Clinton and Obama

[x1hundredregrets]

Originally Posted by Doligan

Is there a reason California was ranked both 6 and 9? is it just that awesome?

Try reading the top of the list. It's the top 10 high schools. California has more than one high school amirite?

[Burf]

Not to mention that Florida is on there 3 times, and Texas twice.....
Good job not only not reading the article, but for also the extreme selective reading of the list.

[Etoille]

ABC News: Sexism: Clinton's Latest Vast Conspiracy?

here we go! called it MONTHS ago.

"I didnt win because people wont vote for a woman".

"Sexism was a bigger deal than racism (which I tried to create but it didnt work so obviously its sexisim)"

"People wont vote for a black man and thats the reason I should be president....but the reason I cant run for president is because people wont vote for a woman!"


So after fracturing the party when it comes to race...shes trying to fracture it further with the gender card. Awesome. Spiteful bitch.

[Eomer]

Not to mention that Florida is on there 3 times, and Texas twice.....
Good job not only not reading the article, but for also the extreme selective reading of the list.

rofl, I don't care which side of the fence you sit on with the whole "stupid people vote Republican", I think we can all agree that a more useless bit of data could not be found for this argument.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by AladainAF

Interesting, if anything.

America's Top Public High Schools | Newsweek Best High Schools | Newsweek.com

#1 - Arizona - Red
#2 - Texas - Red
#3 - Florida - Red
#4 - Texas - Red
#5 - Florida - Red
#6 - California - Blue
#7 - South Carolina - Red
#8 - Florida - Red
#9 - California - Blue
#10- Washington - Blue

So the top 10 high schools in the nation, 7 of the top 10 are from "red" states.

Just found that interesting.

Carry on.

Florida is not blue. It is purple. Plus this means nothing. Everyone in a state is not Democrat or Republican. It is safe to say that Republicans have a lower IQ based on the Republican media, Republican campaign techniques and per capita income of the red states vs. the blue states.

[AladainAF]

IRB,

I posted that because I responded to what you said - that "those states have a large uneducated population that votes republican".

You initiated it, and now you're backpedaling.

[Etoille]

Originally Posted by I'm Rich Bitch

It is safe to say that Republicans have a lower IQ based on the Republican media, Republican campaign techniques and per capita income of the red states vs. the blue states.

It is safe to say that anyone who thinks that making this statement is an example of logical reason and thought is an idiot.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by AladainAF

IRB,

I posted that because I responded to what you said - that "those states have a large uneducated population that votes republican".

You initiated it, and now you're backpedaling.

Those are selected schools. To make it somewhat pertinent you would have to go into the school and poll for Obama vs. McCain supporters. At this point it is a known fact that Democrats are smarter than Republicans. Putting states aside let's just look at the last two Presidents. Which is smarter? The Rhodes Scholar Bill Clinton who balanced the budget and had a successful Presidency or the "C" student idiot George W. Bush who is the worse President in our history?

[Zitar]

The number one school on that list is a charter school in Tucson with about 100 students. They only have about a dozen kids graduate a year and push hard for test scores to help their ranking.While a charter school maybe labeled public they are ran like a private school.

The top schools on that list all look to be charter style schools. So right leaning state have the advantage. Charter schools > bloated wasteful public schools. To bad the left stands in the way of advancing it.

[Sunder]

The only reason Charter schools > public schools is because Charter schools don't have to take every Tom, Jane, and Harry. They can pick and choose their students. If Charter schools had to take everyone in a given area, they'd end up JUST like public schools. So, unless conservatives are willing to do away with the idea of an educated public, the only thing moving completely to private schools will do is create an even more ignorant citizenry.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Zitar

The top schools on that list all look to be charter style schools. So right leaning state have the advantage. Charter schools > bloated wasteful public schools. To bad the left stands in the way of advancing it.

Obama: Feds should experiment with teacher pay, charter schools

Obama said he believes the federal government should help support charter schools and look at new ways to improve performance and pay good teachers more money. He said teacher unions "haven't been thrilled" about some of his ideas.

Again, stop listening to Republican media.

[Zitar]

Originally Posted by Sunder

The only reason Charter schools > public schools is because Charter schools don't have to take every Tom, Jane, and Harry. They can pick and choose their students. If Charter schools had to take everyone in a given area, they'd end up JUST like public schools. So, unless conservatives are willing to do away with the idea of an educated public, the only thing moving completely to private schools will do is create an even more ignorant citizenry.

Charter schools are geared for people who will be moving onto college. Teaching knuckledraggers college prep is a waste of time and money. The country needs to move to a tiered 8-12 system. Teaching the lowered end a trade.

[Sunder]

Originally Posted by Zitar

Charter schools are geared for people who will be moving onto college. Teaching knuckledraggers college prep is a waste of time and money. The country needs to move to a tiered 8-12 system. Teaching the lowered end a trade.

Exactly. Which why any comparison between charter schools and normal public schools is a ridiculous comparison. The two are apples and oranges.

As to your proposal of a tiered system, it's a good idea. Some people just aren't going to college, no matter how many standardized tests you force them to take.

[Soriak]

The Impact of School Choice on Student Outcomes: An Analysis of the Chicago Public Schools

Current education reform proposals involve improving educational outcomes through forms of market-based competition and expanded parental choice. In this paper, we explore the impact of choice through open enrollment within the Chicago Public Schools (CPS). Roughly half of the students within CPS opt out of their assigned high school to attend other neighborhood schools or special career academies and magnet schools. Access to school choice dramatically increases student sorting by ability relative to neighborhood assignment. Students who opt out are more likely to graduate than observationally similar students who remain at their assigned schools. However, with the exception of those attending career academies, the gains appear to be largely spurious driven by the fact that more motivated students are disproportionately likely to opt out. Students with easy geographical access to a range of schools other than career academies (who presumably have a greater degree of school choice) are no more likely to graduate on average than students in more isolated areas. We find no evidence that this finding can be explained by negative spillovers to those who remain that mask gains to those who travel. Open enrollment apparently benefits those students who take advantage of having access to vocational programs without harming those who do not.

The study was mentioned in Freakonomics, for those who've read it. Basically, parents could add the names of their children to a lottery for attendance in better rated schools. The students at the better school did perform above average, but the students who were not picked in the lottery and had to go to a worse school performed just as well as the ones who were picked did in the good school.

What it seems to indicate is that the children who would end up in that lottery are already likely to perform above average. (Because their parents are more likely to be in the group in which children perform well)

Hence the self-selection argument. Children who have parents able/willing to pay for private school already are statistically likely to perform better than those not meeting the conditions. That students at private schools then perform better is expected and is no indication that they receive a better education.


Probably not a politically satisfying answer. The book's whole chapter on parent influence pretty much invalidates a whole multi-billion dollar industry. I guess parents just want to think the little obsessive things they do really matter...

edit: changed the Abstract, think I got an old version originally.

[Zerai]

Parents who actually care about their kids education, check up on their homework, make sure they attend school...end up having more educated kids. Shocking.