MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Warrior of Law on August 24, 2021, 05:11:28 PM
-
According to a University release, the top feeder HS for this year's class:
Reagan Prep High School in Milwaukee with 24 students. Cristo Rey Jesuit High School sent 21 graduates to Marquette, the third-most. Loyola Academy in Chicago is second with 22 graduates
Quite surprised that MUHS didn't make the cut. Good luck to the new 1650 frosh this year.
-
Interesting that the two Milwaukee feeders are both relatively new schools.
Not totally surprising that Cristo Rey outpaced MUHS when you think about it. Both Jesuit HS’s, but given then demographics of CR and it’s intended student base, there are likely many more “first in family” college attendees which are often inclined to stay closer to home. I’d imagine MUHS (and DSHA for that matter) have a far more scattered college attendance distribution. Certainly was the case 15 years ago when I was in school.
-
Many of my Marquette friends sent their kids to MUHS and only one or two ended up at Marquette. I was told Marquette was too close to home as the main reason for not attending.
-
Cristo Rey seems like such an excellent program. The interns I've worked with that attended there were all top notch and, importantly, had plans/drive/ability/skillset to thrive in the future regardless of their background. I feel like it is one of the best things to happen to Milwaukee in a long time in terms of education. I wish it could be replicated a thousand times over.
-
Reagan HS is a fantastic school as well. I have a niece and nephew driving about 20 minutes from another public school district to attend, and their parents could not be happier with that decision.
-
Fluff
I had a niece and nephew attend Reagan and both loved it. Definitely a shining star in the MPS system.
-
I wonder where Fenwick was on the list. They usually have Loyola Academy numbers gong to Marquette.
-
Cristo Rey seems like such an excellent program. The interns I've worked with that attended there were all top notch and, importantly, had plans/drive/ability/skillset to thrive in the future regardless of their background. I feel like it is one of the best things to happen to Milwaukee in a long time in terms of education. I wish it could be replicated a thousand times over.
I don't doubt that, but their program is so tough and strict on little things before defaulting to expulsion that they're able to artificially boost their numbers. If you get rid of everybody that's in the middle, everybody for slight misdemeanor (untucked shirt), have mandatory internships, mandatory school year round, then you're only dealing with the cream of the crop and of course there's no weak candidates because they've already been taken away by then. Essentially if you've only ever seen cream you'd assume that's the only things that comes out of a cow because you've never had to see the milk the farmers skim the cream from before it gets to you.
-
I don't doubt that, but their program is so tough and strict on little things before defaulting to expulsion that they're able to artificially boost their numbers. If you get rid of everybody that's in the middle, everybody for slight misdemeanor (untucked shirt), have mandatory internships, mandatory school year round, then you're only dealing with the cream of the crop and of course there's no weak candidates because they've already been taken away by then. Essentially if you've only ever seen cream you'd assume that's the only things that comes out of a cow because you've never had to see the milk the farmers skim the cream from before it gets to you.
Devils Advocate, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Their trying to create an elite prep school setting for high achievers in the MPS system. If you’re on scholarship to a private school, there are a number of requirements to adhere to that seem outrageously strict for the average MPS student. I’m reasonably certain they aren’t expelling otherwise good students for having their shirt untucked once or twice.
-
Devils Advocate, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Their trying to create an elite prep school setting for high achievers in the MPS system. If you’re on scholarship to a private school, there are a number of requirements to adhere to that seem outrageously strict for the average MPS student. I’m reasonably certain they aren’t expelling otherwise good students for having their shirt untucked once or twice.
That I don't know, I'm only relaying the grievances voiced to me by my fiancé when she was offered a job there.
-
I don't doubt that, but their program is so tough and strict on little things before defaulting to expulsion that they're able to artificially boost their numbers. If you get rid of everybody that's in the middle, everybody for slight misdemeanor (untucked shirt), have mandatory internships, mandatory school year round, then you're only dealing with the cream of the crop and of course there's no weak candidates because they've already been taken away by then. Essentially if you've only ever seen cream you'd assume that's the only things that comes out of a cow because you've never had to see the milk the farmers skim the cream from before it gets to you.
I've looked into these allegations before, and this wholly and completely undermines what the school has accomplished. They do hold students to a high standard (but I never heard of a student being dismissed for an untucked shirt), but the number of kids who left or dismissed for discipline reasons is (if I recall) something like 1% of all students. And that was in their national network... which the Milwaukee school is one of their best schools and likely out performs their network as a whole in this regard and in academics overall. Not to mention their overall retention rate year over year, even with the higher standards and requirements, outpaces most other MPS and charter schools.
All of this is ignoring the amazing things they accomplish with these students. Things I have witnessed first hand. Students who can barely speak english, operate a phone, understand an excel spreadsheet becoming poised, professional, skilled workers who come out of their shell and open up to new aspirations that they never thought possible before. Things like going to college, traveling, finding a professional career, etc. It really is awe inspiring when you see a youngster go through this transformation right in front of your eyes.
-
I've looked into these allegations before, and this wholly and completely undermines what the school has accomplished. They do hold students to a high standard (but I never heard of a student being dismissed for an untucked shirt), but the number of kids who left or dismissed for discipline reasons is (if I recall) something like 1% of all students. And that was in their national network... which the Milwaukee school is one of their best schools and likely out performs their network as a whole in this regard and in academics overall. Not to mention their overall retention rate year over year, even with the higher standards and requirements, outpaces most other MPS and charter schools.
All of this is ignoring the amazing things they accomplish with these students. Things I have witnessed first hand. Students who can barely speak english, operate a phone, understand an excel spreadsheet becoming poised, professional, skilled workers who come out of their shell and open up to new aspirations that they never thought possible before. Things like going to college, traveling, finding a professional career, etc. It really is awe inspiring when you see a youngster go through this transformation right in front of your eyes.
I'll trust your research, as I said to Wags I am only repeating things that were said to me from my fiancé about the potential job.
-
What's lost in all this is that the freshman class is only 1,650 students. That's the same size as last year's COVID freshman class, which was the smallest since 1997. A "normal" freshman class is around 2,000 or slightly above. This trend is not good for the university's finances.
-
Plenty of record class sizes around the country given the increased number of gap years/deferments last year. Not a pretty number for MU.
-
I'll trust your research, as I said to Wags I am only repeating things that were said to me from my fiancé about the potential job.
And to be fair, there's a part of your original statement that has truth in it.
What's lost in all this is that the freshman class is only 1,650 students. That's the same size as last year's COVID freshman class, which was the smallest since 1997. A "normal" freshman class is around 2,000 or slightly above. This trend is not good for the university's finances.
Not joking when I say this... but some successful basketball seasons would help with this!
-
It just seems like the "growth strategy" of just five or six years ago has turned around. They haven't gotten rid of any of their top admissions people, which leads me to believe that they are intentionally decreasing their enrollment and focusing on programs like Nursing, Business and Engineering.
-
What's lost in all this is that the freshman class is only 1,650 students. That's the same size as last year's COVID freshman class, which was the smallest since 1997. A "normal" freshman class is around 2,000 or slightly above. This trend is not good for the university's finances.
Question though, do we have room for more? My class was in the 1400's in 1994. I know we put caps on admission post 2003 and were renting local hotels and turning study lounges into room because we didn't have room in the halls. Is MU trying to limit enrollment and bring in a higher level of student?
-
Does acceptance rates tie into this at all?
The acceptance rate I found on the Internet for MU for 2019-20 was 83%.
-
I've heard of schools pushing some incoming freshmen off until Jan 2022 due to a space crunch created by some students on not graduating on time. Could that be in play with this smaller class size?
-
Does acceptance rates tie into this at all?
The acceptance rate I found on the Internet for MU for 2019-20 was 83%.
Not really. They are targeting people who they have been marketing to for years, and who they want to get applications from so the acceptance rate is going to be high. The key is who then deposits from those acceptances.
-
Question though, do we have room for more? My class was in the 1400's in 1994. I know we put caps on admission post 2003 and were renting local hotels and turning study lounges into room because we didn't have room in the halls. Is MU trying to limit enrollment and bring in a higher level of student?
I have a student there now. Last year, there was plenty of room in the dorms for more. Many did not have roommates in doubles and there were even empty rooms. With the same number of freshman this year, I imagine it is similar.
-
I don't doubt that, but their program is so tough and strict on little things before defaulting to expulsion that they're able to artificially boost their numbers. If you get rid of everybody that's in the middle, everybody for slight misdemeanor (untucked shirt), have mandatory internships, mandatory school year round, then you're only dealing with the cream of the crop and of course there's no weak candidates because they've already been taken away by then. Essentially if you've only ever seen cream you'd assume that's the only things that comes out of a cow because you've never had to see the milk the farmers skim the cream from before it gets to you.
Galway, I can't (and won't - I assume everything you report is accurate) speak to the particulars of Cristo Rey Milwaukee, but I can speak to Christ the King Jesuit College Prep in Chicago (Austin), one of the three Cristo Rey schools in the Chicago area. It is tough on the rules (and do not look for reasons to bounce kids), and there is a fair amount of attrition (more due to grades), but the school does everything to encourage success. The kids who attend are not the "cream" of the west side, as those students can attend the best public schools (WY, Payton, Northside -you know these schools) or get scholarships to Ignatius, Fenwick etc. CtK students mostly are B/C students who typically are driven by the opportunity for a college prep education and the internship model (CtK is not year round school, BTW), as well as a safe environment. CtK does get 100% of grads into colleges, but that includes City colleges, other two year programs and the state directional schools, while also getting a few into each of Marquette, Loyola and Illinois. It is a wonderful program as is the Cristo Rey Network as a whole.
-
I graduated from MUHS in 1971. There were a few students students from my freshmen class who were told not to return for their sophomore year either due to poor grades or the trouble they made as freshmen. I think that was a big advantage for serious students. I do not understand why our education system dummies itself down to cater to kids that do not care and tend to disrupt education for other students. Lack of accountability is why our education system lags behind other countries.
-
I graduated from MUHS in 1971. There were a few students students from my freshmen class who were told not to return for their sophomore year either due to poor grades or the trouble they made as freshmen. I think that was a big advantage for serious students. I do not understand why our education system dummies itself down to cater to kids that do not care and tend to disrupt education for other students. Lack of accountability is why our education system lags behind other countries.
Well no. Not really.
-
I graduated from MUHS in 1971. There were a few students students from my freshmen class who were told not to return for their sophomore year either due to poor grades or the trouble they made as freshmen. I think that was a big advantage for serious students. I do not understand why our education system dummies itself down to cater to kids that do not care and tend to disrupt education for other students. Lack of accountability is why our education system lags behind other countries.
I think that's still the same situation at MUHS today. And most good private schools.
-
I am a graduate of St. Joseph HS in Kenosha back in 1976.
I have not lived in Wisconsin since 1987.
Do the high schools in the old Metro Conference still exist?
Pius
Dominican
Waukesha Memorial
Racine St. Cats
Thomas More
Marquette HS.
-
I am a graduate of St. Joseph HS in Kenosha back in 1976.
I have not lived in Wisconsin since 1987.
Do the high schools in the old Metro Conference still exist?
Pius
Dominican
Waukesha Memorial
Racine St. Cats
Thomas More
Marquette HS.
They all exist.
-
I am a graduate of St. Joseph HS in Kenosha back in 1976.
I have not lived in Wisconsin since 1987.
Do the high schools in the old Metro Conference still exist?
Pius
Dominican
Waukesha Memorial
Racine St. Cats
Thomas More
Marquette
The all exist but sadly not all play in the same conference. MUHS has been off loaded to the big near western suburbs schools (Tosa, Brookfield, Falls). Dominican is in with St. Cats & Joe's (size thing). Memorial I believe plays in the Classic 8 with Arrowhead and Waukesha schools. Not sure where Pius, TM & Milw Lutheran landed. It's devastating, IMO.
-
Galway, I can't (and won't - I assume everything you report is accurate) speak to the particulars of Cristo Rey Milwaukee, but I can speak to Christ the King Jesuit College Prep in Chicago (Austin), one of the three Cristo Rey schools in the Chicago area. It is tough on the rules (and do not look for reasons to bounce kids), and there is a fair amount of attrition (more due to grades), but the school does everything to encourage success. The kids who attend are not the "cream" of the west side, as those students can attend the best public schools (WY, Payton, Northside -you know these schools) or get scholarships to Ignatius, Fenwick etc. CtK students mostly are B/C students who typically are driven by the opportunity for a college prep education and the internship model (CtK is not year round school, BTW), as well as a safe environment. CtK does get 100% of grads into colleges, but that includes City colleges, other two year programs and the state directional schools, while also getting a few into each of Marquette, Loyola and Illinois. It is a wonderful program as is the Cristo Rey Network as a whole.
I differ to your experience and trust those. As I've stated I can only speak to why my fiancé turned them down to take a job at Morton when she moved here from Milwaukee.
-
What's lost in all this is that the freshman class is only 1,650 students. That's the same size as last year's COVID freshman class, which was the smallest since 1997. A "normal" freshman class is around 2,000 or slightly above. This trend is not good for the university's finances.
I suspect and hope that this is intentional.
-
The all exist but sadly not all play in the same conference. MUHS has been off loaded to the big near western suburbs schools (Tosa, Brookfield, Falls). Dominican is in with St. Cats & Joe's (size thing). Memorial I believe plays in the Classic 8 with Arrowhead and Waukesha schools. Not sure where Pius, TM & Milw Lutheran landed. It's devastating, IMO.
Inevitable with the WIAA merger.
