Scott Walker new Gov of Wisconsin

[yyz]

Sorry, I assumed when you said "Leaving us with only the power to bargain our wages DOWN, is really no bargain....is it?" that you worked for the school system. What do you feel the correlation is between the numbers above and Collective Bargaining?

"Us", because I am a state employee, and am covered under this umbrella.

I think the big correlation is a domino effect.


I think, in general, better teachers will head for "better" jobs, first and foremost, and the protection and benefits a union gets them, fits that bill.

Unions often control the limits to class size. I would assume a teacher can do a better job teaching 15 over trying to teach 30.

Now, since there is no union push to get money into the sytem, less money gets into the system. I'll bet my bottom dollar more cash is poured into union driven systems than non. (I don't mean for teachers, either.) Schools, programs, materials.

Just speculation, but I doubt it's far off.

 

[UGA12]

Gotcha

I agree teaching 15 as opposed to 32 in my case would be much better for the Students (and myself from a selfish standpoint). These are the types of things I would like to know specifically. There may indeed be a direct correlation between the two, but without knowing the specific things provided to teachers by unions it is hard to tell. I can tell you for a fact that teachers from Al. and Fla.(not on your list) flock to Ga. because of pay. I am not sure what that says, but it at least indicates somesimply go for the higher pay over other things.

 

[Woodson]

It's definitely a better read than the so call journalists view points. I appreciiate all the comments on thiS subject:0008

 

[Mags]

Well I'm not working for the school system, so I can't help you there.

There is no doubt that unions, unfortunately, save the jobs of people who should be fired. I see it time and time again just where I work. But, on the other side of the coin...you could lose/keep your job through your relationship, good/bad, with your bosses in a non-union shop.


If you belong to the YMCA you know going in that you have to pay dues. You can either pay them, or not sign up. Same with a job.


I do find it quite startling that only 5 states do not have collective bargaining for educators, and they are all the worst scoring schools in the country:

Those states and their ranking on ACT/SAT scores:

South Carolina 50th
North Carolina 49th
Georgia 48th
Texas 47th
Virginia 44th

Wisconsin is 2nd

Ah.. interesting conclusion, but there are so many factors that you need to look at. Here is one from the US bureau of statistics:

Ranking of African American Population by state:

15. Wisconsin 6.2%
33. Texas 12.0%
39. Florida 16.1%
44. North Carolina 21.6%
46. South Carolina 28.2%
48. Georgia 30.2%

These are all people - the rates may even skew higher if looking at children 18 and younger (since minorities are growing faster than white population).

These ranks seem to match the ranks you've shown above (at least directionally). It may be possible, just possible that there are other factors involved in school success than just the fact that collective bargaining is at play here.

I'm sure there are other factors involved too - such as average household income per state, and also how big and strong the private school system is in each state.

But to think collective bargaining is the reason schools are strong in WI is just wrong. In fact, I'll be willing to be that IL is not ranked ahead of WI in outcomes based on the study you showed - even though the average teacher salary is much higher in IL than WI. Of course, IL has a much higher minority population, which makes it much harder to show success as teachers.

First law of statistical analysis - you need to hold all other variables constant before making inferences off the data like this.

And in this case, it may be impossible to hold all the variables constant (I just showed one variable, of likely many, that have a positive correlation to the data you showed).

I could show you higher average SAT scores in the private schools in WI than public schools. I could also show you that private school teachers make 50% less than their public school counterparts, based on the same education/experience. So, I'd make the argument that public teachers are way overpaid based on this data. You, of course, would counter that private schools have admission standards, and as such, draw a "better" student. Of course, you'd be right in that assumption.

But, the bottom line, based on the crude analysis you supplied above, is that it does nothing to support your argument on collective bargaining. At least not with the data/analysis you've presented. Nothing has been been provided that would indicate that collective bargaining is the factor with the highest correlation to student achieve. It MAY be one of the factors, and it just as easily could NOT be one of the factors.

