Asians to a degree.

Hermione makes a telling point about how the bright and educated tend not to breed and perpetuate themselves, while the less able take to it like a duck to water. This is a key reason why ILLEGAL aliens are such a daunting threat to America socio-economically. As soon as the left naturalizes them, they will multiply themselves and inexorably increase and permeate pandemic social pathologies (crime, gangs, illegitimacies, dropouts, poverty, ignorance, cultural disparateness). The one world, PC, multicultural enablers will only make this more egregious and enervating. It is a ticking time bomb... as even a liberal sociologist noted recently, social service welfare for current ILLEGALS will become, "the mother of all entitlement programs."

Education and the Founding Fathers
When the Constitution was written in 1789 there were no “free” public schools therefore the founding fathers had no thought on them what-so-ever. At that time ALL schools were private secular, private religious, or home schooled (the majority). The founding fathers would have been astounded at the level of State involvement in schools and dumbfounded at federal involvement. What is truly amazing is how equal protection under the law which was intended for courts and law has morphed into control of the schools. I am waiting on a roll-back of that little bit of judicial activism.

Boutte...a true humanitarian
Such unbridled optimism. I can tell, you're a real inspiration... a uniter in every sense of the word.

But seriously. We all know about figures and liars. But just for the sake of argument, where are you getting yours?

Do the darker skinned blacks fare worse on these IQ tests than lighter skin? Is there a direct pigment correlation? Because I've seen some mighty light skinned blacks. And some whites that are almost transluscent. Not to mention albinos of all races.

But wait, aren't many Asians of darker pigmentation than the average Minnesotan? Are really light Americans of Swedish descent possessed of higher IQ's than the "Black Irish"?

Your thesis is ridiculous. Using race or skin pigmentation as a means of categorizing people isn't especially bright, considering what we've learned from the human genome project.

I'm even happier than usual that I disagree with most of your diatribes.

It's the parents, stupid
I know a black teacher who teaches 5th grade with a class made up mostly of black and hispanic kids. This past week, one of her ten year old girls was caught performing oral sex on a boy. The girl's father thought it was funny. The Assistant Principal told her to mind her own business.

Such is the environment that produces the most ignorant bunch of kids ever. The parents don't care. School administrations would rather expel a second-grader for a pencil drawing of a gun than get serious about education, and teachers, if they still care, get slapped down from all sides.

In the worst inner city schools, it seems oriental kids are doing fine. Why? Their parent expect it and stay on top of it.

IQ is not totally fixed. Yes, I think we are born with certain parameters of possibilities, but USING it grows it, letting it atrophy diminishes it. That accounts for the differential in IQ scores, not race.

Until we solve the parent problem, we are not going to solve the education problem. If Obama talked more like Bill Cosby, I might consider voting for him. Unfortunately, he talks more like Rev. Wright. And I totally don't get Oprah's support of him.

Maybe if we tied welfare checks to a kid at least making an effort in school. Nah. The libs would go crazy even at the suggestion.

further thoughts on poverty
re;
"Perhaps some day we, as a nation, will come to realize the extent of the harm done to blacks by the War on Poverty."

The Great Society institutionalized and legitimized "poverty." We have spent $11 TRILLION on it in 40 years (about $40k per PERSON in America!), even as (and causative) black rates of illegitimacy, broken homes, and crimes have soared-- the latter lessened more recently only by abortions! And the poverty thing as an excuse is ridiculous-- the lifestyle of the typical American household defined as below the poverty line in is the envy of most of the world. The Mexican government TRAINS ILLEGALS before they come up here how to tap into the social service welfare train.

If we elect Obama, he will try to take more from "the rich" and redistribute it to "the deserving." And if the middle class gets sucked into letting the government "solve" the healthcare crisis, we will simply spend still MORE on it for less service. I like the quip-- if America nationalizes healthcare, what will the Canadians do for timely needed surgeries? The government can make a mess in a cesspool.

loungelizard
If your comments are what we are to expect here on out, I'm leaving with Boutte.

You may not like his conclusions but they are obviously backed up with more than mere preference for a particular cultural construct.

IQ "data"
Sorry, but I don't accept data about IQ. Here's why.

I had a roommate once who told me that on a test he once had to take, he came to a section on math, which he hated, so he left it all blank. I was shocked, because I always tried to do the best that I could on every test I took. Obviously, people approach tests with very different motivations, and my roommate's IQ on the math part would have been zero on this test.

My question for those who accept IQ data is, How do you know that those with low scores simply didn't have the motivation that those with high scores did? I asked a professor of psychology this question once, and he said there was no way to tell.

Isn't it revealing that in the data provided by Boutte, the groups with the best scores -- Jews and Asians -- are also the groups most dedicated to education, while those with the lowest scores -- Latinos and blacks -- are those least dedicated to it?

impact
Thank you! I was waiting for someone to take the parents to task on this thing. Show me a parent where education, and personal responsibility are a priority in the home and I'll show you a kid that will be well educated and will end up doing pretty well in life.

My wife teaches in a pretty affluent school district and the stories she tells me about parents is TERRIFYING! My wife has been called a liar. She has been accused of "being after someone's child." (this may be the dumbest thing I've ever heard because there is no motivation for a teacher to be "after" any 4th grader). She has been lobbied tirelessly by parents to change a B to an A for no particular reason (a B used to mean something good and left room for improvement).

She caught a kid cheating last year. The parent's response was, what did my wife do to her child to make him cheat? Huh? are you kidding me?

Now, I wouldn't give you two cents for the NEA. I think they are dangerous in fact. But there isn't enough money in the world to make me put up with what a lot of teachers do today.

The problem with educ are the educators!
I am retired and nothing has changed since I worked on my Ed.D in educational finance at a large respected major research university. When I first arrived to begin my doctorate, many of my classmates kept repeating ".... the problem with education are the educators." It did not take me long to understand this "charge" was, and is still, accurate.

Will anything change? I fear not for many reasons, some of which are expertly presented in this article by Mr. Will. I use to think, someday soon things will change. But after many years, it is the same old things. So how will change come about, if it does? It does not appear by evolutionary means. So what is left? Revolution!!! When will this Revolution happen? I have no idea - probably not in my lifetime, but hopefully in the lifetime of my children or at least my grand-children. That is, if our country does not become a second-rate country, due in great part to education combined with our major social problems identified so well by Mr. Will.

IMHO!

Dumbed Down
Mr. Will- There is something you don't talk about in this article,the Power Elites with their hidden agendas which includes education. In their quest for a socialist/Marxist society, education is their first target in order to train a complacent, needy, apathetic society that bends to their will. Look at the Colleges and Universities where the most liberal educators congregate. Look at the school curriculum in 1-12 grades. Al Gore's an "Inconvenient Truth" is part of the classroom study. It is hard pressed to find courses in "The Constitution", as the forefounders created. The Federal Government has slowly but steadily taken over almost every facet of our lives, while we slept. No Child Left Behind should be abolished.
The Power Elites have infiltrated the media, the military and Big Businesses in addition. Why- so that they can bring about their ultimate goal of "One World Government". Google Power Elites, you'll see what our apathetic society refuses to believe exists as they take us down the road to total destruction of the United States as we know it! Why else would a bunch of tyrants all buy into the Global Warming hoax?

Double Whammy
I agree that chaos in families and communities impact children and their learning. What I think is overlooked in this article is the reality that children in this chaos were hit with the double whammy of two great experiments: The war on poverty AND the "new" reading instruction pushed by the colleges of education.

My mother taught in public schools for 32 years and finished her career teaching fifth generation project children. She also taught reading using phonics and penmanship. While none of her students came from intact homes,she had all but the most profoundly disabled of her students reading (at different levels, of course)by the end of first grade.

Unfortunately for our schools and our nation Dr. Reid Lyon's research on effective reading instruction has been dismissed by the supermajority of colleges of education. Few, if any, teachers know the sounds to sound out words. Nevermind being able to teach them to their students.

Why is this important? Beyond the obvious (you have to be able to read to learn) there is also brain activity research that shows that becoming a fluent reader corresponds with brain activity centering in the cerebral cortex rather than the cerebellum. Readers are in their "thoughtful minds" rather than in their "instinctive minds."

Children coming out of chaotic environments that don't value reading or education CAN and MUST be taught to read in school. Unfortunately, the colleges of education in our nation aren't preparing the teachers to do so.

can you coach smarts?
re:
"Isn't it revealing that in the data provided by Boutte, the groups with the best scores -- Jews and Asians -- are also the groups most dedicated to education, while those with the lowest scores -- Latinos and blacks -- are those least dedicated to it?"

This is wishful thinking prima facie... the nurture versus nature ilk loves to proffer such drivel. A key trouble is that tests scores ALWAYS best predict academic performance, and it is silly to say that some would simply rather play midnight basketball than study, or it is not "cool" in the hood to achieve.

If you did a regression and correlation analysis of those at the best colleges, in Phi Beta Kappa (like my two daughters), etc., it would overwhelmingly correlate with Boutte's inconveniently truthful data, notwithstanding the PC efforts to insist on AA and "diversity."
Jews are evident EVERYWHERE among high intellects, whether some like it or not (no, I am not Jewish). Their families do foster the importance of education, certainly a plus, but that alone will not make a child ace biochemistry or get rarefied air high SAT's.

Skulin', rydin', ritinn....
Boutte says: It's about racial reality, not sermons AVERAGE IQs OF ADULT AMERICANS, Jew 108, Oriental 105, White 100, Latino 89, Black 85...
Boutte, first thing first: not Oriental but Asian, then here you want to separate the Indians (of India) from those who we (we, the bitter Caucasians) have placed in the "Asian" group like Japanese, Chinese, etc.
Now, G. Will piece is unfortunately sad, yet very true. As far as Boutte's contention, I still bitterly cling to the idea that humans are pretty much the same, as IQ endowement, and it is the cultural environment which fosters one's fulfilling that person's potential ((this space doesn't allow for more about cult/env.).
Superstition? Maybe - but in certain nations which now fly on a very successful arc of achievement, certain American groups are regarded as a great drawback for this countrty's future.



Here we go again...another Lib excuse!
Libs, Unions and the condescending attitude toward poor children (they need so much help we'll step in and screw everything up) especially those in bad neighborhoods are the primary cause of a poor education system. The Socialist model is bad to the core, it serves the union thugs, school administrators and teachers and to hell with the children. You have to ask yourself, whenever it comes down to what's best for the child they take a seat in the 'back of the bus' so they can ride to the Liberal Platantion School. Until the control of schools is totally taken away from unions/administrators this will continue...as it has since 1983.

