I wonder if that has anything to do with surface area? It seems like the top 10 states for public schools are all pretty small. They’re also all in the north, with the exception of Virginia.

Of the worst states, Most of them are in the south, and four of them share a border with Mexico. I’m just wondering if putting this down as a red state/blue state thing isn’t simplifying things a little bit.

You’d have to show that the prevailing political beliefs are responsible for the quality of the schools. That’s hard to do, especially in California, where you have the ultraliberals in the SF Bay area, and the ultraconservatives in Orange County.

You’d also have to prove that the prevailing political beliefs have harmed the quality of schools in the poor-school states.

The second part of the post seems a bit easier for me to buy. People with money like to keep their money, which is why they have money. People with less know what it is like to go without, and are therefore more likely to give.

I wouldn’t call spending money to ban evolution from schools and bombing abortion clinics a form of generosity.

... he said in his best New York limousine liberal accent.

I wouldn’t call spending money to ban evolution from schools and bombing abortion clinics a form of generosity

Go to hell you fucking ignorant worthless troll

Several problems with this article.

California used to be on top but for several issues. When they were on top they were teaching phonics. After several years it became apparent that phonics was creating poor spellers so California switched to the whole language method. This created good spellers but lowered reading comprehension (actually it lead to a whole generation that had difficulties with basic reading comprehension). California has since gone back to phonics rationalizing that computers fix the spelling issue.
The lowering of the scores can also be attributed to mainstreaming. There are no longer special classes for children who do not speak English. In other words these children are thrown into the standard classroom. This WILL have an impact upon the state scores.

Just a little heads up. This is an issue that is much more complicated that what is visible on the surface.

I wouldn’t call spending money to ban evolution from schools and bombing abortion clinics a form of generosity.

Nice

I challenge you to provide proof where any state is spending money to ban evolution. Some districts have wanted to ADD Intelligent Design but none have wanted to ban evolution. I also challenge you to show me where any state is funding an operation that is bombing abortion clinics. Since you mentioned them in the same sentence I want to see some proof. If you have none then you are lying. 

Answer the question Mr. Hit & Run. Don’t do what you did on the other thread. Answer the questions.

Just ignore Morris and he’ll go away.  He brings nothing even remotely reality-based to to these debates anyway.

Oh, Morris, do shut up and add something to the discussion or go away.
I’d like to know what curricula and teaching methods are used.
Also, education is a two-pronged affair. You can fund it all you want but if you have parents and teachers who are less than interested then you will produce students with a low academic level.
In terms of charity, values, values, and values. It seems the red states have more of them.

I wouldn’t call spending money to ban evolution from schools and bombing abortion clinics a form of generosity.

HA! I love it! There goes that Cat food commercial again

Meow meow meow meow… Meow meow meow meow...

Morris… you know what’s really ironic about your pathetic attempt at a response?

1: Some states spend money to *perform* abortions

2: Some spend money to *bomb* and kill their own citizens (Waco.. Ruby Ridge)

3: You and your Liberal, Monkey brained friends do try to *BAN* religion from the schools

Morris, Make sure your brain is in gear before you place your fingers on a keyboard.

The lowering of the scores can also be attributed to mainstreaming. There are no longer special classes for children who do not speak English. In other words these children are thrown into the standard classroom. This WILL have an impact upon the state scores.

and how many of those kids, especially in California, New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas, are here illegally, or have parents that got here illegally?
i’d argue the issue isn’t that there are special classes, but that i would think that you’ll find a different situation with students whose parents may not have english as first language but had to work to get here legally vs those that didn’t. And i’ll clarify that to that i would theorise that you’d find that difference even within, say, legal mexican immigrants vs illegal mexican immigrants.

That’s true, but whether they are here legally or not their numbers affect the quality of the schools in states where they settle. California, Nevada, New Mexico and Arizona are all in the lower portion of the list.

I wonder what Texas is doing that those other state are not. Anyone have information about that?