 

[UGA12]

Ah.. interesting conclusion, but there are so many factors that you need to look at. Here is one from the US bureau of statistics:

Ranking of African American Population by state:

15. Wisconsin 6.2%
33. Texas 12.0%
39. Florida 16.1%
44. North Carolina 21.6%
46. South Carolina 28.2%
48. Georgia 30.2%

These are all people - the rates may even skew higher if looking at children 18 and younger (since minorities are growing faster than white population).

These ranks seem to match the ranks you've shown above (at least directionally). It may be possible, just possible that there are other factors involved in school success than just the fact that collective bargaining is at play here.

I'm sure there are other factors involved too - such as average household income per state, and also how big and strong the private school system is in each state.

But to think collective bargaining is the reason schools are strong in WI is just wrong. In fact, I'll be willing to be that IL is not ranked ahead of WI in outcomes based on the study you showed - even though the average teacher salary is much higher in IL than WI. Of course, IL has a much higher minority population, which makes it much harder to show success as teachers.

First law of statistical analysis - you need to hold all other variables constant before making inferences off the data like this.

And in this case, it may be impossible to hold all the variables constant (I just showed one variable, of likely many, that have a positive correlation to the data you showed).

I could show you higher average SAT scores in the private schools in WI than public schools. I could also show you that private school teachers make 50% less than their public school counterparts, based on the same education/experience. So, I'd make the argument that public teachers are way overpaid based on this data. You, of course, would counter that private schools have admission standards, and as such, draw a "better" student. Of course, you'd be right in that assumption.

But, the bottom line, based on the crude analysis you supplied above, is that it does nothing to support your argument on collective bargaining. At least not with the data/analysis you've presented. Nothing has been been provided that would indicate that collective bargaining is the factor with the highest correlation to student achieve. It MAY be one of the factors, and it just as easily could NOT be one of the factors.

Well said and I agree that there are obviously many variables at play. I work in what amounts to an "Inner City" school and I laugh at times when I hear people in "the know" from private and higher socio-economic schools desribing how to be successful in the classroom. Holding everyone to the same standards and trying to force sqaures pegs into round holes is why our educational system is falling apart. Until fundamental change occurs we will continue to throw money away in the name of improvement and equality when in the end money cant fix the problems at hand.

 

[yyz]

I'm sure there are other factors, Mags.


But if I find a betting trend with a percentage like that.......I don't ask a whole lot of questions about it.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Well I'm not working for the school system, so I can't help you there.

There is no doubt that unions, unfortunately, save the jobs of people who should be fired. I see it time and time again just where I work. But, on the other side of the coin...you could lose/keep your job through your relationship, good/bad, with your bosses in a non-union shop.


If you belong to the YMCA you know going in that you have to pay dues. You can either pay them, or not sign up. Same with a job.


I do find it quite startling that only 5 states do not have collective bargaining for educators, and they are all the worst scoring schools in the country:

Those states and their ranking on ACT/SAT scores:

South Carolina 50th
North Carolina 49th
Georgia 48th
Texas 47th
Virginia 44th

Wisconsin is 2nd

Hate to rain on your parade but ya think considering they only have 6 % of students (college bound) taking SAT--it might have something to do with that ranking--Just thought you might want (all the facts)


http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2007-08-28-sat-table_N.htm

SAT scores by state

Here's a look at SAT scores from each state and Washington, D.C. The College Board cautions against ranking states by scores. The reason: Scores vary greatly by how many students take the exam. The more who take it, the lower the state's score is likely to be.
States are listed according to their participation rates, or the percent of graduating students taking the exam.

Have to click link to see chart
http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2007-08-28-sat-table_N.htm



--and that fellow americans --is the rest of the story---Good Day :0008

 

[StevieD]

Why is it that the unions that supported this crooked gov. would be exempt from this law if the repuplicans shove it thru?

 

[Chadman]

Wayne, I would submit that your numbers are not appropriate for drawing conclusions to yyz's post. For those reading closely - which apparently doesn't happen as often in the states yyz mentioned - his numbers include BOTH the SAT and ACT - and not JUST the SAT. Therefore, his numbers are valid and worth looking at. Your extrapolation is not presenting the REST of the story, just a part of it, like yyz's.

