We have a trust fund baby in Pennsylvania running for the open seat in the U.S. Senate: John Fetterman. He portrays himself as a working class guy and dresses the part in hoodies and basketball shorts, but in reality, his parents kept him going with a yearly salary into his 40s and maybe longer. The guy never did any real work before he was tapped to become lieutenant governor, unless you count his stint as mayor of Braddock, a still-declining and devastated community several miles from Pittsburgh. That job paid him a paltry $150.00 per year and it’s doubtful that he made any real difference anyway. I’ve read that there is the suspicion that the game plan, should he be elected, is to have his radical Marxist wife take over for him in light of his recent stroke and the subsequent health problems stemming from it. It never ceases to amaze me how the Democrats scheme like this.
We can hope he won't be elected. At this point his singular appeal is one of pity. I can't understand how his policy notions benefit anyone. Even before the stoke I sensed something was really off about him. But I'm not in PA.
So very odd that the rich children who have achieved little for others now feel they are our wise keepers. Perhaps because they may have never truly struggled to build and create they have no idea of what that takes in terms of personal effort. Of course, they along with many of their teachers believe they can guide policy toward some utopia that cannot possibly exist.
Got a chance to examine the Romanoff paper. This guy doesn't think much of Christians as if that had anything to do with a decline in education. To counter, US students got worse as secular beliefs became more dominate.
I found the Boston School allocation interesting in that he glorifies Peng Shi maybe from https://goldsea.com/Text/index.php?id=14292. At the time Shi was working towards his doctorate in Ops Research under Dr Parag A. Pathak, chair MIT Econ. It's a good ops research effort in trying to optimize an overly constrained situation faced by nearly every school system. He modeled well (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304407620302530). Shi is a brilliant person no matter where he happened to be educated. We really don't know if he was born in China. His CV doesn't say (http://faculty.marshall.usc.edu/Peng-Shi/). Bit of projection from Romanoff?
I can agree that US education has been failing students for a very long time. I did see that in a Baltimore HS, a significant number of HS seniors couldn't read beyond the 3rd grade level which seems criminal neglect to my mind. Romanoff makes a point about funding, yet we spend a lot more and get less (kinda like the medical world). I suspect that's because we no longer value teachers. Once upon a time (per your earlier article) there were fewer alternative jobs for women so teaching became a solid, respected profession. Somewhat like priests and the military where despite the poor pay, their contributions and sacrifice were important. In today's world we no longer hold these professions in high esteem choosing celebrities and politicians and mega-millionaires to worship. But the crux is around the women who unlike most men have a patience and tolerance for children. But in order to feed our industrial beast, we decided females could be equal to men in business. While true in some businesses we see few women in science and engineering despite a lot of effort. They really aren't interested in those things it seems despite trying to force the issue for some mythical goal. Females in combat arms are rarely equal to men, although some are, but have created all sorts of havoc in the ranks related to sexual conduct - dealing with nature's designs.
So the best and brightest of women no longer are into education choosing instead a more lucrative profession where they often must compromise a lot to become a cog in the machine. How great for them, we are informed. I actually think teaching is a much more important activity. My late wife was a former telecoms executive who decided to become a special education teacher. Our children gone we cared less about money. She found the work quite rewarding and relished her 7th grade student who had mastered reading the cereal box; parents adored her because she cared. She often would comment about other teachers who were merely making time. My sister, a former teacher, turned stockbroker, advised my wife that administration would eventually grind her down and so it did. Incompetent administrators are the bane of schools. The old days of a principal drawn from the teaching ranks has gone away replaced by business types more concerned with student head count (budgets) and perks than students.
I imagine the feminists who perhaps destroyed teaching as a profession in favor of feeding the machine have much to do with decline in education. We get a few solid teachers but too many who couldn't cut it in other academic areas. As such many accept impractical social notions and think their job is to create more SJW types. Principals ought to rein them in but are restrained by unions who actually run the schools. Besides principals are rarely teachers themselves so have no way to evaluate performance. We shall see if efforts in Arizona work where students can use vouchers to select schools, but we really must collapse the system to save education in the US.
