Shifting the Goalposts

Post image for Shifting the Goalposts

by Epoxytocin no. 87 on January 15, 2010

Sometimes, life teaches lessons at the darnedest times. For me, the best lesson on how to deal with feminist propaganda came during a game of HORSE in second grade. Look below for the obvious analogies with our current sorry political situation; far be it from me to spell them out, because we’re the sort of crowd here that is … better at analogies. (See below.)

So anyway, back to my story. I was playing against a kid who was widely regarded – by the masses of students who simply preferred to go about their day unimpeded by needless strife – as a tattletale, a whiner, and, most importantly, a cheater. But the thing was, none of us fair-and-square types were allowed to voice these concerns, since this kid came from a family that had, in a word, “connections”. So we had to play nice with him.

I was winning solidly, by three letters, when The Shifting of Goalposts began in earnest. Lugubriously watching one of my Harlem Globetrotters-inspired trick shots bounce in vain off the rim, I was nonplussed when my opponent suddenly came to life, grabbing the rebound and tossing it nonchalantly back into the hoop. “H!”

“Huh?”

“Rebound on a miss!”

I was taken aback; the kid had simply created a new rule, from scratch, at a time when it was precisely to his advantage.

I rolled my eyes and let it slide. Sure enough, I thought, I’ll get the chance to reciprocate; and reciprocate I did – on the very next shot. I grabbed his rebound and performed a textbook layup, laying claim to the “S” that is the HORSE equivalent of match point.

“Nope, doesn’t count. Can’t touch the rebound with both hands!”

I laughed, ready to take the next shot, but then turned around and realized that the kid was being serious. Still, little scrapper that I was, I foolishly continued to believe that I actually had a chance to win this “game”, as I was still ahead by two letters. So I gamely plodded on, through more and more rules changes that were as ridiculous as they were spontaneous, until I suddenly found myself “losing” the game, four letters to three; the kid’s go-ahead point had come from the expiration of an imaginary shot clock.

I faced two choices with which to preserve a semblance of honor: I could punch the little snot in the face, or I could put down my ball, cock my hat further sideways, and leave. I chose the latter.

I was incredulous the next day – although, in retrospect, I shouldn’t have been – when I was castigated by the teacher for my “poor sportsmanship”.

As today’s analogy for my valiant yet ultimately hopeless effort at HORSE, let’s examine the claim, widely touted in the MSM, that girls are as good at math as boys are.

However – and this should come as no surprise to any of us who have ever taught a class requiring innovative problem solving – these data are only arrived at by a combination of cherry-picking, goalpost shifting, and misleading reporting. In other words, misrepresentations, convenient redefinitions, and outright lies.

Let’s start with the misrepresentations and the “selective reporting”.

NOT-SO-DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

Usually, only a few droplets of the proverbial dew have evaporated from the morning landscape of Statistics 101 by the time students have been taught that there are two main ways to describe a set: average value (most commonly represented by the mean) and variability (most commonly represented by the standard deviation).
Early and often it is taught that either of these statistics, if reported alone, creates a picture that is at best distorted and at worst disingenuous. But this principle seems to have gotten past our intrepid researchers and reporters, who somehow got so excited about boys’ and girls’ equal averages that, despite their best efforts,** they forgot to report the differential variation in their scores.

Sure enough, in these studies, the highest and lowest ranks were occupied predominantly by boys – unsurprising, considering that this greater variability in male mental processes has been corroborated by just about every reputable study undertaken on the subject, and is even accepted by feminists (although with the entirely predictable rejoinder about how there are SOME women in those high ranges of intelligence, astronomical ratios be damned).

Still, in the true spirit of the media’s relentless quest to dismiss any vestige of male superiority in anything as the fortuitous fruit of “socialization”, the MSM deliberately omits this little nugget. To wit, let’s consider the difference in reportage between the average and the extremes.

From the HORSE’s mouth:

THE AVERAGE:
For their current study, the team acquired math scores from state exams now mandated annually under No Child Left Behind, along with detailed statistics on test takers, including gender, grade level and ethnicity, in 10 states. Using data from more than 7 million students, they then calculated the “effect size,” a statistic that measures the degree of difference between girls’ and boys’ average math scores in standardized units.
The effect sizes they found — ranging from 0.01 and 0.06 — were basically zero, indicating that the average scores of girls and boys were the same.

Note the awesome statistical precision.

Now, THE VARIABILITY:
Some critics argue, however, that even when average performance is equal, gender discrepancies may still exist at the highest levels of mathematical ability. To account for this possibility, researchers compared the variability in boys’ and girls’ math scores, the idea being that if more boys fell into the top scoring percentiles than girls, the variance in their scores would be greater.
Again, the team found little difference

“Little difference”!
Note the … not-so-awesome statistical precision. Why not? Could it have something to do with the fact that this “little difference” is actually a difference of more than 100 percent? And on tests from which the strongest bastions of male intellectual strength were almost completely absent (see below)? Who knew! Nah, must have been an innocent oversight.
Just like the similar innocent oversights in every other area in which boys still predictably outshined girls.
In other news, men can run faster, bench-press more, and jump higher than women, but there is actually “little difference”. And, don’t you know that SOME women can run really fast, too?

Aaaaaaaaaaaand now, for the goalpost shifting.

GATTO‘S LAMENT

So, why these newfangled, Johnny-come-lately “No Child Left Behind” tests, hmm? Why not use a test with a long and well-vetted history, such as the SAT?
Here’s why:
However, Hyde and her colleagues are concerned about one facet of the standardized tests they looked at in their study.
In most of the states they gathered data from, and from most grade levels, the standardized tests did not include problem-
solving questions.
(emphasis mine)

That’s right, folks – these “researchers” “equalized” the math performance of boys and girls by deliberately selecting tests that don’t involve problem solving – because (again, as anyone who has taught a day in his or her life, or bothered to observe children at play with a critical eye, would know), boys are much more likely to solve problems by innovation or insight (the “insight approach”), while girls are much more likely to solve problems by rote memorization of established methods (the “algorithmic approach”). This is why the authors of the study tiptoed a wide, quiet circle around the long-established SAT, on which boys still outperform girls handily despite the test writers’ admitted efforts to stack the deck in girls’ favor – because the SAT, at least for now, still contains large numbers of such “insight” problems. Indeed, as documented by the College Board’s researchers themselves (who are as PC as they come), sex differences between insight- and algorithm-based learning are extreme – and the difference becomes even more precipitous at high levels of achievement.

We see the same trend in what is perhaps the last redoubt of widespread creative problem-solving for American school kids, the SAT. The SAT has been unusually slow to yield to the PC brigade, largely because it was originally conceived as a test of unconventional problem solving, designed expressly to identify insight-based and innovative acumen. However, in the most recent revision of the test, in 2005, the test writers deep-sixed two major types of problems – Analogies and Quantitative Comparisons. Not so coincidentally, these were the two most heavily insight-based problem types on the exam, and the two problem types on which boys outscored girls by the highest margin. Not surprisingly, these changes narrowed the gap between male and female SAT scores – a development that has, of course, been seized upon by feminists as grounds for dismissal of the very notion – horrors! – that boys are naturally better than girls at something. Especially something whose importance is growing, in concordance with that of the technology that increasingly runs our lives.

Four letters to three, indeed.

What’s most troubling here, though, is the subtext. Specifically, feminists – and the complicit MSM – are willing to shoehorn “gender equity” into STEM (science/technology/engineering/math) subjects by redefining STEM aptitude in ways that exclude problem-solving skills.

