Oddly, something about that endorsement does not inspire a sudden urge to rush out and find some. But I'm sure the star of that Roku TV 24 hr. goat channel won't mind if I just pull a pizza out of the freezer tonight.Quote: odiousgambit..., interesting flavor.]
Quote: FleaStiff.
Water in Colorado can not be impeded, so no rain gutters or water barrels.
Gutters serve a purpose, they keep the
water coming off the roof from compromising
the foundation and leaking into the basement.
With everybody high on dope, they won't
notice anyway.
Can't see how that can be a bad thing (yet), so I say, great!
(or maybe it was "suspended", anyway)
Worst school system in America. I had a job grading standardized tests once, and their answers were uniformly atrocious.Quote: FleaStiffand in Hawaii the parents get jugged... so what? It doesn't change the fact that the school are boring and the teachers worse than prison guards.
Quote: FleaStiffand in Hawaii the parents get jugged... so what? It doesn't change the fact that the school are boring and the teachers worse than prison guards.
How do you get the idea that consequences for students are the same as consequences for parents?
Teachers too lazy to cheat? School system too stupid to kick out the idiots before the standardized test is administered.Quote: teddysWorst school system in America. I had a job grading standardized tests once, and their answers were uniformly atrocious.
Quote: rxwineHow do you get the idea that consequences for students are the same as consequences for parents?
I don't; they are usually far worse.
Parents have to put up the DMV one day a year, students have to put up with school all the time.
Quote: rxwineHigh school students who miss class in Nevada can have their driver's license revoked starting this year.
Can't see how that can be a bad thing (yet), so I say, great!
(or maybe it was "suspended", anyway)
This might be a good thing. Many times in my junior and senior year I skipped class to go to the arcade..... When I got a car.
did. If caught, they kicked you out. Relax
the rules and you the the uneducated
dummies we have now.
Quote: EvenBobI never skipped class in the 60's, nobody
did. If caught, they kicked you out. Relax
the rules and you the the uneducated
dummies we have now.
Me fail english? Unpossible
Are you referring to the teachers, administrators, guards or students? They are all uneducated dummies. So too are the parents.Quote: EvenBobthe uneducated dummies we have now.
I had a car before I got my license, I constantly Skipped to go party or mess around (I never drank and drove or used drugs)
I put on over 100 miles a day on Washington roads.
I was an absolute maniac in the car, I acted like a stunt driver. There very few a days I didn't push at least 90, I rarely left from a stop without roasting the tiers, I fish tailed every chance I got and jumped cars, I raced others and everything else you can imagine. I oftentimes had friends in the car. I had no fear and felt invincible .And that's the problem when you're young.
Luckily nothing to terrible ever happen while pulling these shenanigans. I did total a car while being reasonable and cautious( go figure). Admittedly Id probably do it all again if I was a teenager.
Even knowing how crazy I was, when they wanted to up the legal age for teens to drive, I was against it.
I bet kids are smarter now then they were back then.Quote: EvenBobI never skipped class in the 60's, nobody
did. If caught, they kicked you out. Relax
the rules and you the the uneducated
dummies we have now.
Unfortunately they are more trouble now.
Quote: AxelWolfI bet kids are smarter now then they were back then.
Unfortunately they are more trouble now.
I agree. Kids are smarter now which makes it easier to beat the system. If the students in the 60s and 70s were a box of rocks then they didn't know how to skip or do things with out getting caught. Kids that are smarter also have the sense of entitlement and think they can do anything with out getting caught which makes them push the lines just a bit to far.
Quote: GWAEKids are smarter now.
"We aren’t getting smarter; we are getting more modern." http://www.newrepublic.com/book/review/are-we-getting-smarter-rising-IQs-james-flynn
The thing is that we are here for a relatively short instance in time. What will a special series of 100-year lifespans matter over the course of 15 or so billions of years? People think that they are changing stuff, but it's all a part of the overall evolution, and/or whatever you ultimately believe in. Couldn't really fight it even if you tried.
