Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

Mensch · Mar 13, 2011

Boo Radley said:
I thought I gave you some of this before:

Private schools are not obligated by any laws regarding admission. Therefore, private school admission is competitive.

For some, yes it is true, but not all and certainly not the majority. Like I’ve been saying, Horace Mann is not representative of ALL private schools. I even acknowledge there are some diploma mill private schools. Are they competitive? Of course not! You’re generalizing all private schools.

Public School vs. Private School - Public School Review

Public Schools Outperform Private Schools in Math Instruction

Private vs. Public: The Great Debate | Education.com

This is quite interesting for its complete contradiction in results. Let me quote something from the first source:

“Private school students generally perform higher than their public school counterparts on standardized achievement tests. As with earlier results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), private school students performed higher than public school students on the NAEP: 2000 tests. Their average scores were above those of public school students on the 4th-grade reading test and on the 4th-, 8th-, and 12th-grade science and mathematics proficiency tests.”
That doesn’t corroborate the ‘evidence’ discovered in the second source. I believe the “freakonomics-style” study is possibly the first and only such study to come up with such results.

No, the major difference is selectivity.

No, it is diversity. Private schools are diverse. There are some highly elitist schools which are extremely selective, and there are others which are less so. Does every private elementary school require potential students to test into their kindergarten classes? I don’t think so. Do the diploma mills require high standards? I don’t think so. Private schools are so diverse it would be unfair to characterize them as all one bloc of discriminating institutions.

I'm doing nothing of the kind.

Of course you are- you are implying that Europeans are socially more aware and therefore more culturally adapted to making the right educational choices for their children. In a sense, that’s a claim of cultural superiority.

Because you have to take into account difference sin culture that may have someothing to do with results. The approach in Japan is very different to the apporach in the US. Students here spend most their time trying not to be students.

Now it is time for you to be more specific. Here are a couple of wiki articles for you to digest:

Education in the Netherlands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Education in Sweden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not abstain, get kicked out, and have parents babysit.

You’ve agreed to repeal truancy laws. Do you know what that means?

I used the word often. However, I did do a search: According to the National Association of Independent Schools, the median tuition for their member private day schools in 2008-2009 in the United States was $17,441. (There are cheaper and more expensive schools, but that is median. )

Private vs. public schools - Defining Your Ideal School | GreatSchools

Given that public school is currently monopolized and access to private school is restricted to those with the monetary resources, this is no coincidence. Expand choice, and like all other commodities, you will see competition bring about higher quality and lower costs.

Only two options?

Well, yes. Currently, the hyper-regulation of public schools dictates that school boards must jump through a number of hoops before it can expand and build more schools. The result is fewer classes and large class sizes. If you want to remedy the situation, you’re going to have to deregulate (in one way or another) the system or else tolerate the existing status quo. You can’t expand the schools by bypassing the regulations.

Of course. But the assumption is that it is widespread and common. It really isn't. Most teachers do a fine job.

That is highly subjective and an incredible generalization. I don’t believe you’ve spent your whole life evaluating “most” teachers, so you’re just guessing.

Are you sugegsting someone who doesn't know the job or what the teacher should eb doing should do the evaluation?

Strawman fallacy. Of course I do not believe such a thing. I believe a number of evaluators, from teachers to administrators to students to parents should evaluate a single teacher. Not just one teacher of the same department who likely shares a close relationship with the teacher who is being evaluated.

I think more care about the letter grade than the actual learning. Give than an easy A and there is rarely a complaint. Fail a child and watch parents beat down the door.

Not all parents are like that. You’re patronizing and discrediting all parents.

I'll try. Countries don't compare directly.

Then perhaps in our UHC debate, you may want to quit bringing up France and the UK.

To borrow a well know quote, a person is smart, people are stupid. But, know that isn't my point. You're not stupid if you not an expert in all things. In fact, knowing your limitations is actually quite smart.

I hate that quote. I find it has no value, whatsoever. I deal with individuals on a daily basis, A LOT of individuals. I deal with some of them in large numbers as groups and as individual one-on-one encounters. Some are stupid. Some are rude. Some are intelligent. Some are polite. But nothing from what I’ve observed ever gave worth to that ridiculous quote.

Very little of life is that exact. In fact, makig subjective judgements happen far often and require greater skill and knowledge than the easy objective lessons.

I don’t agree. I find it takes more skill and knowledge to understand and comprehend complex mathematical problems as it is to understand and comprehend soft sciences. I can write a well-written analysis of history and politics, but I couldn’t build something with my own hands if my life depended on it. My wife is an engineer who can build anything with her hands but her English is her second language and she has more trouble writing a well-written paper. I would argue that my wife is far more intelligent than I am.