Those that created the problem have NO place at the table of solutions!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Brave New World...
... Alphas, Betas, Deltas - maybe Huxley got it right. This fall the pic The Brave New World will be out, so we'll see whether Scott Ridley went on Huxley's pessimistic hand.

HomeschoolMom in AZ, 3:19 AM post.

Timeless wisdom.

But tragically, until the "Moms of America" literally march on the public education establishement, and until we stop letting destructive leftist policies from eroding the family structure... parents are on their own.

For starters, the Dept. of Education needs to be abolished, and power and accountability must be returned to where it belongs... to the school principal.

Make Poverty Extinct
The American government is fully vested in poverty and much like the private sector, has to grow or wither, always needing more "customers," which in turn requires more staff and still larger budgets.

Political greed needs boundaries.

A simple change in our tax collection laws that indexes all taxes to average employment rates/real income gains, so that government could grow in good economic cycles, but be forced to shrink in poor economic cycles, just like the taxpayers in the private sector. This would then launch a non-partisan national government mandate that every able-bodied person that is ambulatory, on crutches or in a wheelchair get a job and pay taxes. Welfare and poverty would drop by 80%.

BTW, Liberals don't need to procreate since they control the national education industry, classrooms and colleges. They will merely convert YOUR children in trade for a high school diploma or college degree.

Homosexuals, likewise, can't procreate and so they recruit young boys. I had no idea how many gay men couples, in tenuous loving relationships, so desperately want young male children to raise that they sign up as foster and adoptive parents. How wonderfully altruistic. Gays are so desperate for access to young males that they prey on alter boys, orphans, and YOUR male children. They want to destroy the Boy Scouts for denying them their "rights." Pedophiles are majority gays with a taste for children.



Sadly Very True ...
I teach high school history (and college history as an adjunct faculty member). I got into education after a stint in the USMC and nearly two decades in corporate America.

The problem with education is three-fold:

One: Far too many educators are well-intentioned but stunningly unintelligent left-bots. Most HS faculty are driven by a union mentality towards every silly liberal idea de jure like bugs to a candle flame.

Two: Families have broken down and, absent the model of traditional 2 parent families, moral standards are pathetically low among the kids.

Three: The government/union nexus in education makes real, meanignful change almost impossible.

While Everyone Else Argues
And the clouds of vitriol, blame, indignation, and condemnation swirl around teachers, I keep doing what I'm paid to do, and I try to do it to the best of my ability. The general public wants to make us the scapegoats for every shortcoming of the public education system. We are blamed for absolutely everything that goes wrong. Fine. Argue your little hearts out. Bleat my lack of worthiness from mountaintop to mountaintop. I will keep doing what I'm paid to do: Try to get 9th-graders who have 3rd-grade reading levels as close to grade level as I can within one year, teach them test-taking strategies to give them a leg-up for all the standardized tests they'll have in high school, and try to teach them how to write a complete sentence, then maybe a cohesive paragraph, and maybe, a few of them, will be able to produce a comprehensible essay. Your braying, recriminations, ignorant rhetoric, and malicious insults do not affect one iota what I have to do in my class room every day: To try to make functional and successful humans out of very-damaged children.

lodestar
"It is silly to say that some would simply rather play midnight basketball than study, or it is not 'cool' in the hood to achieve."

What exactly is silly about it? Are you saying it is true, but irrelevant? Or that it's not true? Or something else?

If it's true, then it may be relevant. The fact that IQ scores correlate well with academic performance means nothing other than that those with the motivation to do well academically will have the motivation to do well on an IQ test, too.

My challenge to those who accept IQ remains: How do you figure out someone's IQ when they have no motivation to do well on the test?

Some truth, Some...not so true
Some of the posters to this forum need to remember that there are many dedicated conservative teachers who do their best in a system that was designed NOT by them, but by administrators, lawyers, and politicians. Both parties/sides have no solutions. The libs think that money will fix everything, except for the bias *they* see causing the remaining problems. The Republicans blame everything on "greedy" teachers who just want to make a living.
The truth is that educational results only mirror the environment of the students. You give me middle class kids from good families, I'll give you strong results. You give me high school kids with 3rd grade mentalities, many of whom speak little English and come from neighborhoods you wouldn't dare step into, never mind live in, and you get what you get.
In one class, I will have 2-4 kids who excel (some Asian, but also some Hispanic or Black), 8-10 kids who struggle, but make it, and then 10 or so who make little or no effort, if they even bother to show up.
The students who are motivated always do well. A teacher cannot motivate 150 kids who have no internal desire to succeed in school. But we teachers go to school every day, and do our best with what we have. So you need not slander us all with a broad brush as lazy and incompetent. If we can improve the system, most teachers can get the job done. We could begin by holding *students* accountable for a change - maybe they should have to actually show up every day on time and do their work. That would be a start.

lodestar @ 8:46 AM
My father, who is very intellegent himself (my aunt said that one of his teachers told her he was the brightest student she'd ever taught), would agree with you (as would I, by the way). He told me that while he was struggling to grasp some of the advanced concepts he was learning while pursuing his MS in Chemistry, his sagacious (my word) Jewish friends seemed to just understand the material almost intuitively, without much effort at all.

George Will, educated man
I'm continually struck by the frequency of George Will's references to European and ancient history -- knowledge that stands out in contrast to most Baby Boomers and their offspring, many of whom were taught that it's unnecessary to know any places, names or dates and that it's only the broad trends, especially broad trends in non-European lands, that count.

It's not surprising that so many people are suckers for socialism and the pseudoscience of global warming: they haven't any background in applied sciences, history and western literature and culture.

Confirming ancient stereotypes
JFP writes: "Sorry, but I don't accept data about IQ. Here's why.

I had a roommate once who told me that on a test he once had to take, he came to a section on math, which he hated, so he left it all blank. I was shocked, because I always tried to do the best that I could on every test I took. Obviously, people approach tests with very different motivations, and my roommate's IQ on the math part would have been zero on this test.

My question for those who accept IQ data is, How do you know that those with low scores simply didn't have the motivation that those with high scores did? I asked a professor of psychology this question once, and he said there was no way to tell."

That could be interpreted as a confirmation of stereotypes established over a hundred years ago that label blacks as "lazy and shiftless."

Of course, This isn't true, otherwise we wouldn't have Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams et al.

The best general predictor of success is a loving, two-parent household that provides encouragement and discipline, establishes boundaries, sets standards and instills ambition, dedication and persistence.

You know the old missive "...unrewarded genius is almost a proverb..." (it's part of a larger bit of wisdom, but I can't remember it in its entirety).

Boutte's 5:54 post is correct
Genetics, not environment, account for anywhere from a minimum of 60%, to a more realistic 85%, of our intelligence or cognitive ability.

And, yes, racial groups DO DIFFER in this ability.

I could not care less what the apologists within the "environment-is-all" crowd says.

Just continue to swig your p.c. kool-aid and ignore facts. I don't even want to hear from you.

Statistics and studies do not lie.

"The Bell Curve" was merely one of many books which incorporated studies demonstrating that intelligence is substantially genetically conferred.

In fact, Herrnstein and Murray probably UNDERSTATE the degree genetics determines intelligence.

George Will states, "for decades schools have been treated as laboratories for various equity experiments".

Is that that different from what the G. W. and the neocons are doing on Iraq...that it is a laboratory for a democracy experiment?

Just substitute the word democracy for equity, and "voila".

The same moronic nonsense applies.

Universities should abolish colleges of education, and scrap all courses related to "theories of learning", "self-esteem in the classroom". In place of such garbage, offer courses specific to the curriculum of the prospective teacher, and have it administered thru more rigorous colleges of arts and sciences.

Greatly restrict the power of teacher unions.

Emphasize monetary rewards for meritorious teachers.

The marxist elite should push genetics
jerabaub says "Genetics, not environment, account for anywhere from a minimum of 60%, to a more realistic 85%, of our intelligence or cognitive ability.

And, yes, racial groups DO DIFFER in this ability."

--

This seems like the perfect excuse for the "war on poverty."

If blacks are (as a group) intellectually less gifted, then we have a "moral obligation as a society" to rob the producers of their income and subsidize the flagrantly self-destructive lifestyles so common in the black community.

Liberals really need to come out of the closet (no pun intended) and say it like it is. The core of the liberal message is "you can't make it on your own, you need us to help you get by."

36 Comments
Most of them correctly identifying the problems with education and offering various solutions, some better than others. So, like every other issue or challenge facing our nation, we have:

1.Endless commissions & reports defining the problem and offering solutions.
2.American citizens voicing their opinions about these reports.
3.More big government intervention to adopt the recommendations of the commissions.
4.No results other than higher taxes and more problems.

Isn't it time we actually did something to effect real change? The ultimate solution is to get rid of the hold on power by the two corrupt parties that are ruining our home. There will be no change unless we recognize that the elites are squandering the resources of this nation to achieve their internationalist agenda. Among those resources are our children!

The Marxist tactic is to brainwash the children in order to manipulate society and usher in the new world order/one world government socialist utopia. Senator Clinton wants mandatory pre-kindergarten education to get to the children even sooner, and also supports "psychological testing" of our children every few years.

The time has come to reject the lies of the elites and realize that it is not true that only "they" have the wisdom, knowledge, and experience to govern.

If you want to see how the elites have perpetrated the perfect scam on the American people, I urge you to visit my website, JOEOLIVAFORPRESIDENT.ORG. We can no longer afford to elect another elite as President, they are destroying this great nation. Check out the site, why not? Our inheritance is being stolen from us, shouldn't we act to reclaim it? Thanks, Joe

To Pat and CCMteacher:
No one is slandering good teachers for their efforts. I am certain both of you are dedicated but are placed in situations and scenarios where you are unable to do your jobs, as you have both indicated in your postings.

But if you do not like the situation you are in, why do you continue to put up with it? What are you and your fellow dedicated teachers doing to reduce the detrimental affects of government. administration, and union interference?

Would not most dedicated teachers quit the NEA and form a new union that shares the goals you claim you have?

Pat states: "I will keep doing what I'm paid to do: Try to get 9th-graders who have 3rd-grade reading levels as close to grade level as I can within one year,"

Whom do you blame for 9th graders arriving in your classroom with 3rd grade reading skills? If you are able to achieve more than 1 year of gains in your classroom, it follows that the teachers whom these children had for their first eight years of education were not as qualified as you, yet if they had the same years of service and degrees as you, they are getting paid the same pay for poorer work. If the NEA pushed for merit pay rather than pay increases for just showing up every year, most of the criticism and problems of education would disappear in a generation or two.