All we can change that matters in the short terms is ourselves. In some things, the individual still has a choice.
Similarly, our overall lifespan increased for a while, but now it is on the decline.
Too bad that the ability to solve equations by hand was passed over in favor of numerical integration.
Quote: AxelWolfI bet kids are smarter now then they were back then.
Unfortunately they are more trouble now.
I will take that bet for ten bucks.
Here is a sample graduation test from 1895. How many of today's school seniors can pass this test of sophomore college students without the aid of the internet?
http://grandfather-economic-report.com/1895-test.htm
Quote: AxelWolfI bet kids are smarter now then they were back then.
In what way? My daughter has taught college
math for 18 years. She says the drop out rate
from her classes gets worse every year. Kids
come from HS without a clue how to do any
kind of math. In the 70's you maybe had
10% drop out and have to take it over, now
it's 50%+ sometimes.
They say a HS diploma in 1930 involved more
education than a college degree from a typical
state U does now. So you think they're smarter
now because they can play video games and
use a Wii? They didn't have all that in 1930
or 1970 when all those 'dumb' kids were actually
a real education. Apples and oranges.
Quote: EvenBob
They say a HS diploma in 1930 involved more
education than a college degree from a typical
state U does now. So you think they're smarter
now because they can play video games and
use a Wii? They didn't have all that in 1930
or 1970 when all those 'dumb' kids were actually
a real education. Apples and oranges.
I think you're on the right track. It's not that they're smarter; it's that they're learning significantly different things.
Most learning requires external stimuli. (The rest is cogitation, generally about or because of that stimuli.)
100 years ago, most external stimuli was conversation, books, pictures, the natural world.
Now? TV/Internet/Schooling/Multimedia/Books/whatever, and more importantly, it's constantly on, not just as background, but demanding your attention.
Kids now can't do basic math, write cursive, diagram a sentence, speak or write grammatically, find the Middle East on a map, a hundred other things taught in my childhood.
But they can write programs, touch-type, set up apps, program DVR's, clean viruses off computers, a hundred things my mother still can't do.
Add, to what they're taught in school, the constant barrage of input all around them. They can't name the Presidents in order, or even more than maybe 10 of them. But they can tell you every character in pokemon, point-by-point plotlines for an entire season of Gossip Girl, whatever is hot with kids. And I think that stimuli, in the aggregate, has made them "smarter" earlier in reaching brain potentials that didn't develop as much or as quickly 100 years ago. Is it largely wasted on garbage knowledge? Absolutely.
You want to raise smart, individual, thoughtful adults with a basic skill set? My sister got it right. Before graduating high school: No cable. No internet. No cellphones. TV only on for specific programs. Select and watch movies together. Play lots of games together, do lots of projects together, do homework at the dining room table/public areas of your house, make your own fun.
Quote: beachbumbabsI think you're on the right track. It's not that they're smarter; it's that they're learning significantly different things.
.
The kids in 1930 were hip and plugged
into what was current then. The kids
today are the same. Difference is, there
was a huge push then to teach kids the
basics, even Latin and a foreign language.
Higher math and geometry. Now we have
them graduating not knowing how to
read a TV Guide because they're teachers
barely know how to. My daughter says
it's frightening what few math skills some
of these college freshmen have, sometimes
half of a class drops out in the first week.
As an alternate pedagogical method, I seem to recall Mrs. Retzlaff validating my specialness with her special wooden ruler placed sharply across my special little knuckles from time to time. And, I may have seen stars, too.Quote:Ooooh, that's soooo very good, Willlow! It was almost similar to something that sounds like it could be the actual result, and you showed up again, two days in a row! Another gold star for you! You're so very, very special!
Harrumph.
