Why use a different word every time to describe the same actions?

UNC Programs - State School in a Red State

https://catalog.unc.edu/undergraduate/programs-study/

University of Alabama Programs - State School in a Red State

https://catalog.ua.edu/programs/

LSU Programs - State School in a Red State

https://www.lsu.edu/majors/a-z.php

University of Arkansas - State School in a Red State

https://fulbright.uark.edu/academics...d-programs.php

Looks like plenty of STEM options to me.

I agree $ isn't the always the answer and with your example it may not help the students. However, if you can attract better teachers bc of higher pay/benefits that would benefit the students. There are many states that don't fund the teacher salaries adequately and that was reflected in the strikes last year. Some of the teachers were making like $35K and hadn't had raises in a few years.

I would be happy to compare. Will I need to provide tax returns?
No need to lash out at me just for calling you out after another thoughtless post Paul.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Don’t confuse the poor fellow this way. Where is the link?🤡
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I used to laugh at teachers who used to say, when contracts were being negotiated, that the reason the students weren't doing well was because teacher's salaries were too low. So what did that mean--if they got pay raises, they would do better? If the salaries went up to meet their demands, then they would do better? Or did it mean that they were not good teachers and that good teachers did not take the job because it didn't pay enough? So, did it mean that, if the administration raised the salaries adequately, they would fire all the teachers and hire good ones that would sign on for the better pay?

No, it would not mean that. It would mean that the same teachers that were in place, and supposedly not good, would all get pay raises. And nothing would change except they'd get paid more for continuing to do what they had been doing.

Or, maybe I'm wrong, and a pay raise would be like a magic wand and make the bad teachers into good ones.

We can compare anything you want. You just rarely show any intelligence. It is usually just snide comments and insults without ever trying to add anything to the discussion. I'm not sure if it due to a feeling of inferiority or what. I'm not lashing out, I'm just responding to your constant insults in this forum. Why should I take your constant childish insults?

I don't think it would work like a magic wand but it would bring in a different group of candidates and you might not have to settle for some of those that are hired bc there were no better candidate. Maybe it might incent some of the bad teachers to do better.

You can't teach those who don't want to learn.

Teachers arent the problem

If you apologize for your stupidity I will consider backing off. Otherwise, continue saying dumb stuff and get called out.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

we’re having decent dialogue here. there’s something to be said for better pay attracting better teachers, but again, i point you to catholic schools, where teachers are almost literally paid in dirt, yet those schools get world
class teachers. teaching is a calling, if
you offer too many perks ( great benefits, insane time off) you get people
who go into teaching for that reason, and that’s not good.

i’ve seen this from every angle. and i'm willing to bet you believe that i want what’s best for all kids, not just my kids. i’ve been a student in public and catholic school, i’ve taught in public and catholic school, i’ve been a parent of
kids in public and catholic school. Money has very little to do with it, and another truth is this, liberals
do a terrible, terrible job of spending that money. way too much money is diverted away from things that actually help
kids learn, way too much money goes to salary and benefits, which does almost nothing for students.

here’s the fix. make teacher retirement and healthcare benefits exactly equal to the average of what’s available to white collar professionals in the private sector. that will save a ton. use that savings to hire more teachers, which reduces class size, because that IS correlated with student performance. Also, there is no sane argument against school
choice. And since all that really matters is what’s going on at home, we need to do more to encourage strong, stable, close nuclear families, because that is by far, the biggest driver of student performance, nothing else even comes close. the older i get, the
more certain i am that this is almost all that matters. without it, almost nothing else works.

i do appreciate the challenging questions, and the respect with which you asked them.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why would I apologize for pushing back on a troll?

Maybe you should go back to commenting on a fellow posters son's college choice and saying it was budget shopping or some other classless insult.

This...

How does a school encourage stable families when some educators found that providing a place for kids to wash their clothes increases the likelihood they will show up every day and that idea was mocked?

It shouldn't be the school's job to encourage stable families. Their job is to teach. People have lost their way on how they approach building a family. It's a societal thing, not a school thing.

I'm pretty sure that everybody here approached having kids and building a family as a serious responsibility, a lot of people don't anymore.

When did terms like Baby Mama and Baby Daddy become A-OK? We need less Kardashians and more Leave it to Beaver

When you plant corn,that is probably what you will sow. Good luck my little cupcake,you had your chance.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Both poverty and rising inequality are largely consequences of America’s failing education system. Fix that, I believed, and we could cure much of what ails America.
Nope, Nick Hanauer wrote an article in the latest issue of the Atlantic that he feels explains why not.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...enough/590611/

Is America's Education system failing, or is it American's failing to take advantage of the Education System?