While both “algorithmic” and “insight” reasoning have their relative strengths and weaknesses – surely, no large enterprise could run without the former – the latter is responsible for essentially ALL progress in scientific disciplines. In the name of feminism, our establishment is willing to exclude the most essential of all mathematical and scientific skills – creative problem solving – from the measurement of scientific aptitude, and, a fortiori, from scientific education itself.

And that’s not all. Even the SAT – an instrument that played a key role in bringing meritocracy into higher education, contributing to the unprecedented flowering of American science in the postwar decades – has started to decelerate. And, like other deceleration, this one looks primed to eventually become backward movement:
[T]he dreaded SAT could actually help produce a national curriculum, a sweeping education reform enacted without the passage of a single law… In the process, the test itself will have to change to include questions more like classroom exercises and less like–well, less like SAT items. … as the SAT morphs from a test of general-reasoning abilities into a test of what kids learn in school.

Bye-bye creative problem solving, hello hypnopaedia.

One more letter and we’re knocked out.

**For a similarly valiant effort, fast-forward to 0:36.

{ 80 comments… read them below or add one }

Black&German January 15, 2010 at 08:00

Absolutely fantastic article. Absolutely fantastic.

Thank you for writing this. But there is one aspect of the war-on-math (a movement that disproportionately slights boys) that you didn’t address: the death of partial-credit.

More and more schools are refusing to give partial credit on homework and test assignments. I survived through Calculus on partial credit. I usually would fill in all of the answers and then go back and struggle to document the work (this is typical among the highly gifted, who are more insight-inclined, and disproportionately male). I could rarely explain my answers and would spend hours every night trying to memorize the rules and algorithms they’d given us to use. This was a particular handicap in Geometric proofs.

Anyway, they’re forcing kids now to show their work and the work has to match the teachers’ example or they get the answer marked wrong. I’d often get a problem marked wrong, even if my work was correct, because my methodology did not fit the prescribed standard.

This benefits girls and the non-gifted because they’re better at rote memorization of algorithms. But try to get them to solve a real-life complex problem and they’re at a loss. We can’t all be accountants.

There is also a movement away from using IQ testing to designate who is allowed into the Talented and Gifted Programs in the public schools. Now you need teacher nomination, rather than raw intelligence. This is changing the TAG programs from a way to cultivate and motivate the truly gifted into a teacher’s pet privilege. And it’s shifting the balance of classes from boys to girls, as girls are better behaved and therefore more likely to be nominated.

Homeschooling is really the only way to go now. But if they change the SAT then… God help us.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Firepower January 15, 2010 at 08:03

What’s interesting:

This has been going on since you were in the second grade.

And, in all those years, not only has discrimination continued, it’s gotten steadily worse.

Since 2nd Grade.

That’s a long time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
"INDIA!" January 15, 2010 at 08:10

My considerable talents lie squarely in creative problem-solving, writing, and rhetoric. I’m terrible at math, and sciences that require a lot of math.

But I will say that bringing political agendas to math and science will only hasten multinational companies looking to India and China.

I can’t wait to see women with fake science degrees bitch and moan to get Indian and Chinese companies to hire them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
WizardKing January 15, 2010 at 08:14

The long march of female-supremacism in the education system – and everywhere else – threatens to absolutely ruin the sciences.

The very existence of The Royal Institution, for example, is now under threat because former director, (Baroness) Susan Greenfield plunged it £3m in debt! She went on a £22m spending-spree to refurbish the Georgian Mayfair base of the RI, in an effort to shake-off its stuffy image. Apparently she’s only a second-rate scientist who only got the job as director because she’s a woman and a ruthless self-promoter.

If women’s nefarious influence continues to grow within the eduction system and sciences, humanity may yet find itself living in grass huts once again.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 15, 2010 at 08:29

This brings back bad memorizes. I really hated math class. I got straight As at the same time as I was the student whose papers were all marked over in red ink. Nowadays they’d just fail me outright. And I can’t add worth a darn. The easy things are hard and the hard stuff is easy. Totally sucks.

Reminds me of my struggle with phonics. I can’t do phonics very well, either. My son is following in my footsteps. We’re working on phonics and it’s just as meaningless to him as it was to me, even though his sight-vocab is unusually large for his age. Sometimes he’ll ask me to sound out a word and, even though I know how to say the word, I can’t figure out the individual phonemes. Very frustrating.

I was a terrible student, a trial to my teachers, and so grateful to finally leave that miserable institution. I probably should have gone on to study mathematics, but after my difficulty in school, I felt like a complete idiot and just wanted to escape.

Another problem boys and the gifted have: you know those essays you have to do at the end of the standardized tests? Well, each and every person in my TAG class my senior year scored a B or lower, whereas As were given out at an usually high rate in the other classes. The reason? The graders couldn’t understand what we wrote. I kid you not. Our TAG English teacher even complained to the state board of education about it.
The topic of the essay was, “What is your favorite subject at school?” I wrote an impassioned plea for more concentration on the humanities, as the integration of multiple disciplines is essential for deeper understanding in any one subject (and so on). Most of my fellow-TAG-students wrote about similar subjects. What did the other kids, the “A” scorers, write about? You probably have guessed it: lunch, recess, and PE. I wonder if my grader even knew what the humanities are?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Paul January 15, 2010 at 08:38

I have spent my entire working life as a professional mathematician. That is how I made my living. I suppose my first observation , may be not too popular, is that mathematical ability is fairly rare both in men and women. I am not really talking about school mathematics here but mathematics as a mathematician understands it.

Since I graduated in 1972 and finished my graduate work in 1975 I would say there has been a tremendous shift in the entire subject. I usually keep my mouth shut here because complaining can sound like so much nostalgia, but I would say that the whole subject has been reduced in such a way as to be a mere fragment of what it was.

Times change and I suppose I should accept that. I can surely do nothing about it. You could characterize the change as a dumbing down but that is not really an adequate description. It is as though all art had been reduced to painting by numbers.

Now is this all part of the goal post moving that is written about above? Probably it is. It would also be surprising if some of what has happened was not due to female pressure. Even now you wont find too many female mathematicians but you will find quite a few female professors of mathematical education. So women are as influential in mathematics teaching as in other subjects.

As an aside I will have to confess that I was not very good a school mathematics and it was only later when I became exposed to the full abstraction of the subject that I really came into my own. I think if I where trying to do the same thing now I would not have succeeded nearly as well. It was only by being given high hoops to aim for that I managed to achieve at all. So I suspect that for a boy who could be good at mathematics there is every chance that he will not have an avenue open to him. Remember just because you are good at mathematics does not mean you are good at anything else.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Nemo January 15, 2010 at 08:38

Women are about 58-60% of al college students in the USA, but they are a legal “minority” and men are not. Women are using the same Title IX laws that have forced “balance” between men’s and women’s sports in college to enforce a similarly unfair “balance” in the STEM subjects.

It’s typical that women will insist that 3 < 2 when they want the privileges of a "minority" but will simultaneously insist that girls are better at math than boys.

The irony is that in engineering graduate schools, US citizens are only 40% of the students, so there is already a 3:2 ratio of foreigners to Americans in our own univerisity system for training tech experts. Enforcing a 50% quota for women will simply force engineering colleges to import qualified women from China and India to fill the slots that feminism has forced our own male citizens to leave empty.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jabberwocky from home January 15, 2010 at 08:39

Great article. Very important. If we hold back our greatest thinkers, our nation is surely doomed. Science and technology is what drives modern economies, wins wars, and propels progress.

