US Students falling farther behind

So claimed a news article today.  US students "showed little improvement" and weren't in "the top 20 [nations] in math, science, or reading."  

Regular readers of this blog, both of us, know I am not a fan of American public education.  It has steadily deteriorated over the past three or four or more decades.  And it's not been a sneaky slide--it's been done willfully by people who shouldn't be allowed to make academic decisions in positions to make them.  US society (with its attitudes toward education--learning and teaching), teachers, and esp administrators are all to blame.  I've taken shots at all of them at one time or another.  Now, with the Bozos in the federal government taking in more and more responsibilities and with businessmen who see education as a way to cut their own training costs, things even worsen.

C'mon, so reading scores are rotten among US students?  Has anyone seen how reading is taught nowadays?  Phonics, good-bye; whole word, hello.  That reading has plummeted apparently is ignored by those running the schools.  What worked is tossed and what doesn't work is kept.  That's what schools have become.  OK, so let's not pick on reading.  Let's look at math.  Have you seen "Everyday Math?"  Oh, boy, I'm getting a headache--and I don't get headaches!  I was watching my granddaughter do addition the other night, something like 54 plus 11.  She is taught to add the tens column first and the ones column second.  Huh?  Yeah, I guess the idea is so they grasp the concept of place.  Huh?  So, what happens when the ones column has a carry, such as 36 plus 15?  Oh, they'll cover that later.  (Is that like spelling, which is no longer emphasized because, "They'll catch up with that later?"  They don't and I have ample evidence that they don't.)  "Everyday Math?"  I can do college calculus and know enough math to get two B+s in physics at an Ivy League college, but this new stuff is ridiculous.  (As I've said about the "Common Core," follow the money.)

Remember, though, although they all spout it, "It's about the kids" or "learning," it never really is and, if anyone really cares to check, the evidence is right out there to see.

Now, why am I not perplexed at the US students' rankings on this "international assessment?"  First, I'm not at all enamored with standardized testing.  We test too much and we test the wrong things.  (Of course, I'm not too sure what to do about the latter, since I really don't trust teachers and the schools to evaluate students properly.)  What is on this test?  Who, in all countries, takes the test?  Are all students tested or just "elites," the best of them?  Are only certain schools included or everyone.  No, I'm not going to jump up and down because "US students showed little improvement and failed...."

What is most disturbing to me are the tired old mantras that keep coming out of the mouths of the so-called "experts" (and they aren't), like Sec of Ed A. Duncan.  (If you doubt me, check on his record while heading the schools in Illinois before heading off to DC.)  "We must invest in early education," he sadly repeats, despite report after report, independent ones that is, that show the positive effects of "early education" have disappeared by grades three or four.  "Raise academic standards," he adds, while pushing "Common Core," which doesn't do that, but does include more, you guessed it, standardized testing.  (Hey, remember, "Follow the money?"  Who's pushing the Common Core?  Yep, the testing, curriculum, textbook, etc. companies.  As Casey Stengel, in another context once said, "You could look it up.")  "Make college affordable," he tiresomely repeats.  Who, other than the federal government and politicians, has contributed more to the increased costs of college education?  Nobody else is even close.  And here's the one that really takes the cake, showing how out of touch the so-called experts like Duncan really are.  "Do more to recruit an retain top-notch educators."  What a joke!  They do more and more to discourage "top-notch" teachers and to dissuade the best-and-brightest from entering education.  I know, because our governor recently said so to defend outlandish raises he gave his dept heads, that to attract the top talent, we have to pay the top dollar.  Of course, that doesn't apply to the top talent in education.  In fact, we have cut and cut and cut teacher pay (and, as I've noted, many teachers are still overpaid--but the good ones are severely underpaid). Didn't one local district here pay its teachers so little that, with a family of two kids, a single-parent teacher qualified for welfare?!?!?  Yep, that'll attract 'em.  Should we also toss in the morale boosters from schools and Americans in general?  The truly best teachers are not recognized; the award winners are those who serve on the committees, are sycophants/bobble heads at staff meetings, do without question or thought the latest silly thing perpetrated by unknowing administrators ("unknowing" because they've never experienced the rigors required of quality education).  And who, most often, become the administrators, the "leaders" of schools and education?  I'll offer a hint--not the best teachers, not those who know the most......