We have a trust fund baby in Pennsylvania running for the open seat in the U.S. Senate: John Fetterman. He portrays himself as a working class guy and dresses the part in hoodies and basketball shorts, but in reality, his parents kept him going with a yearly salary into his 40s and maybe longer. The guy never did any real work before he was tapped to become lieutenant governor, unless you count his stint as mayor of Braddock, a still-declining and devastated community several miles from Pittsburgh. That job paid him a paltry $150.00 per year and it’s doubtful that he made any real difference anyway. I’ve read that there is the suspicion that the game plan, should he be elected, is to have his radical Marxist wife take over for him in light of his recent stroke and the subsequent health problems stemming from it. It never ceases to amaze me how the Democrats scheme like this.
We can hope he won't be elected. At this point his singular appeal is one of pity. I can't understand how his policy notions benefit anyone. Even before the stoke I sensed something was really off about him. But I'm not in PA.
So very odd that the rich children who have achieved little for others now feel they are our wise keepers. Perhaps because they may have never truly struggled to build and create they have no idea of what that takes in terms of personal effort. Of course, they along with many of their teachers believe they can guide policy toward some utopia that cannot possibly exist.
Got a chance to examine the Romanoff paper. This guy doesn't think much of Christians as if that had anything to do with a decline in education. To counter, US students got worse as secular beliefs became more dominate.
I found the Boston School allocation interesting in that he glorifies Peng Shi maybe from https://goldsea.com/Text/index.php?id=14292. At the time Shi was working towards his doctorate in Ops Research under Dr Parag A. Pathak, chair MIT Econ. It's a good ops research effort in trying to optimize an overly constrained situation faced by nearly every school system. He modeled well (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304407620302530). Shi is a brilliant person no matter where he happened to be educated. We really don't know if he was born in China. His CV doesn't say (http://faculty.marshall.usc.edu/Peng-Shi/). Bit of projection from Romanoff?
I can agree that US education has been failing students for a very long time. I did see that in a Baltimore HS, a significant number of HS seniors couldn't read beyond the 3rd grade level which seems criminal neglect to my mind. Romanoff makes a point about funding, yet we spend a lot more and get less (kinda like the medical world). I suspect that's because we no longer value teachers. Once upon a time (per your earlier article) there were fewer alternative jobs for women so teaching became a solid, respected profession. Somewhat like priests and the military where despite the poor pay, their contributions and sacrifice were important. In today's world we no longer hold these professions in high esteem choosing celebrities and politicians and mega-millionaires to worship. But the crux is around the women who unlike most men have a patience and tolerance for children. But in order to feed our industrial beast, we decided females could be equal to men in business. While true in some businesses we see few women in science and engineering despite a lot of effort. They really aren't interested in those things it seems despite trying to force the issue for some mythical goal. Females in combat arms are rarely equal to men, although some are, but have created all sorts of havoc in the ranks related to sexual conduct - dealing with nature's designs.
So the best and brightest of women no longer are into education choosing instead a more lucrative profession where they often must compromise a lot to become a cog in the machine. How great for them, we are informed. I actually think teaching is a much more important activity. My late wife was a former telecoms executive who decided to become a special education teacher. Our children gone we cared less about money. She found the work quite rewarding and relished her 7th grade student who had mastered reading the cereal box; parents adored her because she cared. She often would comment about other teachers who were merely making time. My sister, a former teacher, turned stockbroker, advised my wife that administration would eventually grind her down and so it did. Incompetent administrators are the bane of schools. The old days of a principal drawn from the teaching ranks has gone away replaced by business types more concerned with student head count (budgets) and perks than students.
I imagine the feminists who perhaps destroyed teaching as a profession in favor of feeding the machine have much to do with decline in education. We get a few solid teachers but too many who couldn't cut it in other academic areas. As such many accept impractical social notions and think their job is to create more SJW types. Principals ought to rein them in but are restrained by unions who actually run the schools. Besides principals are rarely teachers themselves so have no way to evaluate performance. We shall see if efforts in Arizona work where students can use vouchers to select schools, but we really must collapse the system to save education in the US.