Quote: DrawingDeadYabbut, what they lack in knowledge, skills, and any real accomplishment in actually doing anything, they more than make up for in enhanced self-esteem.As an alternate pedagogical method, I seem to recall Mrs. Retzlaff validating my specialness with her special wooden ruler placed sharply across my special little knuckles from time to time. And, I may have seen stars, too.
Harrumph.
For me it was Mrs. Gould (5th grade). In Iowa, in the late 60s, hardly any women wore a long manicure. She did, and they were sharpened to claws. She would walk the classroom while we were studying or taking tests or reading something aloud, coming from the back up to the front. And she would peck into the top of your head, HARD, for any reason (or no reason); falling asleep, daydreaming, to call on you, perceived cheating, whatever. Astonishingly painful. I'd like to think she'd be arrested for assault nowadays, it was so awful.
Quote: petroglyphI will take that bet for ten bucks.
Here is a sample graduation test from 1895. How many of today's school seniors can pass this test of sophomore college students without the aid of the internet?
http://grandfather-economic-report.com/1895-test.htm
That test is over a hundred years old. They were teaching different things then than they are now.
In comparison, I could write up a year 2014 test that would be impossible for an 1895-year student.
I don't know which is smarter, nor do I care. But you can't say a monkey is better than a fish because it can climb faster and higher than a fish, nor a fish better than a monkey because it can stay underwater longer than a monkey can.
Like reading, writing, and arithmetic.Quote: RSQuote:That test is over a hundred years old. They were teaching different things then than they are now.
Are you trying to graduate the 8th grade? That's what this test was for. I have seen others from the thirties which similarly impressed me as to their difficulty. No one graduated from that time period that couldn't read. Which I find fundamentally important.Quote:I could write up a year 2014 test that would be impossible for an 1895-year student.
Are you trying to graduate the 8th grade? That's what this test was for. I have seen others from the thirties which similarly impressed me as to their difficulty. No one graduated from that time period that couldn't read. Which I find fundamentally important.Quote: petroglyphLike reading, writing, and arithmetic.
Look at the arithmetic. I've no idea how large a bushel of wheat is, mostly because I'm not a farmer from 1895. I've never heard of the term tare, bu, nor measuring the size of land in "rods".
The questions look confusing, but they really aren't, to someone who's been in a class where that stuff is being repeated day in and day out.
I remember being in elementary school and I could name all the states and their capitals (in the US). I could do the same for Mexico. I couldn't do it for Canada, because nobody cares about Canada. Point is, if you're in a class for something and are currently learning something that's being drilled into your head, those tests are easy. If you aren't learning those things, the test is hard, even if you learned it years ago (or never at all...or learned it differently).
It looks confusing to you, as an adult, because you haven't been getting "The 9 times you need to use a capital letter for words is for names, states, beginning of a sentence, after a colon...." drilled into your head. Same with "Principal Parts" and "Punctuation" and half of the other sh*t on that test.
Quote: RS
Look at the arithmetic. I've no idea how large a bushel of wheat is, mostly because I'm not a farmer from 1895. I've never heard of the term tare, bu, nor measuring the size of land in "rods".
.
Change them to the modern terms they
still couldn't do the math today. My daughter
isn't lying, I've been hearing it for 15 years,
how abysmal the kids are at math and reading
coming out of HS. They sometimes break
down bawling when they find out what
they're supposed to know just coming into
the class. And because they need these
math credits to graduate, she makes a ton
teaching summer school to the ones that
flunked out. She doesn't blame the kids, she
blames the idiot teachers they had.
It shouldn't matter that the "average" person of that age doesn't have the math capabilities -- the college doesn't have to accept "average" kids if they are requiring their students to exhibit better-than-average skills. If they are going to admit students who can't do arithmetic (or algebra, or calculus, or statistics, or whatever) then they shouldn't be offering required courses that require those abilities without offering the preparatory courses and scheduling them as prerequisites.
Quote: DocBob, I'm curious about this college where your daughter teaches. Why the heck are they granting admission to students who are completely unprepared.