In fact, I am. Well respected and awarded as well. but I don't take a lot of time here, as I'm usually doing two or three things at once. So, no editing or proofreading. I'm a published author as well. Have even been featured in a local publication. So, I'm OK with making erroros here.

And a WHOLE LOT of them. When you do write for publication, you must spend hours proofreading and editing. I imagine you must also enlist the help of other editors and proofreaders before you finally submit your work. I’m not an English major or a teacher, but writing well comes naturally for me. I find it to be distasteful, obnoxious, and even embarrassing to make mistakes as I’m writing so I’m quick to ensure my writing is done well in the first place. The result is less time spent proofreading and editing. What’s the point of making an eloquent, thoughtful response if your opponent can’t even read or understand your statements?

There's a belief in education that the weak need the strong as examples.

Did you just run out of things to say?

Boo Radley · Mar 21, 2011

ElijahGalt said:
For some, yes it is true, but not all and certainly not the majority. Like I’ve been saying, Horace Mann is not representative of ALL private schools. I even acknowledge there are some diploma mill private schools. Are they competitive? Of course not! You’re generalizing all private schools.

We're both generalizing to a degree as we're directly comparing any two schools. But, national numbers are an average and include those who are selective. These effect the numbers, and make private schools look better.

This is quite interesting for its complete contradiction in results. Let me quote something from the first source:

“Private school students generally perform higher than their public school counterparts on standardized achievement tests. As with earlier results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), private school students performed higher than public school students on the NAEP: 2000 tests. Their average scores were above those of public school students on the 4th-grade reading test and on the 4th-, 8th-, and 12th-grade science and mathematics proficiency tests.”
That doesn’t corroborate the ‘evidence’ discovered in the second source. I believe the “freakonomics-style” study is possibly the first and only such study to come up with such results.

It helps to read it all together as they explain how they reach their conclusions.

No, it is diversity. Private schools are diverse. There are some highly elitist schools which are extremely selective, and there are others which are less so. Does every private elementary school require potential students to test into their kindergarten classes? I don’t think so. Do the diploma mills require high standards? I don’t think so. Private schools are so diverse it would be unfair to characterize them as all one bloc of discriminating institutions.

All are discrimintory to some degree, if only in terms of someone being able to pay for them. But, you miss the point, and it is the same point as you missed earlier, the selective elements skew the data, making the average higher, and leads to the wrong conclusion.

Perhaps you should try to show some difference in teaching methods that would account for any difference in scores. I suggest they teach exactly the same.

Of course you are- you are implying that Europeans are socially more aware and therefore more culturally adapted to making the right educational choices for their children. In a sense, that’s a claim of cultural superiority.

Nonsense. Only that other nations approach education differently.

Now it is time for you to be more specific. Here are a couple of wiki articles for you to digest:

Education in the Netherlands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Education in Sweden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you read these?

In elementary and high schools, pupils are assessed annually by a team of teachers who determine whether he or she has advanced enough to move on to the next grade.

What not a bubble test?

Choice

Students in Swedish primary schools have very limited choice in their education.

I'm not sure what you think you're showing me.

You’ve agreed to repeal truancy laws. Do you know what that means?

It means the school is not forced to have to keep a student who is disruptive. That is different from abstain.

Given that public school is currently monopolized and access to private school is restricted to those with the monetary resources, this is no coincidence. Expand choice, and like all other commodities, you will see competition bring about higher quality and lower costs.

That is essentially the difference between the words public and private.

Well, yes. Currently, the hyper-regulation of public schools dictates that school boards must jump through a number of hoops before it can expand and build more schools. The result is fewer classes and large class sizes. If you want to remedy the situation, you’re going to have to deregulate (in one way or another) the system or else tolerate the existing status quo. You can’t expand the schools by bypassing the regulations.

This relates to cost controls, and can be managed with a serious committment to education.

That is highly subjective and an incredible generalization. I don’t believe you’ve spent your whole life evaluating “most” teachers, so you’re just guessing.

Yes, you are guessing. I have spent a good deal of time looking at it. Teachers are people, subject to all human failings. But moast do a fine job and deserve a certain amount of respect.

Strawman fallacy. Of course I do not believe such a thing. I believe a number of evaluators, from teachers to administrators to students to parents should evaluate a single teacher. Not just one teacher of the same department who likely shares a close relationship with the teacher who is being evaluated.

And what should the student evaluate? The parent? If they stay to what they know, I have no objection. But let's not inject a lack of knowledge as a standard.