-
Galway, I can't (and won't - I assume everything you report is accurate) speak to the particulars of Cristo Rey Milwaukee, but I can speak to Christ the King Jesuit College Prep in Chicago (Austin), one of the three Cristo Rey schools in the Chicago area. It is tough on the rules (and do not look for reasons to bounce kids), and there is a fair amount of attrition (more due to grades), but the school does everything to encourage success. The kids who attend are not the "cream" of the west side, as those students can attend the best public schools (WY, Payton, Northside -you know these schools) or get scholarships to Ignatius, Fenwick etc. CtK students mostly are B/C students who typically are driven by the opportunity for a college prep education and the internship model (CtK is not year round school, BTW), as well as a safe environment. CtK does get 100% of grads into colleges, but that includes City colleges, other two year programs and the state directional schools, while also getting a few into each of Marquette, Loyola and Illinois. It is a wonderful program as is the Cristo Rey Network as a whole.
Look at their KG, 6, and 9th grade classes and see who remains/graduates after grade 5, 8 and/or 12.
There are no schools that have accepted every student (or run a truly open lottery), abided by the laws that would govern public schools, and eliminated achievement gaps. Societal issues are too difficult to overcome.
I'm not saying I wouldn't send my kid to their schools, but I also won't pretend that they could replicate x1000 like someone suggested. If they tried to do that...they would likely end up worse than MPS is now. Just ask New Orleans how that went.
-
I graduated from MUHS in 1971. There were a few students students from my freshmen class who were told not to return for their sophomore year either due to poor grades or the trouble they made as freshmen. I think that was a big advantage for serious students. I do not understand why our education system dummies itself down to cater to kids that do not care and tend to disrupt education for other students. Lack of accountability is why our education system lags behind other countries.
Bolded: We have to educate everyone. We don't just throw problem kids to curb like private schools can.
Italicized: Nope, try again.
-
I do not understand why our education system dummies itself down to cater to kids that do not care and tend to disrupt education for other students. Lack of accountability is why our education system lags behind other countries.
Brother Bilsu:
I understand part of what you say. One can only look at the Chicago Public Schools to see what happened when you warehouse and ship out students who have no discernable skills.
But as the father of two children who had learning disabilities, I find the absolutism is your statement disturbing. First of all, schools don't want to educate special needs children, whatever their needs. It makes teachers work for a living and it can be frustrating. Crappie teachers who don't care or don't know how to reach children with special needs lead to students who do not care.
In our case, both my wife and I are MU grads. Her grade point put her near the top of her class and I have a master's degree. Both of us are accomplished professionals. We adopted two wonderful children from orphanages in Eastern Europe. The IEP meetings we had at our supposedly very good public elementary school district became combative when I called out their BS and told them to stop reading off a script and set meaningful, attainable goals for our children. The teachers, in turn, accused us of expecting too much from our children. I can't tell you how many times I've heard teachers complain because they're "stuck" with children who have learning disabilities. One of the LD teachers in our grade school district up north said she wanted the class "because it has fewer children..." Wow!
The bloodiest public argument I ever had with anyone was when an LD teacher told my daughter, my wife and I that my daughter should lower her expectations and we should expect less from her. Really, it happened! I was nose to nose with the woman who spoke as my wife and daughter slipped under the table. On the way out, my daughter looked at me and all she said was, "Thank you Dad!"
The result is my wife (and there is a special place in heaven waiting for her someday) re-taught our children their lessons every day. It was grueling but she did it because that's what good parents do. We made sure our children had everything they needed. In doing this, we often wondered what other parents did, especially those were not able or not capable of standing up to the lazy and incompetent educrats
Our learning disabled children both have college degrees from an accredited, respected university in Illinois. Both are at the front end of their careers and are competing straight up against colleagues and competitors who do not have learning disabilities.
I'll leave you with two thoughts. First, one of the most compelling ever pieces of education legislation was No Child left Behind, signed into law by President George W. Bush. Teachers and School Districts hated it to no end because it held them accountable in areas many just swept under the rug. They claimed the federal government didn't send money the same way George Wallace claimed the federal government didn't send money when he was told to protect the Selma to Montgomery marchers.
Second, if we don't do all we can to educate everyone, we'll end up paying more to deal with the after-effects of our educational incompetence. Where do you think gangbangers come from? Or, the chronically unemployed? Letting these kids slide through school leads to far greater incarceration, substance abuse, social service cost and other societal problems. Educate them and we give them a fighting chance to compete.
Remember: Love thy neighbor as thyself.
-
Based on their admissions, and allocated financial aid resources, that the intent is for MU to look (demographically) like the City of Milwaukee. For example, they tout a 33% students of color percentage. In Wisconsin, the percentage of AAs is 6.7%, Hispanic 7.1%, & Asian 3%, collectively 16%.
I personally don't really care how MU spends their resources as it relates to the composition of the student body, but it is clear that they are making a significant conscious effort to be less white (e.g., MUHS, Brookfield, Arrowhead, Stevensons, etc). At least they won't have to photoshop someone on a brochure. :)
-
Brother Bilsu:
I understand part of what you say. One can only look at the Chicago Public Schools to see what happened when you warehouse and ship out students who have no discernable skills.
But as the father of two children who had learning disabilities, I find the absolutism is your statement disturbing. First of all, schools don't want to educate special needs children, whatever their needs. It makes teachers work for a living and it can be frustrating. Crappie teachers who don't care or don't know how to reach children with special needs lead to students who do not care.
In our case, both my wife and I are MU grads. Her grade point put her near the top of her class and I have a master's degree. Both of us are accomplished professionals. We adopted two wonderful children from orphanages in Eastern Europe. The IEP meetings we had at our supposedly very good public elementary school district became combative when I called out their BS and told them to stop reading off a script and set meaningful, attainable goals for our children. The teachers, in turn, accused us of expecting too much from our children. I can't tell you how many times I've heard teachers complain because they're "stuck" with children who have learning disabilities. One of the LD teachers in our grade school district up north said she wanted the class "because it has fewer children..." Wow!
The bloodiest public argument I ever had with anyone was when an LD teacher told my daughter, my wife and I that my daughter should lower her expectations and we should expect less from her. Really, it happened! I was nose to nose with the woman who spoke as my wife and daughter slipped under the table. On the way out, my daughter looked at me and all she said was, "Thank you Dad!"
The result is my wife (and there is a special place in heaven waiting for her someday) re-taught our children their lessons every day. It was grueling but she did it because that's what good parents do. We made sure our children had everything they needed. In doing this, we often wondered what other parents did, especially those were not able or not capable of standing up to the lazy and incompetent educrats
Our learning disabled children both have college degrees from an accredited, respected university in Illinois. Both are at the front end of their careers and are competing straight up against colleagues and competitors who do not have learning disabilities.
I'll leave you with two thoughts. First, one of the most compelling ever pieces of education legislation was No Child left Behind, signed into law by President George W. Bush. Teachers and School Districts hated it to no end because it held them accountable in areas many just swept under the rug. They claimed the federal government didn't send money the same way George Wallace claimed the federal government didn't send money when he was told to protect the Selma to Montgomery marchers.
Second, if we don't do all we can to educate everyone, we'll end up paying more to deal with the after-effects of our educational incompetence. Where do you think gangbangers come from? Or, the chronically unemployed? Letting these kids slide through school leads to far greater incarceration, substance abuse, social service cost and other societal problems. Educate them and we give them a fighting chance to compete.
Remember: Love thy neighbor as thyself.
This is a great story, I have to minor points though:
7 of the top 10 schools in Illinois are CPS. There's trash in there too but a better examole would've been MPS b/c there's basically just trash after Reagan (apparently Hamilton was once decent?)
There's a lot of crappy parts of NCLB that incentivized school administrators to lower standards to get funding. It created a bad cycle of "in order to get students on par with other schools we need funding in order to get funding they need to pass in order for them to pass they need access to the things that other schools have"
-
Post of the year DGIES!
Tuff to do when it's not even about MUBB.
-
This is a great story, I have to minor points though:
7 of the top 10 schools in Illinois are CPS. There's trash in there too but a better examole would've been MPS b/c there's basically just trash after Reagan (apparently Hamilton was once decent?)
There's a lot of crappy parts of NCLB that incentivized school administrators to lower standards to get funding. It created a bad cycle of "in order to get students on par with other schools we need funding in order to get funding they need to pass in order for them to pass they need access to the things that other schools have"
"Trash" comments are poor, imho. NCLB had nothing to do with school administrators. Standards were set at the state level. I know a number of MU staff that have their children attend schools in MPS, outside of just Reagan, and their children have gone Ivy (while apparently attending trash schools).
The best comparison for this is when hospitals were rated for performance based upon outcomes. Long-story-short hospitals stopped taking extremely high-risk patients and trying to push them off on other places to protect their ratings. It's the same thing with schools. Charter schools that claim to be the best will never agree to take over a district because they have to educate all students, and they are already creaming off the top just by introducing choice into the equation. A child whose parents have the ability and/or will to look for a school they feel is best would assumably out-preform a child of similar demographics whose parents don't care to do so. The vast majority of private voucher schools now get state $ yet refuse to educate the most difficult kids. I never felt my Jesuit upbringing taught me to turn away the unmotivated/problematic kids...I guess I went to a different church than many of you.
-
This is a great story, I have to minor points though:
7 of the top 10 schools in Illinois are CPS. There's trash in there too but a better examole would've been MPS b/c there's basically just trash after Reagan (apparently Hamilton was once decent?)
There's a lot of crappy parts of NCLB that incentivized school administrators to lower standards to get funding. It created a bad cycle of "in order to get students on par with other schools we need funding in order to get funding they need to pass in order for them to pass they need access to the things that other schools have"
Rufus King has a very good IB program and Riverside has a college prep curriculum. I think saying the whole system is trash is painting with a very broad brush. I have met & worked with grads from almost every school. If a parent and student are committed and aligned they can get a solid education and move on to college. What I know for a fact is there are people in every MPS building who care and IMO that's the most important factor.
-
I'll leave you with two thoughts. First, one of the most compelling ever pieces of education legislation was No Child left Behind, signed into law by President George W. Bush. Teachers and School Districts hated it to no end because it held them accountable in areas many just swept under the rug. They claimed the federal government didn't send money the same way George Wallace claimed the federal government didn't send money when he was told to protect the Selma to Montgomery marchers.
Second, if we don't do all we can to educate everyone, we'll end up paying more to deal with the after-effects of our educational incompetence. Where do you think gangbangers come from? Or, the chronically unemployed? Letting these kids slide through school leads to far greater incarceration, substance abuse, social service cost and other societal problems. Educate them and we give them a fighting chance to compete.
Remember: Love thy neighbor as thyself.
Great story. Special education is amazingly difficult...there are no special education teachers, and in response, the ability to be licensed as one has gotten ridiculously easy. I pray to God that my children won't need those services. I'm fortunate to reside in one of the most affluent districts in the state...my child needed speech...school couldn't staff the positon.
Not sure about your NCLB comment. It's well understood that NCLB (Bush) and ESAA (Obama) had no positive effect on overall student outcomes.
Like or dislike John Oliver, but this is the single best piece ever done on testing/NCLB/ESAA...and it will make you laugh. It's literally the stuff people on both the right and left can agree on. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6lyURyVz7k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6lyURyVz7k)
-
It just seems like the "growth strategy" of just five or six years ago has turned around. They haven't gotten rid of any of their top admissions people, which leads me to believe that they are intentionally decreasing their enrollment and focusing on programs like Nursing, Business and Engineering.
Interesting. My younger daughter was accepted to MU Nursing and they made a decent financial offer. She picked UVM (Vermont) and it seems MU was her third choice in the end, so a mind-blowing offer probably would not have made a difference.
If my older received the younger daughter's offer, she probably would be starting her Junior year at Marquette right now.
-
No Child Left Behind was a f*cking disaster. So much so that it was basically stripped apart with bipartisan support about a decade after it passed. The acceleration of standardized testing to show "accountability" lead to terrible outcomes that a lot of higher education institutions are still dealing with today. It actually made American public education worse because it didn't incentivize how children actually learn.
-
Brother Bilsu:
I understand part of what you say. One can only look at the Chicago Public Schools to see what happened when you warehouse and ship out students who have no discernable skills.
But as the father of two children who had learning disabilities, I find the absolutism is your statement disturbing. First of all, schools don't want to educate special needs children, whatever their needs. It makes teachers work for a living and it can be frustrating. Crappie teachers who don't care or don't know how to reach children with special needs lead to students who do not care.
In our case, both my wife and I are MU grads. Her grade point put her near the top of her class and I have a master's degree. Both of us are accomplished professionals. We adopted two wonderful children from orphanages in Eastern Europe. The IEP meetings we had at our supposedly very good public elementary school district became combative when I called out their BS and told them to stop reading off a script and set meaningful, attainable goals for our children. The teachers, in turn, accused us of expecting too much from our children. I can't tell you how many times I've heard teachers complain because they're "stuck" with children who have learning disabilities. One of the LD teachers in our grade school district up north said she wanted the class "because it has fewer children..." Wow!
The bloodiest public argument I ever had with anyone was when an LD teacher told my daughter, my wife and I that my daughter should lower her expectations and we should expect less from her. Really, it happened! I was nose to nose with the woman who spoke as my wife and daughter slipped under the table. On the way out, my daughter looked at me and all she said was, "Thank you Dad!"
The result is my wife (and there is a special place in heaven waiting for her someday) re-taught our children their lessons every day. It was grueling but she did it because that's what good parents do. We made sure our children had everything they needed. In doing this, we often wondered what other parents did, especially those were not able or not capable of standing up to the lazy and incompetent educrats
Our learning disabled children both have college degrees from an accredited, respected university in Illinois. Both are at the front end of their careers and are competing straight up against colleagues and competitors who do not have learning disabilities.
I'll leave you with two thoughts. First, one of the most compelling ever pieces of education legislation was No Child left Behind, signed into law by President George W. Bush. Teachers and School Districts hated it to no end because it held them accountable in areas many just swept under the rug. They claimed the federal government didn't send money the same way George Wallace claimed the federal government didn't send money when he was told to protect the Selma to Montgomery marchers.