Boutte, lodestar, jerabaub
All I want to see is data that shows that unmotivated Jews have the same IQ (on average) as highly motivated Jews, and that highly motivated blacks have the same IQ as unmotivated blacks.

So far, the only data I'm getting concerns the total populations of Jews and blacks. If I'm right that motivation makes a difference, then that data doesn't tell us enough.

Race isn't the problem
I forgot to mention that I don't believe race has the final say on achievement (yes, I have read 'The Bell Curve'). I firmly believe it is mainly a cultural issue. Some of my brightest and most favorite students came straight from Africa - refugees on top of it all. (Sounding like the Wizard of Oz here) but what they had that the others DON'T is the work ethic. Some of these African kids stayed after school every day, worked hard in and out of class, and were positive role models in their classes. I met a couple of their parents - wonderful, dedicated and devoted people who made sure their kids did what was expected.

On the other hand, contrary to stereotype, a few of my worst performing and behaving students were either White or Asian. You might say "It's the culture, stupid!" (or maybe it's the stupid culture? LOL)

Plan Ahead
" If you want to think ahead one year, plant rice. If you want to think ahead ten years, plant trees. If you want to think ahead one hundred years, educate the people." --- Chinese proverb

Socialists are far ahead of conservatives on this one.

Tibby

I
am not college educated, however like Sawdust I remember having gone through and graduated H.S. before it morphed into the disaster it is today.
It was years before I realized that my 5 older kids didn't have a clue about "looking it up" to find an answer because it was hammered into me from early grades. I assumed even though they'd
been in a Lutheran parochial school, they'd been taught as I'd been taught.
My mom taught me to read (phonics) when I was three, before my younger brother began school (3 yrs my jr) she was told not to teach him. She complied, he wasn't taught phonics and struggled.
I got into trouble because I was bored and ahead
in reading. I guess it was the beginning of the end back then but it wasn't another 15 or more years til it finally took hold.

JFP and IQ
JFP, your arguments about racial differences in measured IQ probably hold some merit, but are irrelevant to the problem of the decline in educational quality between races.

The IQ bell-curves between races have different mean values, so "on average" one can predict that in a large enough sample size, one can predict who score higher on IQ tests. But the overlap between these curves accounts for, if I remember my reading of "The Bell-curve", is over 80%, meaaning that for eighty percent of any one race you can find someone in the other races that scores higher.

Measured IQ is not the same as genetic potential IQ. I suspect that the maximum IQ is genetically fixed at conception, and also falls into a bell shaped distribution. If, as you assert, blacks fall below other races because they are not "motivated", then what is your solution to motivate them to achieve more? Is it more AA, more government handouts to those who didn't complete their educations and now find themselves forced to compete with illegal immigrants for the low-skill low-wage jobs or turn to crime?

Until we stop rewarding bad behavior (unwed mothers, fatherless marraiges, etc.), and start rewarding good behavior like increasing the deductions for every child over 2 in a stable married, filing jointly, income tax return, reduced interest on student loans based on grades and what percentage of classes are taken in areas of study most required to keep America competetive in a global ecomony, we will continue the slippery slope slide into third-world status. I always wondered why our income tax code includes a marraige "penalty?"

tibby
"Socialists are far ahead of conservatives on this one [educating the people]."

I don't know what you are talking about. A higher percentage of the U.S. population goes to college than in most socialist countries, despite the fact that students in those countries get to go for free whereas we generally don't.

Explain what you mean.

Ron Jones, sorry No Sale
Wrong.

Marxism seeks equality. Abolition of classes, remember.

Marxists abolish all distinctions based on merit.

Marxists envision a world where all peoples are provided with the same amounts of goods and services.

That is the whole point of Marxism..to remove the grinding poverty that some classes are forced to endure due at the hands of a system which rewards the predatory owners of the means of production at the expense of the downtrodden and exploited workers.

That is Marxism's "raison d'etre".

To the extent intelligence serves to permit one person or class to amass more goods and services than his proletariat neighbor, it would be heretical to Marxism.

Your point is totally invalidated.

It is liberals like you infer the state has a duty to redistribute income and goods and services from the producers to the indolent.

If Educators were so smart.....
AND honest, they would have fixed this entire problem long ago. Sadly there are too many vested interests keeping things the way they are.

Of course these are the same folks that sit on these sanctomonious commissions and pontificate to the rest of us solutions.

To that I say, If you are part of the current process you have NO seat at the table. You know the problems and have chosen NOT to solve them simply because you are comfortable trashing our children to pad your pocket. Teachers are the core victims as are the students. It's all those elitest snobs on the top of this mountain of incompetence that causes all the problems....so why don't all you union thugs, bureaucrats, so called experts etc. just 'move on' and let parents and local schools solve their problem...and by the way YOU'RE FIRED!

unfortunate
Will's column is depressingly simple minded in some of the places where serious analysis would be useful. For example, the only evidence presented that schools are declining is that SAT scores peaked in 1964. (He describes other things he thinks are bad, but none of them get at a decline without taking his word for the fact that they are bad). But the main reason SAT scores declined at that point was that college attendance was shooting up, so more people were taking the SATs then before. Of course if students that didn't formally go to college start taking the SATs the average is likely to go down regardless of whether schools are improving or getting worse. That is why the SAT people make clear that the SATs are not useful for group comparisons, only individual ones.

The bigger issue is that he presents the unsurprising fact that factors outside of a school have a bigger effect on academic success than things inside the school. But he argues that this someone shows that one approach to school is better than another. But this is obvious logical nonsense. What the state has control of with regard to schooling is those factors that are school related. That those factors are less important than some that are not under their control is hardly a good argument for the idea that the effect those decisions have had have not been good ones. Again the evidence is consistent with Will's claims, but they no more support them than they support the opposite.

Will does make some true claims towards the end. NCLB does seem to get things backwards. And one can't mandate success by law. But his analysis of the situation up to then does not reflect well on his own education.

Flash
I was thinking the exact same thing when I read Pat's statement. It has long been a source of amusement to me to read teacher's emphatic statements that teachers are NOT at fault and bear NO culpability in the education fiasco of today. Yet, those very same teachers assert that they can advance a student several grade levels which always makes one wonder about the previous teachers who did not even get a 9th grader to 3rd grade level.

Truth is, teachers have a tough row to hoe with parents who are fairly worthless, students who are pathetically unengaged and ignorant, and an administration that thwarts progress every step of the way.

But, the teaching profession itself has long colluded to produce mediocrity while lining its coffers. Unions sytematically reject tougher standards for teachers and more accountability. They refuse to weed out the chaff and beef up teacher's colleges.

In short, they are hoist by their own petard.Unfortunately, America is reaping the bitter fruits of an educational tragedy.

I wonder
Sometimes I wonder if the government really wants to improve education or create and maintain an illusion of improving education. I was in Central America two years ago. There were children there who could read and write and otherwise put U.S. students to shame academically but they lived in an 8x8 shack with no running water or electricity. I think the difference is that they want to learn regardless of the amount of money spent.

Great article, so true,
without a quality home environment, only a tiny few will succeed at school.

Mr. Will,


"It’s the “g” factor...”
The Bell Curve

“When you take the t-e-x-t out of context, you’re left with c-o-n, and we have been conned.”
Wendell Anthony

“...but are you the Master of your Domain?”
Seinfeld


If you haven’t already done so, I highly recommend viewing “Gangland” on the History Channel with one eye on evaluating how “intelligence” evolves and relates to its “environment.”

I once had a detailed conversation with a National Sales Manager for a Fortune 10 company during which we discussed advertising; if you don’t get the message and chemistry right millions of dollars can disappear in a heartbeat. Now I concede that all kinds of tests and hurdles are necessary to determine who is eligible, much less control, that domain. But what interests one who studies character, is what happens when you push back on such a “system.” And, ultimately, of paramount concern, should such a system be foisted upon children, who tend to develop unevenly, in order to facilitate later discrimination between the wheat and the chaff? And whose child is chaff? ...ever.

Perhaps the high expectations are reversed, and are too low for those who ostensibly “make it”
only to suffer a kind of intellectual asphyxiation; leaving their early environments un-composted and less fertile. Other than golf handicaps, who measures THIS? Is this what Daniel Patrick Moynihan was driving at?

In character study, one finds at one point or another, one is labeled a “defective” or an “enemy” when pushing back on such a system, and it isn’t implausible that this “system” will find a way to attack you, maybe even try to kill you, to protect its perceived interests. And so it is... that Gangland has all the poignancy in the world.

NCLB may not be a waste after all
Lon noted that the reason SAT scores declined is that more people that were not previously college bound, are taking them (presumably because now they are college bound?). Maybe that is part and parcel of the problem. Those who cannot get into the engineering and computer, biology, chemistry departments, or into medical schools because their grades are too low, should not be accepted into colleges in the first place. Yearly progress on NCLB testing is an easy method to sort out those who are most likely to succeed in college.

Instead of turning away students who won't be able to cut it, colleges, addicted to the huge federally subsidized loan industry bloated tuition checks, do not turn them away, but create useless departments and degrees, like "art history" and "black women's studies", "sociology", education, and law school.

Those who can do, those who can't, teach or make a living suing those who can do, and giving it to those who can't, after taking a cut for themselves.

about IQ tests
re:
"My challenge to those who accept IQ remains: How do you figure out someone's IQ when they have no motivation to do well on the test?"

This is silly... how do YOU know that low IQ scores for some identifiable groups mean that they have no motivation to try? And as to standardized tests period, why are they SUCH a good predictor of success in college and beyond? They are FAR better than GPA's, though the latter would seem to indicate motivation. If you want to know whether a minority can survive in medical school, better look at her MCAT score instead of her GPA from Morris Brown!

Another myth-- standardized tests are "culturally biased." Not only have studies disproved this fatuous excuse (whites miss the so-called culturally loaded questions just as often as minorities, who handle those questions in like manner to the other questions), but there is no explanation for how oriental Asians such as Viet Namese refugees/boat people who speak English as a second language could very soon excel on SAT's, and then smoke Ivy League curricula.

