Kansas's ravaged economy a cautionary tale as Trump plans huge tax cuts for rich - Polidicks

Popping back in on the SAT conversation. For the most part the Uni's and Colleges in the state care more about ACT in general and therefore the grand majority of the state sticks with that, and considering the in-state secondary education subsidies for staying in Kansas are so great why take the SAT if you're going to be staying at a college who doesn't give a shit. It's sad to see this sort of shit happen all around the state too because I've been damn near everywhere in the US but Kansas still feels like the perfect Family state, especially with the ridiculously low CoL [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Biotoxsin;52967126]The improvements to Kellogg aren't due to be finished until we least 2021, I'd hardly call them quick. I suppose I don't have much of a frame of reference though aside from the previous improvements there. This is a difficult state to live in. It's easy to overlook how rough life in the country actually is for a lot of Wichitans/outsiders.[/QUOTE] I realize it's supposed to take quite a while to finish, but as far as minor road repairs It's been relatively "quick." I don't mean they're kicking ass by any means but on the NW side of town they've made considerable progress especially after they finished over on 235.

[QUOTE=Anderan;52968037]You read those sources so hard you somehow missed their 4% SAT participation and gave their higher education ranking as their public education ranking. All of their educational rankings are average at best (or in some cases even below average) and, as the article in the OP states, the Kansas supreme court found their education spending to be so low it's unconstitutional. You should be smart enough to know budget issues are something that hold long term consequences, not immediate explosions, especially if they're just now barely getting by. But if you want numbers the only ones really posted are from 2015 where their employee spending and spending per student are woefully low. [URL]http://www.governing.com/gov-data/education-data/state-education-spending-per-pupil-data.html[/URL][/QUOTE] Why did you pick out one thing and go crazy on it? The ACT, which is accepted at most universities as well, had a 73% participation rate, and above average scores in every subject. If you note, I also cited the NAEP assessments, which are done federally across the entire country. "Average" results are not typical of a failing or collapsing system. Spending, on it's own, is not a problem. It is only a problem in as much as it has real negative results. There may be correlations between spending and results, but there are also places that use less funds more effectively than places with lots of funds. That's why we have objective measures like the NAEP assessment and testing scores. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] You can totally ignore the SAT point and it has zero effect on my overall presentation. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] Just for my own interest, I took the state spending per pupil ([url]http://www.nea.org/home/66703.htm[/url]) and compared it to the average NAEP reading scores ([url]https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/report.aspx[/url]). While the data has a very slight upward general correlation, it's extremely erratic and not at all clear. [img]https://i.imgur.com/5W7ZNZi.png[/img] [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] Take a look at Utah. They are the second left-most data point. They spent $8,111 per student in 2015 compared to Vermont, the rightmost data point, who spent $30,739 per student. So Vermont spent almost 4x as much money... and only have a 4 point lead in assessment score. It's also interesting to note that Utah is raising their score faster over time than Vermont. So they may very well pass them in the next 5, or so, years.

Sgman, are you seriously arguing that lower public education funding has no effect on education?

[QUOTE=Amber902;52969682]Sgman, are you seriously arguing that lower public education funding has no effect on education?[/QUOTE] I'm looking at numbers and seeing that it doesn't have nearly as direct an effect as people seem to think.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52969684]I'm looking at numbers and seeing that it doesn't have nearly direct an effect as people seem to think.[/QUOTE] Are you looking at social factors too? Id be willing to bet that mormon parents tend to push their kids harder in regards to education, which would likely heavily skew your results Its like how schools with significant amounts of asian students tend to have better test scores

