A new report finds that U.S. college students lack basic reading comprehension and math skills. And naturally, legislators in Olympia are angling to do away with or weaken the graduation requirement linked to passage of the Washington Assessment of Student Learning, the central accountability mechanism in our state's crucial education reform effort. Sponsors include Ds and - I'm sad to say - Rs.
However, groups representing superintendents, principals and business are urging the legislature to keep the WASL as the key high school graduation requirement. Three different bills in the state senate would undermine WASL. The first two are sponsored by Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe (D-1st), the Dark Queen of Washington state education policy, AND GOP Sen. Dave Schmidt (44th), who surely needs to hear from his constituents. SB 6461 is a hideous tangle of gobbledygook that would give grade-point average a greater weight over WASL; SB 6618 would allow weaker alternative assessments for '08 and '09 grads who can't pass WASL (WASL measures reading, writing and math skills at the 10th grade level). SB6620 (short title: "The Social Promotion Bill") eliminates WASL and torturously describes a process whereby local school districts gin up a certificate of academic proficiency based on supposedly rigorous, still-to-be-developed, alternative skills assessments. Is this an alternative to be proud of? Well, the bill also strikes current RCW language requiring transcripts to show whether students won their certificates via WASL or an alternative. Mean people, harmful to the self-esteem of graduates, might misunderestimate the value of the alternative, I guess. Too bad "rigor" currently translates as "reach for your wallet." Three main sponsors: two Dems and - get this - GOP Sen. Don Benton, the original smooth operator.
Charles Hasse of the Washington Education Association, says GPA is the way to go.
(Hasse) said the WASL should not be a high-stakes test. His group contends grade-point average should count more than the WASL in deciding whether a student should graduate. "We're simply saying that high standards and high-stakes testing are at cross-purposes to each other," Hasse said.
Yes, in the same way teachers unions find merit pay and improved teacher performance to be at cross-purposes. WASL testing should be strengthened, not weakened. The WASL graduation requirement should be retained, and there should be a 12th-grade WASL as well, to ensure students have real, and rigorously-defined 12th-grade skills before they graduate. Colleges - including our very own University of Washington - spend way too much time on remedial instruction in core subjects. The preceeding-linked Seattle Times article also has a handy chart showing the average GPA drop for new UW students - from Washington high schools to The U - is from 3.65 to 3.03. High-school grading should be just as tough, relative to the grade level and material, especially for other admitees (many minority) who will end up with GPAs of between 2 and 3 at schools like UW. They need to know sooner, rather than later, what higher expectations will mean. Further, remember that unfortunately college grades are still inflated too. When college graduates arrive in the workplace, many still barely have core skills. The legislative sponsors, plus apologists like Hasse and the WEA are working at cross-purposes to the success of Washington K-12 students, employers, and the economy.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at January 19, 2006 07:00 PM | Email ThisI know I should just roll my eyes and give up on trying to understand how these people even get into the legislature, but I just can't help being perpetually puzzled by this. The dumbing down of WA voters must have started long ago.
I mean, I don't really care if they are D or R, I just would like a little brain power and actual concern for real, middle class people. Concern for the poor too, sure. Even some fairness for the rich. But, these people seem to do EVERYTHING to the lowest common denominator and ultimately serve noone.
Posted by: BananaLand on January 19, 2006 08:14 PMSome of these school superintendents, especially in places like Seattle, are making salaries of up to $200,000 per year -- far more than Governor Gregoire or any of our other statewide elected officials.
Here is my own modest proposal. If less than 90% of the students who meet the GPA and credit requirements for graduation in a given school district are able to pass all portions of the WASL, then the salaries of the superintendent, principals, and all other school district administrators get reduced to that of an entry-level beginning teacher.
This way, we can see how sincere school superintendents and principals are about the WASL requirement. And in the process, most likely take money from fat administrative overhead and put it back into actually teaching our children.
Posted by: Richard Pope on January 19, 2006 08:39 PMThanks to the handy link to SB660, I was able to zip over and read it. It DOES NOT socially promote kids. They have to meet the standards and any alternative has to be as rigorous (ha!) as the WASL. You can dislike the legislation but do be fair about what it says and actually read it.
Kids at UW will always need remedial math if we continue with the math on the WASL which is reading-based (read: bad for boys and ESL kids) and not math language-based. I predict that the math WASL scores for 10th graders won't budge more than a couple of points no matter what happens.