These same bright creative problem solvers are already often enough the ones suffering most from the tedious, assembly line like structure of the education system. Haphazardly memorizing data for tests, only to shortly forget it afterwards, is an exercise in futility. Mastery of material is preached, but never required, as long as you turn in your busy-work homework on time. The education system is a spirit crushing, soul destroying institution of hate towards the elite male mind and any creative problem solvers. If you are not a good little sheeple, the education system will psychologically sheer you, label you dysfunctional, and consider you the problem. Welcome to phase one of the ultimate mind fuck, of a meta-psychological-torture program. You are miserable at school, the tedium slowly drives you to the brink of desperation, you act out, you are punished with more severe and tedious solitary confinement, all the while you are blamed for creating you own discomfort because you won’t play along, so you try to achieve by obeying the program, which is rewarded with nothing but meaningless letters representing your commitment to your slavery and possibly social isolation and/or ostracization, your mind becomes little more than a recording device, simply regurgitating information with little to no context and most often lacking any profound purpose, and no longer capable of thinking for yourself, and thats what they want, because if you thought for yourself, you’d get the hell out of there and read your own books, actually important books, well written books, books that free your mind, not reprogram it to always stay within the lines or suffer the torture of inadaquetcy and hopelessness, you are now a zombie, the perfect worker bee, the best corporate drone paper pusher possible. Congrats. Frame your diploma, I mean slave papers, with pride. You are ready to be chewed up by the meat grinder of life.

Home school. Self educate. If you have kids in school, tell them it is up to them to actually teach themselves.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 15, 2010 at 08:46

Anyway, the deeper truth behind this article is that any form of affirmative action goes against merit-based promotion. Although you guys see this as a male-female problem, and it is that, it is also part a larger one. This skewing of the hard sciences, and similar efforts, effects anyone who is truly brilliant, both male and female. It is going to harm both of my children, my son and my daughter.

One of the things I liked most about working in Germany was that there is no AA, so I could climb the corporate ladder quite quickly, despite not having a college degree. Rather ironic as I am black and female. But once I got to the upper rungs, the unions caught wind of me and started to complain that I should be demoted because I didn’t posses the proper “certification”. My boss actually had to appear before a tribunal with a portfolio of my work and statistics of my productivity and they merely granted me an exception, cut my pay, and barred me from further promotion. It’s like crabs in a barrell. People are the same everywhere.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Education not about learning January 15, 2010 at 08:46

I’ve heard education critics from conservative and liberal circles both point out that education is about brainwashing young minds to be obedient workers in top-down corporate and governmental structures.

Creative problem-solving, whether in math, the humanities, or anything else, is not encouraged because it leads to “not following orders.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Bob January 15, 2010 at 08:49

Good school programs exist, but they are difficult to find. I’ll forever be thankful to my parents for driving me across town throughout my childhood so I could go to schools with good, reputable gifted programs. Even then, they weren’t perfect, but could have been much worse.

The one thing that bothered me most, though, was that in every “advanced” or AP class, three-fourths of the students were girls whose only aptitude – with one or two exceptions – seemed to be the high school equivalent of paint-by-numbers. Two of the brightest guys I ever knew at that age scraped by on C grades, desperately trying to keep their minds from wandering… except in physics and government, where we had male teachers that really engaged them. They taught through interactive discussions, experiments, and conceptualization rather than memorization. Everyone can recite Newton’s laws, but how many teachers ask you to figure out *why* they work?

About half of those girls are now jobless single mothers. Don’t know about the other half, but I hope for society’s sake they’re doing something useful.

Fortunately, I got out of school before the SAT changes, NCLB, or any of that crap. I did see the beginnings of changes in the STEM fields, though. I didn’t know it at the time, but Engineering in particular was changing early to match the changes in the business world. As businesses hire more women and start to require more employees with that “algorithmic” approach to work, colleges start to teach that sort of skill. They will continue to follow the trends of the business world, and pre-college school will follow what the colleges do. It’s in their nature.

Trying to change, or stop changes, in the schools themselves is just treating the symptom. The business world will ultimately determine what schools do, plus it determines the shape of our economy. Look at us now – basically a service economy, held above water only by a small percentage of the workforce that keeps inventing new technology for China to mass-produce and sell to us.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 15, 2010 at 08:50

Good point about engineering. Both my husband and I went into engineering, rather than hard science, because it’s still driven by the profit-motive and is therefore largely ideology-free. However, as my example above shows, socialism and feminism are creeping into that field as well. Especially by saddling companies with fair-hiring practices.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 15, 2010 at 09:08

where we had male teachers that really engaged them. They taught through interactive discussions, experiments, and conceptualization rather than memorization.

Male teachers were the best. And they were always my favorites because I understood them better. But they weren’t allowed to spend any extra time with their students, for fear of being accused of sexual abuse. That’s a real fear and something that happened to a good friend of ours, who has since been exonerated but not until after he nearly died of serial heart attacks.

The only exception was my 10th-grade Geometry 12th-grade Calculus teachers; they were female and brilliant. But they both left in disgust after one year and were replaced with your typical dud. My geometry teacher was actually the first one to pull me aside and explain very gently that I wasn’t allowed to use methods that hadn’t been taught yet and she would have to mark me down for it in the future.

My favorite school-sucks memory is actually from 4th grade. I had complained to my father that I found Reading class mind-numbingly boring. So he bought me a copy of Romeo and Juliet to take with me to school. He said that they couldn’t possibly complain about me reading Shakespeare in Reading class. When they caught me with the book open under the desk, I was promptly issued a detention and the book was confiscated. My father was livid and nearly tore the teacher apart at the next PTA meeting. He was a total enabler, constantly supplying me with interesting books. That’s what Dads are for. :-)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Icaros2010 January 15, 2010 at 09:32

Brings to mind some articles written by La Griffe du Lion. E.g. The Math Sex Gap Revisited: A Theory of Everyone.

Steven Pinker and Amanda Spelke had a debate about this some time ago.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jabherwochie January 15, 2010 at 09:35

I’m a little concerned this socialistic/feminized education problem isn’t discussed more in the MRA movement. I know it is brought up and taken fairly seriously, but it should be one of the front lines in our war. If we don’t teach our children to think for themselves soon, a couple of generations in, and it will be too late. The feminist primary tool of control has been through the university system. The education system must be where we hold our line.

And for those who don’t know me well, I was a teacher once. For four months. It was at an extremely low socio-economic high school. I was awesome. My students loved me, and they were not just learning, but absorbing and integrating the information (although I had to trick most of them into it). I was fired by feminist vice principals, on trumped up charges of poor classroom management (I let my kids do what they wanted as long as it wasn’t disruptive and as long as they were learning. I considered my classsroom an active learning environment. I taught art.).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Icaros2010 January 15, 2010 at 09:37

Gah, Elizabeth Spelke. My gender bias is showing, apparently.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Bob January 15, 2010 at 09:37

I also had a spectacular (female) calculus teacher in high school. Best teacher I ever had – she actually inspired (not threatened) me to do my homework, on time, and correctly. Too bad the school got rid of her shortly after I graduated.

One would think the English programs would require a certain amount of independent thought. Certainly, as a teacher, I would go insane if I had to read thirty book reports about the same book, each of which said the same thing. But that’s exactly what they wanted – I suspect they skimmed the first sentence of each report, then gave a grade based partly on that and partly on how much she (invariably a she) liked the student.