BTW, asking a question is not a strawman. Just thought you should know.

Not all parents are like that. You’re patronizing and discrediting all parents.

enough are, and they are the loudest, thus setting the standard for others, much like how a few who vote set the policy in our states and in the nation.

Then perhaps in our UHC debate, you may want to quit bringing up France and the UK.

Actually, I don't. I have been asked which i prefer, and France over the UK. But I almost never bring them up on my own. However, that is also a different discussion.

I hate that quote. I find it has no value, whatsoever. I deal with individuals on a daily basis, A LOT of individuals. I deal with some of them in large numbers as groups and as individual one-on-one encounters. Some are stupid. Some are rude. Some are intelligent. Some are polite. But nothing from what I’ve observed ever gave worth to that ridiculous quote.

Just watch a mob sometime, or look at silly things too often accepted by a majority that is often easily disproven.

I don’t agree. I find it takes more skill and knowledge to understand and comprehend complex mathematical problems as it is to understand and comprehend soft sciences. I can write a well-written analysis of history and politics, but I couldn’t build something with my own hands if my life depended on it. My wife is an engineer who can build anything with her hands but her English is her second language and she has more trouble writing a well-written paper. I would argue that my wife is far more intelligent than I am.

I'm sure there is room for disagreement. But a mathimatical problem has an exact answer. You kinow that if you can do the math, you'll get the rigth answer. With other things, you can do everything right and still be wrong. It takes more than knwoing the exact procedures, but requires a bit of skill that is harder to define, and rare to be found in all who try.

And a WHOLE LOT of them. When you do write for publication, you must spend hours proofreading and editing. I imagine you must also enlist the help of other editors and proofreaders before you finally submit your work. I’m not an English major or a teacher, but writing well comes naturally for me. I find it to be distasteful, obnoxious, and even embarrassing to make mistakes as I’m writing so I’m quick to ensure my writing is done well in the first place. The result is less time spent proofreading and editing. What’s the point of making an eloquent, thoughtful response if your opponent can’t even read or understand your statements?

yes, I spend a good amount of time proof reading, this is true. I make no claim to the contrary. I'm a old poor boy who came to education late, and have to work hard to be successful. So, I pick where I worry about it and where I don't. If you pay me, I'll write you something pretty and without error.

Did you just run out of things to say?

:roll: No. It was a point.

Mensch · Mar 29, 2011

Boo Radley said:
We're both generalizing to a degree as we're directly comparing any two schools. But, national numbers are an average and include those who are selective. These effect the numbers, and make private schools look better.

Regardless, that doesn't give you the right to deprive others of accessing the school of their choice. At least, if not totally in support of vouchers, you could at least support open enrollment. That, at least, would be a step in the right direction.

It helps to read it all together as they explain how they reach their conclusions.

If you don't mind, please help me understand their methods and how those methods should be looked at separately from their conclusions.

All are discrimintory to some degree, if only in terms of someone being able to pay for them. But, you miss the point, and it is the same point as you missed earlier, the selective elements skew the data, making the average higher, and leads to the wrong conclusion.

If you wish to claim a technicality of error, fine. It still doesn't give you the right to restrict the choice of others.

Perhaps you should try to show some difference in teaching methods that would account for any difference in scores. I suggest they teach exactly the same.

Are you sure about that? No two teachers in the world teach exactly the same. I imagine there are numerous variables associated with the different teaching methods. I believe one group may be a little more creative than the other, but not always superior.

Nonsense. Only that other nations approach education differently.

What you mean to say is people, and culture can easily be substituted for nations. A nation is simply represented by a political entity. A culture is represented by all the unique attitudes and behaviors of the people. Therefore, it would be more accurate to use the term culture instead of nation. Either way, it's a chauvinistic statement claiming intellectual and/or cultural superiority.

Did you read these?

Of course.

[quoteWhat not a bubble test?[/quote]

Though I'm not a huge fan of bubble tests, I imagine they can tell a lot about students. We already know that standardized bubble tests are important in determining the health and wellness of students. I don't doubt it could determine their performance, as well.

I'm not sure what you think you're showing me.

Look beyond the primary schools.

It means the school is not forced to have to keep a student who is disruptive. That is different from abstain.

You're a teacher who doesn't understand truancy laws. Very sad.

That is essentially the difference between the words public and private.

So, you don't mind monopolies so long as they're controlled by the state?

This relates to cost controls, and can be managed with a serious committment to education.

In other words, throw more money at the problem. It's been done. It's doesn't work.