[QUOTE=Amber902;52969700]Are you looking at social factors too? Id be willing to bet that mormon parents tend to push their kids harder in regards to education, which would likely heavily skew your results Its like how schools with significant amounts of asian students tend to have better test scores[/QUOTE] Is Kentucky known for it's parents pushing for education ($12,942/student, 228 score)? How about Indiana ($8,543/student, 227 score)? Those are both examples of spending way less and getting great results. People ought to be doing studies on these states. It's amazing that they can beat out states that spend 2, 3, and close to 4 times as much money.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52969724]Is Kentucky known for it's parents pushing for education ($12,942/student, 228 score)? How about Indiana ($8,543/student, 227 score)? Those are both examples of spending way less and getting great results.[/QUOTE] I mean you're still lagging behind other countries in quite a few fields so, great results? I don't know about that.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52969729]I mean you're still lagging behind other countries in quite a few fields so, great results? I don't know about that.[/QUOTE] "Great" is a relative term, and I'm obviously using it in reference to other states in the US.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52969734]"Great" is a relative term, and I'm obviously using it in reference to other states in the US.[/QUOTE] I think you should look at other numbers than how much money is spent to get a certain score on average. The states vary pretty massively between each other, in many many different ways. Boiling down the education numbers to just "How efficient can we get this to be" ignores the context of the situations and scenarios that are causing these issues in the first place. Why does Kentucky have more success with their system then some other states? What are the reasons for that? I don't think it's as simple as just being more efficient. There's something else going on.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52969758]Why does Kentucky have more success with their system then some other states? What are the reasons for that? I don't think it's as simple as just being more efficient. There's something else going on.[/QUOTE] I would absolutely love to have that sort of data, and I have no clue why more people aren't focusing their studies on it. With that said, I simply don't have the data or skill necessary to do that sort of analysis myself. All I'm doing with these numbers is trying to look at the common theme that more money = better performance, all the time, no matter what.

It's funny you mention Indiana considering my schooling career was spent with schools cutting funding from extracurricular programs, low quality lunches, and them struggling to find and keep qualified staff. Even now the university I work at struggles to pay its employees a decent wage and hire and keep non-adjunct teachers. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] But I guess all that is fine as long as they can narrowly meet the national average that is itself below average.

[QUOTE=Anderan;52970279]It's funny you mention Indiana considering my schooling career was spent with schools cutting funding from extracurricular programs, low quality lunches, and them struggling to find and keep qualified staff. Even now the university I work at struggles to pay its employees a decent wage and hire and keep non-adjunct teachers. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] But I guess all that is fine as long as they can narrowly meet the national average that is itself below average.[/QUOTE] They achieved the 9th best score in the country. That's a little different than "narrowly meeting" it. They also had pretty decent growth over the past 6 years (the extent of the data I have atm). The average state has grown 0.66 points every two years, from 2009 to 2015 (the data I have available). Indiana has surpassed that with an average growth of 1.54 points every two years. That's the second highest growth rate among all states in the top 10, while also have the lowest per student funding in the top 10. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] If everything you say is true, then why are they doing so well? Why are they getting relatively good results and seeing strong growth?

[QUOTE=sgman91;52970302]They achieved the 9th best score in the country. That's a little different than "narrowly meeting" it. They also had pretty decent growth over the past 6 years (the extent of the data I have atm). The average state has grown 0.66 points every two years, from 2009 to 2015 (the data I have available). Indiana has surpassed that with an average growth of 1.54 points every two years. That's the second highest growth rate among all states in the top 10, while also have the lowest per student funding in the top 10. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] If everything you say is true, then why are they doing so well? Why are they getting relatively good results and seeing strong growth?[/QUOTE] Who knows but I wouldn't put it past statistical fudging of the numbers down the line. I really fail to see how you can look at a lowering quality of standards that surrounds education, food, healthcare, exercise and computer equipment and say "well they're doing fine, don't spend money on stuff is the lesson I guess". The anecdotal stories I've heard from friends I have who used to live in all sorts of states from the US makes me wonder if educating the people is even the goal.

You do realize the score you keep referring to is only mathematics right? It's much more average in the other categories and the average growth is skewed by mathematics. As the the why, probably a hard focus on pushing math in standardized testing and a low cost of living state so low amounts go further. You still haven't addressed the other points I made, or do you honestly think that a school's only purpose is to meet standardized test scores.

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52970415]The goal is to get scores so that the school gets funding and people keep their jobs. If children happen to learn on the way there, that's just a bonus.[/QUOTE] My brothers a school teacher. The shit he's told me about what a couple of bad apples will try and do up here gives me no surprise that it could be considerably worse in a system with less accountability and less potential for accountability due to a luck of funds to enforce it.