Also, for the record, Seattle Superintendent Raj Manhas makes $170,000 which, unfortunately, is pretty much in line for a big city with expensive real estate. I don't know what Gregoire makes but that's what Mr. Manhas makes, not $200,000. Also, this push to pay a lot was put in by the business superintendent, Joseph Olchefske, who was an idiot and unmitigated disaster who was propped up by a pro-business Board who refused to acknowledge his almost-complete incompetence.
Posted by: westello on January 19, 2006 08:52 PM"(b) ((The certificate of academic achievement requirements under 29 RCW 28A.655.061 or the certificate of individual achievement 30 requirements under RCW 28A.155.045 are required for graduation from a 31 public high school but are not the only requirements for graduation."
In other words, they are trying to pave the way for a certificate of achievement - issued by local districts with supposedly rigorous oversight from the state and input from outside experts - to stand as grounds enough to substitute for the WASL. Currently, a non-WASL certificate is NOT enough; you have to pass WASL to graduate and that is how that should stay.
The message here is clear: "if you can't pass the test, we'll gin up a certificate of achievement for you anyway, and you're home free."
If this was a suitable substitute for WASL, there would not also be a line drawn through existing RCW language (see bottom of page two and top of page three in the bill) which says a student's transcript must indicate whether he/she earned the certificate of achievement (a graduation requirement) through WASL or an alternative.
So it's supposedly as valid a way of demonstrating proficiency as a standardized test, but no student should have to cop to it. The stigma might be too great. Boy, that's convincing.
It entirely reeks of social promotion. Dressing all this up with language about equal "rigor" and "high standards" may make it sound good to you, but not to me. I guess I've seen too much here in Seattle - those terms are camo cover only, at present.
Posted by: Matt R. on January 19, 2006 09:37 PMNot at my kids' school! (why do you think we bailed out of public school during the Locke administration?? It was then that it finally dawned on me that it would never get any better. Leaving public school was truly one of the best things we ever did for our kids and their education since then proves it.)
Posted by: Outta the nightmare that is public school and never once regretted it! on January 19, 2006 10:13 PMThe people who want to water down the WASL or even eliminate it simply don't want everyone to know what most people already suspect to be true: Many high school graduates do not know what a high school graduate ought to know.
I think the legislature will cave in, and there will be no veto. Too many people would rather pretend that the grades given by each student's teachers are reliable indicators of academic achievement. (If they were reliable, it wouldn't be so obvious that so many high school graduates don't have an actual high school education.)
The bill sponsored by McAuliffe and Schmidt is supported by neither of them. In an odd little twist, they sponsored it to give it a hearing given the attention the issue is getting, but neither support it in the least. A weird turn in an already odd debate.
Posted by: Eric Earling on January 19, 2006 10:43 PMAlso, think of the disproportionate impact of WASL, with some groups having far more than a 50% failure rate. Boys tend to score lower than girls. Blacks and Hispanics tend to score lower than Whites and Asians.
Posted by: Richard Pope on January 19, 2006 11:22 PMWhat are we going to do when they can't get a diploma? That's a no-brainer. We're going to tell them: "Sorry kid, no diploma, no job for anything over $8 per hour."
Why do you think business is pushing the WASL? Cheap wages. That's what all this is about.
Posted by: Ivan on January 19, 2006 11:51 PMAs it is, when kids come out of high school, they are worthless. Paying them minimum wage is too much in most cases.
Having the WASL means that businesses can easily tell who can read, write, and do basic arithmetic. Hence, they will be able to hire people at a level above uneducated and below college educated.
Right now, there is no "middle ground". You either went to college, or you didn't. If you didn't, you either have job experience, or you don't. If you don't, you're worthless.
Posted by: Jonathan Gardner on January 20, 2006 12:31 AMIf memory serves, the Continental Congress, the Confederate States of America, the Weimar Republic, and the Third Reich all tried to solve their financial shortfalls by printing or minting more currency. In all cases, it failed miserably because the real value was never in the paper currency or coin itself, but in what it represented. Running the printing presses nonstop simply resulted in hyperinflation and economic ruin.
Similarly, the value of a diploma is in what it represents. We do not increase the knowledge base of our children by printing and presenting more worthless scraps of paper with great pomp and circumstance.
Posted by: TB on January 20, 2006 12:56 AMWho's the fool here? If some of these companies want "valuable" labor, whatever that is and whoever is to decide, they'll get it from India or China, where people work for less and don't form unions -- yet.
American kids? Dumb, poor, and unorganized. Problem is, it will drive *your* wages down, and those of your kids. And you're their useful idiot.
Posted by: Ivan on January 20, 2006 06:37 AMIt's outrageous that people think it's okay for over 50% of the high school students to flunk out and not receive a diploma.
