Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
Wtf are you talking about. Why should a harder AP class grade be equal to an easier non AP class grade. Sounds like a sensitive parent wanting their dumb kid to have the equal gpa as a smarter kid.

Wtf are you talking about. Why should a harder AP class grade be equal to an easier non AP class grade. Sounds like a sensitive parent wanting their dumb kid to have the equal gpa as a smarter kid.
The shift to weighted grades caused more problems than it solved. How much harder is an AP class? How much harder is it in one district compared to another? What if your school only offers AP Chem and Calc? Should kids that excel in math have an advantage GPA-wise over kids that excel at writing or history? How about honors classes? How do you really know how they stack up? Is it really 25% harder?Wtf are you talking about. Why should a harder AP class grade be equal to an easier non AP class grade. Sounds like a sensitive parent wanting their dumb kid to have the equal gpa as a smarter kid.
At the public school level I see the struggle to innovate being mostly tied to lack of funds and especially federal/State regulations. We are just hamsters on a wheel trying to keep things going. $7000 a kid for a school with almost all kids from low SES just doesn’t get the job done.Like. The public school model hasn't changed very much in nearly 100 years. It's a legitimate concern, imo, of those who think that giant entrenched bureaucracies are the worst places to advance innovative techniques that could hugely enhance our educational results. Communities have largely settled on formats that work just good enough to discourage experimentation, or even the adaptation of concepts proven elsewhere. Even at the next level, I work for a small university; the president is a great guy, really smart, but his mission isn't to educate students as well as we possibly can. That's only a part of his greater mission, which is the survival of our school. Any innovation we initiate is designed first and foremost to attract more students.
I agree with you but it’s not just rural. School funding and opportunity is not fair in this country. Urban and rural are getting screwed. Teacher might easier on kids but school is more challenging that it used to be as well. Kids are required to learn a lot more before they get a diploma.FYI - both of my kids were in the top 10% of their class. Two problems today - teachers grading is easier based on the parental, kids and administration pressures. In addition, kids that live in rural areas, like mine, don't have they same opportunities and access to AP classes so they have no way to achieve these high GPAs I'll let that dumb comment pass this time....
You could make all the same arguments that can be made against GPA in general. What you are calling for is the elimination of the GPA.The shift to weighted grades caused more problems than it solved. How much harder is an AP class? How much harder is it in one district compared to another? What if your school only offers AP Chem and Calc? Should kids that excel in math have an advantage GPA-wise over kids that excel at writing or history? How about honors classes? How do you really know how they stack up? Is it really 25% harder?
The benefit of taking AP classes was to take the AP exam and get a good score and earn college credits. Obviously this looked better on your transcript as well.
Actually I am old enough where my high school didn’t give additional credit for what few AP classes I took; which created a different set of issues of why take a harder class if it can negatively impact your GPA. So I did the reasonable thing and applied to a school where none of that mattered so I could play Madden 92 and drink.The shift to weighted grades caused more problems than it solved. How much harder is an AP class? How much harder is it in one district compared to another? What if your school only offers AP Chem and Calc? Should kids that excel in math have an advantage GPA-wise over kids that excel at writing or history? How about honors classes? How do you really know how they stack up? Is it really 25% harder?
The benefit of taking AP classes was to take the AP exam and get a good score and earn college credits. Obviously this looked better on your transcript as well.
I am not advocating eliminating gpa, even though i acknowledge it has its own issues. I am saying weighted grades didnt solve anything.You could make all the same arguments that can be made against GPA in general. What you are calling for is the elimination of the GPA.
Also AP classes require training, monitoring and pre-set lessons/tests. It’s way more standardized than any other type of class.
Really? Baltimore is bad? Maryland in general has been the best in the country at passing AP tests for years.I am not advocating eliminating gpa, even though i acknowledge it has its own issues. I am saying weighted grades didnt solve anything.
If AP classes are so standardized why do some districts have so many students get an A and still fail the test? See baltimore.
According to this article baltimore doesnt seem so good. Thats not a one off either. There is a baltimore sun article from maybe a year or tow earlier that says same thing.Really? Baltimore is bad? Maryland in general has been the best in the country at passing AP tests for years.