My freshman year of high school, we read the Chocolate War. For those of you who have not read it, it is a perfect example of Sheeple-producing crap. Moral of the story? If you go against the establishment in even the most innocuous way, they will get their way, you will get the shit beat out of you, and you will change your mind. Imagine 1984 set in a catholic school, except instead of being a warning against tyranny, it simply presents unbeatable tyranny as a fact of life.

Apparently, we were supposed to write either that the antagonists were evil (duh) or that the protagonist was stupid (duh). I wrote that the message – that they cannot change the world, and that right or wrong, the establishment will always win – was terrible to give to children. Men have moved mountains, overthrown tyrants, and clawed their way out of the caves and onto the space shuttle. It’s one thing to get beaten down and lose hope, it’s quite another to tell children that the beatdown is inevitable. Then, just to make it seem relevant, I wrote that the story could be taken as a metaphor for Ritatlin. I got a D.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Bob January 15, 2010 at 09:46

One last point on feminized education – I volunteered every year in high school and college at a summer school for kids ages 6-12. One year, despite the fact that it is *summer freaking school*, the higher-ups decided to cut recess in half and drop P.E. God only knows why.

Before that, we had never had any serious behavior problems with boys. There were frequent problems with the girls, though – they always stood at the back of the area, gossiping, until one of them said something nasty and another started crying.

After recess and P.E. were basically gone, we had no problems with the girls. They were kept quiet and busy. But now the boys had too much energy to control, and they started acting up.

I wish I knew of some balanced way to curb both problems. Any ideas?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Education not about learning January 15, 2010 at 09:57

The English teacher I had as a senior was a male, and literally changed my life.

All the other English teachers before him were female, and graded on the basis of grammar, proper sentence structure, and regurgitation of the textbook “interpretation” of the content.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Firepower January 15, 2010 at 09:58

Education not about learning January 15, 2010 at 08:46

I’ve heard education critics from conservative and liberal circles both point out that education is about brainwashing young minds to be obedient workers in top-down corporate and governmental structures.

Unless you are a fortunate son of the Elite and go to Ivy Leagues such as Yale and Harvard.

There, they teach you how to lead others into the cannon fire.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 15, 2010 at 09:59

Sure, homeschool. When the weather’s nice (like yesterday and today) we hang out outside. When it’s crappy (like last week) we stay indoors and the kids use my mattress for a trampoline. Very effective.

For those who can’t/won’t homeschool, the solution would be to have a break time, with the children choosing whether to go outside or stay inside. Most classrooms nowadays have a teacher and an assistant. One could stay inside and conduct busy-work and the other go outside.

Socialism generally overwhelmingly benefits women, that’s why most feminists are socialists. Men make up more of the outliers, so they benefit under libertarianism where merit and effort is more highly rewarded.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Epo January 15, 2010 at 10:09

Ah, testing. I remember being picked to teach the math and verbal section of the GT improvement course (basically the Army’s version of the SAT) we ran in Iraq. The ‘teacher’s edition’ guidebook was perhaps the most algorithmically comprehensive and non-fluffy guide to every type of problem that I’d ever seen. (Woman who wrote it was Japanese, of course.) And I could still see that I would never have enough time to teach all of the homework assignments and massive word lists/definitions in the slightly under 3 months of 3-day-a week class time, with lots of soldiers who were at the time patrolling or doing other work around 9-12 hours a day, not counting days missed on extended off-FOB time.

So I basically up and told all 16 members of the class that the GT WAS an intelligence test, that there would be no way they could memorize a list of thousands of words and their antonyms/synonyms in time for the class, and that while doing homework for that section was encouraged, it was not required, as I’d use most of the usually about 1-2 hour class time to go over every word on the list with a fine-tooth comb, forcing participation from just about everyone on synonyms, antonyms, prefixes, suffixes, history of the word, and common usage. Whether or not they actually did the homework helped, but I took the approach of ‘word meanings should be recognized immediately, so I’m calling on you even if you didn’t do the homework.’ If they were wrong, I did my best to explain HOW they were wrong, how they got wrong, what they might have been aiming for, and the sources of common mistakes.

If we finished early (and we did, often) I just put on someYahtzee.

End status report: The E-7 medical platoon sergeant taught the Arithmetic reasoning section. Had a full Clinton army era list of online degrees in business management, a bunch of A’s, and a decade of ‘teaching experience’ to include previous teaching of GT improvement classes, way more free time than I had, and full control of his own teaching hours and class session lengths, and had an range of math score increases of about…-1 to 3 points.

The E-4 with only 1 single piffling biology degree and about a year of reading Steve Sailer on intelligence…had an increase of 10-20 points.

(Of course, I never did see the aggregate final score, I simply tracked down every member of the class (small FOB, one battalion) and asked for them individually, which they wholeheartedly gave. My platoon sergeant seemed to completely lose interest in the subject, though the battalion sergeant major suddenly found an interest in greeting me by name and congratulating me afterwards.)

So, basically, around 16 soldiers were now able to either simply stay in the Army (score over 100) or go into more lucrative or technical fields (over 110) based almost entirely off of improvement on one section of the GT class. That didn’t elate me so much as the guys with scores of 109s and 98s pissed me off, as they, too, could have gotten there if the guy on math detail had anything resembling a teaching philosophy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jabherwochie January 15, 2010 at 10:13

“I wish I knew of some balanced way to curb both problems. Any ideas?”

Sex segregated schools.

Once you get men teaching boys, competition will spiral into a sublime motivator and teenage graduates will be the equivalent of doctoral candidates.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Snark January 15, 2010 at 10:26

Got there before me, Jabher.

Yes, sex segregated schools.

It is obvious that boys and girls have different needs, and require different environments with different methods of teaching.

In this way, both genders will benefit.

Currently, education is tailored to getting girls to achieve the most, at the expense of boys, whose different requirements are sidelined.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 15, 2010 at 10:45

Sex segregated schools would only help if the teachers were of the same gender.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
slwerner January 15, 2010 at 10:45

Snark – “Currently, education is tailored to getting girls to achieve the most, at the expense of boysIt is obvious that boys and girls have different needs, and require different environments with different methods of teaching.” & “
Currently, education is tailored to getting girls to achieve the most, at the expense of boys”

In fact, it’s “big exciting news” to be opening up a school aimed at helping girls (only) achieve even more. Something to be celebrated. At least here in the Denver area:

Colorado’s first all-girls public school coming to Denver

We’ll see about the response to an all-boys school – if someone ever dares to try to set one up here.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Education not about learning January 15, 2010 at 10:46

Sex-segregated classrooms would even be an improvement. No need to build different schools.

Ultimately, there is a “bipartisan” power structure that wants to keep the masses dumbed-down. With education, we cannot blame any one special interest because so many have had a hand in it. And among the masses, there are just as many conservatives who deny the importance of fancy book learnin’ as there are liberals that champion collectivism over merit.

Speaking personally, I barely graduated high school and do not have a bachelor’s degree, but I’m making a nice living solely due to my creative problem-solving and understanding of people.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Globalman January 15, 2010 at 11:20

Look, women are hopeless at anything that contains math, logic, reasoning, thinking, invention, creativity and anything else that is a hallmark of ‘intelligence’. It’s their lack of grey matter. They have lots more white matter. This is why I can’t remember where I put my car keys but my ex could remember what we had for every meal we ever ate out.