The WASL and the curriculum must mutually support each other to be an effective measurement tool. Do they?????????
After graduation the only thing that matters for gaining employment (or successfully going to college, for that matter) is a general level of competence in reading and writing skills and a willingness to get better at whatever you decide.
If a smart 16-year-old can pass the test, let him/her move on with their life and go to college or work i fthey wish.
Posted by: Easycure on January 20, 2006 07:13 AMhttp://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=28A.655&full=true#28A.655.061
These exceptions are as follows:
"(5) The state board of education may not require the acquisition of the certificate of academic achievement for students in home-based instruction under chapter 28A.200 RCW, for students enrolled in private schools under chapter 28A.195 RCW, or for students satisfying the provisions of RCW 28A.155.045."
So if someone flunks the WASL, but otherwise meets the state credit and GPA requirements for high school graduation, they can pay an approved private school money to evaluate their transcript and issue a high school diploma.
Or they can go through some miminal level of charade and have a home schooling diploma issued without much further ado, based on the education already received in public school.
RCW 28A.155.045 deals with special education. No WASL is required for students with learning disabilities. We can expect special education programs to skyrocket in the future, especially among students in the bottom 20 to 50 percent who would never have a prayer of passing the WASL. This will make the cost of education correspondingly skyrocket.
And of course, high school dropouts and juvenile crime will soar, after people in 10th grade dropout after flunking the WASL a few times and realizing they don't have a prayer of getting a high school diploma and figure what's the use of staying in school.
I think Ivan has a good point. Big business needs a reserve army of the unemployed (or should we said unemployable), so that can pay low wages and so that our labor force can be competitive with China, India, Burma, and Afghanistan.
Posted by: Richard Pope on January 20, 2006 07:27 AMThis is a great turnover issue for Republicans like Mike McGavick. I hope these dumb Democrats spotkight the heck out of this so McGavick and others can turn around and throw it back in their faces.
Posted by: Jeff B. on January 20, 2006 08:30 AMSo, how many students will now take the test seriously, if it stands in the way of graduation? If we lower the standards now, we will never find out, because the students will know that once again, the test has no bearing on their future. They can get around it.
We need to stick with the WASL for this year. See what happens. Hold the students (and teachers) accountable for the results.
The WASL is not a great test, and it is expensive. But, it measures how well students comprehend English, and how well they understand the concept of math, not just computation. Both of these are valuable. And, I think our students are capable of demonstrating competency at both.
Posted by: Janet S on January 20, 2006 08:41 AMPridemore says it's only a "C level test." Then how come he, and the WEA, is so unconcerned about the relatively low numbers of our kids who can pass it?
There are many, many fields of endeavor where a single test must be passed... and those professions are valuable to our community and society as a whole.
I am far less concerned about the delicate sensibilities of failing students then I am about the true value of a high school diploma, where a graduate then has to get into some remedial program before they can get into college-level classes.
My 12 and 14 y.o.'s do well in school. But they know the true test they'll have to pass to go on is the WASL. That concept doesn’t frighten me… or them. And for those who want the WASL gone… there must be SOME sort of benchmark available to replace it. Because my guess (and it’s purely a guess because I haven’t seen any figures one way or the other) is that of the students who pass all phases of the WASL, damned few of them will require remedial classes in college, because, stunningly enough, they’ll be able to read, write and do math.
The retakes allowed of subjects failed also will enhance the numbers. Take a look at the retake experience in Mass:
http://www.k12.wa.us/accountability/CoM%20Files/Massachusetts%20Students%20Attaining%20Competency.pdf
Posted by: Gary on January 20, 2006 09:09 AM"And for those who want the WASL gone… there must be SOME sort of benchmark available to replace it."
I say:
There is. It's called GRADES. What a concept!
Posted by: Ivan on January 20, 2006 09:14 AMThe WASL is actually creating other problems. Because it is a Washington State only test, it value to universities is nil. They can’t compare a WASL score to an Iowa standardized test because it’s apples to oranges. The test is also putting so much pressure on teachers because their jobs are on the line; they have started to triage the students. Some percentage will never pass so why waste time and money. Others will pass with flying colors, so we can ignore those students too (watch for AP and IB program funding to get cut). The third group could go either way and that’s where the time and money is spent. If your kid isn’t in that group, expect them to be ignored.
Don’t get me wrong… I think standardized tests are important, but let’s use one that is recognized on a national level and checks the performance of our schools and the students.
The WASL isn't perfect, but it is what we have now. To dump it without a rigorous replacement just leaves us where we are.