Is it the only thing worth looking at? No, of course not, but it is an interesting statistic to throw in the mix.

And I would also submit a thought to Mags bringing black population into the mix regarding test scores - I think that IS worth looking at, because I think you can probably learn a lot by what goes on in highly racial areas as far as teaching goes - the best teachers, what they have to pay to get quality teachers to teach in those areas, etc. That can certainly skew numbers, both pay/benefits and performance.

I would like to hear UGA12's take on the area where he teaches in GA - inner city kind of thing. What do some of the Atlanta schools have to do to draw teachers to inner city schools denied funding from NCLB? How about rural GA? Same thing? Is it fair to the kids who live in these areas to not have better teachers, or teachers who don't make as much money or have good benefits? So much is never considered when you ONLY look at a narrow money angle from a conservative taxpayer mentality. Do you really care about kids learning, or do you more care about your personal expenditure? I think we all honestly know the answer to that in most cases.

He has touched on the most important thing to teaching kids (if that's what we ALL really care about, which I don't think is the case with the issue of the thread and some respondents - or WALKER, for sure). Forcing kids with prescribed learning scenarios - especially to meet narrow standards established by people NOT in the educational world, to obtain funding (NCLB Act from Bush) is a HUGE problem for schools and education costs. Teachers are spending hours filling out forms, following dictates, altering unique lesson plans instead of trying new and successful teaching strategies to reach different kids, spending paperwork time actually teaching, prepping, learning new ways to teach. Funding is tied dramatically to a standardized test based on a nationally established test. But having national standards for benefits or even statewide benefits for teachers? That's a bad way to go? Talk about hypocritical...

 

[Trench]

I do find it quite startling that only 5 states do not have collective bargaining for educators, and they are all the worst scoring schools in the country:

Those states and their ranking on ACT/SAT scores:

South Carolina 50th
North Carolina 49th
Georgia 48th
Texas 47th
Virginia 44th

Wisconsin is 2nd

Hate to rain on your parade but ya think considering they only have 6 % of students (college bound) taking SAT--it might have something to do with that ranking--Just thought you might want (all the facts)

--and that fellow americans --is the rest of the story---Good Day :0008

Dogs, I hate to rain on your parade but yyz's data clearly indicated combined ACT/SAT scores, yet you conveniently focused on the fact that only 6% of college bound students in WI take the SAT. Might that be because you also discovered that 69% of college bound students in WI take the ACT?

Which of course, makes your point meaningless, doesn't it, Dogs?

--and that my fellow Americans... is the rest of the story-- :0008

 

[Trench]

Wayne, I would submit that your numbers are not appropriate for drawing conclusions to yyz's post. For those reading closely - which apparently doesn't happen as often in the states yyz mentioned - his numbers include BOTH the SAT and ACT - and not JUST the SAT. Therefore, his numbers are valid and worth looking at. Your extrapolation is not presenting the REST of the story, just a part of it, like yyz's.

It appears I was researching those same numbers while you were posting, Chad, so I didn't see your post. :0003

 

[Trench]

I do find it quite startling that only 5 states do not have collective bargaining for educators, and they are all the worst scoring schools in the country:

Those states and their ranking on ACT/SAT scores:

South Carolina 50th
North Carolina 49th
Georgia 48th
Texas 47th
Virginia 44th

Wisconsin is 2nd

Ranking of African American Population by state:

15. Wisconsin 6.2%
33. Texas 12.0%
39. Florida 16.1%
44. North Carolina 21.6%
46. South Carolina 28.2%
48. Georgia 30.2%

I just showed one variable, of likely many, that have a positive correlation to the data you showed.

Mags, please explain the "positive correlation" in these two datasets. Thanks.

 

[Mags]

Mags, please explain the "positive correlation" in these two datasets. Thanks.

Trench - I kinda doubt I need to teach you anything, but...

When you know, statistically, that African American scores on SAT/ACT are lower than European American scores, and YYZ is quoting a study that focuses only on SAT/ACT scores, to ignore the differences in mix between the populations will give you improper results.

And since these both show the same pattern, you can ascern that they are likely positive correlated (correlation coefficient can range from -1.0 to +1.0). A postiive correlation means that they are linked, for lack of a better work, and negative means it is an inverse relationship.

But you know this already.

IF you could hold the African American % of the population constant AND if this was the only variable that affects test scores (which it is clearly not, and I'm sure it is much less about race and more about the learning environment each student has at home), then YYZ's study may mean something.

But this is way too complex an issue to draw any inference from which states have collective bargaining, or what the breakdown of race is in each state, for that matter.

And that was what I was trying to point out - YYZ's point is likely more coincidental than anything. It proves absolutely nothing.

 

[Chadman]

Now that I've looked more into this - Wayne, your point is completely invalid. yyz's numbers consider BOTH tests for college entry, not just one, and many states test all if not most of their students for the ACT test.

Generally, if they rank high in students taking the SAT, they'll rank lower in ACT percentages. The true measure, of course, for the REST of the story, would be to combine both for the only true picture.

For that, refer to yyz's numbers, which I verified to be true.

An interesting sidenote - I was linked to a site dealing with population enlightenment rankings (in 1999) which measure things like education, civic participation, crime, health, etc. Was not surprised to see Minnesota ranked #1, but was interesting to see how closely the rankings of enlightened states match the poor ACT/SAT scores posted here for the states we're talking about. The following link should be good to keep this thread alive for awhile, but will be a source of angst for some... :SIB

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/states/usMAIN.html

 

[Chadman]

It seems the "academic" contingent is working overtime on this issue - nothing new here... and it's been pointed out by some here how much damage the academics are doing to society with all their thinking... so I'll stop now.

I do plan to revisit the % of trailers considered to be homes in some states, though. Thems interestin' numbers, ain't they? 'Course, them kids have just as much 'bility to score well on them testes, ain't they? Stewpid librals. They shud no that testin' ain't got nuthin to do with lightnin, or teechers feelin good 'bout teechin.'

P.S. I grew up in Southwest Missouri, so I gotta right to talk that when when it serves my purpose...

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

You need to tell USA Today--

The College Board cautions against ranking states by scores. The reason: Scores vary greatly by how many students take the exam. The more who take it, the lower the state's score is likely to be.

--that they and the college board are clueless--not me.

We report--you decide! :SIB

 

[UGA12]

Wayne, I would submit that your numbers are not appropriate for drawing conclusions to yyz's post. For those reading closely - which apparently doesn't happen as often in the states yyz mentioned - his numbers include BOTH the SAT and ACT - and not JUST the SAT. Therefore, his numbers are valid and worth looking at. Your extrapolation is not presenting the REST of the story, just a part of it, like yyz's.

Is it the only thing worth looking at? No, of course not, but it is an interesting statistic to throw in the mix.

And I would also submit a thought to Mags bringing black population into the mix regarding test scores - I think that IS worth looking at, because I think you can probably learn a lot by what goes on in highly racial areas as far as teaching goes - the best teachers, what they have to pay to get quality teachers to teach in those areas, etc. That can certainly skew numbers, both pay/benefits and performance.

I would like to hear UGA12's take on the area where he teaches in GA - inner city kind of thing. What do some of the Atlanta schools have to do to draw teachers to inner city schools denied funding from NCLB? How about rural GA? Same thing? Is it fair to the kids who live in these areas to not have better teachers, or teachers who don't make as much money or have good benefits? So much is never considered when you ONLY look at a narrow money angle from a conservative taxpayer mentality. Do you really care about kids learning, or do you more care about your personal expenditure? I think we all honestly know the answer to that in most cases.

He has touched on the most important thing to teaching kids (if that's what we ALL really care about, which I don't think is the case with the issue of the thread and some respondents - or WALKER, for sure). Forcing kids with prescribed learning scenarios - especially to meet narrow standards established by people NOT in the educational world, to obtain funding (NCLB Act from Bush) is a HUGE problem for schools and education costs. Teachers are spending hours filling out forms, following dictates, altering unique lesson plans instead of trying new and successful teaching strategies to reach different kids, spending paperwork time actually teaching, prepping, learning new ways to teach. Funding is tied dramatically to a standardized test based on a nationally established test. But having national standards for benefits or even statewide benefits for teachers? That's a bad way to go? Talk about hypocritical...

Now that I've looked more into this - Wayne, your point is completely invalid. yyz's numbers consider BOTH tests for college entry, not just one, and many states test all if not most of their students for the ACT test.
Generally, if they rank high in students taking the SAT, they'll rank lower in ACT percentages. The true measure, of course, for the REST of the story, would be to combine both for the only true picture.

For that, refer to yyz's numbers, which I verified to be true.

An interesting sidenote - I was linked to a site dealing with population enlightenment rankings (in 1999) which measure things like education, civic participation, crime, health, etc. Was not surprised to see Minnesota ranked #1, but was interesting to see how closely the rankings of enlightened states match the poor ACT/SAT scores posted here for the states we're talking about. The following link should be good to keep this thread alive for awhile, but will be a source of angst for some... :SIB

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/states/usMAIN.html

I teach in a suburb of Atl. that is very transient and has a free or reduced lunch rate of over 80%. It would still be considered rural by many inner city people because of location, but in practice the educational atmosphere and clientele are the same. As to APS(Atlanta Public Schools) they pay very well in an attempt to draw teachers into the city to teach. As a state, your student loans can be forgivin up to so much if you agree to work in low socio-economic areas within and around Atl. My school has been a title 1 (de facto as the term technically only applies to middle and elementary schools) school for years now and because of this I will be able to have thousands of dollars in student loans forgiven.

As to the sat/act for whatever its worth I have not looked at any numbers/studies but can tell you that in MY past experience as student and teacher in Ga. the SAT has been much prefered as opposed to the ACT. This may have changed or be changing but just based on the past I would have guessed probably 80% of students took the SAT.

If anyone in their research comes across what unions specifically "get" for teachers in these states please list a link as I would like to see specifically what variables could play a part in the previously stated numbers.

 

[Mags]

It seems the "academic" contingent is working overtime on this issue - nothing new here... and it's been pointed out by some here how much damage the academics are doing to society with all their thinking... so I'll stop now.

I do plan to revisit the % of trailers considered to be homes in some states, though. Thems interestin' numbers, ain't they? 'Course, them kids have just as much 'bility to score well on them testes, ain't they? Stewpid librals. They shud no that testin' ain't got nuthin to do with lightnin, or teechers feelin good 'bout teechin.'

P.S. I grew up in Southwest Missouri, so I gotta right to talk that when when it serves my purpose...

Chad - not sure what your point was here, but whatever it was, I'm not sure I like it....

 

[Chadman]

Mags, my point here was there are a couple people here who rip my views and others because I lean towards the liberal view and support many of those caveats. There have been comments about liberalism being elitist, "academics" being unrealistic about real world problems and not knowing anything about business, the economy, or working for a living - those kinds of things.

The other part was kind of an attempt to have some fun (seriously, fun) about general geographic assumptions (which are both true and not true, of course) and draw a tangent between student performance in areas that are considered unenlightened (by a non-scientific link). It was pretty much done in jest, but there are probably some valid things that can be drawn from it.

I was not referring to you at all, if that is what you wondered about. However, since you live in Wisconsin and I live in Minnesota -

You're all a bunch of paint thinner drinking backwards ass country farks... :toast:

 

[Chadman]

You need to tell USA Today--

The College Board cautions against ranking states by scores. The reason: Scores vary greatly by how many students take the exam. The more who take it, the lower the state's score is likely to be.

--that they and the college board are clueless--not me.

We report--you decide! :SIB

The USA Today and the College Board are talking about ranking one test in particular because student participation varies between the tests. I invite you to look past the one study, which clearly some states don't think is the best way to measure student scoring. You report in an incomplete fashion, hoping that we decide based on that.

Now, where would you get THAT style of reporting from? Can WE decide that, too? :0074