In all seriousness I have sympathy for your situation. My wife was an elementary ed major, got her masters and then went and got her PhD. So she's at the top of her pay scale by teaching in an elementary school, she could have taught at a university but that just wasn't for her. It's staggering at these figures and how many years she would have to work just to recoup these costs for four years.I was including room and board.
And hey don’t diss Chapman too much. I didn’t know nearly anything about it, but it appears to be quite excellent for my daughter’s preferred major (elementary education) and she may very well go there. (She would have preferred the UCs, but so far she hasn’t gotten in, though we’re still waiting to hear from Irvine.)
parasaurolophus said:According to this article baltimore doesnt seem so good. Thats not a one off either. There is a baltimore sun article from maybe a year or tow earlier that says same thing.
The rate of Maryland seniors who passed at least one AP exam hit 31.8 percent in 2014, but according to The Baltimore Sun, in some of the state’s schools like Woodlawn Elementary, failure rates are commonly as high as 75 percent
Arguing that the College Board and standardized tests is also a scam? Yes I partially agree. However, AP classes are tougher than regular classes relative to the school which makes the GPA numb worthwhile.parasaurolophus said:According to this article baltimore doesnt seem so good. Thats not a one off either. There is a baltimore sun article from maybe a year or tow earlier that says same thing.
Also in CA highly recommend two years of community college. You do really well you get priority transfer to state universities.Shula-holic said:In all seriousness I have sympathy for your situation. My wife was an elementary ed major, got her masters and then went and got her PhD. So she's at the top of her pay scale by teaching in an elementary school, she could have taught at a university but that just wasn't for her. It's staggering at these figures and how many years she would have to work just to recoup these costs for four years.
I know this is something you have likely considered, but have you looked at out of state alternatives and the cost of those? Also, how willing/lax they are on letting you buy a small property and establishing residency there? Granted, I've been out of college for over 20 years but the college I went to was near the GA line and around 1/3 of the student body came from GA. It was pretty common for parents to buy a place rather than having their child pay rent or room/board and then after a year they were considered a resident of the state and got in-state treatment.
Could be correct. It all depends on the specifics. My wife's dad was a college professor but he was in computer science so he was on the higher end where he was. Certainly on the scale of things he would have a higher pay grade than she would. She also teaches in AL where teacher pay isn't all that great, even though she's in one of the better systems within the state. I think in her specific case she could probably do a little better but having done a lot of that type work while getting her PhD she just didn't like that environment as much.Also to the comment that I think alluded to teaching at university being better paying. Not always- lots lecturers get absolute garbage pay.
Um, we're gonna use to to build a wall now.roadkill1292 said:Past time for Dems to take on the defense budget. We have to stop treating it as untouchable.
Asking because I have no idea, but are government shut-downs a thing places other than here.If it's government funded, what happens when there's a government shutdown? No school? No healthcare? No free lunches for school kids?
The non-tenured staff at Loyola are getting ready to strike as claims of adjunct professors making less than minimum wage circulate. This may not be true, but I have read several stories like this.Could be correct. It all depends on the specifics. My wife's dad was a college professor but he was in computer science so he was on the higher end where he was. Certainly on the scale of things he would have a higher pay grade than she would. She also teaches in AL where teacher pay isn't all that great, even though she's in one of the better systems within the state. I think in her specific case she could probably do a little better but having done a lot of that type work while getting her PhD she just didn't like that environment as much.
My kids will be going to a Baltimore City school for Kindergarten next fall. :thumbsup:According to this article baltimore doesnt seem so good. Thats not a one off either. There is a baltimore sun article from maybe a year or tow earlier that says same thing.
No. Health care is a huge budget item. Welfare is a sliver of federal spending.Ilov80s said:If we eliminate welfare, could we pay for health care and education? How much would those 2 things cost?
What about corporate welfare though?No. Health care is a huge budget item. Welfare is a sliver of federal spending.
That’s about 10% of regular welfare. (About $1 trillion for regular welfare compared to about $100 billion for corporate welfare, as of 2012-1013. Health care costs more than $3 trillion. There’s some overlap, though, because Medicaid is both welfare and health care.)What about corporate welfare though?