Second, if we don't do all we can to educate everyone, we'll end up paying more to deal with the after-effects of our educational incompetence. Where do you think gangbangers come from? Or, the chronically unemployed? Letting these kids slide through school leads to far greater incarceration, substance abuse, social service cost and other societal problems. Educate them and we give them a fighting chance to compete.
Remember: Love thy neighbor as thyself.
This is simultaneously one of the most uplifting and disheartening posts ever. This proves what an amazing parent you are and your kids are so lucky to have you and the fact they've gone on to be successful thriving adults is humbling. I hope I can do so well as you have done in your story.
At the same time, the challenges you faced combined with the fact that so many kids out there (especially in impoverished areas) don't have the same support system that yours did, leaves a deep sadness inside of me.
The education challenges we face are so complex and convoluted and so much stems from the home that can't be controlled by educators that it's difficult to know where to start. One thing I do know, and a reason I support a broad spectrum of school models (public, charter, choice, private, homeschool) is because there is no right answer. We need schools for the brightest kids to excel as much as possible, we need "paternalistic" schools that are strict for those who need guidance, we need schools and educators ready/able/willing to do the extra work to help those with learning or other disabilities fulfill their potential, and down the line for so many special cases.
Some of these can and should be a combination, sometimes it's best to have a school specialize, there's arguments both ways. All I know is that too often people take a stance based on a "side" they are on and dig in and no one actually wants to make these things happen. Meanwhile you have large school systems with a 6:1 administrator/non faculty to student ratio (compared to something like 15:1 in a typical suburban system) but teacher/student ratio's 5+ students higher then the suburban counterpart. So many people getting so little actual change to happen, it's so frustrating.
/end rant
Dgies, you really got my blood boiling this morning!
-
Rufus King has a very good IB program and Riverside has a college prep curriculum. I think saying the whole system is trash is painting with a very broad brush. I have met & worked with grads from almost every school. If a parent and student are committed and aligned they can get a solid education and move on to college. What I know for a fact is there are people in every MPS building who care and IMO that's the most important factor.
I agree if a parent and student are committed and aligned they'll get a solid education, of course that situation will work anywhere. A teachers job is to get a certain % of the people who are in gently intelligent but lack support, or visa versa, to get a quality education. In a setting like MPS that's much more unlikely to happen.
https://247wallst.com/state/this-is-the-worst-school-district-in-wisconsin/
"The Milwaukee School District is by far the largest in Wisconsin, with total enrollment exceeding 75,000. It also ranks as the worst school district in the state. Just 18% of students are proficient in reading, and only 15% are proficient in math, according to state test scores. "
Of course there's always exceptions, and it's never ok to write someone off because of where they went to school.
-
No Child Left Behind was a f*cking disaster. So much so that it was basically stripped apart with bipartisan support about a decade after it passed. The acceleration of standardized testing to show "accountability" lead to terrible outcomes that a lot of higher education institutions are still dealing with today. It actually made American public education worse because it didn't incentivize how children actually learn.
Brother Fluff:
No way. NCLB gave us ammunition when the educrats pulled their bureaucratic BS. Mention NCLB to them and immediately they become cationic, almost in fetal positions and if you appear to have intellectual and financial horsepower, the educrats quiver and they usually cave. That's why I always went to those meetings before I went to work and wore a blue pinstripe suit. It scared the hell out of the educrats!
Incidentally, my wife agrees with you! But that's beside the point.
What NCLB did was to remind school districts that they can't ignore needs of certain student segments. It made education a civil right. In our community, our high school has an incredible LD program (very much UNLIKE the grade school district). The complaint against NCLB was and is there was no funding for it. My response back, which made people in our community VERY angry, was "do you fund football? Didn't you just spend $30 million for a new swimming pool?"
My daughter was involved in a very, very costly program for the district. We knew the costs which the District was assuming but never said a word because some in our community would take the same position as Brother Bilsu took -- "My God, why are they spending that kind of money on YOUR child?"
Nobody likes standardized testing. But I'm going to let you in on a little secret. The whole world is a standardized test. The educrats can claim it's unfair, but what's more unfair -- identifying weaknesses and forcing schools to deal with them or passing students who lack basic real world skills and having them fail once they walk from the halls of education?
You tell me which one is better for society?
-
7 of the top 10 schools in Illinois are CPS.
How many of those 7 schools are magnet programs? When you have 100,000 high school students to choose from, it's probably pretty easy to skim off the highest 5-10 percent and set up top-notch programs for them.
-
Nobody likes standardized testing. But I'm going to let you in on a little secret. The whole world is a standardized test. The educrats can claim it's unfair, but what's more unfair -- identifying weaknesses and forcing schools to deal with them or passing students who lack basic real world skills and having them fail once they walk from the halls of education?
No the whole world isn't a standardized test. That's the point! At very few points in ones life, if ever, does a person have to sit down and fill out a test to determine their proficiency in a subject. You succeed in the real world by linking concepts together...by solving problems...by working with other people. Life isn't filling out bubbles with your #2 pencil.
Furthermore, the irony in your statement is that the focus on testing has left society with students who lack "basic real world skills." Ask higher education administrators and they will tell you that the number of students lacking proficiency in math and reading INCREASED since the time of NCLB. I am not necessarily blaming NCLB for that, but I know a TON of teachers who will tell you that the way they taught fundamentally changed over the last 15 years, and it was certainly NOT for the benefit of the student.
And finally, American education, despite spending pretty much more than any other country, has declined when compared to the rest of the world when it comes to basic proficiency. And IMO that is because we no longer teach to how children actually learn. We teach to how they will perform on a test - and that's shameful.
-
How many of those 7 schools are magnet programs? When you have 100,000 high school students to choose from, it's probably pretty easy to skim off the highest 5-10 percent and set up top-notch programs for them.
27/148 rated in the top 100 (1,292 HS total)
7 traditional, 20 magnet. The point is there's plenty of great CPS schools that are rated above most of the suburban schools many on this board sent their kids to. But we focus on the ones in Hegewish, Lawndale, Back of the Yards, Austin, etc. which aren't neighborhoods you should compare to in the first place. If you're in Lake Forest, and crapping on the CPS system, you should ask where would you live around the city that meets your income bracket and realistically where do families in that bracket send their kids. You can't act as if living in the city automatically sends your kids to Steinmetz HS or something.
-
No the whole world isn't a standardized test. That's the point! At very few points in ones life, if ever, does a person have to sit down and fill out a test to determine their proficiency in a subject. You succeed in the real world by linking concepts together...by solving problems...by working with other people. Life isn't filling out bubbles with your #2 pencil.
Furthermore, the irony in your statement is that the focus on testing has left society with students who lack "basic real world skills." Ask higher education administrators and they will tell you that the number of students lacking proficiency in math and reading INCREASED since the time of NCLB. I am not necessarily blaming NCLB for that, but I know a TON of teachers who will tell you that the way they taught fundamentally changed over the last 15 years, and it was certainly NOT for the benefit of the student.
And finally, American education, despite spending pretty much more than any other country, has declined when compared to the rest of the world when it comes to basic proficiency. And IMO that is because we no longer teach to how children actually learn. We teach to how they will perform on a test - and that's shameful.
100%. People who don't understand education think that everyone needs to fit into a square hole... even if they are a round or triangle peg. This is where we've been wrong for the last 50-60 years.
-
This seems to be turning into a similar thread on the Superbar regarding standardized tests.
If the student when he leaves HS can function and be productive in the real world that seems to be what matters.
It looks like schools will never bat 100% in terms of being able to teach with optimal efficiency to every student when modes of learning differ greatly between students.
Being in the technical area, drive/motivation and competition seems to compel individuals to be the absolute best they can be.
Students from China and India have so much competition from each other, the parents over there probably aren't crying Jr isn't being fed courses the way Jr learns best.
-
No the whole world isn't a standardized test. That's the point! At very few points in ones life, if ever, does a person have to sit down and fill out a test to determine their proficiency in a subject. You succeed in the real world by linking concepts together...by solving problems...by working with other people. Life isn't filling out bubbles with your #2 pencil.
Furthermore, the irony in your statement is that the focus on testing has left society with students who lack "basic real world skills." Ask higher education administrators and they will tell you that the number of students lacking proficiency in math and reading INCREASED since the time of NCLB. I am not necessarily blaming NCLB for that, but I know a TON of teachers who will tell you that the way they taught fundamentally changed over the last 15 years, and it was certainly NOT for the benefit of the student.
And finally, American education, despite spending pretty much more than any other country, has declined when compared to the rest of the world when it comes to basic proficiency. And IMO that is because we no longer teach to how children actually learn. We teach to how they will perform on a test - and that's shameful.
Fluff,
Respectfully disagree. If you don't equip people with basic skills, like math, reading, etc., they walk out the door unable to function. To the extent that educrats "gamed the system," I'm not surprised. The notion of, to quote our grade school district's motto, "Learning for All, Whatever It Takes" is farcical. To your point, Brother Fluff, the malpracticing educators are teaching people how to take tests rather than how to learn and retain knowledge and skills.
That's not a function of standardized testing. It's a function of educational incompetence and misplaced priorities. And, I live in an affluent school district!
Look, there's a lot of knowledge out there and, as my experience has shown, lots of different ways to learn. Education certainly is not a "one size fits all" proposition, the educrats and their lap dogs in the teachers unions notwithstanding. There also is an awful lot of knowledge that has to be programmed into children from the time they hit kindergarten until they walk out of high school or college. But to say we should not have a standard for what we expect students to have at certain points is akin to starting a business without a mission or goal.
-
I don't think anyone is arguing that there shouldn't be standards. Just that standardized tests aren't the best way to measure if those standards have been met
-
I don't think anyone is arguing that there shouldn't be standards. Just that standardized tests aren't the best way to measure if those standards have been met
What is? I am not trying to be snarky, but is there currently a superior, realistic alternative?
-
Brother Bilsu:
I understand part of what you say. One can only look at the Chicago Public Schools to see what happened when you warehouse and ship out students who have no discernable skills.
But as the father of two children who had learning disabilities, I find the absolutism is your statement disturbing. First of all, schools don't want to educate special needs children, whatever their needs. It makes teachers work for a living and it can be frustrating. Crappie teachers who don't care or don't know how to reach children with special needs lead to students who do not care.
In our case, both my wife and I are MU grads. Her grade point put her near the top of her class and I have a master's degree. Both of us are accomplished professionals. We adopted two wonderful children from orphanages in Eastern Europe. The IEP meetings we had at our supposedly very good public elementary school district became combative when I called out their BS and told them to stop reading off a script and set meaningful, attainable goals for our children. The teachers, in turn, accused us of expecting too much from our children. I can't tell you how many times I've heard teachers complain because they're "stuck" with children who have learning disabilities. One of the LD teachers in our grade school district up north said she wanted the class "because it has fewer children..." Wow!
The bloodiest public argument I ever had with anyone was when an LD teacher told my daughter, my wife and I that my daughter should lower her expectations and we should expect less from her. Really, it happened! I was nose to nose with the woman who spoke as my wife and daughter slipped under the table. On the way out, my daughter looked at me and all she said was, "Thank you Dad!"
The result is my wife (and there is a special place in heaven waiting for her someday) re-taught our children their lessons every day. It was grueling but she did it because that's what good parents do. We made sure our children had everything they needed. In doing this, we often wondered what other parents did, especially those were not able or not capable of standing up to the lazy and incompetent educrats
Our learning disabled children both have college degrees from an accredited, respected university in Illinois. Both are at the front end of their careers and are competing straight up against colleagues and competitors who do not have learning disabilities.
I'll leave you with two thoughts. First, one of the most compelling ever pieces of education legislation was No Child left Behind, signed into law by President George W. Bush. Teachers and School Districts hated it to no end because it held them accountable in areas many just swept under the rug. They claimed the federal government didn't send money the same way George Wallace claimed the federal government didn't send money when he was told to protect the Selma to Montgomery marchers.
Second, if we don't do all we can to educate everyone, we'll end up paying more to deal with the after-effects of our educational incompetence. Where do you think gangbangers come from? Or, the chronically unemployed? Letting these kids slide through school leads to far greater incarceration, substance abuse, social service cost and other societal problems. Educate them and we give them a fighting chance to compete.
Remember: Love thy neighbor as thyself.
dgies9156:
Our family went through some of the same type of IEP issues yours did. We fought hard and won. The outcome was superb just like your family.
Several years later I was elected to the School Board. As Chairman of the Finance Committee, I advocated for our school to be a regional center for dealing with Learning disabilities and to make the necessary investments to do so. We had a huge flow of students from all over the county and Special Ed became a profit center instead of a cost center . Helped us keep property taxes down
-
Standardized testing is not the problem, the problem is the incentives tied to those tests. OK, having so many tests that all you're ever doing is testing... that's a problem too. But my main point is that once you start putting certain incentives around scores, it's human nature for the school to want to do things like have scores that are as high as possible. They'll probably do that by teaching to the tests and instructing how to take tests instead of properly educating kids so they understand the material.
As Warriorchick said, how else are you going to measure proficiency? We just need to mitigate the motivations behind the result.
-
What is? I am not trying to be snarky, but is there currently a superior, realistic alternative?
Well, first I don't think anyone has said that there is no room for standardized testing at all.
But for decades we relied on teachers to teach and evaluate. And they by and large did a pretty good job at that. There are objective measurements at play as well as the subjective.
-
Well, first I don't think anyone has said that there is no room for standardized testing at all.
But for decades we relied on teachers to teach and evaluate. And they by and large did a pretty good job at that. There are objective measurements at play as well as the subjective.
But aren't teachers held at least partially accountable for their students' academic progress? How are they going to evaluate themselves?