Yes, you are guessing. I have spent a good deal of time looking at it. Teachers are people, subject to all human failings. But moast do a fine job and deserve a certain amount of respect.

I'd agree, but I would disagree if you think their standards are adequate. We're lagging behind far too many countries in the areas of science and math.

And what should the student evaluate? The parent? If they stay to what they know, I have no objection. But let's not inject a lack of knowledge as a standard.

A student will able to tell many things, but of course all statements must be taken as a grain of salt. A parent can also see if their children is learning at the pace they deem appropriate. If so, they will keep with the same school. If not, they'll transfer the student. They have every right to do so.

BTW, asking a question is not a strawman. Just thought you should know.

Of course it can be. If I offer the question, "do you wish to destroy private schools," that would be a question and a straw man.

enough are, and they are the loudest, thus setting the standard for others, much like how a few who vote set the policy in our states and in the nation.

That's an unfair comparison, given the large number of children and people ineligible for voting. If you subtracted those people, then I'd assume the majority voted in the last presidential election. Of course, a possible reason why not everyone votes for every local election is because we've set up far too many bureaucratic positions that are frankly a waste of money. No matter how much I study up on the up-coming state election, I'm ultimately faced with a ballot full of names and positions I've never heard of. At that point, people start voting strictly on the occupation listed under the name.

Actually, I don't. I have been asked which i prefer, and France over the UK. But I almost never bring them up on my own. However, that is also a different discussion.

You can't change the standards. If you don't believe it is fair to compare different national systems, then it is only fair that you refrain from ever comparing different national systems (regardless if the topic is education or health care).

Just watch a mob sometime, or look at silly things too often accepted by a majority that is often easily disproven.

And none of it gives evidence to the ridiculous claim, "people are stupid, individuals are smart." It reminds me of when my teacher in 11th grade tried teaching us the difference between republicans and democrats in simple terms. "Republicans support the rights of the group and democrats support the rights of the individuals." Both are ridiculous statements.

I'm sure there is room for disagreement. But a mathimatical problem has an exact answer. You kinow that if you can do the math, you'll get the rigth answer. With other things, you can do everything right and still be wrong. It takes more than knwoing the exact procedures, but requires a bit of skill that is harder to define, and rare to be found in all who try.

I just finished my last class of my undergrad degree, so let me give you an example. A classmate and I wrote a paper on virtually the exact same topic. We both were archiving material from a water resource institute and writing reports on our findings. Our professor liked both of us and considered both of us to be outstanding students. In our rough draft, I left out my finding aid and she left our her container list (both are critical pieces of the paper). I received an overall B- whereas she received an A. In our presentations, we both did OK in my modest opinion (both of us had left out certain important facts), yet my professor claimed hers was the second best in the class. In our final, our professor claimed that if we followed his instructions exactly, we all would receive As. I did, yet I received the same grade as the first final paper (it's another complicated story where the professor stupidly averaged out the grades for the rough draft and final and gave us the average of the two as the final grade). I received a 37/50 on my first rough draft, a 47 on my first final draft. Our last final paper had no rough draft and I followed the recommendations exactly. I got a 47 again on the last final, yet I put in a lot more consideration into the second paper. The professor told me he would discuss the grades next quarter, realizing I would have already graduated by then. What's the moral of the story? If you have tits and a pretty face, you can easily pass a social science class with a male professor.

In my experience, I have also learned that being buddy-buddy with the professor also helps your grade tremendously. Again, none of this crony education is possible in a math class. You either fail or you succeed based strictly on your merit.

yes, I spend a good amount of time proof reading, this is true. I make no claim to the contrary. I'm a old poor boy who came to education late, and have to work hard to be successful. So, I pick where I worry about it and where I don't. If you pay me, I'll write you something pretty and without error.

I don't accept the poor boy excuse. I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth, but I learned fairly quickly that a person's writing is a reflection of their professionalism. It should automatically come naturally to you, as an English teacher. The fact that it doesn't only casts doubt on your ability to effectively teach the subject.

No. It was a point.

An unrelated point that had nothing to do with the original statement.

Boo Radley · Mar 29, 2011

ElijahGalt said:
Regardless, that doesn't give you the right to deprive others of accessing the school of their choice. At least, if not totally in support of vouchers, you could at least support open enrollment. That, at least, would be a step in the right direction.

What are you talking about. There's all kinds of things I can't spend public money on and I'm not being denied anything. Public means public and not private.

If you don't mind, please help me understand their methods and how those methods should be looked at separately from their conclusions.

Sentences work together, building one upon another. They don't always, in fact rarely, stand alone without connection to what comes before and after. I really do appreciate that you take time to respond fully, but those who do this much breaking down often miss something. In the end, it gets broken down so much the points are lost. Often what you say would be clarified by just reading the sentences together. There are rarely more than three or four points in a response, so there should really never be this many breaks in a reply.

If you wish to claim a technicality of error, fine. It still doesn't give you the right to restrict the choice of others.

You can't choose private with public funds. But this again leaves what is being argued. The overall numbers are skewed by those who discriminate. It is not the different teaching or the schools that make the major difference, but the student population.

You also make another mistake. It isn't that all teachers are exactly the same in terms of style and personality, but they all study the same methods, approach the material and task in very similar ways. The same diversity in public school is found in private schools and vice versa. There is really no difference in either approach or method in private schools than there is in public schools and challenge you to show any.

Now, your interest in me is flattering I suppose, but it isn't just poor boy, and has nothing to do with professionalism as nothing here has anything to do with my profession. This is a quickly done diversion, and not something I spend too much time on. Writing is more than spelling and grammer. In fact, those things can be perfect and the writing poor, and those things can be rough and the writing exciting and insightful and interesting.

Mensch · Apr 6, 2011

Boo Radley said:
What are you talking about. There's all kinds of things I can't spend public money on and I'm not being denied anything. Public means public and not private.

No taxation without representation. You should have some say over how your money is spent, and ultimately, in some cases, some control over its direction. You pay taxes to furnish an education for your children and for the children of other parents. A voucher program would be absolutely no different. In the case of a voucher program, at least we're paid once for the same service.

Sentences work together, building one upon another. They don't always, in fact rarely, stand alone without connection to what comes before and after. I really do appreciate that you take time to respond fully, but those who do this much breaking down often miss something. In the end, it gets broken down so much the points are lost. Often what you say would be clarified by just reading the sentences together. There are rarely more than three or four points in a response, so there should really never be this many breaks in a reply.

I only occasionally break up paragraphs. Usually, I respond to full paragraphs and therefore the majority of your points should remain intact so long as the paragraph is consistent in thought. However, we're not talking about your individual points. We're talking about the sources you provided which contradict each other. You suggested that I look toward their methods for answers and I asked why.

You can't choose private with public funds. But this again leaves what is being argued. The overall numbers are skewed by those who discriminate. It is not the different teaching or the schools that make the major difference, but the student population.

I don't understand this "can't choose private with public funds." With a food stamp program, individuals are choosing privately sold and marketed food with public funds. And that's just the quickest example I can think of, at the top of my head. I'm sure, if given enough time, there's quite a few "private" initiatives paid for with tax dollars. The difference is in terms of relative cost and benefits. If we're going to force every American parent to educate their kids or to send their kids to a facility to be educated, it is best that we provide them with the means to choose the facility.

You also make another mistake. It isn't that all teachers are exactly the same in terms of style and personality, but they all study the same methods, approach the material and task in very similar ways. The same diversity in public school is found in private schools and vice versa. There is really no difference in either approach or method in private schools than there is in public schools and challenge you to show any.

Though I won't argue that they may study the same orthodox methods, I highly disagree that they approach the material in the same fashion. It may be true that they approach the material in the same fashion at the very beginning of their careers, but that most certainly doesn't mean they'll keep with the same approach over time. They learn typically the same theory but they certainly don't apply identical practices.

Now, your interest in me is flattering I suppose, but it isn't just poor boy, and has nothing to do with professionalism as nothing here has anything to do with my profession. This is a quickly done diversion, and not something I spend too much time on. Writing is more than spelling and grammer. In fact, those things can be perfect and the writing poor, and those things can be rough and the writing exciting and insightful and interesting.

You may be right, though at the top of the my head, I can't think of a single literary genius in the American history of literature who provided exciting, insightful, and interesting material through the use of poor writing. I realize there are some notorious figures in history who used exciting imagery and inflammatory rhetoric to get their point across with poor writing and/or speaking skills, but it was precisely their propaganda that was able to mask their deficient abilities. I'm not saying you are a propagandist, but only that I can't think of a literary genius who wrote poor and deficient literature. Granted, I'm sure even Mark Twain jotted down a few points that were only coherent to him. But when it comes to proving a point of political passion, it is essential to proofread and keep your mistakes limited. Like I said earlier, I haven't been able to understand roughly a quarter of your points, not because I would break up sentences of connected thought, but because the grammar and/or spelling was incoherent.

Mensch · Apr 6, 2011

More to the issue of education:

From the director who brought you, "An Inconvenient Truth" comes...