BTW, I have personal knowledge of a student who passed the math WASL in 4th, 7th, and 10th, but couldn't pass the basic assessment for math at BCC. Lots of reasons for it, mainly that math wasn't taken in 12th grade. My conclusion is that the WASL is not overly burdensome.
Posted by: Janet S on January 20, 2006 09:35 AMTeachers by and large are accountable and want to be accountable. There are slackers and rotten apples in every population of workers, no more or less so in education than anywhere else.
The problem, in my experience, is the administrators, who are more interested in cutting themselves a fat hog at the expense of students, parents, and teachers, and blaming everything on the unions.
There is one main reason why *some* teachers' unions oppose merit pay in *some* situations. It is because school administrators have used it arbitrarily to reward their friends and screw their enemies, and to reinforce their own positions.
I have a kid in school, so this is not some theoretical argument for me. I do not oppose merit pay for teachers on principle, and neither do most teachers that I know.
They all tell me they could live with it if it came with ironclad language in their union contracts that would ensure that merit pay was being granted fairly -- to those who deserved it based on their service to their students, and not to the principal's friends.
But that would require a strong union, which you lot will never accept. So the stalemate continues. If right-wingers are looking to blame somebody, stand in front of your mirrors. My kid's teachers are there for her, and therefore I am there for them.
Posted by: Ivan on January 20, 2006 10:03 AMThere are no predictive validity studies relating to the WASL.
There is a high correlation between the WASL math tests and the WASL reading tests. This could account for almost one-half of the math score.
Subjective scoring leads to arbitrary decisions. There can be a 28.9 percent chance that a child has had his or her test incorrectly scored.
The arbitrary standard will be raised each year, eventually reaching 100 percent.
Correct answers are determined after students' answers are read.
On some questions, students can earn full points, even if they get the wrong answer.
The WASL has appearances of a technical disaster.
Do you know that all student tests are shredded? In Nevada, Minnesota and New York City, scorer errors were common. Your child could be kept from graduating because of incorrect scoring and you have no recourse.
One test in high school actually is required by NCLB (though the President would like to expand that), but it has nothing to do with a graduation test. That's totally a state issue. In Washington's case, we use the 10th grade WASL for NCLB purposes and for our own graduation test.
Richard -
I would suggest we give this year's test a chance before we start complaining about the number of kids not passing all sections of the WASL, since this is the first year it will actually count. Massachusets, a state not to dissimilar from us (especially on education reform), saw a dramatic jump in passage rates (something like 20%) as soon as their 10th grade test actually became a graduation requirement. Moreover, they've implemented a lot of the options we're already talking about such as re-take opportunities for the sections a studnet doesn't pass, targeted assistance including summer school, alternative options for some students, etc. Massachusets' passage rate is now well into the '90's and they just implemented the graduation test a few years ago.
Posted by: Eric Earling on January 20, 2006 10:25 AMThat contract is arrived at after bargaining, and both sides of the table have a hand in creating it -- AND in enforcing it.
When you bash the union, you are bashing your kids' teachers. The biggest lie you right-wingers spew is that the union is a "third party."
I have seen rotten apples, too. There is always a way to get rid of them without violating the contract.
*Competent* dminstrators in the public sector and *competent* employers in the private sector know how to document a slacker or a rotten apple for termination, and how to get the cooperation of the union in doing so.
But they don't. They would rather bash the union. Why? Because it's easier, and they're either dumb or lazy -- or because control is more important to them than results.
Posted by: Ivan on January 20, 2006 10:33 AMI agree that it should be correlated to the ITED. If results are similar, then there is no need for the WASL. But, the WASL employs lots of people in Olympia, and the ITED is a private test that costs pennies to administer. Which do you think will actually be used?
No test is perfect. But this one can be passed by students getting a reasonable education. Until the state comes up with something better, I'm not willing to toss it out.
Usually, in the private sector this interest is balanced against the profit motive of the evil capitalists, but no such counterweighing interest exists in the public sector.
Contracts prevent parents from hiring busses to take their kids to unfunded school competitions without first paying the school district employee. Contracts prevent parents from visiting classes. Contracts prevent parent conferences. Contracts prevent districts from finding private providers of basic services. Contracts prevent administrators from placing the right teacher in the right subject area when seniority interferes.
This isn't right wing-extremism, it is basic self interest of an employee group, written down, and governing the operation of schools.
You say the employer must sign first. What portion of the school board members are elected with the help of union political push? At the state level, the governor appointed a former union official to negotiate opposite the current union official on the state employee contract. Who represents the public interest at that table?