As usual, don't add anything. Just throw insults. I had my chance to do what - ignore the troll?

you’re right, their absolute salary isn’t the same as comparable
private sector
professionals. nor should it be, because that’s the sacrifice you make as a
public servant, same way a prosecutor doesn’t make
Anywhere near as much as an attorney in the private sector. people in the private sector dont get the time off teachers get, nit do we have tenure. again, catholic schools pay crap, and yet they get good teachers. you’ll never convince me that if we reduce overall compensation a bit, that no one will teach, all of the empirical
evidence refutes that. kids need
more teachers, not a smaller number of better paid teachers
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

both. but more the latter.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i didn’t mean the school
should encourage nuclear families, i mean all public policy should
be designed to encourage and strengthen nuclear families. paying teenage girls to have babies, and paying them
more to do so if they aren’t married, encourages shattered families. that’s the kind of idiotic public policy that needs to be changed. liberals bashing traditional
family values with every breath, probably doesn’t help
either.

sure, some
good families produce unproductive kids, and one
amazing people come
from tough family situations. but it is by far, the surest way for kids to thrive. i do t think most democrats accept that. family is the bedrock of everything, nothing else comes close. it’s old fashioned and corny, it’s also true.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Biden politicized curing cancer.

Either you deny he did that ( despite his promise that cancer would be cured if he wins), or you have no problem that he did that.

Which is it? Have fun squirming your way out of this one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This says it all too...

there should be two parents who are non binary gender, then you’ve got it. what a great leap forward.

i also taught in a very affluent town a long time ago, and i taught math, and i had parents ask why their kid got a b, and when i said because they typically get about 85% of the questions right, they didn’t like that. i knew parents who threatened to come in with lawyers, rather than help their kids with homework.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Neither, it's being able to take advantage.
I'm sure there is anecdotal evidence of this family did well despite......
But society as a whole changes incrementally and things have changed over the last 50 years.

These are a few relevant paragraphs from the article I linked above, and will link here again: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...enough/590611/

What I’ve realized, decades late, is that educationism is tragically misguided. American workers are struggling in large part because they are underpaid—and they are underpaid because 40 years of trickle-down policies have rigged the economy in favor of wealthy people like me. Americans are more highly educated than ever before, but despite that, and despite nearly record-low unemployment, most American workers—at all levels of educational attainment—have seen little if any wage growth since 2000.

Meanwhile, nearly all the benefits of economic growth have been captured by large corporations and their shareholders. After-tax corporate profits have doubled from about 5 percent of GDP in 1970 to about 10 percent, even as wages as a share of GDP have fallen by roughly 8 percent. And the wealthiest 1 percent’s share of pre-tax income has more than doubled, from 9 percent in 1973 to 21 percent today. Taken together, these two trends amount to a shift of more than $2 trillion a year from the middle class to corporations and the super-rich.

Today, after wealthy elites gobble up our outsize share of national income, the median American family is left with $76,000 a year. Had hourly compensation grown with productivity since 1973—as it did over the preceding quarter century, according to the Economic Policy Institute—that family would now be earning more than $105,000 a year. Just imagine, education reforms aside, how much larger and stronger and better educated our middle class would be if the median American family enjoyed a $29,000-a-year raise.

We have confused a symptom—educational inequality—with the underlying disease: economic inequality. Schooling may boost the prospects of individual workers, but it doesn’t change the core problem, which is that the bottom 90 percent is divvying up a shrinking share of the national wealth. Fixing that problem will require wealthy people to not merely give more, but take less.

This forum has a serious case of ADD...

Biden's "cancer-cure campaign promise" and current school problems???

Following most threads here is like watching TV with a remote control freak that changes channels like an idiot gamer...

:huh:

i taught in an economically challenged city, and i taught in an insanely wealthy city. One thing i learned without a doubt, is that money is very, very overrated when it comes to raising happy productive kids.

poor kids from living stable homes, are a million times better off, than wealthy kids from chaotic homes. There is no comparison. None.

Fix families and our values and the things we prioritize in our culture, and the rest takes care of itself. spend your time obsessing about the material things beyond your grasp, and you’re doomed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Missed the next sentences.

Both poverty and rising inequality are largely consequences of America’s failing education system. Fix that, I believed, and we could cure much of what ails America.
Nope, Nick Hanauer wrote an article in the latest issue of the Atlantic that he feels explains why not.