-
Standardized testing is not the problem, the problem is the incentives tied to those tests. OK, having so many tests that all you're ever doing is testing... that's a problem too. But my main point is that once you start putting certain incentives around scores, it's human nature for the school to want to do things like have scores that are as high as possible. They'll probably do that by teaching to the tests and instructing how to take tests instead of properly educating kids so they understand the material.
As Warriorchick said, how else are you going to measure proficiency? We just need to mitigate the motivations behind the result.
First, if they were actually teaching the kids to understand the material they would not have to be afraid of standardized test scores. If they are teaching to the test and instructing kids how to take the test they must know the questions on the test to obtain high scores. Sounds like the kids are being cheated on both ends and the teachers don't want to be accountable for low test scores. If my students were getting low test scores I would want to know why they were not comprehending the subject material and correct it.
-
But aren't teachers held at least partially accountable for their students' academic progress? How are they going to evaluate themselves?
For decades it was working just fine so....
-
Standardized testing is not the problem, the problem is the incentives tied to those tests. OK, having so many tests that all you're ever doing is testing... that's a problem too. But my main point is that once you start putting certain incentives around scores, it's human nature for the school to want to do things like have scores that are as high as possible. They'll probably do that by teaching to the tests and instructing how to take tests instead of properly educating kids so they understand the material.
As Warriorchick said, how else are you going to measure proficiency? We just need to mitigate the motivations behind the result.
Years ago, the Diocese of Nashville did it simply. The Office of Education prepared standardized tests of expected knowledge that were administered at the end of every school year -- aka final exams. You had the Diocese's standardization across all Catholic Schools.
-
But aren't teachers held at least partially accountable for their students' academic progress? How are they going to evaluate themselves?
Of course, and standardized tests are part of the evaluation process. But they're not the entirety, or close to the entirety, of the process because a) there's more to effective teaching than teaching to a test, b) teachers can only control so much of a student's academic progress and c) a child's academic progress cannot be measured solely by a single test.
-
As an old timer who graduated from MUHS before most of you were born, Many changes have occurred since my sojourn there. I was distracted from the football subject by the discussion of he merits of various schools and school systems. When I attende the school had 7 classes of 35 students each. they were determined by the results of tests given at all Catholic schools in the Milwaukee Archdiocise. Those 250 accepted were divided into 7 classes of 35 each on the basis of the test results. the classes were identified by letters with those scoring highest on the test into Class "A" the next into Class "B". etc.
I Sports we competed in the Catholic Conference along with the other schools Catholic Schools listed, except for More and Dominican and Memorial which did not exist. Inaddition was Don Bosco and Notre Dame and St Johns which also don't exist. I am not sure as I have not lived in WI for over 25 years MUHS dominated in sports. Of course girls sports did not exist then. "Sports were not for girls" at that time. Particularily in football . During m,y 4 years we lost only 1 game, to St Catherine, score 12 - 6.Also 1 tie wih St Ignatius of Chicago. 0-0 . At the time my cousin was the football coach. He told me that every year he wrote to all of the City and Suburban Schools and asked to schedule each, but none were were willing to do so.
As to scholastics, we were as arrogant as today. The division into A B etc would not happen today, but my class produced 6 physicians, 2 lawyers, and 1 Jesuit out of 35 students. A good reord, but some of those in Classes F and G turned out to be bankers (one CEO of one of the largest bank holding companies in the State} Others from the "lower classes" turned to also be lawyers,doctors and successful entrepeneurs. In fairness, MUHS selected the cream of the crop from all of the catholic (private) schools. I wished at the time and do now that the WIAA and WCIAA were merged.
All off my children, on the other hand, went to a milw city HS (Riverside) one is a physician, one an engineer, one a courtroom advocate for the Hispanic women in abusive relationshops, another an electrical engineer and one a buyer for a large Corporation. So that doesn't confirm separation based on mental performance.
My father also graduated from MUHS -- in 1915!
Finally, I certainly detect a strong "bias" against public education in these comments. Surely as MUHS grads we had a arrogance similar to those who graduated from the U of Notre Dame, of whom Al Mcguire once said "a ND graduate will pick his nose at the table to show off his class ring".
-
As an old timer who graduated from MUHS before most of you were born, Many changes have occurred since my sojourn there. I was distracted from the football subject by the discussion of he merits of various schools and school systems. When I attende the school had 7 classes of 35 students each. they were determined by the results of tests given at all Catholic schools in the Milwaukee Archdiocise. Those 250 accepted were divided into 7 classes of 35 each on the basis of the test results. the classes were identified by letters with those scoring highest on the test into Class "A" the next into Class "B". etc.
I Sports we competed in the Catholic Conference along with the other schools Catholic Schools listed, except for More and Dominican and Memorial which did not exist. Inaddition was Don Bosco and Notre Dame and St Johns which also don't exist. I am not sure as I have not lived in WI for over 25 years MUHS dominated in sports. Of course girls sports did not exist then. "Sports were not for girls" at that time. Particularily in football . During m,y 4 years we lost only 1 game, to St Catherine, score 12 - 6.Also 1 tie wih St Ignatius of Chicago. 0-0 . At the time my cousin was the football coach. He told me that every year he wrote to all of the City and Suburban Schools and asked to schedule each, but none were were willing to do so.
As to scholastics, we were as arrogant as today. The division into A B etc would not happen today, but my class produced 6 physicians, 2 lawyers, and 1 Jesuit out of 35 students. A good reord, but some of those in Classes F and G turned out to be bankers (one CEO of one of the largest bank holding companies in the State} Others from the "lower classes" turned to also be lawyers,doctors and successful entrepeneurs. In fairness, MUHS selected the cream of the crop from all of the catholic (private) schools. I wished at the time and do now that the WIAA and WCIAA were merged.
All off my children, on the other hand, went to a milw city HS (Riverside) one is a physician, one an engineer, one a courtroom advocate for the Hispanic women in abusive relationshops, another an electrical engineer and one a buyer for a large Corporation. So that doesn't confirm separation based on mental performance.
My father also graduated from MUHS -- in 1915!
Finally, I certainly detect a strong "bias" against public education in these comments. Surely as MUHS grads we had a arrogance similar to those who graduated from the U of Notre Dame, of whom Al Mcguire once said "a ND graduate will pick his nose at the table to show off his class ring".
thanks Harryp for sharing this great history. I love how the bottom of the class did so well. Shows how grades aren't everything.
-
Standardized testing is not the problem, the problem is the incentives tied to those tests. OK, having so many tests that all you're ever doing is testing... that's a problem too. But my main point is that once you start putting certain incentives around scores, it's human nature for the school to want to do things like have scores that are as high as possible. They'll probably do that by teaching to the tests and instructing how to take tests instead of properly educating kids so they understand the material.
As Warriorchick said, how else are you going to measure proficiency? We just need to mitigate the motivations behind the result.
But the test requires that kids be properly educated to understand the material in order to achieve a high score. I don't understand the complaints about teaching to the test, when the test is of the material that you're supposed to be teaching anyway.
I suspect that the real issue here is that it takes time to properly educate kids so they understand the material--time that teachers would rather spend pontificating on social justice causes. But instead, they have to spend their time on math or science or grammar--you know, teach to the test.
-
Interesting thread but let's move the conversation back to how all of this affects MU and not pontificate about standardized tests, etc. Not being a professional educator, Porky has no expertise in this area and any comment Porky makes regarding standardized tests, no child left behind, etc. will not be based on any professional or academic experience, only Porky's personal opinion, which may as well come from Porky's Butthole.
Now that's out of the way, Porky is 100% with KC Warrior and Drewm88 on this. These numbers are ugly and MU has a lot to worry about. No doubt the numbers were likely going to be down no matter what due to Covid but this is still 150 students short of where they should be.
Porky isn't religious but understands that MU is a Jesuit School and that social justice is part of the Jesuit Ethos. That said, Porky doesn't understand MU's relentless obsession with recruiting as many students as possible who are the first in their family to go to college. It's great that MU has more of these types of students than ever, but it seems like the MU administration wants 100% of all undergrads to be in that category if possible and that Porky doesn't understand. What MU should care about is getting the best students they can period end of story. The socio-economic status from which they come shouldn't matter. If 2/3 of MU's Frosh class are first gen, Porky couldn't be happier. Conversely, if 75% of the incoming class came from families with Household income of $500K a year or more, Porky wouldn't lose any sleep either.
NC MU Fan mentioned MU's 83% acceptance rate earlier and as a Northeasterner both native and post-graduation, there's no question in Porky's mind that the 83% acceptance figure is a turnoff to a lot of high caliber students and discourages smarter students from applying to MU who otherwise might. Porky is anything but an academic elitist and generally agrees with the midwestern contingent on this issue that acceptance rates are not reflective of quality but rightly or wrongly a lot of people in other parts of the country (wrongly in Porky's view) still think it does, and as long as that continues to be the case, it will have a negative impact on MU's enrollment because that 100 student shortfall might all be students from the east and west coasts who say you know what.....I can do better. Porky is 100% certain of this and suspects most other folks on this board who live outside of the Midwest will agree. It's not a coincidence that NC MUFan raised this issue, which Porky knows has been debated on here ad nauseam. If MU continues not to care so be it.
-
100%. People who don't understand education think that everyone needs to fit into a square hole... even if they are a round or triangle peg. This is where we've been wrong for the last 50-60 years.
I used to disagree with this logic but one of my best friends and partner that didn't sniff a chance to go to college is worth more than anyone I know. He went to vocational school, "shop" during high school. He's now worth close to $100MM. I think he could teach some Ivy League kids a lesson or two.
Definitely a square peg in a round hole.
-
Interesting thread but let's move the conversation back to how all of this affects MU and not pontificate about standardized tests, etc. Not being a professional educator, Porky has no expertise in this area and any comment Porky makes regarding standardized tests, no child left behind, etc. will not be based on any professional or academic experience, only Porky's personal opinion, which may as well come from Porky's Butthole.
Now that's out of the way, Porky is 100% with KC Warrior and Drewm88 on this. These numbers are ugly and MU has a lot to worry about. No doubt the numbers were likely going to be down no matter what due to Covid but this is still 150 students short of where they should be.
Porky isn't religious but understands that MU is a Jesuit School and that social justice is part of the Jesuit Ethos. That said, Porky doesn't understand MU's relentless obsession with recruiting as many students as possible who are the first in their family to go to college. It's great that MU has more of these types of students than ever, but it seems like the MU administration wants 100% of all undergrads to be in that category if possible and that Porky doesn't understand. What MU should care about is getting the best students they can period end of story. The socio-economic status from which they come shouldn't matter. If 2/3 of MU's Frosh class are first gen, Porky couldn't be happier. Conversely, if 75% of the incoming class came from families with Household income of $500K a year or more, Porky wouldn't lose any sleep either.
NC MU Fan mentioned MU's 83% acceptance rate earlier and as a Northeasterner both native and post-graduation, there's no question in Porky's mind that the 83% acceptance figure is a turnoff to a lot of high caliber students and discourages smarter students from applying to MU who otherwise might. Porky is anything but an academic elitist and generally agrees with the midwestern contingent on this issue that acceptance rates are not reflective of quality but rightly or wrongly a lot of people in other parts of the country (wrongly in Porky's view) still think it does, and as long as that continues to be the case, it will have a negative impact on MU's enrollment because that 100 student shortfall might all be students from the east and west coasts who say you know what.....I can do better. Porky is 100% certain of this and suspects most other folks on this board who live outside of the Midwest will agree. It's not a coincidence that NC MUFan raised this issue, which Porky knows has been debated on here ad nauseam. If MU continues not to care so be it.
Porky is one of my favorite posters.
-
But aren't teachers held at least partially accountable for their students' academic progress? How are they going to evaluate themselves?
I always totally sucked at standardized tests. Elementary school teacher doesn't believe in them, gets lots of students that can barely read or write who did good on standardized tests. Some teachers do "cheat" so they look good for evaluation. Sad story but true.
-
But the test requires that kids be properly educated to understand the material in order to achieve a high score. I don't understand the complaints about teaching to the test, when the test is of the material that you're supposed to be teaching anyway.
Because teaching to the test only teaches a student how to regurgitate the narrow range of material - usually in multiple choice format - that some state bureaucrat has decided is necessary for a given grade level.
Because teaching to the test doesn't recognize the reality that children learn and express their knowledge in different ways ... and it's those differences that often make the difference in whether a person succeeds or not in life.
Because standardized tests have been provento be a poor measure of child's intelligence or academic achievement.
Because teaching to the tests limits the focus of curricula to what's on the test.
And most of all, because teaching to the test disincetivizes classroom activities that encourage students to figure sh*t out on their own, develop critical thinking skills, foster creativity, and learn how to learn.
It's the kids who can do those things are going to grow up to be the most successful, not the automaton who can best fill out ovals with a No. 2 pencil.
I suspect that the real issue here is that it takes time to properly educate kids so they understand the material--time that teachers would rather spend pontificating on social justice causes. But instead, they have to spend their time on math or science or grammar--you know, teach to the test.
Have you actually spent any time in a classroom? Read a lesson plan? Reviewed a school district's curriculum. What you've written here is so asinine it hurts my brain.
-
Because teaching to the test only teaches a student how to regurgitate the narrow range of material - usually in multiple choice format - that some state bureaucrat has decided is necessary for a given grade level.
Because teaching to the test doesn't recognize the reality that children learn and express their knowledge in different ways ... and it's those differences that often make the difference in whether a person succeeds or not in life.
Because standardized tests have been provento be a poor measure of child's intelligence or academic achievement.
Because teaching to the tests limits the focus of curricula to what's on the test.
And most of all, because teaching to the test disincetivizes classroom activities that encourage students to figure sh*t out on their own, develop critical thinking skills, foster creativity, and learn how to learn.