I’m not sure I understand your meaning, Lowbacca. Whether the children are born of legal or illegal immigrants (chances are the children are American-born), it is their exposure to the common language- that being English, for the time being- what is taught in schools and how it is taught that is important.
Also, don’t try to argue with the likes of Morris et al. Waste of time and bandwidth. They hear what they want to hear.

Here’s the top ten.

1. Vermont
2. Connecticut
3. Massachusetts
4. New Jersey
5. Maine
6. Minnesota
7. Virginia
8. Wisconsin
9. Montana
10. New York

Im from Maine and it is impossible to believe that the public schools are the fifth best in the nation. Also, it was a blue state only because the very liberal universities have a large population compared to the rest of the state.

In Howitzer’s vein… I just got out of the public school system, and I went in PA and VA… and there is no way in hell VA schools are better than PA schools… furthermore, there is no way VA schools are #7. If this is true, i feel bad for everyone below it.

Another thing to consider is the disparity between schools in urban areas and schools in rural or suburban areas in the same state. The differences bewteen them would make a worthwhile state-by-state comparison of educational quality very difficult.

Note to Morris, and all the other lurking troll blowhards: Notice how it is possible for people to disagree and discuss the matter respectfully and intelligently at the same time. I respect Lee and pretty much everyone else who comes to Moorewatch to post, even if I don’t agree with everything that is said.

It’s called “tolerance”, which is something that lefty trolls like to think they own exclusive rights to.

I’ll bet Morris lives in Arizona.

I’ll bet Morris lives in Arizona.

Hey!!! I live in Arizona. But then, I wasn’t educated here.

Eh, don’t worry, I live in California.  I’ll make my point more literal: Morris has preconcieved notions about people from the south bombing abortion clinics and trying to stop schools from teaching education as if it’s something everyone there does.  This means that he’s prejudiced against people in these states and part of what makes the liberals think they’re morally superior to everyone else is that they don’t have prejudices.

Morris is pathetic.

And as for the generosity levels, the blue states are higher taxed.  No incentive to give.  Also, states like Michigan with their high, almost Frenchlike unemployment levels are not in a giving mood.

I wouldn’t call spending money to ban evolution from schools and bombing abortion clinics a form of generosity.

And I wouldn’t say the above thought was formulated, much less expressed, by any form of higher intelligence either.  It makes me wonder if there’s a noticeable sloped recess on Morris’s forehead.

I wonder what Texas is doing that those other state are not. Anyone have information about that?

Yes, they are cooking the books, and they have been caught too.

There has been a lot of cheating in the testing. For example special needs children (children with learning disabilities) were excluded from the testing in one school district. There are certain parameters that must be met. For example, the criterion for children’s ability to take the test is “can they read”? If so then they are given the same test as their peers, regardless of their actual level of development. So if you have a child who can read at the first grade level (common in ELL students) and they are in lets say seventh grade then they are given the same test as those of their peer group. This also goes for children who have learning disabilities. Some are trying to fix this but at this time, to the best of my knowledge, no one has found out how to count these students fairly.

Hey!!! I live in Arizona. But then, I wasn’t educated here.

That’s not news to us.

Children with learning disabilities have been excluded from testing? Where else has this gone on?
Also, it is ultimately, I feel, values that would cause one to give to charity. If the blue states are apparently the more academic and therefore (according to some) more charitible, that should be reflected. So why isn’t it?
Also, don’t feed the trolls.

I wouldn’t call spending money to ban evolution from schools and bombing abortion clinics a form of generosity.

While amusing at times, im slowly becoming sick of the liberal mentality.  Their arguments are based off what someone tells them.  Case an point, Morris’ latest argument is nothing but a ridiculous claim that has never EVER been an issue.  However, liberals like this (who claimm to be the elite), fail to grasp the facts surrounding this argumennt.  Grow up and learn a little before you speak… it was fin for a while, but now its become irritating to listen to an argument without and substance or backing.

As a lifelong New Hampshire resident, I would just like to comment on our status as the least generous state.

(1.) Red?  Blue?  Quite frankly, nobody knows what we are on that scale.  We were always traditionally a “red” state until half of fu***ng Massachusetts moved here.

(2.) Yeah, we’re cheap.  We practically invented the concept of the frugal yankee.  So sue us!