Boo Radley · Apr 6, 2011

ElijahGalt said:
No taxation without representation. You should have some say over how your money is spent, and ultimately, in some cases, some control over its direction. You pay taxes to furnish an education for your children and for the children of other parents. A voucher program would be absolutely no different. In the case of a voucher program, at least we're paid once for the same service.

We have representation. Which is different than the argument I made. Public funds go to public institutions. Private funds go to private institutions. Private is not public. The public library isn't Barnes and Noble. Nor should the two cross.

I only occasionally break up paragraphs. Usually, I respond to full paragraphs and therefore the majority of your points should remain intact so long as the paragraph is consistent in thought. However, we're not talking about your individual points. We're talking about the sources you provided which contradict each other. You suggested that I look toward their methods for answers and I asked why.

Actually, you break up a lot. Go back and look. But that's besides the point. I asked you to show me methods that differ. what is different in classroom instruction. I don't recall you ever giving me any such difference. If they are all educated trained instructors, coming from the same colleges, getting the same instruction, praciticing the same methods, what could possibily be different other than the population? Maybe the rules they live under, which we've discussed. But it is highly unlikely the actual education could be any better. The information is the same, the methods the same, the approaches largely the same. Unless you can show me a difference, I have no reason to believe otherwise as I know and work with teachers who teach in both types of schools (and have across the country).

I don't understand this "can't choose private with public funds." With a food stamp program, individuals are choosing privately sold and marketed food with public funds. And that's just the quickest example I can think of, at the top of my head. I'm sure, if given enough time, there's quite a few "private" initiatives paid for with tax dollars. The difference is in terms of relative cost and benefits. If we're going to force every American parent to educate their kids or to send their kids to a facility to be educated, it is best that we provide them with the means to choose the facility.

Very different. Apple to tree frog comparison. We don't have government groceries. However, we do limit what they can buy. Again, largely and on the whole, there is not much difference in anything but population between schools. If a specific school has a problem, it would be better for all to fix that problem and not run away.

Though I won't argue that they may study the same orthodox methods, I highly disagree that they approach the material in the same fashion. It may be true that they approach the material in the same fashion at the very beginning of their careers, but that most certainly doesn't mean they'll keep with the same approach over time. They learn typically the same theory but they certainly don't apply identical practices.

All I ask is for some evidence. I speak to teachers daily, from both sectors. I have seen or heard nothing to support your claim.

You may be right, though at the top of the my head, I can't think of a single literary genius in the American history of literature who provided exciting, insightful, and interesting material through the use of poor writing. I realize there are some notorious figures in history who used exciting imagery and inflammatory rhetoric to get their point across with poor writing and/or speaking skills, but it was precisely their propaganda that was able to mask their deficient abilities. I'm not saying you are a propagandist, but only that I can't think of a literary genius who wrote poor and deficient literature. Granted, I'm sure even Mark Twain jotted down a few points that were only coherent to him. But when it comes to proving a point of political passion, it is essential to proofread and keep your mistakes limited. Like I said earlier, I haven't been able to understand roughly a quarter of your points, not because I would break up sentences of connected thought, but because the grammar and/or spelling was incoherent.

You might study more. Often you see the finished product and not their rather impersonal writing. My finished work is largely error free. That said, William Faulkner won a Nobel Peace Prize dispite problems with the comma splice. Bother my nun professor to no end. Made me laugh.

That said, I often have to hurry between things. If something isn't clear, just ask for clarification. I don't see that as too large a problem.

Boo Radley · Apr 6, 2011

Some reading:

Government Oversight and Curriculum

The government has less power over the day-to-day administration of private schools as compared to public schools. This is because private schools do not use tax dollars thereby removing many state requirements that public schools have to meet. Whereas in public schools most of the subjects offered and much of what students learn is mandated by the state, private schools have much greater leeway in the courses they offer and the curriculum standards they use. Further, public schools must use state mandated standardized tests to measure learning while public schools can choose to use these or their own tests.

It is also important to note that while it is against the law for public schools to espouse and provide specific religious instruction, many private schools are built on the belief that religion should be a part of each child’s education. Therefore, the religious orientation, if any, of a private school is an important consideration before you take a job there.

Teacher Education

While public schools have certain minimum requirements for teachers including certification and specific degrees, private schools have much greater leeway. Therefore, teachers in private schools may not be required to have certifications or specific degrees to teach in their subject areas.