So, let's not get too excited about the latest test scores.  Yes, American education is not very good.  And, realize that, with those in charge now, those making the so-called "reforms," it's not likely to get any better.

Heh Heh......

I got a bit of a chuckle several times in the past week or so.

First, some grocery industry spokeswoman on the radio noted how prices at grocery stores are "going down."  Huh?  Where does this lady live?  I'd like to know so I can shop there.

Second, a spokeswoman for the Detroit Lions wrote a letter to the editor in today's newspaper opposing  proposed legislation that would legalize scalping tickets.  I would assume with a straight face she wrote that scalping "drives up prices past what families can afford."  Hmmm......  I guess this depends on what "families" she's considering.  Has she seen the prices of, say, her own team's tickets?  I haven't looked in quite a while, but about four or five years ago, when my grandson played at halftime of a Lions' game, tickets were $55 each--and we were about half a dozen rows from the very top.  Perhaps I'm just grousing a bit, but the Lions even made the kids who were playing at halftime purchase tickets.  Yeah, they are out there to make money, but how much is enough, esp considering the outlandish salaries players get?  "...drives up prices to past what families can afford?"

Third, an Obama apologist took critics of the Iran-US pact to task, claiming they were all wet to compare the deal with Munich.  Oh?  Well, maybe he's right--if Iran doesn't enrich any fuel behind our backs.  But what exactly is it when we give $9 billion in return for a promise from a known scoundrel, one who has more than once yelled out, "Death to America!?"  Maybe it's Nobel Peace Prize consideration?  After all, the Nobel committee has already belittled the award.

Ramblings

I was talking to a guy last week about Medicare.  I have signed up for it, being eligible in a few weeks.  It was, as I noted to this fellow, a bit painful.  Oh, it wasn't the Web site, which made signing up pretty easy.  I do have to mention a couple of things.  The opening page told me to expect the process to take "about 10 minutes."  Page two changed that to "30 minutes."  Since it took closer to 10, it wasn't a big deal.  But then it asked me if I was born in the US.  Of course, I was.  I was asked in what city and state I was born.  Then it asked me if I am an American citizen!  I'm not kidding.  So, my own government doesn't know what constitutes citizenship?  Later, it asked me if I am insured under any other "group plan."  If so, is it through my employer?  No.  Is it through someone else's employer?  Yes.  Then I was asked who my employer is and when I started working for that employer, who doesn't provide my coverage.  Again, perhaps I nitpick......

Anyway, signing up for Medicare seems like a rite of passage of sorts.  First, who ever really believes he'll be old enough to get Medicare?  I certainly didn't--even a few weeks ago!  Second, I have this aversion to getting things like this from the federal government.  I know I've paid for this for the past 45 years or more, so it's not really an "entitlement." Still, there's that lingering feeling.  Silly?  I guess so.

This fellow was talking about how great Medicare was for his mother, who lived until her 90s.  It took care of a lot of problems/expenses.  Good!  Then, I recalled last Sun or the Sun before, on one of the Sun AM talk shows, one of Obama's Obamacare point men admitted there are likely to be some "rationing of services" under the ACA.  I think his admission was "Certainly, I think there might be."  I wanted to tell this guy, a fervid Obama-guy and one who's loudly proclaimed, "Having health insurance is a right!," about "rationing."  I didn't, mostly because he wouldn't hear what I was saying.  I suppose it's just like nobody admitting that maybe Sarah Palin was right about "death panels."

Which leads me back to Clarence Thomas's autobiog.  I am continually reminded that people aren't supposed to think for themselves.  They are expected to fall into line, to accept the party line, be it with their political parties, their unions, education, whatever.  Any deviation (I almost wrote "deviance," a Freudian slip?) is anathema, equivalent to heresy.  Regardless of how wrong, misguided, or even just different the conventional wisdom of these groups/leaders, to think outside of their framework is worthy of the worst of name-calling.  I guess I would question why we need a First Amendment, particularly the part about freedom of speech, if this is now the norm.