Memory does not equal intelligence. If it did Google would be ‘more intelligent’ than us all. The bad guys have been manipulating the education system for decades. The rockefellers took over the american education in the 20s and started dumbing kids down from then on.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 15, 2010 at 11:38

The simplest, cheapest, and most egalitarian way of helping all children get a better education is school vouchers. Everything else is just a temporary fix.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Firepower January 15, 2010 at 11:45

Yes, school vouchers automatically turn into schools of choice, which have made so many amazing changes for society here in America.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel January 15, 2010 at 11:55

@Jabherwochie

Once you get men teaching boys, competition will spiral into a sublime motivator and teenage graduates will be the equivalent of doctoral candidates.

You’ve just described my high school education at an English public (private) school. Very effective educationally, but this created a big problem for me. Despite having some solid alpha traits, I knew nothing about girls and was basically sharkbait for a decade after high school.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Snark January 15, 2010 at 12:05

We need sex segregated schools where boys are taught that the majority of women are extremely dangerous and will stab them in the back for any kind of financial incentive – or just to be a bitch.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
LIL January 15, 2010 at 12:11

However – and this should come as no surprise to any of us who have ever taught a class requiring innovative problem solving – these data are only arrived at by a combination of cherry-picking, goalpost shifting, and misleading reporting.

Ah, yes…I remember the last time I was teaching a class requiring innovative problem solving…

Heh.

Love it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Paul January 15, 2010 at 12:20

Some above has suggested that men teaching boys is the way to make improvements. This could be so but I am not so sure. Men do not actually treat other men all that well. Certainly male teachers are not necessarily either kind or supportive of boys. I expect some of you can offer example of where they have been but that is not a universal truth.

The treatment of boys in the English educational system by their male teachers could be quite cruel and sadistic. In fact some might use the interaction as a ego trip and take a pleasure in humiliating the boys.

One of the sadnesses that MRAs might like to face up to is that men can be very cruel indeed to other men. Most firing squads where made up of men and those giving the order to ‘go over the top’ where also men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Nutz January 15, 2010 at 12:33

Mark my words, when globalization hits the US educational system women will be the hardest hurt. Women move the goal posts to accommodate their shortcomings. We know this. But the world at large hasn’t shown any indication it’s willing to meet those demands. The long term effect with still hurt both men and women in western society, but I think men more so than women have the natural proclivity to overcome the shift. When China drives the market, which it will eventually, for more hard science, and the westernized women don’t want to do “icky” jobs such as those that hold them accountable, then it’ll be men that meet the charge.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Nemo January 15, 2010 at 12:38

A few thoughts:

If we create schools just for boys, then heterosexual men who go into teaching will have a greatly diminished chance of being accused of sexual misconduct.

If we create schools just for boys, then women will do everything in their power to deny them propoer funding and staffing in favor of girls’ schools. It would be just like the Deep South before the Jim Crow laws were repealed and Brown vs. Board of Education forced integration. Men are the most oppressed minority in the US right now, so we can expect “separate and unequal” boys’ schools.

If we create schools just for boys, then liberalism will die out among men. Liberals don’t have enough kids to replenish their own population. The reason why schools and colleges shove liberalism and political correctness down the throats of the young is that this is the only way that liberalism can survive. They must convert the sons of conservatives to liberals or at least MTV-reality-show-style libertines before they become full adults, or else it’s game over for them.

In other words, women will fight tooth and nail to prevent young men from getting a true and proper education. It would wipe out feminism, and they know it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Firepower January 15, 2010 at 12:48

Nemo

Liberals don’t have enough kids to replenish their own population. The reason why schools and colleges shove liberalism and political correctness down the throats of the young is that this is the only way that liberalism can survive.

Not the only way.

First liberals breed more Democrat voter – with welfare benefits lucrative enough to prompt even the laziest ghetto queen to pop out 6 before her 19th birthday.

And, they wave Amnesty greencards at border jumpers, open up the floodgates, and *bingo*

Obama 2012

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Mr. N January 15, 2010 at 12:57

Vouchers will give governments authority to confiscate schools from religious institutions.

I would say it would start with the jihadist training tykes camps but we all know it will start with the cults of west Texas and the American west.

“If you’re receiving government money you should be accountable to government standards,” they’ll say. “Some schools aren’t teaching math, some schools aren’t teaching science.” In reality those schools won’t be teaching the Fed’s agenda.

I have heard awful things about Canadian religious schools, state funded, spouting blasphemies and curses against the church it was connected to. The parents of the students complained to no avail. “Where else were they going to go,” they were confronted with. They didn’t run the supposedly religious school, the government did.

(I don’t know if that is typical of all Canadian schools but his testimony left an impression on me.)

The feminists don’t care about exploiting the voucher system in that manner… yet. The current public school system is so much more complete in its domination of student’s lives. But that would be their method of returning a voucher system to the current communist one.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
LIL January 15, 2010 at 12:59

The problem with goal-post shifting for minority (or “minority”) groups is that it completely devalues the work/achievements of anyone who succeeds from those groups.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Firepower January 15, 2010 at 13:14

Not if they
have a great
ass

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Internetwood January 15, 2010 at 13:35

Some twit said:

But I will say that bringing political agendas to math and science will only hasten multinational companies looking to India and China.

I have no idea how they could be more aggressive than they already have been and are continuing to be.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Internetwood January 15, 2010 at 13:45

I think it’s amusing that people here think the Big Bosses want smart workers.

They only want smart workers if they can pay them the same as Julio from across the border. Think Slumlord waving around his “Big Dollar” for this “Little Project”. “Don’t spend it all in one place!”-he chortles.

In one factory I did a project in, a machine worth +100,000 dollars was idle because the mechanic… not engineer, they didn’t have one, and didn’t want to hire one except for piece work and then you had to prove yourself to them…. didn’t know what a dead-band was for the set-point of the machine he was attempting to program.

Who here knows that simplest of simple real world machine control methods?

They want smart workers, so long as they can pay them minimum wage. And if they have to lose FIVE TIMES that persons salary to “save” on labor? Well, that’s what they are going to do.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Firepower January 15, 2010 at 13:46

Simple:

Indians & Asiatics have just learned to (barely) speak engrish for customer service. They haven’t learned Spanish or Ebonics.

Yet.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
piercedhead January 15, 2010 at 13:50

boys are much more likely to solve problems by innovation or insight (the “insight approach”), while girls are much more likely to solve problems by rote memorization of established methods (the “algorithmic approach”)

Interesting how this parallels the genetic/evolutionary roles of male and female.

It is sperm that is widely variant and whose final form is determined on the fly – it is the ‘innovation gamete’. The ova are fully formed at birth and undergo no genetic transformation – they are the ‘standard-issue gamete’, having been produced by a tried-and-true biological algorithm.

Again we see the same in male and female behavior. The males take the risks – which is impossible to separate from innovation, and the females play it safe – which guarantees atrophy.

The noise made recently by so many feminists that the credit-crunch would never have happened if women dominated financial market decisions is very probably true – but if women were in charge, the finance companies would quickly degenerate and fold through lack of bold, risky innovation. I watch Norway’s experiment in forced female leadership in business with much interest – especially because Norway’s standard of living now is one of the highest in the world without women participating and making half of its crucial commercial decisions.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Internetwood January 15, 2010 at 14:00

Firepower said:

Simple:

Indians & Asiatics have just learned to (barely) speak engrish for customer service. They haven’t learned Spanish or Ebonics.

Yet.

Then I guess my study of Portuguese puts me ahead of the curve.

It’s ironic that the Big Bosses think brahmin will take orders well. Do they understand what brahmin actually means? Let me translate it for them in terms the Big Boss can understand:
Brahmin=Big Boss

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
gwallan January 15, 2010 at 14:07

Male teachers were the best. And they were always my favorites because I understood them better. But they weren’t allowed to spend any extra time with their students, for fear of being accused of sexual abuse. That’s a real fear and something that happened to a good friend of ours, who has since been exonerated but not until after he nearly died of serial heart attacks.