Besides, it’s not like we’re up to our collective asses in poor people.  At least, it wasn’t always that way.  See point #1…

Hmm 28th for education and 11th for generosity.  Well the schools here are the only liberal strongholds in the state, which is why sadly we are so low.  Im wagging my finger at yah Idaho libs.

I challenge you to provide proof where any state is spending money to ban evolution.

hehe, yeah that’d be enforcable wouldn’t it? You are hereby forbidden to evolve!!! LMAO!

All goes to show that the world’s not just Black and White… or Red and Blue…

I’ll bet Morris lives in Arizona.

hey, I live in Arizona and was mostly educated here as well. I did finish up my last three years of high school in California.

Just to add to the discussion a little bit, our school system is greatly impacted by illegal immigration. I’ve seen more schools where the teachers have to be billingual to be able to communicate with the students and the parents, and have the lowest among low test scores.

Then I’ve seen schools with top notch curriculum and the test scores are some of the highest in the nation. It’s a matter of demographics and location. Your Phoenix area schools are among the lowest in test scores, highest in drop out rates and highest in the percentage of students who either they themselves are illegals or their parents are. Then you can look at some of the Mesa/Gilbert/Scottsdale schools who have some of the highest test scores, lowest drop out rates and lower percentage of students who are illegal or children of illegals.

It’s a sad thing. I live in Phoenix and I drive my son 26 miles 1 way to a school in Tempe where I know he will get an education. The school right next to my home is horrid. I would never send him there.

yes Arizona is the lowest in the nation, but education is one of the most talked about issues in this state...along with immigration. They are trying to do something about it. I may be a “republican” by registration, but our democratic governor has my support. She has done more to try and push education reform than I have seen in some time. I honestly do not know if the republican party can put out a candiate strong enough to challenge her next election. As it stands now, she has my vote.

hehe, yeah that’d be enforcable wouldn’t it? You are hereby forbidden to evolve!!! LMAO!

Hrmm… using tax money to stem human evolution, huh?

Actually, we already have that program.

We call it welfare.

Hrmm… using tax money to stem human evolution, huh?

Actually, we already have that program.

We call it welfare.

At first I read this like it was just a joke.  But its probably true.  Take away all forms of welfare and social assistance ... then youll really have your process of natural selection / survival of the fittest.

crichton:

I’m not sure if I was insulted or praised!

Janna:

Yes, it all depends on the district.  Phoenix sucks while PV and Scottsdale are much better.  Private schools are very expensive (and sometimes hard to get into) and charter schools run the gamut from decent to horrid—and I mean horrid!

Take away all forms of welfare and social assistance ... then youll really have your process of natural selection / survival of the fittest.

So the “progressive” thing to do to further the advancement of the human race would be to cut welfare and social assistance. I think up4 is finally coming around! ;-)

Janna:

Yes, it all depends on the district.  Phoenix sucks while PV and Scottsdale are much better.  Private schools are very expensive (and sometimes hard to get into) and charter schools run the gamut from decent to horrid—and I mean horrid!

Exactly. My sons school is a public school but is worth the drive. I’ve seen some really bad charter schools and I dont know that I would trust to put my son in even a good one. I’ve just seen too many bad things when it comes to charter schools. I’m not to up and up on some of the private schools and most likely would not be able to afford one anyway. So public it is with my boys. But my oldest sons school in the Tempe school district has greatly impressed me. I started him there when he was in Kindergarten ( midway through the year). he did have to repeat but the half year he was there he had made strides over his previous school. He is now in first grade and the school and administration is amazing. They really care about the kids and the curriculum is tougher than I remember 1st grade being :-)

I just think it is such a black eye on our state to be ranked last in the nation in education...yet you look at the headlines today and two students here shared a $100,000.00 scholorship prize from a contest based on math/science.

I honestly feel that if we could somehow get a handle on the immigration problems in the state, we would rank much higher in education. It’s a sad commentary but a true one from my perspective.