Speaking of rights, I believe it was Walter Williams who wrote a column a couple of weeks ago that touched upon some of my blogs of the past.  He used different terminology, "negative rights" and "positive rights," but I've explored the concepts.  A "right" is something that is possessed merely by being--coming from God or wherever.  It is not granted by a government, at least not by our government in our system--or so we purportedly believe.  Government is there to protect/guarantee rights, not to confer them.  A "right" does not infringe on anyone else.  That is, another person doesn't have to give up something in order to have others possess a right.  Williams called that a "negative right."  For instance, for me to have freedom of religion, the right to choose my own belief, nobody is required to concede anything.  I am left free to choose and my choice doesn't burden or encumber anyone else.  Now, as the guy above claimed, "Having health insurance is a right!" is a "positive right."  That is, to have such a right requires others to concede, to give up something. If health care is "a right," well, somebody must pay for it.  That requires taxing people to grant this "right" to others.  That is, others have to give up something--their own money--in order to confer this so-called "right" to health care.  That, it seems to me, is redefining "natural rights," changing their meaning to fit a political agenda/view, etc.  (Of course, that's dangerous.  As my math buddies were fond of noting, "If you start with a false premise, you can prove anything."  If we start with our own definition, making one of our own choosing, we can make practically everything "a right."  Now that I think about it, maybe I like this.  Karen and I fly to Las Vegas several times a year to visit Matt.  If the "right" to travel is a natural right, perhaps we can get others to pay for our increasingly expensive flight tickets??????  After all, don't Karen and I have a "right" to see our son??????  C'mon, who can argue with that one?)

Out to color with the kids......

Attn: J. Dayton

Surely, as I recognize, I am losing some of my faculties/memory.  I, no doubt at one time, knew Jonathon Dayton was a signer of the Constitution, not the Declaration.  I believe he was the youngest, or one of the youngest, signers.  I thought, though, that I remembered John Dayton's mother, at a parent conference, telling me of the lineage connection.  I must have been wrong--yet one more time.  Again, my memory does fail more often than I would like or even like to admit, although it is often cause for some humorous stories.

Lessons to Be Learned

In the recent past, I've had several folks make faces when I mentioned I heard something on this or that radio program.  Two, one local and one national, hosts were particularly noted as "racist" and "bigoted." That, when I asked what makes the host "racist" and "bigoted," there was no response at all, not even an attempt at an example, is not the point here.  A third instance, when I brought up another host, my conversant asked, "You listen to...?"  Before anything else could be uttered, I quickly said, "No, he's not a racist.  No, he's not a bigot."  That seemed to nonplus the questioner, but again, that's not the point.

I'm about halfway through the autobiography of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.  I don't hold him in reverence as I do, say, Holmes, Harlan, and a few others.  But I also resent the unwarranted vitriol usually tossed his way by the so-called "intelligentsia," well, at least those arrogant enough to believe they are the intelligentsia.

My Grandfather's Son is easy-to-read, somewhat insightful, and gives a glimpse of the man who I came to at least respect after the bigoted (yes, bigoted!) onslaught against him at his confirmation hearing.  This isn't to suggest I fully agree with his rulings/decisions from the bench.  But I think perhaps from personal experience I recognize the dignity he displayed when vehemently attacked by his political opponents in 1991. (How interesting that the same people who lambasted Thomas in the Anita Hill accusations, either strongly defended Bill Clinton or remained noticeably silent when the President was accused of mulitple like offenses.)

But those are matters for another day, perhaps.

Politics, Constitutional and legal opinions aside, I've already been reminded of an important lesson from My Grandfather's Son.  People, at least I, should think as individuals, not as members of some group.  For instance, as a black student who had graduated from Holy Cross and Yale Law, Thomas was expected to think the way, well, the way a black student who had graduated from Holy Cross and Yale Law should think.  And, originally, he did--and acted on that way of thinking.  Soon, however, he became conflicted with what he was supposed to think and how he really did, especially based on his personal experiences and research.  And, he became vilified from straying from that accepted thought.