The real irony in this is that in a P-12 school setting a teacher who sexaully abuses a student is three times more likely to be female than male.

I’ve had the opportunity to tutor a number of teenagers in mathematics over the past decade or so. A couple of the boys turned out to be startlingly good at maths even though their poor marks had led to their parents asking me for help. Their problem was poor language skills. The texts and class materials in use today are markedly different to those I learned from in the sixties and seventies even though most of the curriculum is the same. Oh they’re very pretty and colourful and full of cute little drawings and pictures but for the kid who doesn’t read well they are a disaster. I gave the young lads concerned my old texts. They absolutely flew through all of it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 15, 2010 at 15:03

Best freaking topic EVER, in my opinion. Great comments.

Modern math texts are atrocious. Very colorful, with lots of arrows, speech bubbles, and moral lessons, but little math. Sometimes I have to read and re-read the page a few times before I even understand what they’re asking for, among all of the decorations and other mess. Both my husband and I are perplexed by them. Ridiculous. I’m going to use my old college texts when we get to higher maths. We really like Kitchen Table Math (and The Art of Problem Solving is supposed to be amazing) and the stuff from Critical Thinking Company, by the way.

Also, they are incredibly dumbed-down. The pattern seems to be to begin teaching earlier and earlier, but water down the knowledge learned by the end. They do phonics with 2 year olds, but have 18 year olds who can’t read. It would make more sense to wait until they’re 6 to start, and then hit the ground running. But doing that would also disproportionately benefit boys, who mature later. And then the kids would have to waste all of those years doing stupid things like playing outside, learning chess and checkers, carpentry, painting, etc. Why do that when you can learn the alphabet for 4 years? We have no time to waste!

And why don’t they learn logic and rhetoric anymore?

Re: vouchers
All schools in the US are already state-regulated if they want to be accredited, so vouchers wouldn’t change that. For example, my kids’ homeschooling co-op works like a formal school, but because we’ve decided to remain a co-op instead of a charter school, we may not apply for public funds, including vouchers. Anyone who sends their kid there is technically a homeschooler. Fair enough (and we like it that way).

When China drives the market, which it will eventually, for more hard science, and the westernized women don’t want to do “icky” jobs such as those that hold them accountable, then it’ll be men that meet the charge.
China is becoming more feminist and their divorce rate is skyrocketing. Forget about them; they’re not reproducing so they’re dying out and are irrelevant. India still has a chance to get somewhere.

The problem with goal-post shifting for minority (or “minority”) groups is that it completely devalues the work/achievements of anyone who succeeds from those groups.

Bingo. This has always grated on me. I’ve always been in the success group, but everybody who saw me there would assume: black and female = quota filler. It didn’t matter how intelligent or talented I was, they assumed that I had not made it on my own merit.

The noise made recently by so many feminists that the credit-crunch would never have happened if women dominated financial market decisions is very probably true

No, it’s not. Feminists say a lot of crap that sounds good, but is a bold-faced lie. The credit crunch is a direct result of an over-investment in mortgage-backed securities. What lead to that investment? The federal government underwriting loans to unsuitable house buyers. Who pushed that? Socialists and feminists (the poor and unmarried women being the principle buyers). Investing in the mortgage-backed securities wasn’t actually a very risky enterprise as everyone knew the federal government would not allow Fannie and Freddie to fail and would bail out any institution large enough to rock the economy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
InternetWood January 15, 2010 at 15:35

Black & German

They do phonics with 2 year olds, but have 18 year olds who can’t read.

The point with the two year olds is to get public educations hooks into the children as early as possible. The “Education” part is simply an excuse.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
David January 15, 2010 at 16:12

As affirmative action moves into the sciences and mathematics in America, overseas people like myself will start assuming that any prominent woman in these fields in the United States got her job through affirmative action, and is second rate.

I already do this for most fields. I am sure I am not alone.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Bob Smith January 15, 2010 at 16:56

It would make more sense to wait until they’re 6 to start, and then hit the ground running. But doing that would also disproportionately benefit boys, who mature later.

As I recall, this is so even for something as simple as handwriting. At the age at which we start teaching it, boys don’t have good enough fine motor control to do well at it. By the time they have the fine motor skills to write well the relevant “muscle memory” has been trained to write poorly. I think that’s why most men have atrocious handwriting as adults.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Bob Smith January 15, 2010 at 17:03

Modern math texts lack abstraction, probably because the “education professionals” who write them can’t handle it and assume students can’t either. They were the dimwits in my math classes who, when presented with things like “for each a,b that are elements of set X”, always asked “What is a? What does it mean?”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
hankmoody January 15, 2010 at 17:14

@gwallan
I have seen many of my classmates suffer the same fate.Bad at english(in India the effect is exacerbated) yet they really came into their own with maths, especially those with a little help from the teacher.And they bested girls who were consistently ahead otherwise! More gifted? Maybe. More interested in maths than other subjects? Certainly.
Most of them loved the challenges of understanding maths and physics and found the literature classes reading about family troubles,(family planning might become a course in India) extremely boring.
They did like Chekov’s endings though. :)

An article presenting the differences in motivation of sexes towards academics(imo the biggest cause for difference )
What the media missed in the AAUW’s report on gender equity.

This article spoke a great deal about same-sex schools-
Teaching Boys and Girls Separately

But as usual the writer couldn’t let go of her prejudices and had to be corrected on a number of points.
Leonard Sax

Other good links-
Why boys fail
Why gender matters

@Black&German

I hope we do.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
piercedhead January 15, 2010 at 17:35

“The noise made recently by so many feminists that the credit-crunch would never have happened if women dominated financial market decisions is very probably true…
-piercedhead

“No, it’s not. Feminists say a lot of crap that sounds good, but is a bold-faced lie.”
-Black&German

You’re quoting only half of what I said. The second half makes the first half true by implying that there would have been no banking system to start with, had women been in charge.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 15, 2010 at 17:58

Bob, that made me laugh. Thanks.

Hankmoody, so do I.

Piercedhead,
I read the second half, but I’m saying it’s a double lie. They claim that they’d have prevented the situation, but they helped cause the situation.

The problem with feminists and socialists (two groups that strongly overlap) is that they can’t understand basic economic concepts like incentive, demand, and moral hazard. Even when you try to use logic to dissuade them or change their minds, you just receive a big “Uh….” in response. “Too much logic… too many numbers… will self-destruct…”

This is something that I find absolutely soul-crushing: arguing logically with people who don’t understand logic. Even when I make a good point, they are incapable of recognizing it. It’s about as productive as talking to a wall. At least if you’re going to engage me in a debate, use logic to make your points. Don’t just say “What about the children?” or some other such nonsense.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Kathy Farrelly January 15, 2010 at 18:02

Interesting article.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/life/boys+aren+same/2157168/story.html

“All boys are’nt the same.”
“Lumping boys together for gender-based education ignores the differences among boys, and can reinforce potentially harmful stereotypes”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
hankmoody January 15, 2010 at 18:46

“There is no evidence that simply putting more male teachers in schools, or separating boys from girls, actually makes a difference. The research shows that what makes a difference is good teaching, and the boys I have spoken to have confirmed this.”

Where’s the research??And the boys have confirmed this!!
And even if it were true, then why is there so much noise for more female role models in fields where women are a minority and why does a research suddenly spring up that says they do?