It's the kids who can do those things are going to grow up to be the most successful, not the automaton who can best fill out ovals with a No. 2 pencil.
Have you actually spent any time in a classroom? Read a lesson plan? Reviewed a school district's curriculum. What you've written here is so asinine it hurts my brain.
Wow. In addition to being an expert at most everything, we can now add k-12 education to you sparkling resume.
Do you do model trains too? Nuclear physics? Finding the G spot?
-
Do you do model trains too? Nuclear physics? Finding the G spot?
Oh, never mind. I'll be nice.
-
Finally, I certainly detect a strong "bias" against public education in these comments. Surely as MUHS grads we had a arrogance similar to those who graduated from the U of Notre Dame, of whom Al McGuire once said "a ND graduate will pick his nose at the table to show off his class ring".
Brother Harry,
While I agree with your sentiments about Notre Dame but I think the public school issue is less a bias and more a frustration with an unwillingness to live up to their mission. Nothing is more important to the strength of our country and the cohesiveness of our communities than a good public education system. Period.
I believe the way out of poverty is education. I've put my beliefs in action by assisting my children and by my contributions to MU and others. But I am frustrated by the fact that Learning isn't for all and that too often the educrats and teachers game the system rather than make real progress. A lot of good concerns about everything from parental involvement and commitment to education to children caring have been raised in our discussions and I'm grateful for the thoughtful dialogue, even when I don't agree with posters. But the common thread is the schools too often don't do their job.
When the head of special education in an affluent Illinois school district tells me that my learning disabled son meets the eighth grade graduation requirements even if he flunks two or fewer classes, my blood boils. She needed to be fired ON THE SPOT. Or when an administrator tells me there's nothing wrong with children making hateful comments about gay and lesbian people and blows off the fact that suicide is the number one cause of death among gay and lesbian teens, I have a severe problem. That's not what inclusiveness, equality and love for our neighbor is all about but it is what's tolerated in our grade school district. And try to do something about it? You have a better chance of electing Alexandria Occasio-Cortez Governor of Texas than you do of changing our grade school district and the attitudes of our educrats.
I'm a Catholic School kid. Except for summer school in Duluth, I never saw the inside of a public school in my life. From kindergarten to graduate school, I was in the Catholic system in Nashville, Milwaukee and Chicago. I recognize the good that they do. But private schools are limited and may subject families to views about life on which they may not agree. Our public schools are the basis for progress and growth of our society and even we Catholic School families would never disagree with that.
-
I always totally sucked at standardized tests. Elementary school teacher doesn't believe in them, gets lots of students that can barely read or write who did good on standardized tests. Some teachers do "cheat" so they look good for evaluation. Sad story but true.
Standardized tests are basically IQ tests, aina?
-
Standardized tests are basically IQ tests, aina?
If you're saying equally pointless, sure.
-
Geez, DG, you sound like a rather reasonable, fair minded, well thought out individual.
Just a week ago, the enlightened folks on this board had deemed you to be a racist and utterly vile to the core.
How dare you have the audacity to actually live your life in a virtuous manner, being a wonderful parent, husband, and an all around decent human being (your baseball fandom has me rethinking this, though).
All this goodie-goodie stuff you claim does not fit The Narrative about you last week.
Popcorn time.
-
Geez, DG, you sound like a rather reasonable, fair minded, well thought out individual.
Just a week ago, the enlightened folks on this board had deemed you to be a racist and utterly vile to the core.
How dare you have the audacity to actually live your life in a virtuous manner, being a wonderful parent, husband, and an all around decent human being (your baseball fandom has me rethinking this, though).
All this goodie-goodie stuff you claim does not fit The Narrative about you last week.
Popcorn time.
No! He thinks Yadier is the best PR baseball player ever. DG is just a dirty bird fan, makes him a dirty old man.
-
Standardized tests are basically IQ tests, aina?
Still using anesthetics on yourself, bad for you doc.
-
Geez, DG, you sound like a rather reasonable, fair minded, well thought out individual.
Just a week ago, the enlightened folks on this board had deemed you to be a racist and utterly vile to the core.
How dare you have the audacity to actually live your life in a virtuous manner, being a wonderful parent, husband, and an all around decent human being (your baseball fandom has me rethinking this, though).
All this goodie-goodie stuff you claim does not fit The Narrative about you last week.
Popcorn time.
INCOMING!
-
Standardized tests are basically IQ tests, aina?
They measure both achievement and IQ, two things currently out of favor.
The brightest will always score the highest, but everyone can improve on the margins if they are taught basic math, reading and grammar skills. I gather from Pakuni’s post that these are also out of favor. We’re producing kids that are way behind in reading, math and science but keen on at least one version of social justice. How this is considered “progress” escapes me.
-
Because teaching to the test only teaches a student how to regurgitate the narrow range of material - usually in multiple choice format - that some state bureaucrat has decided is necessary for a given grade level.
How does one teach a student to regurgitate the answer to something like "2x + 9 = 21. Solve for x"
Or: "You need to by a pair of shoes and some socks. A pair of shoes costs $9. Socks cost $2 each pair. How many pair of socks can you buy if you have $21."
If you teach the concept, the test will be easy. So don't teach to the test. Teach the concept. The test is a measure as to whether you've done that.
And most of all, because teaching to the test disincetivizes classroom activities that encourage students to figure sh*t out on their own, develop critical thinking skills, foster creativity, and learn how to learn. [/b]
It's the kids who can do those things are going to grow up to be the most successful, not the automaton who can best fill out ovals with a No. 2 pencil.
If you have successfully taught via activities that encourage students to figures sh*t out on their own, develop critical thinking skills, foster creativity, and learn how to learn, THEN a student should be able to apply what they figured out, their critical thinking skills, and their creativity to answer a damn question on a test.
-
How does one teach a student to regurgitate the answer to something like "2x + 9 = 21. Solve for x"
Or: "You need to by a pair of shoes and some socks. A pair of shoes costs $9. Socks cost $2 each pair. How many pair of socks can you buy if you have $21."
If you teach the concept, the test will be easy. So don't teach to the test. Teach the concept. The test is a measure as to whether you've done that.
That's cool for math. Now do that for reading comprehension, history, social sciences, etc.
-
We’re producing kids that are way behind in reading, math and science but keen on at least one version of social justice. How this is considered “progress” escapes me.
Other than the glib about social justice, I agree. Which is why some are questioning if the status quo (excessive standardized testing) is the correct path. This is certainly a multi-faceted problem with no easy one size fits all solution.
-
That's cool for math. Now do that for reading comprehension, history, social sciences, etc.
Hard to get good at reading comprehension (or any subject that requires it) without first learning how to read.
-
Hard to get good at reading comprehension (or any subject that requires it) without first learning how to read.
No kidding. Tell me how you can evaluate that on a standardized test?
-
No kidding. Tell me how you can evaluate that on a standardized test?
If you can't read, you'll perform poorly on a standardized tests. Then the child will get assistance.
If our little Catholic school could figure that out, why can public schools with more aides, social workers, specialists, etc than actual classroom teachers figure that out?
Oh yeah, we don't want to make a kid feel bad by not simply advancing them through the grade levels instead of asking sure that kids are ready to do the work in the next grade.
Then, when illiterate and otherwise not prepared kids "graduate" they are condemned to low wage, low skill jobs, because that's all they can do. You need to be able to read and do math for the trades, manufacturing, and most other blue collar jobs, short of day laborer and fast food.
Then poverty, crime, prison, and repeat.
-
If you can't read, you'll perform poorly on a standardized tests. Then the child will get assistance.
If our little Catholic school could figure that out, why can public schools with more aides, social workers, specialists, etc than actual classroom teachers figure that out?
Oh yeah, we don't want to make a kid feel bad by not simply advancing them through the grade levels instead of asking sure that kids are ready to do the work in the next grade.
Then, when illiterate and otherwise not prepared kids "graduate" they are condemned to low wage, low skill jobs, because that's all they can do. You need to be able to read and do math for the trades, manufacturing, and most other blue collar jobs, short of day laborer and fast food.
Then poverty, crime, prison, and repeat.
While you're right this sort of ignores the fact that ESL kids are left out to dry there. Can we at least agree that they should probably offer the exams in various languages?
-
So don't teach to the test. Teach the concept. The test is a measure as to whether you've done that.
We agree, then. Don't teach to the test.
Though you and I (and educators) may not share the same understanding of what "teach to the test" means. It doesn't mean "don't teach the material that will appear on the test." It means don't limit the curriculum, lesson plans and classroom instruction to the test. Don't reduce time spent on material that isn't on the test, i.e. music, art, foreign language, PE, and, depending on the grade level and test, even science and social studies. Don't waste time on test preparation (which can do more for test scores than actual subject knowledge ... there's a reason test prep is a $10 billion industry in this country).
And, give space for kids to learn in different ways. To explore. To fail and learn from it. That's not an option when the entire curriculum and school year is built rigidly around one or two days of testing.
If you have successfully taught via activities that encourage students to figures sh*t out on their own, develop critical thinking skills, foster creativity, and learn how to learn, THEN a student should be able to apply what they figured out, their critical thinking skills, and their creativity to answer a damn question on a test.
How do you do this when lessons are focused on the limited material on a standardized test and preparing for said test?
-
If you can't read, you'll perform poorly on a standardized tests. Then the child will get assistance.
If our little Catholic school could figure that out, why can public schools with more aides, social workers, specialists, etc than actual classroom teachers figure that out?
Oh yeah, we don't want to make a kid feel bad by not simply advancing them through the grade levels instead of asking sure that kids are ready to do the work in the next grade.
Then, when illiterate and otherwise not prepared kids "graduate" they are condemned to low wage, low skill jobs, because that's all they can do. You need to be able to read and do math for the trades, manufacturing, and most other blue collar jobs, short of day laborer and fast food.
Then poverty, crime, prison, and repeat.
Again, you aren't addressing the question. How do you measure proficiency in reading, social sciences, etc. using standardized tests?
And again, I will point out, that proficiency in those topics have gotten WORSE since No Child Left Behind.
-
Replace teacher focused/led, listen and regurgitate for standardized tests with child focused/led, project and presentation based learning. Of course some colleges, trade schools, jobs will require proficiency in certain areas, and this switch in learning might lead to young people curious to learn those skills in order to progress in any direction they see fit and in a way they deem successful for them in life.
-
They measure both achievement and IQ, two things currently out of favor.
The brightest will always score the highest, but everyone can improve on the margins if they are taught basic math, reading and grammar skills. I gather from Pakuni’s post that these are also out of favor. We’re producing kids that are way behind in reading, math and science but keen on at least one version of social justice. How this is considered “progress” escapes me.
We actually do OK in reading, but are indeed lagging in math. This has remained true despite an intense focus over the past two decades on standardized testing as a cure to all that ails our educational system.
And here's why ... American schools' math curricula sucks. It focuses on memorizing formulas and procedures - the kind of things you need to know for a standardized test - rather than how other countries do it, by teaching creativity, problem solving and critical thinking.
Here's a good read and a good podcast examining why American students are behind in math. You'll be shocked to learn it has nothing to do with your latest right-wing boogeyman.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2020/02/28/math-scores-high-school-lessons-freakonomics-pisa-algebra-geometry/4835742002/
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/math-curriculum/
-
I think there are a lot of people here who should give up their current careers and get into the classrooms. There is a shortage right now. Opportunity to make a difference.
-
No! He thinks Yadier is the best PR baseball player ever. DG is just a dirty bird fan, makes him a dirty old man.
Great Puerto Rican Baseball Players:
1) Roberto Clemente
2) Nobody -- compared to the person Clemente was and the ballplayer he was, nobody measures up.
3) Yadi Molina
4) Orlando Cepeda
5) Jose Oquendo
6) Everyone else
OK, I'm thoroughly off topic but I had to address this. My Cardinal credentials are at stake!
-
They measure both achievement and IQ, two things currently out of favor.
The brightest will always score the highest, but everyone can improve on the margins if they are taught basic math, reading and grammar skills. I gather from Pakuni’s post that these are also out of favor. We’re producing kids that are way behind in reading, math and science but keen on at least one version of social justice. How this is considered “progress” escapes me.
Just as honors programs are falling out of favor because too many Asian kids are testing into them. And don't forget about the new math where 2+2 can equal 5 if the kid says so. Yeah, that's who I want working on our roads and bridges.
Sure, there are kids who are going to naturally test better, but I see these tests as a great equalizer. Basing college admissions on GPAs only is not an adequate barometer of preparation of future success. Those can be manipulated though grade inflation and weaker scheduling. I think of my school's co-valedictorians; one took AP classes and now works at Apple after doing grad school at Stanford. The other took no AP classes, Yearbook, and classes like that, and flamed out at Michigan Tech. Standardized tests are great equalizers. Of course, plenty of studies that Pakuni posts say otherwise, but it's easy to manipulate those when you go in with the conclusion already decided.
If we get rid of the ACT and SAT shouldn't we also get rid of the GMAT, MCAT, and LSAT? How about the TOEFL too? We wouldn't want kids left out of med school and feeling bad about themselves because they didn't do well enough on the MCAT.
-
While you're right this sort of ignores the fact that ESL kids are left out to dry there. Can we at least agree that they should probably offer the exams in various languages?
I'm guessing there is now, but if not it should be that way.
-
If we get rid of the ACT and SAT shouldn't we also get rid of the GMAT, MCAT, and LSAT? How about the TOEFL too? We wouldn't want kids left out of med school and feeling bad about themselves because they didn't do well enough on the MCAT.
Perhaps. Do those tests equate to the best doctors and lawyers? Malcolm Gladwell does a podcast on a Supreme Court law clerk that went to Ohio State and also addresses standardized testing.
-
They measure both achievement and IQ, two things currently out of favor.