Back to teachers though. Logically, is it in the employee group to measure student achievement in any way other than by the teacher himself? Of course not, so the employee group folks (who make a living at identifying the employee interests and working to make those interests primary in all policies), will not support objective assessments that signal achievement or failure.
Posted by: Anon on January 20, 2006 11:23 AMHow do we compare to the Dakotas?
Posted by: swatter on January 20, 2006 11:26 AM"Ivan, you seem well-meaning but perhaps naive. The very concept of a union is the protection the self-interest of the employees against ANY other interest. You have to know that includes even legitimate interests in cost controls, accountability, management authority, and even the interests of parents and students.
Usually, in the private sector this interest is balanced against the profit motive of the evil capitalists, but no such counterweighing interest exists in the public sector."
I say:
Oh, yeah, I'm so naive. Employees want their employers to exist and to prosper so that they can have jobs. Is that enough of a "counterweighing interest" for you?
Posted by: Ivan on January 20, 2006 11:47 AMUnion worship amounts to nothing more then cheering for mediocrity. Unions make sure the worst worker gets paid the same as the best worker. Three cheers for Socialism.
Posted by: swassociates on January 20, 2006 11:58 AMOr are you saying that all bosses, just *because* they are bosses, are bosses because they somehow are smarter and more competent than anyone else?
If that's what you're saying, then you still must believe in Santa Claus. "My boss is an idiot" is a universal statement that has nothing to do with anyone's political leanings.
Posted by: Ivan on January 20, 2006 12:27 PMThe employers in public education are the school districts as required by State and local laws.
The contracts between the teachers unions and the employers in public education are required by Federal, State and local laws.
The Unions are mandated by Federal, State and local laws.
The contracts are "negotiated pro forma" but the unions have all of the bargaining power under Federal, State and local laws.
When we bash the teacher's unions, we are bashing our kids' teachers, because many of our kids' teachers refuse to educate our kids, and they have a legal strangle-hold over public education that allows them to do as they wish.
Competent employers in the private sector know how to document a slacker or a rotten apple for termination, and when there is no union or a weak union they take the appropriate actions. When they don’t, eventually they lose market share and go out of business.
There are very few competent public employers. The employers in public education are incompetent because the unions are so powerful that they crush incentives, consume bloated bureaucratic budgets, and promote a liberal agenda of utter incompetence.
Ivan is a good example of the product of Public Education; blind obedience to partisan doctrine in direct contradiction to common sense and obvious facts. Ivan is, ”The dumbest and the laziest person on this thread. He demonstrates a complete dishonesty lying about something of which all of us know better, as though we will simply ignore the facts. He believes what he says only because it is easy.
Unions are the single most important problem in Public education. If we do not rid Public Education of teachers’ unions or provide an alternative to Public Education, we will be conquered and become a third world country not worth living in. Ivan is a pig that the rest of us who work for a living must carry along because he believes in socialism, and actively promotes socialist ideals that don’t work.
Skip the references to NCLB, it mandated performance testing, not the WASL.
WEA - if the WASL is so bad and so broken (I'm not saying it is or isn't, my daughter has done well on it) what is YOUR alternative SOLUTION?
Posted by: SouthernRoots on January 20, 2006 01:19 PMIf one dislikes what the WASL measures (usually not the argument, ironically), then suggesting a new look at the EALRs is the practical path.
More often the criticism is simply that a test exists and the results are unflattering.
Posted by: knowsabit on January 20, 2006 01:47 PMTests like ITED and PSAT are norm-referenced, mean they tell you how well students are doing against other test takers, not whether they've met the standard for that grade.
Moreover, states participating in No Child Left Behind (states choose to participate in this law, it's their choice), have to use criterion-referenced tests - per Congress' stipulation for the receipt of federal funds for these programs. Federal education funding has spiked as part of NCLB, up to $378 million for Washington state in 2005.
It strikes me on the whole, this debate is about having the stones to hold students to the standards we already agreed they need to reach to be prepared for life after high school...whether that be going right into the workforce, higher education, etc. Since the question is about courage, it shouldn't be a stunner some in the Legislature are wussing out, and some interest groups continue not to like it since it promotes public accountability they're uncomfortable with.
Posted by: Eric Earling on January 20, 2006 01:54 PMI've read the K-8 EALRs and must confess that they are confusing.
Ronin - I was just wondering if there was a better program already in use somewhere. I was also wondering what the teachers suggested as solutions. Perhaps replace the Board of Education, elect a commission from the whole teacher base, or something. I haven't heard what they want to allow us to better measure student learning. Perhaps one solution would be to forgo Federal funds and then we can do whatever we want.....