The Leonard Sax’s link in my earlier post gave evidence that it does on a school level.
Here’s some more, with numbers-
single-sex education done correctly

boys in coed classes: 37% scored proficient

girls in coed classes: 59% scored proficient

girls in single-sex classes: 75% scored proficient

boys in single-sex classes: 86% scored proficient.

Remember, these students were all learning the same curriculum in the same school. And, this school “mainstreams” students who are learning-disabled, or who have ADHD etc. Many of those boys who scored proficient in the all-boys classes had previously been labeled “ADHD” or “ESE” in coed classes.

“Lumping boys together for gender-based education ignores the differences among boys, and can reinforce potentially harmful stereotypes”

IMO same-sex education is better for both sexes to diversify their interests since they don’t have to be apprehensive or be ridiculed for entering a field that is dominated by the other sex.
And what are these potentially harmful stereotypes that can’t be present in a coed system?

The researchers conducted extensive interviews with individual students, and thus were able to distinguish among students rather than lumping all the boys into one group and all the girls into another. The researchers were particularly interested in gender-atypical boys: boys who don’t care for sports, for example. How do these pupils fare in the all-boys classroom? Here’s another excerpt: “Interviews with [these] ‘non-macho’ boys suggest that these boys did not feel exposed in single-sex classes. . . .Such boys told us – without exception – that they felt at ease and comfortable, that they did not experience bullying or aggressive behaviour from other boys, and that they were not intimidated by the atmosphere in all-boys’ classes.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi January 16, 2010 at 01:35

”””””””Nemo,
If we create schools just for boys, then women will do everything in their power to deny them propoer funding and staffing in favor of girls’ schools. It would be just like the Deep South before the Jim Crow laws were repealed and Brown vs. Board of Education forced integration. Men are the most oppressed minority in the US right now, so we can expect “separate and unequal” boys’ schools.”””””

Catholic school kind of proves you don’t need much money to educate well. When they can pay 18k a year and get teachers they must want to be there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
msexceptiontotherule January 16, 2010 at 02:22

Religious private schools generally charge a lot of money for tuition, and they do pay their teachers less, which I’d assume is because many of them are not credentialed because they don’t have that requirement like public schools do.

“I wish I’d gone to a private catholic school – they have penguins teaching.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Novaseeker January 16, 2010 at 02:24

I attended an all-boys catholic HS and it was fantastic. None of the bullshit that comes along with trying to sculpt classes for both sexes. Men and women have different strengths and tailoring is made capable through sex segregation in education. The arguments against this, as far as I have seen in the media, are not based on actual results, but rather on social engineering goals relating to sex relations. So, the current system prioritizes those (dubious as they are, dominated by feminist ideology for certain) over actual education.

Yes, some of our teachers were harsh. But we were harsh back, at times. The atmosphere of openness and candor was very appropriate for boys of my age, rather than the eggshell-treading atmosphere that dominates in unisex secondary schools.

It’s a very important issue for boys, which is the main reason why feminist groups like NOW and AAUW are dead-set against *any* changes away from the status quo to address the issues of boys, especially white boys (AAUW almost grudgingly admits that attention should be paid to non-white boys, because most of the AAUW people are upper middle class white women, who feel solidarity with blacks, but viscerally hate any white males who are not feminists).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi January 16, 2010 at 03:15

””””msexceptiontotherule January 16, 2010 at 02:22
Religious private schools generally charge a lot of money for tuition, and they do pay their teachers less, which I’d assume is because many of them are not credentialed because they don’t have that requirement like public schools do.

“I wish I’d gone to a private catholic school – they have penguins teaching.”
”””””

Yea usually college is quit high My great aunt nun type even founded one. My highschool was 1500 a year no nuns though. I did have some in younger years. Far as credentials I think they have to have those as well. Can’t just volunteer he he he

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi January 16, 2010 at 03:34

”””’ Novaseeker January 16, 2010 at 02:24
I attended an all-boys catholic HS and it was fantastic. None of the bullshit that comes along with trying to sculpt classes for both sexes. Men and women have different strengths and tailoring is made capable through sex segregation in education. The arguments against this, as far as I have seen in the media, are not based on actual results, but rather on social engineering goals relating to sex relations. So, the current system prioritizes those (dubious as they are, dominated by feminist ideology for certain) over actual education.
”””””””

Well my dad did to. He went to seminary like his father and his father before him. Well not the last part. But yea I guess good experience plus he got to blow up stumps with dynamite. Then they were like no marriage no kids and he was like wait a second.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Kathy Farrelly January 16, 2010 at 05:10

“I attended an all-boys catholic HS and it was fantastic. None of the bullshit that comes along with trying to sculpt classes for both sexes. Men and women have different strengths and tailoring is made capable through sex segregation in education”

I attended an all girls Catholic high school, for my first two years of high school, Nova. In my third year of high school we amalgamated with the Catholic boys high school.
I think on the whole I enjoyed my latter years of high school much more. There was always this air of mystique about the boys at the Catholic college down the road.. When the amalgamation occured it was much more natural.. We related to one another more easily.

A far as tailoring subjects went. There was more opportunity for both sexes. For instance woodwork was not a subject offered at the girls only school. However a few girls chose woodwork when the schools went co-ed. A few boys opted for home economics and cooking,not available to them when
it was a boys only school.

On the whole there were more choices for the boys and the girls, I think.

I look back with fond memeories of those years.

I did not think that there was an atmosphere of “eggshell treading” at my school. Perhaps I was just fortunate.. We had some great teachers.. My biology teacher was a brilliant and likeable bloke for instance.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
David Brandt January 16, 2010 at 08:33

My elementary school teachers were the same ones who taught my mom–they were very good. My sixth grade teacher was a man–any troublemakers were halted very effectively within the first week, and although it was a public school, it went very well. This was, of course, W Milwaukee during the 50′s and early 60′s. I know a guy who just graduated (another aspergers, in case you were interested Jabher) with a very high IQ who intentionally ‘dumbed himself down’ to survive in that environment–the teachers, etc. were extremely hostile toward him, and my observation is that he didn’t fit what they wanted–an equally brilliant female. I wonder where we would be if men like Tesla or Einstein were ‘educated’ under these conditions?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jabberwocky from home January 16, 2010 at 09:41

@Kathy Farrelly-

I’m sure you enjoyed having the opposite sex around during your educational exprerience. Women are in control of the sexual and social dynamics of of large groups, especially at that age. Were as you found freedom and new opportunities in such an environment, many young men who are intelligent in male systemizing, yet lacking in social skills, find it confusing, distracting, and uncomfortable. You also didn’t go to school in the over sexualized atmosphere that existed for me in the 90′s, but especially today with sexting, internet networking, and a the sexual free for all of our modern slut culture. Young men are have their inner calm daily assaulted by female sexuality, and in the game of hypergamy, something exacerbated in the high school and college experience, most men are losers who suffer severe psychological doubts and unmet urges. I would go so far as to say young men are continuously bombarded with sexual displays and suggestive behavior to the point that they are psychologically “raped” by our feminist slut culture of female moral superiority and hedonism. What say you?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Firepower January 16, 2010 at 13:02

Internetwood January 15, 2010 at 14:00

Firepower

Then I guess my study of Portuguese puts me ahead of the curve.