Because I was/am a teacher, I'm expected to think, speak, and act according to a certain "teacher way" of thinking, speaking, and acting.  That I didn't and don't has made me, in many eyes, an apostate of sorts. That I saw weakness, stupidity, incompetence, etc. and refused to go along with it (to the degree I could refuse) was/is seen as treason, well, of sorts.

All of this leads me back to my opening.  Each of these people, in speaking of these radio hosts, weren't offering their own reasoned opinions, not at all.  (Of course, a clue was they couldn't offer any examples, any bases for their claims of "racist" and "bigot.")  They merely parroted what they've heard from people like them.  They said what they were supposed to say, whether they believe it or even knew what they were saying.

I suppose such reasoning is in the same intellectual domain as "just 'cuz."

Turning the World Upside Down

When Cornwallis surrendered to Washington at Yorktown, he purportedly had his fife and drum corps play a popular London ditty, The World Turned Upside Down.  The lyrics go like this:

If buttercups buzz'd after the bee,
If boats were on land, churches on sea,
If ponies rode men and if grass ate the cows,
And cats should be chased into holes by the mouse,
If the mamas sold their babies
To the gypsies for half a crown;
If summer were spring and the other way round,
Then all the world would be upside down.

Now, some historians doubt this was played, claiming it's a myth.  But it's far too delicious to think otherwise, isn't it?  And of course, some historians still think FDR was one of our best Presidents, that the Emancipation Proclamation didn't free any slaves, and that the Versailles Treaty was a rotten treaty that caused WW2.  But I digress......

How's this for turning the world upside down?  Obama lets Iran, a rogue (if not worse) nation, keep its nuclear weapons and gives it $9 billion of American taxpayers' money.  But he doesn't let millions of American citizens keep the health insurance they like/want and, to get new coverage, they have to pay more of their own money!  It's great irony, something we can't make up.  And the LameStreams laud the Iranian deal.  But, of course, the media thought Neville Chamberlain had struck a great deal, too.  ("There he goes with that history stuff again!")  Only later did "Munich," "appeasement," and "Chamberlain" become four-letter words.

Perhaps Obama and Kerry think Iran is "reasonable.  After all, in a letter to his sister shortly after Munich, Chamberlain asserted that Hitler "is a reasonable man."  And who would/could argue with the arrogant, elitist Chamberlain?  Why wouldn't the equally arrogant, elitist Obama and Kerry think the same?  They are far smarter than anyone else, you know.  ObamaCare proves that--er, forget I mentioned ObamaCare.

Now, what Iran has agreed to, according to Mike Rogers, chair of House Intelligence Committee (I will refrain from the comment I'd really like to write.), is to turn its uranium into an oxide powder, which will, the Obama Administration contends, make it useless.  Except, as several nuclear scientists have said, reversing the process of oxidation is very simple.  Besides, does anyone think Iran will stop its work on developing its nuclear capabilities, well, anyone other than the Bozos in the Obama Administration?  The crackpots there, crazy like foxes?, will take our (that is, yours and mine) $9 billion and laugh at us behind our backs.

So, where does this leave the Middle East?  Hmmm......  My guess is the Saudis will feel betrayed (rightly so, as much as I dislike them) and vulnerable.  With their money, they can buy a bomb or two from, say, the Pakistanis.  The Israelis are now much more likely to make a preemptive strike against the Iranian nuclear factilities.  In other words, Kerry and Obama, with their continued fumbling and bumbling, have created an arms race, a nuclear arms race, in the Middle East.

Can the Nobel Committee have a revote??????

BTW, I received an e-mail announcing that Congressman Levin has introduced a bill to renew federal unemployment compensation.  I sent a return e-mail asking when he was planning to introduce a bill to repeal ObamaCare.  Gee, I'm still waiting for a response to my e-mail of a month or so back, which read, "Maybe you should have read the bill first?"