I haven't been to college in over 40
years, I have no idea what the admission
process it. Could it be a student shows
up waving the admission fee over their
heads and they're let in, no matter
their qualifications? Naw, that would
mean colleges are more concerned
about profit than education, and we
know that would never happen..
Quote: DocBob, I'm curious about this college
Doc has nailed it. Colleges generally have been getting away with murder for far too long, but in particular there are just too many, and plenty who will accept students who have no chance at all.
Quote: EvenBobI haven't been to college in over 40
years, I have no idea what the admission
process it. Could it be a student shows
up waving the admission fee over their
heads and they're let in, no matter
their qualifications? Naw, that would
mean colleges are more concerned
about profit than education, and we
know that would never happen..
I assume that last part was sarcasm.
It is getting to the point that they should just start selling the degree. Charge 20% more if yoh elect not to take classes.
Quote: EvenBobI have no idea what the admission
process it. Could it be a student shows
up waving the admission fee over their
heads and they're let in, no matter
their qualifications?
That could certainly be the case at some "colleges". If your daughter has higher standards for her students, perhaps she should seek employment at a college with higher standards.
Otherwise, she has a couple of options where she is: (1) she can just keep blaming the high school teachers who couldn't adequately teach algebra, trig, calculus, or whatever to students who came unprepared out of elementary school, or (2) she can teach an introductory (remedial) course to prepare students for her "real" course. I suspect that the college with inadequate admission standards would be willing to collect the additional tuition revenue for the added remedial course.
With option (2), your daughter could generate added profit for her employer while getting better-prepared students into her primary courses, and those students might actually learn something along the way. Win, win, win. What's wrong with that?
Quote: DocThat could certainly be the case at some "colleges". If your daughter has higher standards for her students, perhaps she should seek employment at a college with higher standards.
She works at a university, she has
tenure and is head of her dept. I'm
sure their standards are just fine.
Quote: odiousgambitnot just a college, but a university!
You think they're the same? Hardly.
Colleges only offer and focus on
undergraduate programs. Universities
offer both undergraduate and graduate
degrees. Look at that, you learned
something..
Quote: EvenBobYou think they're the same? Hardly.
Colleges only offer and focus on
undergraduate programs. Universities
offer both undergraduate and graduate
degrees. Look at that, you learned
something..
wrong.
any college can call itself a university. They've figured out it helps their image, so they all do know. How many places just call themselves a college now? not many
sorry to be stepping on toes!
magna cum mustard.
Quote: odiousgambitwrong.
any college can call itself a university. !
Nope. They have to apply to the state
for permission.
”University means a higher educational institution offering a range of registered undergraduate and graduate curricula in the liberal arts and sciences, degrees in two or more professional fields, and doctoral programs in at least three academic fields.”
Quote: EvenBob”University means a higher educational institution offering a range of registered undergraduate and graduate curricula in the liberal arts and sciences, degrees in two or more professional fields, and doctoral programs in at least three academic fields.”
who are you quoting?
Quote: EvenBob (regarding admission standards)She works at a university, she has
tenure and is head of her dept. I'm
sure their standards are just fine.
Excellent! As a tenured department head at a university, she is right in the position to create the remedial courses and require them as pre-requisites for any students who do not arrive at the university with the proper academic skills. She doesn't need to complain about high school teachers, since she can remedy the problem and charge the students what it costs. Remedial courses typically do not earn credit toward graduation, and they are not necessary for students who arrive prepared, but tuition is definitely charged.
Quote: EvenBob (regarding college vs. university)Nope. They have to apply to the state
for permission.
”University means a higher educational institution offering a range of registered undergraduate and graduate curricula in the liberal arts and sciences, degrees in two or more professional fields, and doctoral programs in at least three academic fields.”