Knowsabit - I agree with you about the criticism - it's what we always hear. So, if you do your class planning around the EALRs, supposedly the WASL should just fit in? Many teacher complaints I've heard is that they teach a certain way all year and then all of a sudden they have to "teach to the test".
Eric - Thanks for defining the differences between the tests. I tend to agree with you that it is better to set the standards and then help the student meet (or exceed) them, than it it to lower the standards so that it appears everyone passes. In the real world, meeting or exceeding standards is expected - we should help our kids by teaching them this too.
(Although, it may not be a necessary skill if they run for public office.)
Posted by: SouthernRoots on January 20, 2006 02:25 PM
Sure NCLB wants us to use the criterion test and to improve those scores or face federal wrath ('course, we can set the standard low and avoid it).
But the rub here is whether students will get to walk across the platform like in years past.
Posted by: Knowsabit on January 20, 2006 02:36 PMExacly correct. I don't know about anyone else here, but I don't wish to look forward to a future planned by Engineers, adjudicated by Lawyers, treated by Doctors and protected by Military Leaders who can't function above a nominal level. If I wanted that, I could move to Canada, or France.
If this continues the way it is going, there will be a profusion of private schools, home schooling, voucher systems, and charter schools. That's not necessarily a bad thing. I think it's the only way to save our nation from mediocrity.
Posted by: Amused by liberals on January 20, 2006 02:41 PMI repeat: I support my daughter's teachers, which is to say their union, because it is one and the same thing, because they deliver for her.
I hold my daughter, her teachers, and myself responsible for getting her a quality education. So far we have all held up our end.
Politically in this state, we intend to crush nutbags like you who are trying to tear down public education. Try to maintain your characteristic sense of humor.
Posted by: Ivan on January 20, 2006 03:08 PMAnd yes, the state can do whatever it wants for a graduation test. But switching to the PSAT or something like that would fly in the face of over a decade of education reform decisions that have been made by Republicans and Democrats alike. So that course seems unlikely. The debate about what kind of test gets used for graduation is over and done with - despite the vocal minority of naysayers you noted - the only question is how it gets implemented.
Posted by: Eric Earling on January 20, 2006 03:44 PMPosted by Eric Earling at January 20, 2006 02:04 PM
http://wdcrobcolp01.ed.gov/CFAPPS/employee_locator/employee_detail.cfm?id=1252
Hmm -- maybe Mr. Earling should become a Democrat.
Seems like 2:04 p.m. on Friday, January 20, 2006 is part of normal business hours for the federal government, including the U.S. Department of Education.
And Mr. Earling is spending his time (OUR TIME, to be more correct) at work browsing the internet, and posting comments on Sound Politics.
Sounds like something a good liberal Democrat would do.
Posted by: Richard Pope on January 20, 2006 05:35 PMBut thanks for your kind offer to switch parties. A quaint tactic to use when someone disagrees with you.
Posted by: Eric Earling on January 20, 2006 06:02 PMDo you work FULL-TIME for the Department of Education? Or do they just give you LOTS and LOTS of paid holidays and vacation time?
Posted by: Richard Pope on January 20, 2006 06:15 PMIf you're that fascinated with my posting history, most often you'd see, especially for my longer posts, they come on the weekends and evenings from my home computer.
As for daytime posts, yes sometimes those come when I'm on vacation or sick leave so come from my home computer. Sometimes I work from my home office because of my meeting schedule and post on my break times. And sometimes, though least frequently, I'll offer up a short post on my break time at work. I don't take a traditional lunch (or other breaks) when I'm in the office, but take breaks when I get the chance during the day. Personal use of the office computer is acceptable in those circumstances under government policy since it incurrs no cost to the government.
Also, I should add the intellectual underpinning of your party switching offer is exceptionally weak. I was interviewed by Bush political appointees at the Dept of Education for my job, then recommended to and approved by the White House, which is known for only hiring people with proven loyalty to this President and the party. So, yes, I'm a great candidate for switching parties.
Posted by: Eric Earling on January 20, 2006 06:46 PMWASL is an extremely expensive, ineffective, and harmful Democrat boondoggle. Why can't we use a standard kind of test which many other states are already using? Is there something different about reading, math, science, and social studies in Washington, as compared to the rest of the country, which requires a different kind of test?
I am still wondering what we are going to do in 2008 when we have to deny diplomas to 58% of our students -- and about 80% of blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans -- because they can't pass the WASL.