Mike Rogers also talked about ObamaCare and its provisions.  He said the government's own estimates are that by next year, 40,000,000 Americans will have lost their health insurance.  (I think a newspaper article used a higher figure, up to 80 or 90 million.)  So, to remedy a problem--so it was termed a "problem"--the Bozos in Washington passed a law, thousands of pages long, a bill they never read, to give health insurance to 15 or 20 million uninsured (many of whom are illegal immigrants or who opted, by personal choice, not to spend money on health care) and it resulted in the loss of up to 40 million already-insured people to lose their coverage?  That sure sounds brilliant.

Of course, a guy with whom I spoke a couple weeks ago insisted, really insisted, that "health insurance is a right!"  I let him rant/rave for a couple of minutes and then gave him examples of people for whose health care I don't want to pay--smokers, obese people, couch potatoes, etc.  I ended the conversation with something like, "Instead of going on a vacation for two weeks, why don't you stay home and buy a health insurance policy for one of the uninsured?"  He didn't answer and didn't have to answer.  "Don't tax you and don't tax me.  Tax the fellow behind the tree."

ISOP and other sundry things....

So the comet ISOP is out there, however fleeting.  I thought it was out there the other night, but watching through binoculars reevaluated.  Then I pegged it for a helicopter, due to what I thought was a red blinking light at its rear.  I rechecked tonight and I think it's the comet, the red blinking lights the comet's tail.  It's pretty cool, esp for an ex-astronomy jock.  I think this is the first one I've seen since Hale-Bopp (a much cooler name) about a dozen years or so ago--maybe longer.  I remember running right along side of it during the Light Fest 8K at night.  It was pretty cool, esp with its long tail.

Last Sun AM we ran in shorts and tee shirts.  This AM it was 13 degrees!  Temperatures were forty + degrees colder this AM than last week.  Heh Heh Heh......

And I filled up with petrol tonight.  Granted, I didn't have my 10-cents off per gallon Kroger bonus, but I still paid 40 cents more a gallon.  Ouch!  That's five bucks.  I guess I should be thankful it's not already back up to $5 a gallon?

I read two letters to the editor in recent newspapers from folks who noticed what I did last month--their auto insurance premiums have gone up, one, I think, was 15% and the other 10%.  One said a call to his insurer revealed, yep, you guessed it--ObamaCare and personal liability increases because of it.  All told, so far, our insurance premiums--health and auto--will cost us at least $1500 in '14.  Good thing I have that money tree in the backyard--and that the windstorm blew down the black walnut tree instead of it!

Are these the beginning signs?  Yesterday, I was driving to my blind buddy's for our weekly run.  I left a bit early, to scrape the frost off my windshield and, at least planned, to buy petrol.  It's about an hour there, an hour to run, and an hour home.  I took a gander at the car clock and smiled a bit, if only for a short while.  I thought I had a few minutes to spare, making my drive home a bit less hectic since K and C were walking and I had to be back to watch the kids.  Oops!  I suddenly remembered, so K and C could walk, that I had moved up my run with my blind buddy by half an hour.  I had forgotten.  After all, I did make the change on Fri afternoon!  Now, I wasn't ahead of the game, but behind.  How could I have forgotten?  Beats me, except that......  And, the drive home was hindered by snow squalls, heavy ones that left the last 10-12 miles of my drive home on some very slick roads.  Then, today, I was proud of myself that I wrote and typed two articles for which I had end of the month deadlines.  They took almost six hours, including a little bit of last-minute research I had to do.  Good!  Now, only one more article, one column, and one review left by the 30th, next Saturday.  Then I remembered; I already did the other (the third) article and had sent it in to my editor last week.  I felt pretty good about finishing it, not so good about not remembering.  One would think I'd remember, but I didn't.

OK, out to get Ashley, Cody, and Michael a piece of cherry pie I baked this afternoon.  Then, it's off to bed for them--with Grandpa not far behind.