Pat writes: While Everyone Else Argues
I commend you for doing your job while many of those around you fail miserably in doing theirs. You are obviously one of the few who become teachers because they believe in teaching kids to be good and well educated citizens. The fact that the kids arrive in your 9th grade classroom with a 3rd grade reading level is exactly the point. Obviously even though you work very hard to correct the deficiencies of other teachers those problems still exist. Instead of complaining here about being unfairly criticized you might consider being more active in correcting the problems that cause your students to arrive in your class with such unsatisfactory skills.

the flash
Nice analysis on "Bell Curve", or generally the significance of distribution of bell curves generally.

If one transposes bell curve intelligence distribution of, say, blacks, onto same distribution of whites, the extreme(right)end of the black distribution bell or curve extends into the range of the higher end of the white distribution curve...so that a small number of blacks possess i.q. scores equal to the scores of the much larger white population possessing above average scores.

Your point that maximum i.q. is genetically fixed at conception is true, but even I agree environmental factors can have minor effects on increasing i.q.

I just utterly reject the argument by those who contend environment is predominant.

It is not.

In fact, it is of very limited significance.

To Flash
In response to your questions:

Basically, why don't we change things? My answer is that the changes needed are so deep and systemic, that they are beyond comprehension. Also, any change would still take several years to come to fruition. Before the effects could be seen, a new batch of politicians/administrators would come in and screw things up all over again.
I feel like I'm bailing out a sinking ship with a dixie cup, and now someone wants me to build a new boat (while I'm bailing). Also, many laws have been passed that tie our hands. Special Ed has become a monster, and half of our student body has some kind of "disability." A ton of money is wasted trying to fulfill all of the technicalities.

As for merit pay: how do you measure merit? It sounds good until *your* living is on the line. I don't believe there is much I could do differently to improve the outcomes for my students. The ones who work hard learn the subject matter. Should doctors who work in urban hospitals be paid less because their patients take lousy care of themselves?

BTW, I don't belong to the NEA. We are under the AFT, a slightly more conservative union. But without the union, I'd never have become a teacher; I couldn't live on $25,000 a year.

the flash
"If, as you assert, blacks fall below other races because they are not 'motivated'..."

I'm not asserting it, but am merely suggesting it as a reasonable possibility. I don't think there's any data on it yet.

"... then what is your solution to motivate them to achieve more?"

The same as what you suggested in the last paragraph of your post.

So what??
So we have a problem. It's great talk about and hear solutions but Americans do not have the will or backbone to do anything about it. Here's my idea, let's spend more on education. Has anyone tried that? How about another cabinet level department on Education? I think that might work. Can we send Carter in to negotiate with the terrorist teachers unions or would that disrupt the process for the future?

The system is corrupt and broken. Get used to it and quit debating it. Throw in the towel already.

GOP can't fix it, so blame liberals
If the liberals are to blame for the current state of education, then why didn't the Republicans fix it while they had control of the House, Senate and White House? Instead, they passed NCLB, to give us more federal oversight.
Republicans want less govt? Yeah, right. Give that slogan a rest because it ain't true.

In fact, since Republicans want public education to fail, why would they try to fix it? Wouldn't they want to sabotage public education anyway they can so that they can say "See, we told you it wouldn't work."

Also, those of you that tout private education as being superior to public education need to look at the studies that showed private education is no better than public education:
http://epicpolicy.org/newsletter/2007/12/review-questions-o stensible-differences-between-two-studies-comparing-public- and-

Those that want private education either
1) Believe that their little, struggling kid would actually be an honor roll student if they just had the right teacher, instead of admitting that they, as parents, need to be more involved in their kids education
or
2) Want to separate themselves from the current racial and economic make-up of public schools.

Show me a child that has parents (or just one parent) involved in their education, and I'll show you a child that will succeed. It doesn't matter if it's a public or private school.

WE KNOW THE PROBLEM

...WHAT'S THE FIX? ...

...PROBLEMS ...

... 1. The Dept of Education (Jimmy Carter)

... 2. The NEA (Democrat Party)

... 3. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT (Dysfunctional families)

... 4. Forced intergration (School Bussing)

.....I graduated from an inner City Public H.S. in 1952 before the above problems came into being ...I received an excellent education that is only possible today in an expensive Private School ...so how do we put the spilt milk back in the bucket? .....COLOSSUS

If the government wants to assist

parents in educating their children, it should do so. It has no business supporting only those parents who agree with the beliefs the government teaches in its monopolistic government schools.

School Admin Makes a Difference
Things are not all bleak. Last week, I observed classes in three inner-city low socio-economic schools. In two of them, the students were happy, well-disciplined, orderly in the halls and all working hard during class. The schools were big, clean and in good repair. Both schools have strong pricipals who believe in discipline, the ability of the students and maintaining order.

Unfortunately, the third school was not like the other two. As I was leaving, one young boy hugged me, thanked me for visiting and apologized for the way his classmates behaved.


the flash... check your lightbulb
"Those who can do, those who can't, teach..."

If I was to believe that useless, overused phrase then I guess all the teaching hospitals are full of worthless doctors. And, since parents are teaching children how to behave and live, then I guess that means no parent knows how to behave or live themselves. I sure hope you're not a parent.


To Flash, Jan, and Snake 0311
I got a bit of a chuckle out of your posts that you see teachers as such powerful beings. It's akin to expecting the assembly-line worker to improve the design of the product. Public education has turned into such an assembly line, and let's face it, I'm just a schlub, a tiny cog in a huge process. I despise the union, but without it, if a student accuses me of wrongdoing, I have no legal protection whatsoever. I back merit pay for teachers as long as administrators have it, too, because I've seen too many teachers given plum assignments because they are having sex with the bosses. I wish that I were "SUPERTEACHER!"(cue stirring movie theme). It would cut down on the daily frustration caused by my inability to change the system. It's a shame, because I'd be cute in a cape.

To: Syler, there is a third reason
I don't dispute your reasons number 1 and 2 as to why a parent would choose private over public. But you need to add:

3) A parent desires there child to receive a liberal arts (i.e., real) education.

What public schools offer this?

research on SAT's, etc.
It is amazing how many different excuses are proffered for falling SAT scores over time since a peak in 1963. To suggest that more minorities who would not have taken the test 50 years ago have brought down the scores proves an inconvenient point. To suggest that the trends should not matter belies their usefulness in predicting college success. To suggest that some groups might be less motivated when taking such tests is at least condescending on one level, and a rather obvious cop out on another.

Are white jocks "less motivated" when they go to NFL Combines (tryouts)? Why do the blacks mockingly refer to an inability to jump high as "white man's disease"? Is it not too clever by half to attempt to explain substantial racial differences as a whole on standardized tests by relative cultural motivation? One standard deviation is a HUGE difference.

http://www.uwgb.edu/DutchS/PSEUDOSC/DENYSAT.HTM
http://www.princeton.edu/~jrothst/workingpapers/rothstein_C Bvolume.pdf

excuses offered 30 years ago:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,915392,00. html

Pat
Teachers are very powerful beings. They have the power to mold the minds of our children for good or evil. I consider that very powerful indeed. Remember that change starts with 1 person.

povidus
You wrote:
"3) A parent desires there child to receive a liberal arts (i.e., real) education.
What public schools offer this?"

If you look at the current curriculum in public vs private schools, you'll find that, overall, public schools actually have more resources and a more expansive curriculum than private schools.

Snake0311
I wholeheartedly agree with your statement, or I would've left this field years ago. The question raised was why teachers don't try to change the system. That's what I was responding to.

Flash and Jan - Part One
Until you actually attempt to work within the public school system, you have no idea of what you write. Children get passed on through the grades without actually acquiring the necessary learning at the insistence of the parents and incentives from the Federal and State DOEs. Schools and teachers do not get rewarded for holding children accountable; they get rewarded for telling the public and the parents what they want to hear. Do you seriously suggest that I tell parents at my next conference "I’m sorry, but the apple hasn’t fallen far from the tree here. Little Johnny is as dumb as a stump and there is no chance he will pass the 9th grade.”

Furthermore, you seem to think that teachers can wave a magic wand and make their students value the lessons being taught. That limited view ignores how our culture has degenerated into one that celebrates ignorance and mediocrity. We no longer have stories about heroes; we instead have losers and misfits as our icons. Being intelligent, self-disciplined and educated is not valued by popular American culture. American society is all about “gimme what I want now.” Students come to school with an attitude that something is owed to them and they have no need to earn or work for it.

Teachers also have to fight the “Educations Gurus” who peddle the latest educational fad to the school systems. (These are much like management programs in corporations and about as useful.) Traditional teaching methods that worked for thousands of years have been discarded in favor of exciting new ways to learn. In this Brave New School System, memorization is passé. Critical thinking skills were overrated. Sustained reading is archaic. Individual work is discarded in favor of group projects. The adult in the room is the facilitator of discovery, not the font of wisdom. Saying one meant to do it is more important than actually doing it. The most imperative point to remember is that the students must all feel good about themselves.


Part Two
As to the general comments regarding compensation and salaries, why don’t teachers deserve a decent salary? Are there special stores for teachers where groceries and clothing costs less? Does deciding to be a teacher make one ineligible for the American Dream? Should teachers be forced to live in substandard housing or low income neighborhoods? You make claims of wanting the best teachers for your children yet you seem unwilling to pay them a decent wage. You get what you pay for. (One important note, too much of the per student spending is on administrators and bureaucrats who produce paperwork and teacher tasks intended to justify their jobs.)

Critics of teacher salaries often comment on how little time teachers spend working, getting summers off and only having to work an 8 hour day. Of course, studies comparing hourly wages ignore time spent grading papers, attending meetings, taking required classes and such as well as ignore the differences in time on task. A teacher’s day is structured and can have no deviations. When students are in the room, the teacher is always on task. There is no time for a coffee break or even a quick trip to the bathroom. The typical white collar office worker or professional has much more flexibility and spends less time on task per hour paid than a teacher.

Schools are nothing more than a reflection of the society to which they belong. When Americans start to value hard work and self-discipline, schools will improve. Allow teachers to discipline children in the classroom and expect good manners from students and learning will increase. Get the Federal Government out of the classroom and common sense will return.

IQ: nature vs. nurture...
... The Bell Curve... then last winter's scandal about Jim Watson's (the DNA guy) remarks about Africa... then the Moynahan Report... then the TV-s ceaselessly flashing in certain "homes"... then the iPods... then the fuzzy math... then the puntuality thing... then the perserverence thing... then the "two legs bad, four legs good!" thing... then the cultural relativism... then the "don't act white, modafuka!" vs. the niggardly thing... then... then...
Where is my parachute?

Pat
I know several teachers who have voiced the same concerns as you have. When I asked them why they didn't try to change the system/correct the problems the answers I got indicated that fear of reprisal from the union was the primary demotivator for any action they might want to take. Obviously the union is a problem even though they do some things that are good.