It is interesting that the WASL is required in 10th grade, instead of 12th grade. That's how big business wants it. If someone can't pass the WASL in 10th grade, why bother going to high school for another two years? They can go right into low paid factory work at age 16, and provide this state with a competitive low wage work force, thereby making the state more attractive to big business and boosting its profits. Big business figures too many folks waste their physically productive years (i.e. 16 to 24) pursuing a high school diploma and college degree. The U.S.A. is oversubscribed with college educated people, who aren't willing to clean a floor, flip a burger, or assemble electronic components at any wage that might be offered.
It used to be that Republicans generally opposed the WASL, especially among conservatives. Several years ago, the Washington Education Association was enthusiastic about the WASL. And far too many conservatives have knee jerk opposition to ANY position that may be advocated by the WEA.
Posted by: Richard Pope on January 21, 2006 02:01 PMIn California, 100,000 seniors will be denied diplomas this year. Though they have fulfilled all other requirements, they haven’t passed the test. Another 45,000 would-be seniors failed the test as sophomores and have since disappeared from school records—dropped out."
http://www.mothersagainstwasl.org/tulalippresentation.html
Posted by: Richard Pope on January 21, 2006 07:38 PMSorry... grades won't cut it. We HAVE grades... we ALSO have remedial math and reading, etc. If "grades" are the answer, then why do we need remedial classes?
NO ONE GRADUATING FROM HIGH SCHOOL SHOULD NEED ANY REMEDIAL CLAWSS... PERIOD. That they do... well, that tends to speak for the true value of "grades," doesn't it?
Posted by: Hinton on January 21, 2006 07:58 PMIt is always amusing to read your comments.
If I don't sound very "amused" to you, it is because you are a humorless true believer defending things that don’t exist. Yes Republicans have lost ground in this area—mores the pity—but this won’t last because the policies you promote are based on lies and distortions that are doomed to fail. As you readily demonstrate, corruption is it’s own reward, and public education is going down.
You, ”support [your] daughter's teachers, which is to say their union, because . . . they deliver . . . ” They deliver the liberal ideological bent that fits with your indolent education and limited thinking ability.
You,” hold [your] daughter, her teachers, and [yourself] responsible for getting her a,” liberal socialist democrat education, and judging from the obvious lies you tell about Public Education and it’s problems, you ” have all held up [your] end.” Indeed the system is failing because of people like you or this discussion would not be taking place. I don’t need to do or say anything, you and your ilk are tearing public education down very well all by yourself. I pity your daughter.
It is especially humorous that you feeeeel so strongly about saving it that you would tell obvious lies that only hasten the failure. Typical liberal democrat—full of crap—and proud of it.
Thanks for the notably irritable but amusing response.
My daughter is a straight-A student who does not need your sympathy or anyone else's. Bloviating and calling me names only shows your ignorance and lack of any substance, and utter frutration over your inability to stem your headlong rush toward self-marginalization.
Posted by: Ivan on January 22, 2006 11:34 AMYour comment that,"far too many conservatives have knee jerk opposition to ANY position that may be advocated by the WEA," is an unfair characterization that assumes a motive without regard to the reasons for one.
There is no evidence to conclude that conservatives automatically oppose the WEA simply because they-assume-that principally every position the WEA promotes is negative. They recognize that principally every position the WEA promotes is negative simply by looking at the results.
Teachers unions are destructive in virtually every principal way imaginable to everyone involved except the actual union employees themselves, including school children, parents, and teachers themselves. Our whole society is overtaken with ignorance and prejudice arising from the type of socialist collectivist world view promoted through out the American Public school system.
Posted by: Amused by liberals on January 22, 2006 11:41 AMWhen you attack unions, you attack teachers. You are only saying "I hate teachers! It's all the teachers' fault!" Please keep speaking out and continuing to expose yourself in public.
And please, continue to be "amused."
Posted by: Ivan on January 22, 2006 12:28 PMYour daughter is probably a very nice young person. If I didn't have a solid point about education you would simply let my comments pass. Instead you make ludicrous statements in defense of things that can only be defended to those who are too lazy to think. I am not.
EXAMPLE:
You say, ”The biggest lie you right-wingers spew is that the union is a "third party." This is amusingly dumb on its face.
Unions are NOT third parties? Do you know what “third party means?” Many, many, teachers are conservative and they despise the teachers’ unions for the same reasons that I do. Since obviously you believe that my criticism of unions is the same as criticism of conservative teachers, solely based on the fact that they are forced to work within union constraints alone, you make my point for me. I’d wager that your daughter knows better than this. If not—mores the pity for her sake.