It’d appear so,
but, you can’t check the “Hispanic” Affirmative Action preferential hiring box

on a job app or get Government race goodies if you’re Portuguese.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 16, 2010 at 14:53

Religious private schools generally charge a lot of money for tuition

No they don’t. Private schools are actually pretty cheap to run, in comparison to public schools. And the religious ones often subsidize the tuition.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Kathy Farrelly January 16, 2010 at 15:19

Jabberwocky from home, can’t argue with what you say mate.
As you pointed out I did not go to school in the “oversexualized atmosphere ” of the nineties.

Also, being somewhat of a late bloomer I was quite shy around the boys back then..

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Epoxytocin No. 87 January 16, 2010 at 16:46

@ Firepower

It’d appear so,
but, you can’t check the “Hispanic” Affirmative Action preferential hiring box

on a job app or get Government race goodies if you’re Portuguese.

How much research will entities conduct to determine whether the checking of the “Hispanic” box is legitimate?

I know several people who have claimed those goodies by “finding” a “long-lost” Cuban/Colombian/etc. great-grandparent, and were subsequently admitted to various schools. (They were borderline cases, so the box-checking probably helped, although, of course, no one really knows to what degree or if at all.)

It’s also a good idea for part-Indians (dot, not feather) to check all the “American Indian” boxes, since there is always plausible deniability, i.e., not knowing that “American Indian” and “Indian-American” are different.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 16, 2010 at 19:10

Working those quotas, eh Epoxytocin? My children are listed as “black” everywhere, and people always bring me the forms for correction after they get a good look at them. But I stand my ground. After all, the One Drop Rule still sort of applies, doesn’t it?

Affirmative action is stupid. But as long as it’s around…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Scattered January 17, 2010 at 02:40

I think the English course is designed to screen certain ‘unfavorable’ people (mostly men) from getting into the tertiary level.

Looking back its no wonder I did so bad, throughout primary and the early years of secondary school we never learned any English theory, to this day I don’t think I would be able to explain the fundamental’s of grammar and the classification of various types of words never mind all the more advanced concepts of language.

At year 10 (age 15) we were all of sudden required to write essays, we were given no informal training in logic and were not taught what essays actually were and how to construct a reasonable and coherent argument. All we had was the teacher’s example, if you followed her example you would pass, either you got it or you didn’t. After that it was assumed you could write and if you didn’t meet the standard you clearly weren’t academic material.

Where I lived a scaled 50% pass in English was a prerequisite for any university entrance.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
jz January 17, 2010 at 06:10

I haven’t read comments above.

Let’s consider the NCLB methodology. *

Let’s examine the methodology. NCLB exams are aimed at low-to-average achievers. The high-end achievers -both male and female–are loathe to take these exams because they are insulting and time-wasting. Listen to high-end high school performers grumble about these.
Now calculate average or median scores. None of this gives any information on the high end achievers.
Conclusion: when forced to take mind-numbingly boring exams, focused on their low-performing peers, the high-end students will show no gender differences at the average.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Epoxytocin No. 87 January 17, 2010 at 07:57

Affirmative action is stupid. But as long as it’s around…

There’s nothing unethical about cheating a system that is inherently unfair.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 17, 2010 at 11:41

Yeah, it’s like taxes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Firepower January 17, 2010 at 14:29

Epoxytocin No. 87 January 16, 2010 at 16:46

@ Firepower

It’d appear so,
but, you can’t check the “Hispanic” Affirmative Action preferential hiring box

on a job app or get Government race goodies if you’re Portuguese.

How much research will entities conduct to determine whether the checking of the “Hispanic” box is legitimate?

I know several people who have claimed those goodies by “finding” a “long-lost” Cuban/Colombian/etc. great-grandparent, and were subsequently admitted to various schools. (They were borderline cases, so the box-checking probably helped, although, of course, no one really knows to what degree or if at all.)

It’s also a good idea for part-Indians (dot, not feather) to check all the “American Indian” boxes, since there is always plausible deniability, i.e., not knowing that “American Indian” and “Indian-American” are different.

I know the racial checkbox is lawyered-up to explicitly state “Native American” – thus taking away options for clever rulebreakers. Plausible deniability no longer is enough to pass the checkpoint – documented proof is required.

The biggest jackpot is for Native Americans, due to their small population: Free tuition to state universities in relation to the percentage of Native American ancestry one claims. If one is 30%, then one gets 30% free tuition. If one is 100% – a totally free ride, etc.

Rigorous checks by government beancounters and clerks are in place and scrupulously employed. Government employees are increasingly composed of Affirmative Action hires who benefited themselves and subsequently value this cutting ahead in line and vigorously protect this advantage. Likewise, after 40 years of Affirmative Action, their supervisors and upper management are birds of a feather, having been given preferential hiring back in 1978.

If a blue-eyed applicant claims the goodies, a suspicious eye is cast by the lifetime appointee government clerk. Because those in control of dispensing the benefits are on the same team, not even a whisper of Reverse Racism is hinted at in the office when the applicant is “outed” to higher ups as unemployable strictly because of race. Phenotypes are scrutinized. Soon, maybe they’ll take a page from the Reich and employ calipers and nose-measuring charts to the suspect. It’s profiling of a different sort, for a different reason.

With certainty, I state that claiming that most valuable checkbox of Native American ancestry is guarded with heightened security because of it’s magic power.

Birth certificates of ancestors, roll calls of those in teepees on 1870′s reservations and even withered, wrinkly brown documents of signatures on Wild West treaties are suspiciously requested to thwart any uppity white boy daring to claim a cash prize.

It’s a 1930′s Nazi “Racial Purity Law” applied in reverse, where one must prove the purity of one’s blood by percentage in order to be counted amongst the Sacred Class reaping undeserved benefits.

The cynical record of American race-based preferential sweepstakes has done more for amateur genealogists than any other schooling; the concocted goodie reward industry promotes too good of an incentive.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi January 17, 2010 at 14:45

@firepower

I plan on putting black on my next resume. I have now spent enough time on the inside where I can be like you wouldn’t know what it is like growing up in the hood where the real black people live. They will be unable to deny my black qualifications. Although there will be a certain amount of double take at my white features.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi January 17, 2010 at 14:49

I also plan a dual edge strategy of enjoying the benefits of being muslim as well.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
E. Steven Berkimer January 17, 2010 at 16:56

@Firepower,

I’m actually about 20% Native American, but to look at me, I’m white as a ghost. I’ve been called worse than a lier, until I back it up. You’re correct, in that you better have some pretty good proof.

Of course, lets not even get into how the full blooded treat the impures (been called that many times when I would go to the reservation).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 18, 2010 at 19:29

Gunslinger,

Anyone can claim black. You don’t even have to provide evidence because you can just say that your ancestors are undocumented. They’re slaves, after all. And technically, you are black… if you go back far enough. LOL.

All I have to do is stand there and look really certain that I am actually black and they believe it. I am black technically, but you can’t tell, so the fact that they believe it, shows how stupid the whole system is. Sometimes they get a strange look on their face like, “Is she gaming the system?” but they have to go along with it. Just make some random complaint about “the man” keeping you down, if they look suspicious. That usually does the trick.

LOL. Okay, now the other black people are going to take away my Africa Card.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
msexceptiontotherule January 19, 2010 at 06:04

Ok, I’ll amend my earlier statement:

Not all private schools allow teachers who lack state-certified credentials to teach in their classrooms.

Not all private schools (including religious ones) have expensive tuition costs.

The ones that a few of my friends taught at do, and the ones I went to did. (answers in order above)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
J. Durden January 24, 2010 at 04:06

I thought I had commented on this post already…whoops.

This was great. I linked it to several of my buddies and they enjoyed it as well. Looking forward to your future contributions!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 4 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: