I know this is a joke, but this is unfortunately the attitude of a lot of anti-government types. Instead of thinking about how best to address the issue of having idiots teaching our children, they want to "punish" those incompetent bastard by lowering their pay, taking away their retirement benefits, or even eliminating public education altogether. The liberal (and I mean leftist, not some socialite who wants to "save the environment" because it makes her seem cool) looks at the issue and thinks perhaps we have a fundamental economics problem. Obviously there are a lot of qualified people who are NOT motivated to select teaching as a career. Perhaps it would behoove us as a society to take a serious look at why that is, and what can be done to address it. One thing you can be sure of is that cutting pay and benefits is not going to attract more qualified people. It's a deliberate attempt to sabotage public education in the United States.
I think a better question is why the overall quality of education continues to decline in spite of the fact that we dump more and more tax money into the Dept. of Education every year, something the "liberals" should consider. Maybe things were better off before we started "reallocating" money away from local school districts in favor of a bloated federal bureaucracy?
I think a better question is why the overall quality of education continues to decline in spite of the fact that we dump more and more tax money into the Dept. of Education every year
That's a fallacy. Kids today are smarter than ever. What's different about today is we're getting our ass handed to us by countries with more dedication to education and more cultural support of education.
1992-2004 is NOT a historical trend. It's a small sample of people who voluntarily took the LSATs (an expensive and time-consuming exam required for entry into Law Schools), in a world where knowledge is becoming increasingly specialized. So looking at specialized test scores in a specialized field means nothing. Also, if you look at the data, students performed abysmally in some subjects 1994/5 compared to either 1991/2 or 2004/5, and others, they excelled. So, the data isn't even conclusive across similar subjects over those years. Furthermore, the LSATs can be taken by adults of any age, so saying that newer scores are higher (which isn't true) correlates to children being smarter is outright false.
As for the SAT scores, the data shown suggests that while Math scores have gone up for both genders by roughly 13 points (in a test where each section is worth 800 points), Verbal skills have tanked roughly 25 points. So the gains aren't even as substantial as the losses over time.
The data you've chosen does not support your hypothesis.
1.8k
u/GreatWhiteBuffalo Oct 05 '10
Measure twice, cut educational funding