Teaching at Private Versus Public Schools - Public School Compared to Private School Teaching

Summary of CEP Findings
•Low-income students attending public high schools performed just as well academically as low-income students attending private high schools.
•Neither private school students nor public school students with similar background characteristics were more likely to attend college.
•Young adults at age 26 who attended private school are no more likely to be engaged in civic activities than young adults who attended a public school.
•Private school graduates aren't any more satisfied with the jobs they hold at age 26 than are public school graduates.
'Contrary to popular belief, we can find no evidence that private schools actually increase student performance,' stated Jack Jennings, the president and CEO of CEP. 'Instead, it appears that private schools simply have higher percentages of students who would perform well in any environment based on their previous performance and background.'

Public Schools vs. Private Schools: New Study Says There is No Difference

. . . a team of University of Illinois education professors has found that public-school students outperform their private-school classmates on standardized math tests, thanks to two key factors: certified math teachers, and a modern, reform-oriented math curriculum.

Public Schools Outperform Private Schools in Math Instruction

American · Apr 6, 2011

randel said:
in my union, the UAW, member dues most certainly DO NOT GO TO SUPPORT POLITICAL CANDIDATES..the money used for that comes from separate VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS . NO DUES ARE USED...

Hahahahaha.

disneydude · Apr 6, 2011

That is true of most unions

Boo Radley · Apr 6, 2011

disneydude said:
That is true of most unions

Do you think he really wants to know?

ptif219 · Apr 7, 2011

Boo Radley said:
Do you think he really wants to know?

Do you really want to know?

In Wisconsin, Big Labor politicians help make right-to-work case

Every two years, compulsory unionism’s corrupting influence on America’s political system is on display. Union officials funnel huge sums of money, estimated to be in excess of a billion dollars, into federal, state and local elections.

This money comes straight from union treasury accounts that consist overwhelmingly of dues and fees that millions of workers are forced to fork over as a condition of employment.

A large share of those sitting in Congress and state legislatures, and on city councils and school boards, depend upon Big Labor’s forced dues-fueled largesse to remain in office. Since they’re well aware of which side their bread is buttered on, they consistently fight with determination and zeal to perpetuate and expand union bosses’ special privilege to extract money from unwilling employees as well as voluntary union members.

Conservative · Apr 7, 2011

ptif219 said:
Do you really want to know?

In Wisconsin, Big Labor politicians help make right-to-work case

Every two years, compulsory unionism’s corrupting influence on America’s political system is on display. Union officials funnel huge sums of money, estimated to be in excess of a billion dollars, into federal, state and local elections.

This money comes straight from union treasury accounts that consist overwhelmingly of dues and fees that millions of workers are forced to fork over as a condition of employment.

A large share of those sitting in Congress and state legislatures, and on city councils and school boards, depend upon Big Labor’s forced dues-fueled largesse to remain in office. Since they’re well aware of which side their bread is buttered on, they consistently fight with determination and zeal to perpetuate and expand union bosses’ special privilege to extract money from unwilling employees as well as voluntary union members.

Wow, looks like union members don't have a clue as to where their dues money is going, just another example of union misleading their members.

Boo Radley · Apr 7, 2011

ptif219 said:
Do you really want to know?

In Wisconsin, Big Labor politicians help make right-to-work case

Every two years, compulsory unionism’s corrupting influence on America’s political system is on display. Union officials funnel huge sums of money, estimated to be in excess of a billion dollars, into federal, state and local elections.

This money comes straight from union treasury accounts that consist overwhelmingly of dues and fees that millions of workers are forced to fork over as a condition of employment.

A large share of those sitting in Congress and state legislatures, and on city councils and school boards, depend upon Big Labor’s forced dues-fueled largesse to remain in office. Since they’re well aware of which side their bread is buttered on, they consistently fight with determination and zeal to perpetuate and expand union bosses’ special privilege to extract money from unwilling employees as well as voluntary union members.

Do you have any thing for a less questionable source?

In a line of decisions, the Supreme Court has addressed this issue and has concluded that compulsory union dues of non-members may not be used for political and ideological activities that are outside the scope of the unions’ collective bargaining and labor-management duties when non-members object to such use.

The Use of Labor Union Dues for Political Purposes: A Legal Analysis

Conservative · Apr 7, 2011

Boo Radley said:
Do you have any thing for a less questionable source?

In a line of decisions, the Supreme Court has addressed this issue and has concluded that compulsory union dues of non-members may not be used for political and ideological activities that are outside the scope of the unions’ collective bargaining and labor-management duties when non-members object to such use.

The Use of Labor Union Dues for Political Purposes: A Legal Analysis

Who is auditing the unions to make sure they are following the law? Where are the millions and millions of union dollars coming from if not from dues? PAC's don't have that kind of money.

