Sigh. GIGO, you’re really wasting my time. I hope that’s not your intent.
I’ve already seen that paper, and even quoted from it at least once:
But that is only counting state and local spending! When you factor in the large amount of federal money schools get, particularly for Title 1 and SpEd, the disparity will be higher—although no source I have yet seen quantifies how much.
Just give it up already, sheesh. :rolleyes:
It’s called special education, or SpEd for short. Do you really want teenagers with intellectual disabilities to sit in little grade school chairs year after year? Not only would that be socially awkward and humiliating, possibly dangerous, and certainly disruptive of those classrooms, it is not the best way to teach those kids. Kids with intellectual disabilities do best when getting extra help from specially trained SpEd teachers and paras (teaching a teenager with ID how to read a 5th grade level book requires different pedagogical techniques than teaching a grade schooler the same material), but also spending time around their peers.
Oh, it was “official”? And you took video? That’s totally normal and not weird in any way. I was considering the possibility that such a “score report” could be faked, but it’s “official”? I’m convinced! Amazing how that magic word “official” is so powerful!
Nope, that makes it worse.
Again you **willfully **ignored that point it was also made by Shore to claim that intra-district spending inequality is limited (something that we are not ignoring) **while outside of it ** minority students are being underfunded on the whole. (The point me and many others are making).
How is it that you keep missing the “state and local” caveat, GIGO? I’m getting very tired of holding your hand.
(1) I don’t set out to be “totally normal and not weird in any way”. Not a goal of mine, and never has been. Sounds awful, in fact.
(2) Anyone who took the ACT relatively recently, or has a child who did, or works in a high school or college where they are sent, will know what the official report looks like. If you think I have the ability to doctor a video, in which the report is moving around slightly, and make it look legit, you are giving me credit for a level of technical wizardry I cannot claim to possess.
You’re obviously double plus genius, so I’m sure doctoring a video isn’t beyond you. Or if it were, the far easier task of doctoring paperwork could be well within your grasp.
Or are you too stupid to figure out a way to forge a test score?
The issue here is that the point by Shore was not the only one.
While intra-district spending inequality is limited that is something that we are not ignoring)
The point that stands, even after all his attempts at obfuscation, is that minority students "from low-income families receive far less funding than those serving White and more affluent students.
And despite widespread attention to inequitable school funding formulas — and courts that have declared them unlawful for shortchanging school districts serving large percentages of low-income students — too many states continue this unfair practice."
What is clear is that the Slacker wants to pretend that what he cited was not modified already by what the researcher **already **reported, and so the slacker’s overall idea that “So more money is spent on them” was only telling us a half truth. By omitting information and telling half-truths he can claim that he is not “lying”, but it is still a deception.
GIGO, so help me…okay, this is the last time I’m going to try to get this through your head: this paper only looks at state and local spending! This is the point you seem to be utterly blind to, and perhaps you don’t realize what a large share of school funding comes from the feds.
And it isn’t ignored also, you do seem to be a dunce about understanding the word “expand”. Federal funds are not added in studies like one cited because “those dollars are intended — and targeted — to provide supplemental services to traditionally underserved groups.” The reality is that even with the fed money the differences are big enough (and they are not always related to education, but to services) to tell us that you do press for the deceptive incomplete item as a discussion point.
But of course you have no evidence for this “reality” you assert. :dubious:
You really are fucking stupid.
For everyone who doesn’t care enough to read through SlackerInc’s stupid posts to understand what he’s blathering on about, here’s a simple math example:
There’s a school with 99 white students and 1 black student, and it receives $10,000 in funding, which is equally distributed across the students.
There’s a second school with 1 white student and 99 black students, and it receives $100 in funding, which is equally distributed across the students.
Now obviously, black students receive less funding on the whole; a total of $199 in funding for 100 black students
And, equally obviously, white students receive more funding on average: a total of $9,901 for 100 students.
Now a person of normal intelligence would look at the above fact pattern and think to themselves “boy, black students sure get less funding!”
But SlackerInc is not a person of normal intelligence, no matter what his mommy told him when he was growing up, so when he looks at the above facts he thinks to himself “if you look at only the mostly black school, both white and black students receive $1 of funding, which is totally fair. And then if you look at only the mostly white school, both white students and black student receive $100 of funding, so that’s fair.”
To summarize, SlackerInc is fucking stupid.
I proved it mathematically in an earlier post.
You’re too stupid to understand mathematics, so to you it’s as though no proof exists, I guess.
It’s probably a good idea for you to tell people you’re smart, otherwise they would never know.
It was a truly, truly great post. Probably your best. …I mean, if I haaad to find one flaw in it–and this is only if you were twisting my arm–I think the one flaw might be the way in which, in a spectacular display of incompetence and ineptitude you disproved your own claim and then didn’t realize it. But that’s just picking nits.
Reality in this thread showed that the Slacker does press for deception, IOWs half truths to make a point and to pretend to make sense.
I’ve never been a fan of the “not even wrong” framing. But there’s “wrong” that makes an argument that can be rebutted; then there’s “wrong” that’s just a flurry of insults and wild, unsupported claims. Not much I can do with that. So, go to town. If I see someone make an actual argument that marshals evidence, logic, that sort of thing, I will respond.
Will you respond with a quote that you didn’t really understand that actually proves you wrong?
I want this to be the bottom post in this thread, because I think I really captured **SlackerInc’s **ignorance, and I don’t want it to get lost:
I do want to correct a couple things that someone reading only the past couple pages might not have caught:
(1) I’ve consistently said that I would prefer our education system be like France’s, unified on a federal level—which would make disparities between districts a nonissue. That is nowhere near politically feasible, however.
(2) I also consistently said that I want black schoolkids to get even more funding than they do now. So many of them have a lot of intellectual deficits, and it takes intensive effort to get them closer to grade level. The average white kid will be fine with less funding.
I presume you recognize the fact that, across the country (not per district), black kids get considerably less funding on a per capita basis than white kids, right? Could that fact be at least partially responsible for differences in achievement levels?