Syler and the lightbulb:
Syler wrote: "I guess all the teaching hospitals are full of worthless doctors. And, since parents are teaching children how to behave and live, then I guess that means no parent knows how to behave or live themselves. I sure hope you're not a parent."

Big difference. Professors of medicine at teaching hospitals first had to prove themselves worthy as a doctor, and then are appointed to faculty based upon their phsycisian skills and ability to teach to others by example.

A teacher with a masters degree in business who never ran a company much less worked in a competitive industry should not be paid more than a teacher with no advanced degree but ran several successful and a few unsuccessful businesses. Advanced teaching degrees only prove a teacher was a good student, but has no ability to determine whether she can impart that knowledge to others, or to apply her knowledge in the real world she is supposedly preparing her students to survive in.

As for my parenting skills, I can only claim half credit for my two now collage aged children. Both with GPA's over 3.5, both carrying part-time jobs to cover a 1/3 of their outrageous tuitions, and one on a D3 baseball team in his "spare" time. The other half of the credit goes to my wife, who was willing to forego here carreer while the children were too young for formal school, and then only part-time when they were in grade school.

Somehow we found the money to send them to a Catholic grade school on one salary. They received an education grounded in the same religious morality that they lived in at home the other 18 hours a day. Judeo-chrisitan morality is apparantly illegal to teach much less display in our government school system.

The fact that I scored a 34 on my ACT may have something to do with their genetically determined IQ as well.

Deornwulf is correct:
"Allow teachers to discipline children in the classroom and expect good manners from students and learning will increase. Get the Federal Government out of the classroom and common sense will return."

I wholeheartedly agree.

But giving parents vouchers won't work. No one values something given to them as much as something they built or worked hard for themselves. That is why public housing in this country and the similarly built housing provided for the citizens of the former soviet union look like slums within a few years of being built.

Moynihan was not a voucher guy, as Will Smith failed to mention because he didn't want to replace or augment one government bureacracy with another one that administers the voucher program. His idea would cost the taxpayers almost nothing to administer. He suggested we just add one line on the income tax return that gives parents a credit for tuition they pay out of pocket.

HOW?
...so how do we put the spilt milk back in the bucket? .....


No correction will be allowed because there is too much at stake...

Too many interests have conspired to create this situation, which at it's core creates power and wealth for a few. Not based upon merit or innovation but law and desire, regardless of the facts. They will not give up this power because it is wrong, and doesn't accomplish the goal of education. It does accomplish their goals, ideologically and personally, so long as the truth can be concealed and unrecognizable to the average person.

At this point only collapse, seems to be the likely remedy. As was I believe, the intention, all along.

My Advise As A Past Teacher
Most parents have the tendency to believe their school is an exception, their schools are good and their children are getting a good few years in the educational process. Remember education is a process, it is not a result. The formal part of the process should be a consistent continuum toward excellence. Break the continuum with sorry teachers or a sorry school and the damage may take years of personal (unassisted and unsupervised) effort to repair. Parents must visit their children's school frequently and preferably unannounced to observe first hand what is being accomplished. Many students are being robbed of their educational opportunity (you are buying opportunity with your tax dollars---you cannot buy a guaranteed result) by poor classroom management and unchecked disruptive students. Some teachers are competent at the board but totally incompetent at discipline. It is a known fact a disruptive student over rules and degrades good, even competent, instruction. Don't let your child become systemically retarded; demand excellence from every teacher in your neighborhood school.

BABIES HAVING BABIES
The problem I see is that we have babies having babies and how do you expect the baby(MOM) to teach her children what she dont know. When we took discipline out of the schools during the Carter Admin the schools went to SH#T

Also I have a problem today with teachers teaching our children PROPAGANDA.

The schools I have went to were my children go have a problem with teaching kids MATH, ENGLISH and READING. They are more into showing them about AL GORE and his GLOBULL WARMING CRAP and scaring the children whom in turn goes home and
tries to tell their parents the world is going to be destroyed and the poor Polar bears and everything is going to die or drown. They dont teach the kids that Polar bears and Penguins can swim. I blame the teachers for allowing Kids to be pushed through their grades without knowing SH#T. So when the teachers feel that they are being treated wrong then they need to0 take a step backwards and see for themselves and quit blaming others for their OWN FAILURES.
Dang sounds like Im talking to LIBS

Sorry for the Typo
"advise" should read "advice" in the subject line.

This is Why I Love TownHall
Just wait a little while and the racism becomes crystal clear. People on more liberal sites are more guarded.

Here are two considerations.

First, its axiomatic that the variation inside any group is greater than the variation between two separate groups. For example, inside a particular group one would have very high IQ's and very low IQ's, let's say from 60 to 270 in each group, a variation of 210 points. However, the difference between the groups would be, according to someone like Boutte, maybe 3, maybe 6 points.

Thus any individual one encounters, from any group, could be significantly more intelligent (IQ accepted) than any random person from another group.

That why Boutte et al are racists. Racism is exactly that, assigning a negative characteristic to someone based on their membership in a race rather than on their individual characteristics. While any such comparison is unlikely to involve a black guy with an IQ of 270 and a white guy with an IQ of 60, or vice versa, it is quite a bit more likely to involve someone of one race with an IQ of 103 and someone else with an IQ of 97.

It's sad that such inforamtion, even if it were universally accepted, which it is most assuredly not, so readily encourages other unsubstantiated racist babble, such as lodestar's dire warning that Hispanics are inherently more violent and anti-social.





Can of worms
You've opened up a can of worms. We could go on all day. Where do you suggest we start to conquer this BLOB. A good start would be defunding any Federal School Programs. I attended private schools. I don't believe we had quotas to meet. Our Catholic schools out produced the public schools even in poor neighborhoods.
I believe the real problem lies in our universities. Do they know how to teach? The smart people we need to rely on for their smarts are not as smart as they should be.
We don't need a population that has spent to much time in school learning little.

All of us are members of a Commission...
Where do we start, what changes do we make, who/what in the current system needs to be eliminated and/or changed?

Well to start with we don't need no stinkin' commissions telling us what is patently obvious.

Next, Kill all the Lawyers...Oh, that's another story but wouldn't hurt here.

Next, Make it illegal to sue schools/teachers.

Next, Get rid of the NEA, the Dept. of (non)Education and Unions.

Next Return control to the local communities.

Next, Get Liberals out of everything having to do with laws and society so we can fix the damage they have done...

Well we're 90% of the way, then foster responsibility in students, parents so outcomes are most important.

Lastly, punish anyone preching indoctrination in our schools about any thing not related to actual learning...global warming, plastic self esteem...

Put comptition back in schools and last but certainly not least...

Put Prayer back in schools IF the students want to pray, and to hades with those that don't and feel insulted.

Solution
I have proposed this solution several times. It is counterintuitive but, I believe, likely to be more effective than doing the same thing over and over again. One side says we just need to spend more money, which wont' work absent a new vision of what to spend money on. The other side wants to return to some Halcyon days of fresh faced, uniformed, obedient kids, which also will not happen.

I suggest we make secondary education completely volitional. Amend state laws requiring students to be educated up until the age of 16 so that they need only attend school up through 8th grade. PArents would not be obligated to send kids to school past 8th grade, and states would not be mandated to educate past 8th grade.

The result would be high schools populated with students who elect to be there. Disruptive, disinterested students could simple be asked to leave. Education past 8th grade would be available, but only to those who value it.

To be sure, a number of students with some potential would be lost. But eventually, the value of educaiton would be more apparent: more and more students would return to school and do so with a more positive attitude.

This system satisfies both sides of the debate. It provides a mechanism for changing the school environment, rather than just a rant about how important that is. And it increase per capita funding dramatically, by cutting the capita down significantly.




Mick
Mick,

Using the issue as an opporunity to flog your own particular prejudices isn't particularly useful. It might make you feel better, but it has no imapct whatsoever.

Chuck is onto something!
"The problem I see is that we have babies having babies and how do you expect the baby(MOM) to teach her children what she dont know. "


In the late 1950's, and early 60's, girls were taught cooking, sewing, home economics (balancing a checkbook) and other motherly skills in high school. Guys were taught machine shop, auto mechanics, drafting, personal finance (loans, mortgage, how to calculate interest).

Today girls are taught how to put a condom on a cucumber and that they are "equal" to men in every respect. (They never bother to explain why schools have separate sports for men and women, or why separate world records are kept in olympic sporting events or even how to question such obvious inconsistencies).


Slightly off topic, but high schools used to offer even more for less money back then. The public high school my two older brothers attended in Chicago were in the ROTC and the school operated a gun range in the basement! Handgusn are somehow now illegal to possess in Chicago, although last week a record number of students were shot on or near school grounds. Go figure.

Jack
Why would it have to be a negative characteristic?

A socalled "racist" could assign either negative or positive characteristics to a person based on the person's membership in the race.

Certainly the Nazis extolled the virtues of the pure Aryan race.

Professional basketball franchises whose teams are 90% black must be engaged in racism, to you anyway, assuming athleticism on the court is a positive characteristic.

If differences in physical aptitudes and abilities exist among races, why not mental aptitudes and abilities?

The problem is not Townhall.

The problem is your refusal to acknowledge statistical probabilities.

Most educational psychologists agree that the difference between white and black i.q.s is one standard deviation from the norm, which is 15 points on a 100 point scale.

And it may be more.

But even one standard deviation ain't exactly chickenfeed.

By the way, enjoy your p.c. koolaid.


Two things:
1. How come only conservatives like Mr. Will are willing to tell the truth about education, the failure of too many American families to produce children fit to educate publicly, and the federal government's brown social thumb?

2. How come the Republican party has deserted conservatives like Mr. Will on education reform, preferring instead Democrat solutions?

Jack's solution won't work.
In an agrarian society, one only needed an 8th grade education to run a tractor, plow a field, milk a cow, or slaughter a pig. Today's modern civilizations require more than that.

Just as electricity seeks the path of least resistance, making secondary education volountary would result in a majority of students (especially those already with an adolescent for a mother and an unknown father) to stop at the 8th grade. With no means of supporting themselves, they become another lower class that the government will have to support or keep from rioting.

An educated populace is a requirement for any ordered civilization. What is lacking in our system is that we have created a one-size fits all educational system, when in fact, and as any good tailor will tell you, one size fits nobody (well).

The beauty of letting parents choose where to spend their tax dollars for their children is that it creates a system of variety where schools and students will find each other and a good fit will make educating the populace easier.

The indoctrination of our youth into the PC/diversity/lowered expectations world of our government school system is stiffling innovation, creativity, and the promotion of individuality, by requiring conformity within the "system".

Teaching is supposed to be a vocation, not a government sponsored retirement program.

The Bell Curve
Those interested in the discussion should really read the book.

There are substantial differences in average IQ between Americans who self-identify themselves in different racial groups. The black-white difference appears to be about 1 standard deviation, with little or no evidence of convergence since about the 1970s.

Differences in IQ make a big difference on AVERAGE outcomes. I capitalize AVERAGE because understanding this is absolutely critical. As I recall, the correlation between IQ and various life outcomes (positive or negative) is typically about 0.4. This is very strong in the social sciences, but leaves a huge amount of variation that depends on the individual.

The result, paraphrased from Herrnstein & Murray: If I know that a person has an IQ of 110, or 95, or whatever, I can tell you very little with confidence about their life outcomes. But if I know that a school of 1,000 students has an average IQ of 110, or 95, or whatever, I can tell you with a great deal of confidence about the AVERAGE outcome for this group.

It's statistically similar to flipping a coin. On a single flip, I have a 50-50 chance of guessing right. After 1,000 flips -- if it's a fair coin -- the number of heads is very unlikely to be far from 500.

the flash, you proved my point
You consider yourself a good person, plus you were able to teach your children how to be good people. So, that proves my point about the quote "Those who can do...etc." being incorrect.

Also, if you think that education is only successful if you're spoon-fed all the answers, then you don't understand the idea of education. An education gives you the tools to figure things out on your own.

Dear Teacher Pat
Dear Teacher Pat:

Yes, I agree that many of the kids are monsters. Yes, they have been "raised" by ignorant "parents" that basically are not educated and don’t give a damn. But wait! Who "educated" these "parents" and probably their "parents?" Why all you hard working dedicated teachers! You (teachers for the last forty years) reap what you sow. Get it Ms. Teacher? Also, teachers all agree that there are good teachers and many horrible teachers. I have yet to hear any teacher admit that they are one of the horrible ones. I would bet a lot of money that if I interviewed every one of you over-pampered, overpaid, over-perked, over-pensioned, under-worked teachers in the country, not one would admit to being one of the horrible teachers. I wonder where all the horrible ones hide?

Let's move on to the new A Nation atRisk
the College Board's report:
Teachers and the Uncertain American Future,
commentary and link here:

http://www.ednews.org/community/showthread.php?t=38

End PerCapita Funding
A lot of problems would get better if we would end per capitqa funding formulas. Many bad policies are devised to attract more people to get more money. Schools and immigration are just two examples.
I would like to retire all of the conservative purveyors of negativity. They are mostly just impressed with their status. To wit, NCLB is not a failure. Test scores for minority students are higher than ever. There would not be as many of them, however, if the government did not offer such powerful incentives.
Schools built on a 19th century Prussian model will soon become obsolete. A homeschool mom said she got a laptop and software for her son for $1000 that allows him to learn at his own pace. Why, then, pay so much more?
If I were to suggest one thing, I would have governors and homeschoolers massively advertise their great results. Double the homeschools and you would improve test scores and can cut thestate budget. Although there are some other initiatves that produce results, they are not as good.

horrible teachers - maybe
FairnessMan writes: Thursday, April, 24, 2008 3:02 PM
Dear Teacher Pat
Dear Teacher Pat:

"Yes, I agree that many of the kids are monsters."

Some are most aren't.


"Yes, they have been "raised" by ignorant "parents" that basically are not educated and don’t give a damn. But wait! Who "educated" these "parents" and probably their "parents?"

Ignorant how?
In the raising of children, I assume?
Not generally part of the school curriculum.


"Why all you hard working dedicated teachers! You (teachers for the last forty years) reap what you sow. Get it Ms. Teacher? Also, teachers all agree that there are good teachers and many horrible teachers. I have yet to hear any teacher admit that they are one of the horrible ones."

There are some horrible teachers, agreed. Not many. Usually in their
first 3 years of teaching. Some older teachers don't have the spark
left and probably were better years ago. Most are adequate or more
than that - professionals who do what they're paid to do and do it
well. We can't all be Jaime Escalante.

"I would bet a lot of money that if I interviewed every one of you over-pampered, overpaid, over-perked, over-pensioned, under-worked teachers in the country, not one would admit to being one of the horrible teachers. I wonder where all the horrible ones hide?"

You would have to find a teacher who defined themselves as you do.
Good luck.
My siblings all believe I work harder than them.
You seem to think that there are no horrible workers in blue collar and
white collar work - that is not my experience. Is it yours?
Most workers I've found are adequate or more so. Sound familiar?

Decline in Education
Four of the greatest contributors to the decline in the quality of education in the US are:

1. teacher's unions - reversing the belief that educating the children is paramount to where membership in and for the purposes of political and economic clout are the objectives.

2. lbj's "Great Society" - too numerous to list.

3. Welfare Programs - where females paid to produce children in a fatherless home becomes an "occupation" and is repeated by generations of illegitimate and under educated females. Bearing children out of wedlock becomes a requirement for acceptance by peers.

4. Multiculturalism - in which striving for academic excellence becomes a stigma for exclusion by peers. Holding individuals accountable for their own progress and development is repudiated for group acceptance.

30% of teachers are Repubs
there goes that all teachers are libs / Dems.

most are not libs or Dems most are Repubs or Indies just like the rest
of the American public.

http://www.hoover.org/pubaffairs/dailyreport/archive/286704 6.html

The Bell Curve Part 2
Other important points to remember:

(1) The intelligence bell curve is, of course, bell-shaped. About 68% of people have IQs between 85 and 115, and about 95% have IQs between 70 and 130.

(2) The shape of the bell curve interacts with the rougly 6.6-1 population predominance of whites (non-Hispanic) over blacks, with the result that there is a disproportionately small number of blacks at the extreme high end of the intelligence bell curve.

Using rough figures for those with IQ over 130 ( generally the "genius" cutoff): This is 2 SD above the white mean, so about 2.28% of the white population is in this range. It is 3 SD above the black mean, so about 0.14% of the black population is in this range. As a result, we would expect to see about 107 times as many whites as blacks with IQ over 130.

But it is also important to remember that there are a lot of blacks in America -- over 38 million in 2006. This implies over 50,000 black geniuses. That's a LOT of geniuses!


schools are a reflection of society
Deornwulf writes:

"Schools are nothing more than a reflection of the society to which they belong."


the best book on the subject, actually the best book on the history of
high schooling is Gerald Grant's _The World We Created at Hamilton
High_.

This shows that society leads schools not vice versa as so many on this
list believe.

intelligence isn't static
it can be learned.

i am not sure how the bell curve should influence what goes on in a
classroom? Do you suggest teachers make assumptions of the
students before them based on race?
no, thought so.

interesting book though. there were 2 or 3 follow up articles last year
in the Wall Street Journal y'all might be interested in.

JFP
Re your specific question about motivation issues in IQ testing: the Bell Curve addresses this as well. There are several examples of studies that make lack of motivation unlikely as an explanation for lower IQ scores in certain groups:

(1) Forward vs. backward digit memorization: This is where you're told a string of numbers, and then have to repeat them either forward or backward. Backward digit memorization is twice a "g loaded" as forward digit memorization ("g loading" is a measure of how well a specific tests correlates with the IQ factor, called "g," statistically derived from testing).

With respect to the black-white difference in particular, blacks (again, on average, and only on average) do relatively better on the whites on the forward test than on the backward test -- even when the test questions are interspersed with each other.

If the issue was lack of motivation, you would expect the results of these two types of questions to be the same. It's hard to accept the proposition that blacks would be motivated on questions 1, 3, 5 and 7 (the forward digit questions) but not on questions 2, 4, 6, and 8 (the backward digit questions) on the same test.

(2) "Processing time" tests: These involve a test procedure in which the subject starts holding down a central button. There are several other buttons on the display, as well as lights. The subject's task is, for example, to move his finger from the central button to the button closest to a light that comes on. More complex tasks can also be used, such as asking the subject to move his finger to the button farthest away from a group of lights that comes on.


JFP Part 2

This test allows two measurements: reaction time and movement time. Reaction time -- the time between the lights going on and the test subject lifting his finger off the central button -- is heavily g loaded. This is essentially a measure of "processing time," i.e. the amount of time it takes for the subject to decide what to do. Movement time -- the time between the subject lifting his finger from the central button and pressing the selected button -- is not very g loaded.

Studies consistently show that, on average, whites have significantly faster reaction time, but significantly slower movement time, compared to blacks.

As Herrnstein and Murray noted, it's hard to believe that black subjects are less motivated while deciding which button to press, but more motivated in the next split second, as they actually move to press the selected button.

As a disclaimer, I should tell you that my source of information for this is solely the Bell Curve. This isn't my field, and I'd be interested to hear if there is more recent, contrary data.

Jerrybob I
jerrybob,

I suppose, in one sense, that it is just as racist to attribute inordinately positive characteristics to an individual based only on his or her racial background. This would fal udner htre headings of delusions of racial superiority. In this context, however, the examples people are using exhibit a racism of quite the opposite sort.

You also wrote: "Professional basketball franchises whose teams are 90% black must be engaged in racism, to you anyway, assuming athleticism on the court is a positive characteristic." You appear to miss the point. The individuals who land plum roster spots in teh NBA do so becuase they, as individuals, exhibit the skills and dedication. If a team gave a spot to a black player instead of a white player under the assumption the white player couldn't jump, that woudl be racist. If they measured their actual vert, it would be a legit comparison of quality. Similarly, the old football addage that black players didn't have the requisite mental capacity to be winning quarterbacks didn't consider individuals, but rather assigned a negative group characterisitc unfairly to an individual. Racist.






JerryBob II
You also wrote:

"If differences in physical aptitudes and abilities exist among races, why not mental aptitudes and abilities?"

There is no reason this could not be true. But as I said, this would tell you nothign about the merits of any single individual and next to nothing about any subset of that group.

"The problem is not Townhall."

I didn't say the problem was Townhall. I said Townhall is a great thing... because it brings the closet racists and bigots out into the open.

"The problem is your refusal to acknowledge statistical probabilities."

No, the problem lies with folks who don't understand what statistics do and do not mean. GG is particularly insightful. The stats being bandied about here tell one virtually nothing about any individual, and attempting to apply this group data to any individual is the very definition of racist.