[QUOTE=Anderan;52970403]You do realize the score you keep referring to is only mathematics right? It's much more average in the other categories and the average growth is skewed by mathematics. As the the why, probably a hard focus on pushing math in standardized testing and a low cost of living state so low amounts go further. You still haven't addressed the other points I made, or do you honestly think that a school's only purpose is to meet standardized test scores.[/QUOTE] The score I'm citing is for reading, not mathematics, a much more basic and fundamental skill. I think the goal is to teach children successfully, and that there must be objective measures by which to evaluate them. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52970415]The goal is to get scores so that the school gets funding and people keep their jobs. If children happen to learn on the way there, that's just a bonus.[/QUOTE] Having standardized tests isn't a problem. If there is a problem, then it's that the tests aren't representative of the information that a student needs to know. Doing well on a truly representative test and learning the information that you ought to know would be essentially equivalent.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52970444]The score I'm citing is for reading, not mathematics, a much more basic and fundamental skill. I think the goal is to teach children successfully, and that there must be objective measures by which to evaluate them. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] Having standardized tests isn't a problem. If there is a problem, then it's that the tests aren't representative of the information that a student needs to know. Doing well on a truly representative test and learning the information that you ought to know would be essentially equivalent.[/QUOTE] Well there's a few issues reported with the standards being pushed in American Education, that isn't happening in other nations that are your "equal" so yes, there ARE issues with standardization in your country.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52970444]The score I'm citing is for reading, not mathematics, a much more basic and fundamental skill. I think the goal is to teach children successfully, and that there must be objective measures by which to evaluate them. [/QUOTE] You cited Indiana ranking 9th, which they did not do in reading, unless mobile is mixing the datatables up. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] The entire point of education is to give people skills to succeed in adulthood, not just encourage them to memorize topics for an upcoming test.

Indiana is 15th in reading scores Sgman. [url]https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/indiana[/url] [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] and these are the numbers the state uses to sell themselves on and make themselves look attractive. If they were actually #9, wouldn't they blast that loud and proud?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52970588]Indiana is 15th in reading scores Sgman. [URL]https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/indiana[/URL] [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] and these are the numbers the state uses to sell themselves on and make themselves look attractive. If they were actually #9, wouldn't they blast that loud and proud?[/QUOTE] My data is the 4th grade NAEP scores while yours is 8th grade NAEP scores. I figured that 4th graders would show a larger effect from the cuts as they have less residual from before the cuts were made. From the NCES website, Indiana is most definitely ranked 9th for 4th grade reading. [editline]12th December 2017[/editline] As a side note, they are ranked 4th when it comes to 4th grade math scores.

You kinda get what your vote for, if you vote GOP, you get GOP I know, the two party system stupid as hell and the cycle of the two parties taking turns governing is a statistical inevitability at this point and the divide that poisons the U.S. will only worsen going forward. It is gonna be a lot worse before it gets any better unless the Democrats get their heads out of their asses about gun control and other issues and focus on limiting and fixing what can be fixed in the next legislature period about the political system regarding voting, governing and legislating and corporate influence. Further problematic is the fact that major reform would take a constitutional amendment to fix the first-past-the-post issue in its entirety which wouldn't be in the interest of either party in the meta sense if they wanted to stay in power, just taking turns. It would be like cutting into their own flesh. In the face of the divide it is near impossible that that might ever happen. Democrats are getting really short end of the stick by that their governing runs are plagued by the awful conservative fiscal polices rammed through last-term slowly take effect and cause another recession so Dems have more to deal with and get blamed my the republicans again. All neatly playing into the GOP's hands again so they can rile up their base and further the divide and profit from it while the whole country goes down the shitter because families and households still haven't really recovered from the last recession's long-term after-effects. tl;dr U.S. looks pretty fucked going forward if no major reform happens, which also seems highly unlikely.

Obviously the take away was that we need to cut harder and spend harder.