Well, Janna, I’m too old to remember much of 1st grade. :)

Both of my kids are now out of high school, but from what I remember of middle school and high school, it was tougher in the past.  My son used to complain about kids in 11th grade English who couldn’t read worth a damn (and that was in the PV district).  Also, when they would have a reading assignment such as To Kill A Mockingbird, the class would also see the film over a period of class days!  What kind of crap is that?  No wonder some of them couldn’t read.

I do know that some industries (and I have read the same for universities) are having problems with people coming out of school (high school and college) with such minimal reading and writing abilities, that remedial training is required.

Children with learning disabilities have been excluded from testing? Where else has this gone on?

This actually happened in California, in my hometown as a matter of fact.

There were several irregularities happening in Texas. Teachers giving the students the answers, teachers helping students to “comprehend” certain question (i.e. they would verbally emphasize the right answer), teacher handing out the answer list several weeks prior to the test, some students “encouraged” to take a “cut day” on the day of the test.

There have been lots of things going on and will continue until things get straightened out.

Thank you for the information, Thorisin. I wonder if these people don’t realise that they will be found out sooner or later.
I think the bigger problem is not necessarily immigration but integration and teaching methods. If a child is constantly surrounded by one language and one culture then his ability to adapt to the larger culture remains stunted. Teaching and studying methods are also a factor. I teach ESL abroad. My students will have one hour a day where they are surrounded only by English. After that, their own language, ect. I try to use drills and games to re-enforce certain points. It works sometimes but it’s an uphill battle if I am the only English influence they will see all day or all week. Also, if the student does not do his homework, that will affect his academic standing, as well.
Money doesn’t always mean better students, either. I work with some kids from affluent backgrounds and they aren’t worldbeaters.
Just some thoughts.

I think we need to keep in mind that the argument of wealth and giving stems from some libtard of long ago claiming that the blue states were footing the bill for the red states, who apparently just suck the blues dry and then vote for the latest Chimpy McHitlerburton to come down the pike.  So the libs fired the first shot in the war on red/blue oversimplification.

I may be going out on limb here..but I think Morris was just throwing that out there in order to get your typical knee jerk reactions. You guys are like trained monkeys. And no, I don’t have proof of the monkey thing. That is something I heard from a friend of a friend (both liberals).

You know, I was going to make a comment about how these lists really don’t mean very much since the education one gets in this old world depends more on the individual than on the system; However, after seeing that the state where I received my entire formal education was ranked a lowly 43rd in the nation, I decided what the hell, I’m too ignorant and probably too stupid to make any meaningful contribution to this discussion.

Lee:

So, I ask you my friends, where’s the liberal compassion and love of their fellow man that we hear so much about?…

Given that liberal states are “smarter” and better educated than red states, this sure says something about liberal priorities, doesn’t it?

I don’t think it proves what you’re suggesting, and it looks as though the study’s authors are backing off drawing any similar conclusions.

First, the ranking is based on relative giving. So it is weighted towards poorer states. Another study found:

“If everyone in Massachusetts gave 100 times as much to charity as we do today and everything else remains the same, we wouldn’t get above the bottom half of the chart,” said David Trueblood, a spokesman for the foundation. “And no matter what Mississippi did, it couldn’t fall below 22nd or 23rd.” Article

To which the author of your study replied: “its purpose is to promote discussion about philanthropy and that it never sought to hang a label on any state.”

Second, Most people reach a personal ceiling of what they’re willing to give, no matter what they’re income. So a person who makes $40,000, if they were to receive a boost in income to $50,000, they would still likely donate at the same level as prior to the raise.
And this study also says nothing about total giving by state or income group. The study’s authors actually point out:
“3) Most charitable giving is done by affluent taxpayers; itemization is heaviest among that group, with penalties for perjury if they exaggerate, and loss of tax deductions if they under-report.”

And finally - and this is true up here as well - charitable giving stats are greatly skewed because of religious giving. Much like in Canada, over 30% of charitable giving is to churches…

This is seconded by the authors of the study who point out “religious cultures to influence giving significantly, because religious giving accounts for over one-third (35.5% in 2004) of all charitable giving, the largest single field of interest to donors (Education: 13.6%, Health 8.8%).”