And defense is what? $650 billion. I just don't see where the money for health care and education comes from. How big would the tax increase on the wealthy have to be to cover it?That’s about 10% of regular welfare. (About $1 trillion for regular welfare compared to about $100 billion for corporate welfare, as of 2012-1013. Health care costs more than $3 trillion. There’s some overlap, though, because Medicaid is both welfare and health care.)
It depends on how you define wealthy.And defense is what? $650 billion. I just don't see where the money for health care and education comes from. How big would the tax increase on the wealthy have to be to cover it?
Anyone not on welfare? LOLIt depends on how you define wealthy.
A lot of it will come from employers, who will pay new income and/or head taxes (or even taxes based on their levels of automation) in lieu of kicking in on employee health insurance premiums. I figure the personal brackets will also get a little bump way down the income line. This really doesn't have to entail much of a change. The money comes from a combination of individuals, employers and government now.And defense is what? $650 billion. I just don't see where the money for health care and education comes from. How big would the tax increase on the wealthy have to be to cover it?
Any idea how much money private businesses are currenty contributing to health care costs?A lot of it will come from employers, who will pay new income and/or head taxes (or even taxes based on their levels of automation) in lieu of kicking in on employee health insurance premiums. I figure the personal brackets will also get a little bump way down the income line. This really doesn't have to entail much of a change. The money comes from a combination of individuals, employers and government now.
Just consider the Syria strikes a $225 million stimulus package for arms dealers.Love we have to find money for healthcare but for needless war the coffers are always full.
There are roughly 150 million with ESI [1]. The average premium (for an individual) is about $6700 (a tad under 3 times that for family) [2]. The average employer pays 82% for individual and 69% of family [3].Any idea how much money private businesses are currenty contributing to health care costs?
This is true, but in terms of being hit hard, we need to consider the net effect rather than the gross effect.It depends on how you define wealthy.
I don’t think you could ever do it with wealthy income tax alone. You would have to tax assets and hit the middle class pretty hard.
It may also be possible for someone with a lower income to only owe an additional $480 in monthly taxes and come out $110 ahead. That may be the more likely scenario if the overall costs are lowered to something close to that of other western industrialized nations.This is true, but in terms of being hit hard, we need to consider the net effect rather than the gross effect.
I'm paying around $590/mo for health insurance. If the government taxed me an extra $700/mo and provided my insurance for me, it would really cost me $110/mo rather than $700/mo, in a net sense.
Yes, but I suspect that last part is impossible. Path-dependence matters, and I don't think there's any realistic way to get to Europe from here. (Maybe a rope boat.) I think reducing health care costs in the U.S. is a pipe dream, and we should instead just try to reduce the rate of growth while acknowledging that we'll probably never be as efficient as Europe currently is in this particular domain.It may also be possible for someone with a lower income to only owe an additional $480 in monthly taxes and come out $110 ahead. That may be the more likely scenario if the overall costs are lowered to something close to that of other western industrialized nations.
Well, it certainly seems as though the plans are designed around the notion that people are not going to college due to cost, and that we should have a more educated work-force overall.I would assume that colleges would still have a max capacity and requirements to get in, just once the students qualified, tuition is taken care of.
I dont think people suggesting these plans are saying that every HS grad should go to college now.
Maybe I have a wrong read on it then. My take was that for those who qualify for college and are going, it shouldn't put them in crushing debt to do so. I am guessing that there are many who have the intellect and skills to be at a better school but can't because of financial reasons, so I think it would help the cream rise to the top a little more in that sense.Sinn Fein said:Well, it certainly seems as though the plans are designed around the notion that people are not going to college due to cost, and that we should have a more educated work-force overall.
That suggests, to me, either more students, or that we are saying the colleges are currently accepting students who are not qualified.
This varies tremendously from school to school. Many of the household-name public universities are at capacity and turn away well-qualified students every year. But not all. The University of Missouri, for example, has the capacity to add quite a few students because their enrollment has take a hit the past several years.Sinn Fein said:I don't know how close schools are to capacity now - I assume pretty close -