I don't know where that quote comes from, but it certainly doesn't apply to all academic institutions with "university" in their names. I do not think the states are involved in granting university status to any schools other than their own state universities -- they just are not involved in naming of the private schools. Also, there are plenty of universities that do not offer doctoral programs at all. However, you are correct that it is customary for "university" to imply an offering of some graduate programs.
On the other hand, offering courses that are (allegedly) at the graduate level does not necessarily imply a high-quality institution, nor does the lack of graduate programs detract from academic excellence -- some colleges specifically avoid offering graduate programs, instead focusing on providing the very highest quality undergraduate programs that they can.
As sort of a cross between these, in Tennessee the University of the South (commonly known as Sewanee) focuses on undergraduate education and does a very good job of it. I might be mistaken, but I think that their only graduate offerings are summer programs in fine arts and theology.
Another outstanding school that emphasizes undergraduate programs is Williams College (not University) in Massachusetts. They do offer a couple of masters programs, but the bachelor programs are what they are known for. There are a number of other excellent undergraduate institutions, including the first college I attended (Davidson College), where I don't think they have ever offered a graduate course in anything -- that's not the role they want to fill.
I get sick with many artificial sweeteners but think the strength of concentration in my stomach makes a difference. Hence a better reaction with a full stomach. Maybe the slower digestion or different parts of milk used in cheese and ice cream matters.Quote: djatcI cant drink milk, it upsets my stomach, but I can eat ice cream and drink milkshakes. I can eat pizza cheese, but cannot eat a cheeseburger or a cheesecake. Am I a mild lactose or am I just picky?
Quote: onenickelmiracle50% drop her class in the first week and the other 50% probably kill themselves I'm guessing.
The other half usually pass OK. There's
also usually a lot more girls than boys.
I don't think they tell kids in HS that math
is very important at the university level.
Quote: EvenBobYou think they're the same? Hardly.
Colleges only offer and focus on
undergraduate programs. Universities
offer both undergraduate and graduate
degrees. Look at that, you learned
something..
Sorry Charlie. I've got a graduate degree from St. Anselm's COLLEGE.
If Bob lives in a state where they make a distinction and prohibit the use of "university" by smaller colleges with limited programs, then good for them.
But otherwise it can actually get comical to me. The online-only blood-sucking program that Univ. of Maryland offers is called "University of Maryland University College" which pretty much gets me rolling on the floor.
I might be out of date on this one, but I doubt it. When I first heard it, it asked about schools with NCAA division 1-A football programs, which shows how old the question is, since that division was renamed the FBS in 2006.
Challenge: Name the schools with NCAA 1-A (or FBS) football programs that do not include the word "University" in the official name of the school. Hint: There are (were) five of them.
Spoiler buttons for answers might be a good way to help keep this question entertaining for others thinking about it.
Great question. Here's my answers, without looking:Quote: DocUniversity Trivia time:
I might be out of date on this one, but I doubt it. When I first heard it, it asked about schools with NCAA division 1-A football programs, which shows how old the question is, since that division was renamed the FBS in 2006.
Challenge: Name the schools with NCAA 1-A (or FBS) football programs that do not include the word "University" in the official name of the school. Hint: There are (were) five of them.
Spoiler buttons for answers might be a good way to help keep this question entertaining for others thinking about it.
Quote: teddysGreat question. Here's my answers, without looking:
The three service academies: West Point, Naval Academy, and Air Force. Georgia Tech. And muther-fukin' Boston College!!
Well, teddys indicated the correct schools (with a bit of apparent negative bias revealed), but he didn't bother to give the official names of any of the schools other than the one toward which he expressed such negative bias. No, I didn't ask for official names, but maybe teddys inadvertently revealed that he really has a soft spot in his heart for that one, in spite of his language. ;-)
Quote: 1BBHappy birthday, Elvis! You don't look a day over 80. What's everyone's favorite Elvis song?
I think Elvis was more of a statement thing than a music thing. Sort of "you had to be there".
I don't like any of his stuff. He does that weird thing with his voice. When I hear him, I can only think of one thing...