They continue: “We do this to illuminate a fact: that nationwide, giving is not consistently related to income; rather, giving is shaped more by cultures, which tend to be regional, and by religion (not politics).” (My emphasis)

I think you touch on this with your statement: “...evil ignorant fascist redneck hick Christians.”

I’m not suggesting that religious giving isn’t important, I just think that when you take certain religious giving out of the equation, (like donations to Jim Hagee and Benny Hinn [do you have him down there??]) I think the results of this study change dramatically.

Let me put it this way, I’d be willing to bet everything I own in the world that there are a hell of a lot more shares of Halliburton stock owned…

I really don’t understand how these two points are connected: charitable giving and stock ownership.

And besides, I bet there is more Halliburton stock owned by Texans than New Hamshire-ans (?); and there are a hell of a lot more of ALL stocks owned by New Yorkers than Mississippians.

"John Hagee”

Canuck,

First, the ranking is based on relative giving. So it is weighted towards poorer states. Another study found:

“If everyone in Massachusetts gave 100 times as much to charity as we do today and everything else remains the same, we wouldn’t get above the bottom half of the chart,” said David Trueblood, a spokesman for the foundation. “And no matter what Mississippi did, it couldn’t fall below 22nd or 23rd.” Article

To which the author of your study replied: “its purpose is to promote discussion about philanthropy and that it never sought to hang a label on any state.”

Considering the source of the statements you quoted (a representative from a group seeking to show the Northeast in a more positive light), I would take those statements with a grain of salt.  I mean, some of them are patently false on their face (e.g. Mississippi could give zero and it would fall below 22nd or 23rd).  Plus, given the fact that the study looked at charitable contributions claimed on tax returns versus adjusted gross income on those same returns could provide quite a bit of difference in favor of states that have higher average incomes (high income taxpayers are more likely to itemize and claim their charitable deductions than lower income individuals who are more likely to claim their standard deduction).

Other than that, I agree with your second point (about people tending (not always, but usually) having an absolute dollar upper threshold of giving (as opposed to a percentage of income)) and your third point (about religious giving potentially skewing the results (although I think the effect might be less than you would think it is - and I would point out that most religious giving is not to the fringe groups that you described)).

Zinger:

Considering the source of the statements you quoted (a representative from a group seeking to show the Northeast in a more positive light), I would take those statements with a grain of salt.

Absolutely. But the authors of the original study are also from Massachusetts…so we should take there findings with a grain of salt too?

I mean, some of them are patently false on their face (e.g. Mississippi could give zero and it would fall below 22nd or 23rd).

Well yes, they were off by one spot – the lowest Mississippi could possibly fall to is 24. If you look at the chart, Mississippi is ranked 50th (last) in the “have” column. So if, as you posit, they were to give $0, that would rank them (likely) as the 50th most generous (therefore the least generous state.) That’s a difference of ‘0’ in “Rank Relation” on this table and would rank them in the middle of the index…don’t forget there’s a ton of states with negative “Rank Relations” (about half). This table skews the results in favour of the poorer states. Factor in religious giving (and what I mentioned about philanthropic ceilings), and one really has to question the importance of their findings.

Plus, given the fact that the study looked at charitable contributions claimed on tax returns versus adjusted gross income on those same returns could provide quite a bit of difference in favor of states that have higher average incomes (high income taxpayers are more likely to itemize and claim their charitable deductions than lower income individuals who are more likely to claim their standard deduction).

I honestly don’t follow you here. Sincerely, no sarcasm intended. Dumb it down for me.

(although I think the effect might be less than you would think it is - and I would point out that most religious giving is not to the fringe groups that you described)).

You’re right, I just threw out those names. But my point was more that religious giving, though important, isn’t always the same as other philanthropic giving. For example, a good portion goes back into the churches coffers.

Just out of curiosity, is John Hagee fringe? We get him up here on the Christian Television Network and his ministry looks rammed. He seems to be making good coin. I love his fire and brimstone rants…and the backdrops he chooses are priceless – planes flying into things, thunderbolts, satan…