GG
You might be interested in the so-called Flynn effect, which indicates that people, all people, have been gettign smarter over time, as measured by IQ. Of course, it's an artifact of norming, but it suggests that black test subjects of today are smarter than white test subjects of 1954.

In practice, its worth remembering that 50% of any group is below its median in intelligence. The problem isn't the differential IQ: the problem is that there are a great many dumb people of all races.

Also interesting is data that suggests that Asians tend to be as successful with an IQ of 90 as other groups are with an IQ of 100, suggesting that cultural characteristics play a significant role in "success".

the founders and public education
here's your public education:

"Vic writes: Thursday, April, 24, 2008 7:40 AM
Education and the Founding Fathers
When the Constitution was written in 1789 there were no “free” public schools therefore the founding fathers had no thought on them what-so-ever. At that time ALL schools were private secular, private religious, or home schooled (the majority). The founding fathers would have been astounded at the level of State involvement in schools and dumbfounded at federal involvement. What is truly amazing is how equal protection under the law which was intended for courts and law has morphed into control of the schools. I am waiting on a roll-back of that little bit of judicial activism."

MA Constitution:

"And the people of this commonwealth have also a right to, and do, invest their legislature with authority to enjoin upon all the subjects an attendance upon the instructions of the public teachers aforesaid, at stated times and seasons, if there be any on whose instructions they can conscientiously and conveniently attend."
[This was public schools, the teacher had to be Protestant, but not of
a particular denomination.]



founders continued
"Wisdom, and knowledge, as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people, being necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberties; and as these depend on spreading the opportunities and advantages of education in the various parts of the country, and among the different orders of the people, it shall be the duty of legislatures and magistrates, in all future periods of this commonwealth, to cherish the interests of literature and the sciences, and all seminaries of them; especially the university at Cambridge, public schools and grammar schools in the towns; to encourage private societies and public institutions, rewards and immunities, for the promotion of agriculture, arts, sciences, commerce, trades, manufactures, and a natural history of the country; to countenance and inculcate the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private charity, industry and frugality, honesty and punctuality in their dealings; sincerity, good humor, and all social affections, and generous sentiments among the people"

1777-8

Flash
The population you are speaking about exists anyway. Just because people are in the halls in high school doesn't mean they didn't effectively drop out in 8th grade.

Bringing only motivated, interested students into secondary schools would change the schools dramatically. In short order, the greater value of education and the positive changes in teh environment would become apparent and would bring people back into the system.

Real facts for everyonesfacts
Ignorant how? In almost every possible way - from raising kids with some discipline, sense of right and wrong, how to handle money and on and on.

I’m sure all your siblings believe you work harder than them. Forty years of teacher/union brain washing has succeeded. Remember that nice man in Germany in the early 40’s who said something like "if you repeat a lie often enough eventually it will be believed as the truth." How right he was.

Finally, as opposed to fantasy island in the magic kingdom where teachers delude themselves, the real world with real jobs works a little differently. A horrible worker, a mediocre worker or a worker that just wears the wrong color shirt on any given day is out on his/her A$$ with no recourse. A bad teacher just laughs while dreaming about the next big raise, the big pension and the next week of the sixteen weeks off he or she steals from the taxpayers each year.

Yes, teaching is the hardest job in the world except for all the other jobs. Also, never forget, those that can do, those that can’t, teach.

FairnessMoon
you write: "Yes, teaching is the hardest job in the world except for all the other jobs. Also, never forget, those that can do, those that can’t, teach"

Wow. Where does that leave you?

here are the facts you asked for
"I’m sure all your siblings believe you work harder than them. Forty years of teacher/union brain washing has succeeded."

Oh, forgot to say 2 have tried teaching.
Sorry, forgot. Ummm, I'm not saying that all teachers work harder than
my brothers, just that I do. Going towards the moonbattery of the
right and trying to equate my anecdote with Nazism is uncalled for
and batty.

Your real world examples are not universal.
I was speaking from experience - warehouse work, shipping, sales,
door to door, office work - I've done it. Horrible workers, adequate
workers, bad dress these workers in my experience often stay.


"A bad teacher just laughs while dreaming about the next big raise,"

Because that is all he can do. lol

"the big pension and the next week of the sixteen weeks off he or she steals from the taxpayers each year."

Teachers do get good pensions.
Nothing is stolen - all is negotiated. You could be at the table at
negotiations, I bet, if your district is like most in the US and the school
committee negotiates the contract. So, it is people like you and me and
every one else that is a tax paying American citizen that decides what
teachers get paid. In the next contract salaries could be lowered. See
if your local voters agree with you.

"Yes, teaching is the hardest job in the world except for all the other jobs."

More stressful than difficult:
a quick google search came up with these:

http://eknowledger.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!F475D4DE444DB1A B!1111.entry
http://www.cdc.gov/ulcer/myth.htm
http://www.24dash.com/news/Education/2007-08-22-Teachers-to p-UK-s-most-stressful-job-league
http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2016553,00 .html


JackA$$
It leaves me with a very demanding, technical, high pressure job that I can DOOOOOOOOO, but few teachers could do.

and on society
FairnessMan writes:
"Ignorant how? In almost every possible way - from raising kids with some discipline, sense of right and wrong, how to handle money and on and on."

Some are, is this anything new?
The world is a much more complicated place in the areas you talk about
raising kids and money. that nearly everyone agrees upon. I'm not
sure you or anyone should place most of the blame on schools or
teachers when that is not their job.

Again I recommend all read Gerald Grant's _The World we Created at
Hamilton High_ to see how society is stronger molder of kids than the
schools. Teachers surely do not advocate an average of 6-7 hours of
tv a day.

are you a civil engineer?
fairness man?

because that would put you in one of the 10 least stressful jobs.

http://www.cdc.gov/ulcer/myth.htm

More fantasies from the magic kingdom
everyonesfacts

Teaching - stressful my A$$. No teacher could ever imagine real stress on a real job. Meeting drop dead deadlines, praying haste did not make waste, boss on your A$$ watching over your sholder pressuring you to do magic and miracles 8 or 9 or 10 or 11 or 12 hours per day. F&%$up and your out the door. Please teacher parasite give us a break. Teachers never do a day’s work in their lives!

Yes, your theft is negotiated - by Commie union thugs praying on cowardly politicians and then rubber stamped by the ignorant soccer parents that have heard all the truths again and again and again as taught using the theory of that nice German man of the 1940’s.


your objective fairness gives you away
Again, I have worked in the private world so you're wrong.

My brothers now work in private industry and do not agree with your pov

Again the facts do not support your assertions.
This is not to say that an individual job, yours, could be more stressful,
than an individual teacher's job. This is no doubt true.

But in general it seems that my beliefs are correct. Again the difficulty
of teaching is in the stress.
Your tone is uncalled for.
So is your moonbattery.
And stupidity: "Teachers never do a day’s work in their lives!"

Your views according to your own post are not popular and do not
the day in the republican / democratic governments that you live.
Maybe some day they will.

I would also suggest you look for new work, at least a new employer.
Best regards,

on negotiations
"Yes, your theft is negotiated"

Agreed.

"by Commie union thugs"

See stats of political affiliation linked above.
Don't know how many are communists.
My guess is close to 0
Thugs? I think you are thinking about other unions.

"praying on cowardly politicians"

no just politicians. Again you could be one of those cowards, I mean
pols. Most not all school committees are elected. I would bet yours
are probably too.

"and then rubber stamped by the ignorant soccer parents"

Before hand - that is how republican government works.
You can always vote them out.
And salaries, benefits, and working conditions are on the table at the
next contract talks. You already know this I assume.


not agreeing that it is theft
but wanted to play along with fairness man.

do like the phrase "negotiated theft" has an oxymoronic feel to it that
any lover of the language should appreciate.

Jack
I agree that its racist to assume that an individual black is unintelligent, because the average black IQ is lower than the average white IQ. Such a conclusion is not only racist, it is, well, unintelligent.

In my view, racial and ethnic IQ differences are principally important as an alternative explanation for differential group outcomes. When we observe, for example, differences in average income or college graduation rates between two groups, many jump to the conclusion that racism is the explanation. Group IQ differences may explain these differential outcomes, even in the absence of racism. Which was pretty much the major point of the Bell Curve.

It's also true that there are many, many factors other than intelligence that affect life outcomes.

I'm familiar with the Flynn effect, and I don't think that anyone has a good explanation for it. I suspect that it is partially explained by: (1) improved nutrition, and (2) more uniform education. As you look further back in American history over the past 100 years, much larger proportions of the population were poor, malnourished, and obtained what we would today consider only a rudimentary education. These could have a significant depressive effect on average IQ figures.

While the gap between rich and poor has probably increased, the absolute level of nutrition and education received by poor Americans improved dramatically in the 20th Century.

RE: Pat's Comments
Pat--I laud teachers who are dedicated, focused on improving the education of their students & don't try to indoctrinate our children. Sounds like your students are lucky to have you.
I read most of the articles up to yours and I didn't see everyone just blaming the teachers. The blame was much more pervasive then that: Big Gov't; administrators; the lack of a cohesive family unit; etc.
Their are dedicated teachers out there, but not all teachers actually do their jobs (for whatever reason). Teachers are to blame, although it doesn't sound like you're one of those teachers, but they aren't the only ones to blame.
I was lucky enough to go through a public school system that was exemplary. Unfortunately, I don't live in that state & I'm stuck with substandard teachers. Instead of actually teaching my children, I'm left trying to teach them. My collegiate emphasis was not on elementary education so I have to struggle to get my kids to learn math since they aren't learning it at school.
I agree: Big gov't is screwing up our children & the future of this society; More administrators are taking their 6 figure or more salaries without providing the classrooms with funds & more; because even the families that have two parents, both have to work to be able to afford anything, they aren't available to help their own children; and classrooms have gotten away from teaching the fundamentals.
Is there an easy answer?
Personally, I'm looking into private schools. Not easy, but I don't want my kids to be unable to enter college due to indifferent teachers.

public vs. private schools
about the same.
pretty amazing since one would assume that private school parents are
more committed and involved in their kids education:

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs/studies/2006461.a sp

The Bell Curve II
On the subject of IQ, there has been a new, controversial finding in the past decade. For about a century, IQ researchers believed that men and women had the same average IQ. Recent studies suggest that average adult male IQ is about 4-5 points higher than average female IQ, and that the male standard deviation is larger (16-16.5 IQ points for men, 13.5-14 IQ points for women).

FYI, IQ is typically normalized with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15.