The brightest will always score the highest, but everyone can improve on the margins if they are taught basic math, reading and grammar skills. I gather from Pakuni’s post that these are also out of favor. We’re producing kids that are way behind in reading, math and science but keen on at least one version of social justice. How this is considered “progress” escapes me.
I mean, at your age, I'm sure a lot escapes you.
But in all seriousness, we are "way behind" because your generation dropped the ball. Its shocking to me that the people who have been in control for the last 30-40 years can't believe how far behind our children are. But that's just par for the course with you old folk. Absolute abdication of responsibility is your generations greatest gift to the world!
You're the same numbskulls that berated millennials about getting "participation trophies". Did you guys think we went to the trophy store and had those made for ourselves?
-
The 'OK, boomer' response. Well played.
-
I mean, at your age, I'm sure a lot escapes you.
But in all seriousness, we are "way behind" because your generation dropped the ball. Its shocking to me that the people who have been in control for the last 30-40 years can't believe how far behind our children are. But that's just par for the course with you old folk. Absolute abdication of responsibility is your generations greatest gift to the world!
You're the same numbskulls that berated millennials about getting "participation trophies". Did you guys think we went to the trophy store and had those made for ourselves?
Right. I mean, for a long part of our country's history, our public schools were the envy of the world. We funded them well, we prepared our teachers fantastically, people were given access where they weren't getting access in other countries. And the results showed! All the progress that was made in the sciences in the 19th and 20th centuries for instance, was largely lead by Americans who were educated in public K-12 school systems.
But then the generation that reaped from that system, decided that teachers were overpaid, that schools had enough resources, and declared fat was there to be trimmed. And when proficiency suffered, you blamed the teachers and the schools more, increased testing and tied it to funding (with predictable results). And now that's not working either. So you are blaming teachers and "educrats" some more. Oh and "critical race theory" and such dog-whistling nonsense.
But some people don't understand history so...here we are.
-
I mean, at your age, I'm sure a lot escapes you.
But in all seriousness, we are "way behind" because your generation dropped the ball. Its shocking to me that the people who have been in control for the last 30-40 years can't believe how far behind our children are. But that's just par for the course with you old folk. Absolute abdication of responsibility is your generations greatest gift to the world!
You're the same numbskulls that berated millennials about getting "participation trophies". Did you guys think we went to the trophy store and had those made for ourselves?
Yet, the Millennials are the most educated and according to this, the wealthiest generation. Something must have gone right.
While there are downfalls in standardized testing, something must have improved versus the 3Rs the Boomers grew up in. You do realize we inherited dirt scrabble schools in the South and Appalachia, no Early Start programs, day care didn't exist. No equal opportunity laws or quotas. Segregation was the norm. There was a lot to fix.
China's education philosophy teaches student book smarts but they lag so much on conceptual thinking as it's all about The State.
The switch in US schools to teach math conceptually (the University of Chicago school), transformed how Millennials were taught, for example. Put it this way: The Chinese (using US technology) could give the world the Covid genetic map, the US had the mRNA technology to advance it into a vaccine.
I think we left things behind too like the seven liberal arts philosophy were students were exposed to and taught new challenge viewpoints. This was replaced with specialization and digital Johnson measuring. Lost was academic curiosity.
I am a believer that educational concepts are short lived (10 years) and serve their purpose. Philosophies should constantly change at the inflection points. We are in the middle of one for Millennial kids with the COVID kids. Let's see how things evolve, Big Boy, now that you are in the captain's chair.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-23/millennials-the-wealthiest-generation-believe-it
-
I mean, at your age, I'm sure a lot escapes you.
But in all seriousness, we are "way behind" because your generation dropped the ball. Its shocking to me that the people who have been in control for the last 30-40 years can't believe how far behind our children are. But that's just par for the course with you old folk. Absolute abdication of responsibility is your generations greatest gift to the world!
You're the same numbskulls that berated millennials about getting "participation trophies". Did you guys think we went to the trophy store and had those made for ourselves?
Says the guy that will inherit his boomer parents' business. Or will you walk away out of principle?
-
Ziggy
Thanks for the laugh. Hards ain't doing anything out of principle when it comes to that business. He will take the money the run.
-
Isn't it actually the in-law's business?
-
real
It is some stupid Boomer that started and owns it. Does it matter which idiot Boomer started it?
-
LOL
-
I'm guessing there is now, but if not it should be that way.
(https://www.memesmonkey.com/images/memesmonkey/34/340d3ad5cd8a6d929ad8bcb665d4cfa6.jpeg)
-
(https://www.memesmonkey.com/images/memesmonkey/34/340d3ad5cd8a6d929ad8bcb665d4cfa6.jpeg)
Friend me on Facebook, yo.
-
We actually do OK in reading, but are indeed lagging in math. This has remained true despite an intense focus over the past two decades on standardized testing as a cure to all that ails our educational system.
And here's why ... American schools' math curricula sucks. It focuses on memorizing formulas and procedures - the kind of things you need to know for a standardized test - rather than how other countries do it, by teaching creativity, problem solving and critical thinking.
Here's a good read and a good podcast examining why American students are behind in math. You'll be shocked to learn it has nothing to do with your latest right-wing boogeyman.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2020/02/28/math-scores-high-school-lessons-freakonomics-pisa-algebra-geometry/4835742002/
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/math-curriculum/
Thanks for sharing--it validates the point I was trying to make.
Other countries based on similar tests outperform the US--so the problem obviously isn't either the tests themselves or the fact that students have to take them.
So my point is to stop worrying about testing or the limitations imposed by trying to "teach to the test," and instead just teach so that kids understand the material--the test scores will take care of themselves.
-
I'm sorry, I passed my logic class at Marquette, so I'm not following. What does Hards' family business have to do with educational policy?
-
I'm sorry, I passed my logic class at Marquette, so I'm not following. What does Hards' family business have to do with educational policy?
It was his anti-boomer diatribe that highlighted his hypocrisy.
-
It was his anti-boomer diatribe that highlighted his hypocrisy.
So, nothing to do with it?
Though, upon rereading Hards' post, he opened the door to other non-educational topics. Have at it.
-
Thanks for sharing--it validates the point I was trying to make.
Other countries based on similar tests outperform the US--so the problem obviously isn't either the tests themselves or the fact that students have to take them.
So my point is to stop worrying about testing or the limitations imposed by trying to "teach to the test," and instead just teach so that kids understand the material--the test scores will take care of themselves.
I'm not an expert but I'll throw out my experiences as validation for the quality of the education against our peers in Western Europe.
When my daughter first arrived, we had a German au pair come to care for her for a year. She was an architectural student who took a year off and came from a fairly affluent German family and a good German educational system. In short, she and her community valued education.
One day she tuned in the History Channel and asked about World War II. We discussed it at length and she finally said to me, "Didn't the US declare war on Germany to free the Jews?"
Me: "Britta, have you ever heard of Pearl Harbor?"
Britta: "What's Pearl Harbor?"
Me: "Don't you understand, the entire defense of the Western World is built around an assurance Pearl Harbor will never happen again!"
Britta: "What happened?"
Me: "We were bombed in a sneak attack. We declared war on Japan and your country's government declared war on us three days later..."
She got a little snooty and asked me questions about German history and to name any three Chancellors of the Federal Republic. When I named five, she nearly fainted. The only President she could name was Clinton and JFK, who she linked to Marilyn Monroe.
My point is I don't think I'm unique. We're turning out very educated Americans by the carload, who know not just technical issues but understand our culture, our history and that of the rest of the world. We aren't perfect, as our debate has shown, but we do pretty well against the world. Look at the technological, cultural and scientific achievements by Americans. We lap the rest of the world several times over. That flag on the moon doesn't have a Union Jack, Rising Sun, Hammer and Sickle or Tri-Color in it.
-
I'm not an expert but I'll throw out my experiences as validation for the quality of the education against our peers in Western Europe.
When my daughter first arrived, we had a German au pair come to care for her for a year. She was an architectural student who took a year off and came from a fairly affluent German family and a good German educational system. In short, she and her community valued education.
One day she tuned in the History Channel and asked about World War II. We discussed it at length and she finally said to me, "Didn't the US declare war on Germany to free the Jews?"
Me: "Britta, have you ever heard of Pearl Harbor?"
Britta: "What's Pearl Harbor?"
Me: "Don't you understand, the entire defense of the Western World is built around an assurance Pearl Harbor will never happen again!"
Britta: "What happened?"
Me: "We were bombed in a sneak attack. We declared war on Japan and your country's government declared war on us three days later..."
She got a little snooty and asked me questions about German history and to name any three Chancellors of the Federal Republic. When I named five, she nearly fainted. The only President she could name was Clinton and JFK, who she linked to Marilyn Monroe.
My point is I don't think I'm unique. We're turning out very educated Americans by the carload, who know not just technical issues but understand our culture, our history and that of the rest of the world. We aren't perfect, as our debate has shown, but we do pretty well against the world. Look at the technological, cultural and scientific achievements by Americans. We lap the rest of the world several times over. That flag on the moon doesn't have a Union Jack, Rising Sun, Hammer and Sickle or Tri-Color in it.
I had a German student who said he was going to sign up for History of WWII. I told him "you're about to learn a lot of things you never knew about!" Though to be fair, they now learn about WWII instead of the old "we all went on vacation between 1933-1945" approach.
However, as for your last point, that was 50 years ago. We'd never be able to do that today thanks to the Social Justice movement declaring Math as "racist." https://www.ocregister.com/2021/07/26/california-educators-battle-over-woke-math/ Instead, I've observed international students, especially Eastern Europeans, coming to US colleges and even with a limited grasp of English, significantly outperforming US students.
-
However, as for your last point, that was 50 years ago. We'd never be able to do that today thanks to the Social Justice movement declaring Math as "racist." https://www.ocregister.com/2021/07/26/california-educators-battle-over-woke-math/ Instead, I've observed international students, especially Eastern Europeans, coming to US colleges and even with a limited grasp of English, significantly outperforming US students.
So...no where in that opinion article did anyone call Math racist as you claim. Nor did it go into any details of what this new curriculum advocates for. The only thing that it mentioned was that there is bias out there that assumes that female, Black, and Latinx students can't do math and the new curriculum seeks to address that. And they are correct, that bias does exist.
To be clear, I'm not advocating for one form of math instruction over the other. I haven't read the curriculum mentioned in the opinion piece or the "traditional math" curriculum already in place (how great is that they refer to it as traditional?). I have no idea which one is better. I'm just pointing out that the opinion piece you linked doesn't actually say what you say it does.
-
So...no where in that opinion article did anyone call Math racist as you claim. Nor did it go into any details of what this new curriculum advocates for. The only thing that it mentioned was that there is bias out there that assumes that female, Black, and Latinx students can't do math and the new curriculum seeks to address that. And they are correct, that bias does exist.
To be clear, I'm not advocating for one form of math instruction over the other. I haven't read the curriculum mentioned in the opinion piece or the "traditional math" curriculum already in place (how great is that they refer to it as traditional?). I have no idea which one is better. I'm just pointing out that the opinion piece you linked doesn't actually say what you say it does.
Love that you are still using Latinx when most Latinos hate that word. Liberal, white academics use that word.
Romance languages are gendered. It's not bad, it is what it is.
-
Says the guy that will inherit his boomer parents' business. Or will you walk away out of principle?
Oh, we bought it. Sorry to inform you. I'm an outlier for my generation, and I'm right on the edge of being GenX. The kids who graduated a year or two after me had it much more difficult. I've been very fortunate, and I'm not afraid to admit it... unlike your buddy rocket.
Yet, the Millennials are the most educated and according to this, the wealthiest generation. Something must have gone right.
While there are downfalls in standardized testing, something must have improved versus the 3Rs the Boomers grew up in. You do realize we inherited dirt scrabble schools in the South and Appalachia, no Early Start programs, day care didn't exist. No equal opportunity laws or quotas. Segregation was the norm. There was a lot to fix.
China's education philosophy teaches student book smarts but they lag so much on conceptual thinking as it's all about The State.
The switch in US schools to teach math conceptually (the University of Chicago school), transformed how Millennials were taught, for example. Put it this way: The Chinese (using US technology) could give the world the Covid genetic map, the US had the mRNA technology to advance it into a vaccine.
I think we left things behind too like the seven liberal arts philosophy were students were exposed to and taught new challenge viewpoints. This was replaced with specialization and digital Johnson measuring. Lost was academic curiosity.
I am a believer that educational concepts are short lived (10 years) and serve their purpose. Philosophies should constantly change at the inflection points. We are in the middle of one for Millennial kids with the COVID kids. Let's see how things evolve, Big Boy, now that you are in the captain's chair.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-23/millennials-the-wealthiest-generation-believe-it
Lmao. We have more networth because the stock market has been on a disgusting run for the last decade. If you believe that bubble isn't going to pop, I've got a bridge to sell you. We have more debt, don't own homes at the same pace as our parents, and the housing market is insane.
So, nothing to do with it?
Though, upon rereading Hards' post, he opened the door to other non-educational topics. Have at it.
Anecdotes are Ziggy's specialty; well, that and literally never adding anything to any conversation. He just throws grenades. Most kids grow out of this phase by their early twenties.
Ziggy
Thanks for the laugh. Hards ain't doing anything out of principle when it comes to that business. He will take the money the run.
Actually, we've expanded our fleet by 25% since we started running it a decade ago. Keep the theories coming though!
I'm surprised you guys don't know more about me by now... after having stalked me for the last two years. Also pretty surprised at how I managed to trigger the entire "underboard" or "meat eaters" or whatever you guys are calling your bridge club these days. The only two missing right now are rocket and keefe (LOL)... but I'm sure they'll show up eventually to try to pile on.
-
Love that you are still using Latinx when most Latinos hate that word. Liberal, white academics use that word.
Romance languages are gendered. It's not bad, it is what it is.
Hehehehe I actually agree.
-
Superbar
-
Love that you are still using Latinx when most Latinos hate that word. Liberal, white academics use that word.
Romance languages are gendered. It's not bad, it is what it is.
Use of the word Latinx isn't about the Latino/a population as a whole. It came from the LGBTQ+ community within the Latino/a community. The "hatred" you describe is in many cases because of the connection to the LGBTQ+ community.
My use of the term is to be inclusive of LGBTQ+ community. If I'm speaking to someone who I know identifies as Latino or Latina, I use those terms. I don't find it to be a burden to change the terms I use to match the person I'm talking tos preference.
-
Oh, we bought it. Sorry to inform you. I'm an outlier for my generation, and I'm right on the edge of being GenX. The kids who graduated a year or two after me had it much more difficult. I've been very fortunate, and I'm not afraid to admit it... unlike your buddy rocket.
Lmao. We have more networth because the stock market has been on a disgusting run for the last decade. If you believe that bubble isn't going to pop, I've got a bridge to sell you. We have more debt, don't own homes at the same pace as our parents, and the housing market is insane.
Anecdotes are Ziggy's specialty; well, that and literally never adding anything to any conversation. He just throws grenades. Most kids grow out of this phase by their early twenties.
Actually, we've expanded our fleet by 25% since we started running it a decade ago. Keep the theories coming though!
I'm surprised you guys don't know more about me by now... after having stalked me for the last two years. Also pretty surprised at how I managed to trigger the entire "underboard" or "meat eaters" or whatever you guys are calling your bridge club these days. The only two missing right now are rocket and keefe (LOL)... but I'm sure they'll show up eventually to try to pile on.
Hot tip: don't identify yourself with your username.
-
Hot tip: don't identify yourself with your username.
Lol thanks for the advice old man.
Or, you guys could just not be creeps.
-
Thanks for sharing--it validates the point I was trying to make.
Other countries based on similar tests outperform the US--so the problem obviously isn't either the tests themselves or the fact that students have to take them.
So my point is to stop worrying about testing or the limitations imposed by trying to "teach to the test," and instead just teach so that kids understand the material--the test scores will take care of themselves.
Maybe I'm misreading you, but you think this validates your belief that standardized testing and teaching to the test works because students in countries that don't do standardized testing or teach to the test do better on tests?
It would seem that it does the opposite of validating your belief. Countries that have more creative curricula and where "there's little high-stakes testing, leaving more time for instruction" are the ones doing the best.
No one is saying don't "just teach so the kids understand the material." I'm saying do teach so that kids understand the material ... and to do that, don't make a specific score on a standardized test given over a single day or two the entire goal of the learning process, or the sole factor in determining who knows what.
-
I'm surprised you guys don't know more about me by now... after having stalked me for the last two years. Also pretty surprised at how I managed to trigger the entire "underboard" or "meat eaters" or whatever you guys are calling your bridge club these days. The only two missing right now are rocket and keefe (LOL)... but I'm sure they'll show up eventually to try to pile on.
Hey, donut leev me out. Eye'm still a member of dis exclusive klub, aina?
-
It's super creepy to spend even a second trying to figure out Scoopers' identities, you stalking motherf*ckers.
-
It's super creepy to spend even a second trying to figure out Scoopers' identities, you stalking motherf*ckers.
Ok, Tim.
-
The idea that standardized test are worthless is great until you find out your hart surgeon or the person who engineered the plane your about to board scored an 18 on ACT.
These tests are flawed but not worthless.
-
The idea that standardized test are worthless is great until you find out your hart surgeon or the person who engineered the plane your about to board scored an 18 on ACT.
These tests are flawed but not worthless.
Being good at analogies and writing a solid essay are super important skills for a heart surgeon.
-
Being good at analogies and writing a solid essay are super important skills for a heart surgeon.
Sure, Pak. Lots of great heart surgeons scored 300 on the SAT verbal. My guess is one less than the number of US presidents who flunked the 3rd grade.
-
Sure, Pak. Lots of great heart surgeons scored 300 on the SAT verbal. My guess is one less than the number of US presidents who flunked the 3rd grade.
That's exactly what I said, Lenny..
When you need to visit a doctor, do you first inquire about his or her ACT score?
-
The idea that standardized test are worthless is great until you find out your hart surgeon or the person who engineered the plane your about to board scored an 18 on ACT.
These tests are flawed but not worthless.
Honest question, has anyone said they are worthless? I personally don't think they're worthless but I do think they're too heavily relied upon.
-
Lmao. We have more networth because the stock market has been on a disgusting run for the last decade. If you believe that bubble isn't going to pop, I've got a bridge to sell you. We have more debt, don't own homes at the same pace as our parents, and the housing market is insane.
A decade is a “bubble”? A hot housing market at record low interest rates is “insane” (not the 20% prime rate us Boomers inherited)? Record personal savings rates and debt forgiveness based on stimulus packages is a horrible burden to be handed off? A 13th place ribbon sounds pretty good to me, no offense.
I can’t wait for the educational, social, health and economic breakthroughs you Millennials will deliver future generations. I think it will be significant. When are you running for the school board?
-Signed
The Cheese Under Board
-
The idea that standardized test are worthless is great until you find out your hart surgeon or the person who engineered the plane your about to board scored an 18 on ACT.
These tests are flawed but not worthless.
No one said they were worthless.
But do you know what your surgeon would have scored on their ACT? If you found out that a really great heart surgeon did score a 18 a decade plus years ago, would you not want him to operate on you?
-
That's exactly what I said, Lenny..
When you need to visit a doctor, do you first inquire about his or her ACT score?
Of course not. I was always confident that the screening process (which included standardized tests) kept low IQ people out of medical schools. I think that’s a good idea.
-
A decade is a “bubble”? A hot housing market at record low interest rates is “insane” (not the 20% prime rate us Boomers inherited)? Record personal savings rates and debt forgiveness based on stimulus packages is a horrible burden to be handed off? A 13th place ribbon sounds pretty good to me, no offense.
I can’t wait for the educational, social, health and economic breakthroughs you Millennials will deliver future generations. I think it will be significant. When are you running for the school board?
-Signed
The Cheese Under Board
+1- resentful people will bitch no matter how much is given them.
-
Honest question, has anyone said they are worthless? I personally don't think they're worthless but I do think they're too heavily relied upon.
Hards_Alumni
Quote from: 4everwarriors on
"Standardized tests are basically IQ tests, aina?"
"If you're saying equally pointless, sure."
Also a lot of top schools don't require an ACT or SAT score now.
-
Of course not. I was always confident that the screening process (which included standardized tests) kept low IQ people out of medical schools. I think that’s a good idea.
Well, that's sort of the point, isn't it Lenny?
The system has four years of high school, four years of undergrad, a 12-hour medical school entrance exam, four years of medical school, a multi-day, three-step board exam, and five to seven years of residency to weed out those who lack the requisite skills to perform surgery.
But you guys somehow think a three-hour test taken on a Saturday morning as a 16- or 17-year-old is an essential and necessary part of the process. And without that three-hour test taken on a Saturday morning as a 16- or 17-year-old, a "low IQ" person might end up performing your triple bypass.
Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?
In the grand scheme, it's a pimple on an elephant's ass, only far less relevant.
-
Well, that's sort of the point, isn't it Lenny?
The system has four years of high school, four years of undergrad, a 12-hour medical school entrance exam, four years of medical school, a multi-day, three-step board exam, and five to seven years of residency to weed out those who lack the requisite skills to perform surgery.
But you guys somehow think a three-hour test taken on a Saturday morning as a 16- or 17-year-old is an essential and necessary part of the process. And without that three-hour test taken on a Saturday morning as a 16- or 17-year-old, a "low IQ" person might end up performing your triple bypass.
Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?
In the grand scheme, it's a pimple on an elephant's ass, only far less relevant.
Of course there are other points along the way where someone who wants to be a doctor is weeded/washed out by the system but a very effective first point is an IQ test.
You mock IQ tests by asking “Has anyone ever asked his heart surgeon what he/she got on the ACT?”. Conversely, has anyone ever asked his heart surgeon what his high school class rank was? His undergrad GPA? His med board scores? Etc., etc., etc.? Of course not. That would be stupid.
We assume that the system has given us bright people who completed the necessary work to be qualified. An test that identifies the brightest early is helpful.
-
Well, that's sort of the point, isn't it Lenny?
The system has four years of high school, four years of undergrad, a 12-hour medical school entrance exam, four years of medical school, a multi-day, three-step board exam, and five to seven years of residency to weed out those who lack the requisite skills to perform surgery.
But you guys somehow think a three-hour test taken on a Saturday morning as a 16- or 17-year-old is an essential and necessary part of the process. And without that three-hour test taken on a Saturday morning as a 16- or 17-year-old, a "low IQ" person might end up performing your triple bypass.
Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?
In the grand scheme, it's a pimple on an elephant's ass, only far less relevant.
Wrong. Had you gone through the process, you'd soon realize the need for all of it. Only the best and the brightest need apply, aina?
-
Of course there are other points along the way where someone who wants to be a doctor is weeded/washed out by the system but a very effective first point is an IQ test.
You mock IQ tests by asking “Has anyone ever asked his heart surgeon what he/she got on the ACT?”. Conversely, has anyone ever asked his heart surgeon what his high school class rank was? His undergrad GPA? His med board scores? Etc., etc., etc.? Of course not. That would be stupid.
We assume that the system has given us bright people who completed the necessary work to be qualified. An test that identifies the brightest early is helpful.
First, Lenny, the ACT is not an IQ test. Not sure if you're conflating the two intentionally or if you're simply unaware of that basic fact, but it's a pretty important difference.
Second, there's little evidence that ACT tests are a "very effective" first point. In fact, according to the latest research from the University of Chicago (link to story and full study below) GPAs are five times stronger than standardized scores at predicting future academic success. And, in some cases, there's a negative relationship between ACT scores and academic success, according to the research.
https://news.uchicago.edu/story/test-scores-dont-stack-gpas-predicting-college-success
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.3102/0013189X20902110
Third, I do absolutely mock ACT scores when it comes to considering a heart surgeon, because how well a person does on an ACT says nothing about whether he or she has the unique set of physical, emotional and mental skills to perform a risky surgery over several hours. It's akin to considering an ACT score when evaluating a point guard or quarterback. Sure, those jpbs also require a certain kind of intelligence, but not the kind that's revealed by an ACT.
-
Of course there are other points along the way where someone who wants to be a doctor is weeded/washed out by the system but a very effective first point is an IQ test.
You mock IQ tests by asking “Has anyone ever asked his heart surgeon what he/she got on the ACT?”. Conversely, has anyone ever asked his heart surgeon what his high school class rank was? His undergrad GPA? His med board scores? Etc., etc., etc.? Of course not. That would be stupid.
We assume that the system has given us bright people who completed the necessary work to be qualified. An test that identifies the brightest early is helpful.
Actually, you SHOULD ask your heart surgeon if he played video games. Thoserare the guys you want operating on your body. Much more important than their ACT score.
Out of 33 surgeons from Beth Israel Medical Center in New York that participated in the Archives of Surgery study, the nine doctors who had at some point played video games at least three hours per week made 37 percent fewer errors, performed 27 percent faster, and scored 42 percent better in the test of surgical skills than the 15 surgeons who had never played video games before.
-
A decade is a “bubble”? A hot housing market at record low interest rates is “insane” (not the 20% prime rate us Boomers inherited)? Record personal savings rates and debt forgiveness based on stimulus packages is a horrible burden to be handed off? A 13th place ribbon sounds pretty good to me, no offense.
I can’t wait for the educational, social, health and economic breakthroughs you Millennials will deliver future generations. I think it will be significant. When are you running for the school board?
-Signed
The Cheese Under Board
I don't even know where to start with this absolute sh!t fan of a post. So instead of wasting my Saturday digging through source after source I'm just going to walk away. I'd just be talking to a brick wall anyway.
-
Actually, you SHOULD ask your heart surgeon if he played video games. Thoserare the guys you want operating on your body. Much more important than their ACT score.
Out of 33 surgeons from Beth Israel Medical Center in New York that participated in the Archives of Surgery study, the nine doctors who had at some point played video games at least three hours per week made 37 percent fewer errors, performed 27 percent faster, and scored 42 percent better in the test of surgical skills than the 15 surgeons who had never played video games before.
So wait, are you suggesting fine-motor skills and hand-eye coordination are more essential traits for a successful surgeon than vocabulary and grammar?
Madness!
-
I would rank correct decision making ability as a critical component. Intellect is a vital component of that, hey?
-
I would rank correct decision making ability as a critical component. Intellect is a vital component of that, hey?
A surgeon whom I know personally once said something I never forgot. He was tired of listening to some of his fellow surgeons espousing various techniques and procedures and said " You want to know what makes a good surgeon? One who knows exactly what to do and in what order when something unexpected goes horribly wrong during the operation."
-
Among the growing list of universities and colleges that no longer require prospective students to take the SAT or ACT:
Chicago ... NYU ... Cornell ... Smith ... Cal (Berkley) ... George Washington ... Colorado College ... Hampshire ... Lawrence ... Reed.
Lots of dogs there. Those schools will never amount to anything.
And those are in addition to the hundreds that have temporarily dropped SAT or ACT requirements due to the pandemic, including 7 Ivy League schools. Some in academia believe many of those might decide to make the change permanent.
-
What is missing is that great doctors and surgeons work as part of teams and communicate. Some doctors think they are THE man/women and work in silos. It is not good if you want good outcomes. Things have gotten way to complex.
So, yes, the ability to write and communicate is an essential skill. You all are paying to much to surgical technique. That is a small part of most surgery or other medical “systems” and outcomes.
I’m too lazy to look up Mayo and the cooperation required of their doctors and how they hire. But central to it is the ability to work with others across the system, share info, etc. It is amazing if you’ve experienced the difference. These doctors and others are THE man/women but act like regular dudes.