Your ardent support for UNIONS is especially humorous in the light of your own failure to distinguish between public and private sector employment. As Anon said very well,
”The very concept of a union is the protection the self-interest of the employees against ANY other interest. You have to know that includes even legitimate interests in cost controls, accountability, management authority, and even the interests of parents and students. Usually, in the private sector this interest is balanced against the profit motive of the evil capitalists, but no such counterweighing interest exists in the public sector.” Posted by Anon at January 20, 2006 11:23 AM
Your answer to Ronin was, ”Employees want their employers to exist and to prosper so that they can have jobs. Is that enough of a "counterweighing interest" for you?” Your answer assumes that teachers through union's somehow play a role in the existence of public education. It doesn't exist for teachers but to promote the general welfare of society. Public education is a constitutionally mandated institution. This mandate explicitly guarantees that unions have no stake in the success or failure of public education unless there are standards with which to scrutinize the union’s role. The battle over STANDARDS is LARGELY associated with that scrutiny, and you completely miss that fact.
Because unions have nothing to lose by children's failure, they have nothing to gain by their success. The only concern the WEA has is collecting dues from teachers, and saying otherwise is simply hairsplitting nonsense. The solutions are twofold; elimination of the union, and/or alternatives to public education. Unions in certain situations protect workers rights but they never assist the employers in any way. Anyone who believes this has been indoctrinated without thinking. In this instance, the losers are children and our future.
As for my utter ”frustration [sic] over [a supposed] inability to stem [my] headlong rush toward self-marginalization,” It doesn’t matter in the least what you feeeel about me, I am not the person in this exchange making ludicrous and utterly unsupportable statements like this. Who is frustrated and marginalized?
Again, the system is failing because of people like you . . . or this discussion would not be taking place. You come here to dump cheap indefensible lies and junk-reasoning because you are concerned about the inevitable failure of modern liberalism. Otherwise you wouldn't bother. I don’t need to do or say anything, you and your ilk are tearing public education down very well all by yourselves. Works for me. Maybe in the future it will be replaced with a system where kids like your daughter will have an opportunity to get a decent education instead cynical indoctrination from pin-headed liberal socialists like you.
Thanks for your comments, especially because they offer such rich opportunities to exploit your ignorance.
Strong unions are teachers' best defenses against right-wing wackaloons like you. And you know what else? Conservative teachers have the same protections, because the union is required by law to provide fair representation to *all* members.
My daughter is getting a terrific education in the Seattle School system, from union members. Not my problem if you don't like that.
How did that referendum on charter schools come out again?
Posted by: Ivan on January 22, 2006 03:29 PMYou say, ”THE BIGGEST LIE YOU RIGHT-WINGERS SPEW IS THAT THE [TEACHERS’] UNION IS A "THIRD PARTY." I establish that ”Many, many, teachers are conservative (right-wingers), who despise the teachers’ unions for the same reasons that I do, and thus . . . how could attacking the unions be attacking teachers who agree with me? They don't want the union, they want to teach. You reply that "Strong unions are teachers' best defenses against [conservatives].”
Although you are obviously too emotionally engaged to recognize it, principally we agree:
The teacher’s unions, dominated by liberals and solely maintained to promote the interest of liberal teachers, are the best defenses they can mount against conservative teachers and against objective, decent, and politically neutral education. As a result, public education is challenged by a crisis of conflicting interests—unions versus standards. Are you proud if your daughter got an A plus for putting a condom on a banana?
Weiss, if you are happy with your contributions to this thread, I certainly am. You prove that if you ever had a point in disagreement with mine, . . . you are thoroughly incapable of making and then defending it rationally. You don’t care about your intellectual laziness, dishonesty, and lying . . . and neither do I (except to snicker), but I am sure, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that if your daughter has half of the brains you attribute to her, she will take note of your shallow disingenuousness, and adjust her ideological course accordingly. She will still love you, but she will transcend your bull$hit.
Otherwise . . . another moonbat liberal—who cares—how amusing indeed. Liberalism is on the decline in a big way, and in the future, anyone who refuses to take responsibility for themselves will be left in the dust. These are symptoms. Our public school system as we know it, is going down.
Thanks for the entertainment.
I genuinely wish your daughter well.
We (at least I) believe our intellect . . . not your stupid partisan prejudices.
"How did that referendum on charter schools come out again? You know; control us or destroy us? It will fail . . . big.
You are wrong . . . and I have proven it.
Graceful retreat (sort of).
Posted by: Amused by liberals on January 22, 2006 11:43 PMFurthermore, your daughter is being force-fed a bunch of empty-headed, sloganistic, socialistic feel-good crap, and will likely miss out on the joy of using her brain.
Mores the pity......
Posted by: alphabet soup on January 23, 2006 12:25 PM