This difference was missed in many early studies because they focused on children. The male-female IQ differential appears to emerge after age 15, due to differential growth patterns. Women mature earlier, while men have significant growth (both in body and brain size) after age 15, even into their early-to-mid 20s.

All of the caveats referenced in the race IQ difference discussion above apply equally to the male-female differential, if not more so, because the differential is smaller. There is enormous overlap between the two distributions.

The significance of these findings is at the upper tail of the distribution. Assuming the average of the figures above (average male/female IQ differential 4.5, male std. dev. 16.25, female std. dev. 13.75) leads to the following calculations:

(1) "Genius" level, IQ>130: About 4.4% of men, 1% of women. Men outnumber women about 4.6:1 at this level.

(2) IQ >145: About 0.43% of men, 0.03% of women. Men outnumber women about 14:1 at this level.

It would be interesting for Charles Murray to write a "Bell Curve II" exploring the male/female differential.

As discussed in the posts above, IQ isn't everything. Some of the same studies that confirmed a higher male IQ also determined that women do better in college.

I would like to rerecommend
the College Board report
Teachers and the Uncertain American Future which has been hailed
as the new A Nation at Risk:

http://www.ednews.org/community/showthread.php?t=38

everyonesfacts
The study you referenced is interesting, but I think that you may not be interpreting it properly. It is a comparison of public and private schools by the Dep't of Education, based on 2003 data.

I'll focus on the 8th grade results. Private school students performed better than public school students in reading by 18.1 points with an "effect size" of 0.58, and in math by 12.3 points with an "effect size" of 0.38. The effect size the absolute difference divided by the overall standard deviation for the test scores.

Assuming a normal distribution, this means that the average private school student outperformed about 72% of public school children in reading, and about 63% of public school children in math.

The public schools excluded 5% of students from the reading test and 4% from the math test. The public schools excluded less than 1% of their students. I presume that this is to take the severely mentally disabled out of the analysis.


everyonesfacts continued
The study then adjusted these differentials for "selected student characteristics" -- essentially a measure of better family backgrounds or other reasons to expect higher scores (race and sex were both included, though I didn't check to see if either had a significant effect).

The result was that the private school differential in math disappeared after the adjustment, becoming "near zero," while a statistically significant differential of 7.3 points remained with respect to reading scores, in favor of the private schools.

Overall conclusions (taken with a grain of salt, as the analysis includes many assumptions):

(1) Private school children significantly outperform public school children in both math and reading.

(2) Public and private schools teach math equally well. The superior performance by private school students reflects more favorable demographic characteristics.

(3) Private schools teach reading better than public schools. About 60% of the superior performance of private school children is explained by more favorable demographics. The remaining 40% presumably relates to the schools themselves.

("effect size" 0.58, meaning that this represents 58% of the standard defiation)

JFP - On IQ testing
--
At 8:15 AM today, JFP made an interesting comment:

"I had a roommate once who told me that on a test he once had to take, he came to a section on math, which he hated, so he left it all blank. I was shocked, because I always tried to do the best that I could on every test I took. Obviously, people approach tests with very different motivations, and my roommate's IQ on the math part would have been zero on this test.

"My question for those who accept IQ data is, How do you know that those with low scores simply didn't have the motivation that those with high scores did? I asked a professor of psychology this question once, and he said there was no way to tell."


I think that your psych professor ducked the question. Not surprising.

What Stanford-Binet (IQ) testing - like all testing - can reveal is an individual's willingness to face a challenge.

Whether it's a typical standardized "Fill in the circle completely with your Nr. 2 pencil or the grading machine won't be able to read your answer" test or an oral (viva voce) exam, what testing demonstrates is the participant's capability in a challenge situation.

It's not only about the ready knowledge he brings into the test, but his willingness to pit his wits against a stressful situation.

Think of the "mock code" situations by which students are assessed for certification in the various advanced courses in cardiac, trauma, and pediatric life support.

Those "code" simulations are made as realistic as possible, and they push the student to the limit in order to test not only retention and ability but also the will to win.

To literally defeat death.

Your former roommate showed that he was unwilling to face a challenge in math ("which he hated").

What does that tell about his likely performance in a situation where something more than just a grade is on the line?

--

gg-az - public v. private study
yes, about the same as I said (when apples are compared to apples).

pretty amazing when you consider that private schools can select
their students and end their students careers whenever they wish
for the slightest infraction, if they chose, as fairness man seems to
think all of private industry is like.
my experience is that most private schools will bend over backwards
to work with and keep a student, but that's all. Public schools have to
keep the kids they've bent over backwards for whether they like it or
not.

The biggest weakness of the study is it does not show cost.
imo, it shows students getting roughly the same educations but the
public schools cost more.

the "TH thought police" strike again
re:
Boutte's 5:54 a.m. post has been expurgated... too much truth I guess... perhaps his other posts as well. It spoke of undeniable differences in IQ by race/ethnicity. I found it amusing because it was so heretical to the PC status quo, though it spoke the inconvenient truth. It prompted some vehement disagreement that Boutte predicted, but no fact-based retort. Actually, the motto here, "Where your opinion counts" only applies when/if it is politically acceptable to the powers that be.

I made a copy which I am tempted to copy here, but someone would no doubt simply expunge me also. Funny how when some do not want to deal with uncomfortable realities some expunge them. They did that in Nazi Germany and in the Communist Soviet Union... perhaps that should be a warning here.

an Rx for improving education
Part of a post below by the typically sagacious and persuasive jerebaub on how to improve education-- it is worthy of a reprise for emphasis and reflection:

**************************

"Universities should abolish colleges of education, and scrap all courses related to "theories of learning", "self-esteem in the classroom". In place of such garbage, offer courses specific to the curriculum of the prospective teacher, and have it administered thru more rigorous colleges of arts and sciences.

Greatly restrict the power of teacher unions.

Emphasize monetary rewards for meritorious teachers."

***************************

I understand why good teachers grow weary of being "scapegoats," but somehow we need to quit making excuses and return our way of educating to more fruitful methods. we lag TERRIBLY behind other countries in results, though we typically spend far more per capita. I am convinced that vouchers, e.g., may be necessary to force the worthy goals above on the union-plagued LCD ("lowest common denominator"-- back when they taught that). Accountability works in the competitive world that these young people must enter-- we MUST expect no less from their school teachers.

SJ Doc
"Your former roommate showed that he was unwilling to face a challenge in math ("which he hated").

What does that tell about his likely performance in a situation where something more than just a grade is on the line?"

Am I missing something here? I brought up the example of my roommate to show that motivation might affect scores on IQ tests. You seem to be talking about something else entirely. My roommate's likely performance in another situation might be very bad, but how does that relate to IQ scores?

Try reading GG-AZ's responses. I don't agree with him, but he's responding to what I said.

GG-AZ
OK, the second test you mentioned in your post relates to motivations on a motor-skills test. That may have nothing to do with motivation in an intellectual exercise. The first test seems like a very thin reed to build anything on.

Against those tests, I SAW with my own eyes how people's grades changed with their motivation. And that is relevant because IQ tests have to be anchored to something in order for the testers to be sure that they are testing intelligence, and what they are anchored to is grades in school. So if people's grades improve significantly as their motivation improves, that suggests that any earlier IQ score they had was too low.

Here's what I saw:

1. The roommate I mentioned earlier was a person I knew in high school. He drifted along and got Bs and Cs. He seemed to be in a fog. In college he woke up and got motivated. He went on to get a Ph.D. In high school there was no indication he would ever get a Ph.D.

2. I myself had changing motivations throughout school, and my grades changed accordingly.

3. Blacks who come to America from a foreign country to go to college have been raised in a completely different cultural milieu than American blacks have. They are highly motivated. It can't be coincidence that such a comparatively high percentage of the blacks who benefit from affirmative-action programs and become professors are from foreign countries.

JFP
It is difficult to argue with anecdote, but anecdote often proves nothing. The current food price increases are an example: perhaps the price of eggs is up 50% over the past year; but the price of food overall is up much less, closer to 5%.

This is why it is important to use statistics. Of course, statistics can be so easily abused. There are really great quotes on this:

(1) "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics."
(2) "Torture numbers enough and they'll confess to anything."

This doesn't actually mean that statistical analysis is useless, just that it must be carefully analyzed and understood. And unfortunately, understanding good statistical analyses is beyond the intellectual ability of probably 85-90% of the population as a whole.

I completely agree that motivation, and many other personal qualities, can have enormous impacts on individual outcomes. IQ is not determinative of anything. But, as explained in detail in The Bell Curve, it is very strongly correlated with many life outcomes, and generally in the "right" direction. That is, outcomes that we consider "positive" -- HS graduation, higher incomes, having children within wedlock -- are positively correlated with IQ, while outcomes that we consider "negative" -- crime, welfare, unemployment -- are negatively correlated with IQ.

As I noted earlier, the correlations are typically about .4, which in colloquial terms means that IQ explains about 40% of the observed differences among individuals. That is very significant, but leaves 60% of the correlation to be explained by other factors.

There is plenty of room for a genius to be a complete loser, unemployed, or even criminal, and plenty of room for a person of average or below average, intelligence to be an outstanding, upright citizen in every respect, and make a fortune too.

lodestar
I missed Boutte's 5:54 am post. It must have been wiped before I reached this site. Would you post it again, so I can check it out before the "thought police" strike again?

Teachers cannot do it alone
Learning is connected not just to IQ but to the culture of a potential learning milieu including family involvement, community attitude toward learning and students peer group attitude toward the value of learning.

Read some of John McWhorters books about attempts to get African-Americans to use their innate ability and succeed. He is an PHD African American teaching at UCLA. He cites cultural attitudes toward time, to learning as "acting white" to cultural victimization attitudes interfering etc.

As for white disinclination to real learning, let's look at child rearing practices by baby boomers. indoctrination as learning in high schools and colleges,and over-affluence impeding real energy investment etc.

Lets look at a culture of technology offering little from participants other then pressing some buttons on video games or computors. Lets look at how this influences learning now as entertainment rather then hard work.

All the issues I have raised calls for a massive campaign to reengage Americans in rigorous learning. And teachers cannot do it alone,

Coming Soon: Nontrepreneur Nation
Just sharing another related risk to our nation:

Coming Soon: Nontrepreneur Nation
How parenting and education are killing American entrepreneurship and innovation
http://insidework.net/resources/articles/coming-soon-to-the -usa-nontrepreneur-nation

Back to parenting...
"If you're not ready to tend the garden, don't plant the seeds."
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.