Boo Radley · Apr 7, 2011

Conservative said:
Who is auditing the unions to make sure they are following the law? Where are the millions and millions of union dollars coming from if not from dues? PAC's don't have that kind of money.

Well, before you suggest they have broke the law, you should at least have some evidence that they have. Wouldn't that be appropriate?

Or I suppose you can just take the word of an agenda driven publication with no actual evidence. After all all claims are always true. :roll:

Conservative · Apr 7, 2011

Boo Radley said:
Well, before you suggest they have broke the law, you should at least have some evidence that they have. Wouldn't that be appropriate?

Or I suppose you can just take the word of an agenda driven publication with no actual evidence. After all all claims are always true. :roll:

I asked a question based upon logic and common sense. It has been reported that 40% of the union members vote Republican so that leaves 60% to support PAC's. Are you contending that dues aren't going to the PAC's?

CaptainCourtesy · Apr 7, 2011

Moderator's Warning:

FYI. This thread is approaching 2000 posts and will be closed soon.

Boo Radley · Apr 8, 2011

Conservative said:
I asked a question based upon logic and common sense. It has been reported that 40% of the union members vote Republican so that leaves 60% to support PAC's. Are you contending that dues aren't going to the PAC's?

I've given you the law. Are you sugegsting the law has been broken? Evidence?

Conservative · Apr 8, 2011

Boo Radley said:
I've given you the law. Are you sugegsting the law has been broken? Evidence?

The evidence is the number of union employees, the number that vote for Republicans, and the amount spent on elections. Yes, I believe the law is being broken but since I don't live in a union state, it doesn't affect me at all. Can explain where the money actually comes from that is being spent in Wisconsin and where the votes are coming from in Wisconsin that generates more dollars and more votes than there are people in the various precincts?

Boo Radley · Apr 8, 2011

Conservative said:
The evidence is the number of union employees, the number that vote for Republicans, and the amount spent on elections. Yes, I believe the law is being broken but since I don't live in a union state, it doesn't affect me at all. Can explain where the money actually comes from that is being spent in Wisconsin and where the votes are coming from in Wisconsin that generates more dollars and more votes than there are people in the various precincts?

You must provide evidence the law was broken. No one else has to prove it wasn't. What you THINK doesn't mean much. What you can support does.

Conservative · Apr 8, 2011

Boo Radley said:
You must provide evidence the law was broken. No one else has to prove it wasn't. What you THINK doesn't mean much. What you can support does.

I don't see a lot of evidence from you on any issue. You bury your head in the sand because that is what you want to believe. Logic and common sense tells me that if 40% of the union workers vote Republican and that union membership is dropping that there is no way that unions can fund campaigns out of PAC contributions alone. Believe what you want to believe but that just shows how naive you are

Boo Radley · Apr 8, 2011

Conservative said:
I don't see a lot of evidence from you on any issue. You bury your head in the sand because that is what you want to believe. Logic and common sense tells me that if 40% of the union workers vote Republican and that union membership is dropping that there is no way that unions can fund campaigns out of PAC contributions alone. Believe what you want to believe but that just shows how naive you are

Where I make a factual claim, I offer support. If I had claimed the law was broken, I wold provide evidence and explain my reasoning. It is not too much to ask that you support your claim.

randel · Apr 8, 2011

Conservative said:
I asked a question based upon logic and common sense. It has been reported that 40% of the union members vote Republican so that leaves 60% to support PAC's. Are you contending that dues aren't going to the PAC's?

i've explained this several times, provided several links, as where money for political activity comes from, you choose to ignore it in order to keep perpetuating your LIE....the law has been explained to you, links have been provided...where are yours ?

Conservative · Apr 8, 2011

randel said:
i've explained this several times, provided several links, as where money for political activity comes from, you choose to ignore it in order to keep perpetuating your LIE....the law has been explained to you, links have been provided...where are yours ?

You have explained the law but laws have and continue to be broken. Doesn't look like liberals care much about laws that they don't like. Union membership is dropping, 40% of union employees vote Republican, PACS alone cannot support the money being thrown into campaigns. You want to believe that your dues don't go to campaigns, so bet it. enjoy the fantasy. It is your money and apparently you don't mind wasting it.

Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

Mensch

Mr. Professional

Boo Radley

Mensch

Mr. Professional

Boo Radley

Mensch

Mr. Professional

Mensch

Mr. Professional

Boo Radley

Boo Radley

American

Trump Grump Whisperer

disneydude

Boo Radley

ptif219

Conservative

Boo Radley

Conservative

Boo Radley

Conservative

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

Boo Radley

Conservative

Boo Radley

Conservative

Boo Radley

randel

Conservative