-
Great Puerto Rican Baseball Players:
1) Roberto Clemente
2) Nobody -- compared to the person Clemente was and the ballplayer he was, nobody measures up.
3) Yadi Molina
4) Orlando Cepeda
5) Jose Oquendo
6) Everyone else
OK, I'm thoroughly off topic but I had to address this. My Cardinal credentials are at stake!
Still against Pudge, hey? You dirty sick birds fan
-
What is missing is that great doctors and surgeons work as part of teams and communicate. Some doctors think they are THE man/women and work in silos. It is not good if you want good outcomes. Things have gotten way to complex.
So, yes, the ability to write and communicate is an essential skill. You all are paying to much to surgical technique. That is a small part of most surgery or other medical “systems” and outcomes.
I’m too lazy to look up Mayo and the cooperation required of their doctors and how they hire. But central to it is the ability to work with others across the system, share info, etc. It is amazing if you’ve experienced the difference. These doctors and others are THE man/women but act like regular dudes.
Thirteen states don't offer standardized tests in Spanish. Do you think that those students forced to take those in English would be unable to effectively write or communicate or act like regular dudes in a primarily Spanish speaking community?
-
What is missing is that great doctors and surgeons work as part of teams and communicate. Some doctors think they are THE man/women and work in silos. It is not good if you want good outcomes. Things have gotten way to complex.
So, yes, the ability to write and communicate is an essential skill. You all are paying to much to surgical technique. That is a small part of most surgery or other medical “systems” and outcomes.
I’m too lazy to look up Mayo and the cooperation required of their doctors and how they hire. But central to it is the ability to work with others across the system, share info, etc. It is amazing if you’ve experienced the difference. These doctors and others are THE man/women but act like regular dudes.
We agree. Traits like communication, cooperation, charisma, i.e. "people skills " are all really important.
However, these traits are measured not by intelligence, but by EQ. And, get this, there's no k own correlation between intelligence and EQ. In fact, research suggests that there's a negative relation between the two, i.e. people with the highest IQs tend to fare more poorly in areas like communication and cooperation.
So, while you're right about the importance of those abilities, if you're trying to link those abilities to some kind of standardized test of academic ability, you'd be mistaken.
-
I would rank correct decision making ability as a critical component. Intellect is a vital component of that, hey?
Good point.
Can you explain how a single standardized test taken as a teenager determines this differently and/or better than four years of high school, four years of undergrad, four years of medical school, five to seven years of residency and multi-day board exams?
-
Its all part of the vetting process. I have no problem with it. Its a merit based system and as such, there shouldn't be any shortcuts or points given for style.
As Al said when the waiter brought his lobster that had only 1 claw, "bring me the winner of that fight," hey?
-
What is missing is that great doctors and surgeons work as part of teams and communicate. Some doctors think they are THE man/women and work in silos. It is not good if you want good outcomes. Things have gotten way to complex.
So, yes, the ability to write and communicate is an essential skill. You all are paying to much to surgical technique. That is a small part of most surgery or other medical “systems” and outcomes.
I’m too lazy to look up Mayo and the cooperation required of their doctors and how they hire. But central to it is the ability to work with others across the system, share info, etc. It is amazing if you’ve experienced the difference. These doctors and others are THE man/women but act like regular dudes.
If one has a complex medical situation , Mayo and their collaborative style gives you a great chance for success . I highly recommend it .
-
Good point.
Can you explain how a single standardized test taken as a teenager determines this differently and/or better than four years of high school, four years of undergrad, four years of medical school, five to seven years of residency and multi-day board exams?
If you have no realistic chance of ever being a heart surgeon I’d rather find it out in a few hours than live in some unrealistic dream world for 8 years or more. Of course having the intellect is only a pre qualifier that guarantees nothing - it only eliminates people.
-
Its all part of the vetting process. I have no problem with it. Its a merit based system and as such, there shouldn't be any shortcuts or points given for style.
As Al said when the waiter brought his lobster that had only 1 claw, "bring me the winner of that fight," hey?
No medical school cares what a candidates ACT score was.
-
nm
-
If you have no realistic chance of ever being a heart surgeon I’d rather find it out in a few hours than live in some unrealistic dream world for 8 years or more. Of course having the intellect is only a pre qualifier that guarantees nothing - it only eliminates people.
You think going through four years of undergrad and four years of med school wouldn't reveal that a person has no realistic chance of being a heart surgeon, but an ACT score would?
Lenny, what is it that you believe makes someone capable of being a heart surgeon, and what portion of the ACT reveals that?
-
No one said they were worthless.
But do you know what your surgeon would have scored on their ACT? If you found out that a really great heart surgeon did score a 18 a decade plus years ago, would you not want him to operate on you?
I do care where they went to med school. My current MD went to Georgetown.
-
Well no. Not really.
there certainly is a lag of accountability in American school systems. What planet do you live on?
-
I do care where they went to med school. My current MD went to Georgetown.
Why Georgetown?
-
there certainly is a lag of accountability in American school systems.
Saw this and reviewed your recent posts. Sometimes a little off-target as to the point but overall I'm becoming a fan.
-
You think going through four years of undergrad and four years of med school wouldn't reveal that a person has no realistic chance of being a heart surgeon, but an ACT score would?
Lenny, what is it that you believe makes someone capable of being a heart surgeon, and what portion of the ACT reveals that?
Of course not and of course I never said as much. A standardized test (I was thinking IQ and not necessarily ACT or SAT - though there is a great deal of overlap) isn’t the end all and be all. But if the profession of your choice (like heart surgeon) is only available to the brightest it can tell a whole lot of people early in life whether their dream is realistic. To me that provides value.
Of course a medical school doesn’t care what you got on an IQ test or the SAT. And major league teams don’t care what your batting average was in Little League or Pony League. But how many guys who couldn’t hit or throw a baseball by the time they were 12 or 14 make the show?
-
No one said they were worthless.
But do you know what your surgeon would have scored on their ACT? If you found out that a really great heart surgeon did score a 18 a decade plus years ago, would you not want him to operate on you?
Assuming English as a first language, if I found a “really great” heart surgeon who scored an 18 (or 16, 14,12 etc.) on his ACT I’d eat your hat. And he can operate on your loved ones, not mine.
-
Since fewer and fewer students are taking the ACT, or if they have to take it they take it less seriously, and since it was pointed out that GPA is a better indicator of College success, some med programs may have problems choosing who gets admitted without a real ACT score. I say that in jest, of course.
I suspect there are a lot of great doctors and surgeons who didn’t score all that well on the ACT, especially from disadvantaged backgrounds. When I need to choose a doctor I’ll start asking about high school GPA and ACT scores and start to correlate their success/reputation. Maybe if we all do it, we’ll have a decent sample size in a decade and can check back.
Being real, I do know a dermatologist who didn’t do so well on her MCAT but yet is in fact a dermatologist.
-
What do you call the student that finishes last in their class in medical school?
Doctor
-
So in 2031, folks won't trust a doctor who got her or his undergrad and advanced degrees from the University of Chicago because the school didn't insist upon ACT/SAT results when those eventual doctors were 17 years old?
-
A surgeon whom I know personally once said something I never forgot. He was tired of listening to some of his fellow surgeons espousing various techniques and procedures and said " You want to know what makes a good surgeon? One who knows exactly what to do and in what order when something unexpected goes horribly wrong during the operation."
This is number one. Second, would be the humility and passion to be a lifelong learner. As the past year has shown us, medicine rapidly evolves. To be good at what you do, you have to knows the ins and outs of everything going on.
-
So in 2031, folks won't trust a doctor who got her or his undergrad and advanced degrees from the University of Chicago because the school didn't insist upon ACT/SAT results when those eventual doctors were 17 years old?
C’mon, man. Nobody said the ACT (or any other test) was a necessity for prospective doctors. It can’t predict success but it can tell one when he’s not being realistic about his future.
There can be other effective indicators that people don’t have the “right stuff”. For example, your conclusion above is indicative of poor reading comprehension - a condition that would eliminate Med school from your potential pursuits. Thankfully there was another career available for which it was not a requirement.
-
What do you call the student that finishes last in their class in medical school?
Doctor
Yup. ;D
-
There can be other effective indicators
Most of the rest of your post was silliness, but I'm glad you agree with this general thesis.
Enjoy the rest of your Sunday, Tony.
-
Most of the rest of your post was silliness, but I'm glad you agree with this general thesis.
Enjoy the rest of your Sunday, Tony.
Mike,
How does one reply to silliness except with more of the same? I assume your silliness was as intentional as mine was.
Happy Sunday!
-
This is number one. Second, would be the humility and passion to be a lifelong learner. As the past year has shown us, medicine rapidly evolves. To be good at what you do, you have to knows the ins and outs of everything going on.
I'm not going to enter the standardized exam debate. But I agree with this. I'll add a third. Know what you don't know.
One of my mentors drilled into us that the 2nd best answer to any question (the best, being the correct answer) is I don't know. He used to answer lots of questions in class, conferences, etc. with something very similar to, "You know what, I don't know, but get back to me in a couple days and I'll have an answer for you."
Amazingly brilliant man, was always willing to learn, and had absolute humility in understanding he did not know everything.
-
Assuming English as a first language, if I found a “really great” heart surgeon who scored an 18 (or 16, 14,12 etc.) on his ACT I’d eat your hat. And he can operate on your loved ones, not mine.
So you don't care how good a heart surgeon someone is, but if he had a poor ACT score in high school, that's a disqualifier for you?
So someone who struggled while in high school, but hit their stride in college, got a good enough GPA and MCAT to get into medical school and did everything they needed to excel in their profession isn't good enough?
So much for the ability to pull one up from their bootstraps and the American Dream hey? Lenny's heart is too good for someone who struggled as a 17 year old.
-
What do you call the student that finishes last in their class in medical school?
Doctor
Yeah, cute joke.
But the guy that finishes last in the class in Medical school is still a very smart guy or he never would have gotten in in the first place.
-
C’mon, man. Nobody said the ACT (or any other test) was a necessity for prospective doctors. It can’t predict success but it can tell one when he’s not being realistic about his future.
How do you feel about that U of Chicago report that indcated ACT scores can put students in academic situations for which they're unprepared?
-
So you don't care how good a heart surgeon someone is, but if he had a poor ACT score in high school, that's a disqualifier for you.
Never said or implied anything remotely close to this. If that’s what you understood from what I posted I’m not surprised that you hate standardized tests where comprehension is necessary.
What I did say is that a low IQ or struggles on standardized tests can be indications that a career as a heart surgeon is a bridge too far.
-
So someone who struggled while in high school, but hit their stride in college, got a good enough GPA and MCAT to get into medical school and did everything they needed to excel in their profession isn't good enough?
So much for the ability to pull one up from their bootstraps and the American Dream hey? Lenny's heart is too good for someone who struggled as a 17 year old.
“Struggling in high school” is beside the point. I know a lot of really smart people who screwed around and got middling or worse grades in high school and then went on to great things - but none of those people struggled with IQ or standardized tests. It was always clear they were smart enough.
I’m a big believer in the American Dream and the success that hard work can bring to all - not just the most gifted. But I’m a realist. Some professions require special qualities - be they physical or mental. To tell a 17 year old who is small, slow and clumsy that he has a future in the NBA is silly and a little cruel. Same goes for telling a 17 year old with a 95 IQ or an 16 or 18 on the ACT that a career as a heart surgeon awaits.
-
How do you feel about that U of Chicago report that indcated ACT scores can put students in academic situations for which they're unprepared?
I don’t know a single thing about the report and I’m not trying to argue that a particular standardized test is perfect or the end all be all - but I will argue that test that measure achievement and/or ability are helpful and in some cases necessary.
-
Never said or implied anything remotely close to this.
Yes you did. Sorry it slipped your mind:
“…if I found a “really great” heart surgeon who scored an 18 (or 16, 14,12 etc.) on his ACT I’d eat your hat. And he can operate on your loved ones, not mine.”
-
Yes you did. Sorry it slipped your mind:
“…if I found a “really great” heart surgeon who scored an 18 (or 16, 14,12 etc.) on his ACT I’d eat your hat. And he can operate on your loved ones, not mine.”
Guess’s you missed the “I’d eat your hat part”. That means he or she is non existent. But in the one in a million chance that you find one, he can operate on your loved ones, not mine.
-
Guess’s you missed the “I’d eat your hat part”. That means he or she is non existent. But in the one in a million chance that you find one, he can operate on your loved ones, not mine.
Lol.
That’s logic so Chicoseaque that even Chico’s would be embarrassed to use it.
-
One of my mentors drilled into us that the 2nd best answer to any question (the best, being the correct answer) is I don't know. He used to answer lots of questions in class, conferences, etc. with something very similar to, "You know what, I don't know, but get back to me in a couple days and I'll have an answer for you."
I dated a physical therapist for awhile. I had a hip issues and asked her for help. She got her computer and looked up some stuff. Some of it was Googling looking for a resource she liked but didnt have bookmarked. I was kind of stunned cause I assumed she had sort of an encyclopedic knowledge of treatment. And she explained that diagnosis and understanding of treatment “path” was more important that a snap “do this” treatment. Always add to your knowledge
My next physical, I asked my GP, who I’m friendly with and have been going to since I was a teen, something similar. He echoed her sentiment. He said people would be shocked how much doctors look up. Medicine is about learning and adapting and adding to your pool of experiences, not necessarily memorizing a bunch of conditions and treatments.
“Struggling in high school” is beside the point. I know a lot of really smart people who screwed around and got middling or worse grades in high school and then went on to great things - but none of those people struggled with IQ or standardized tests. It was always clear they were smart enough.
I’m a big believer in the American Dream and the success that hard work can bring to all - not just the most gifted. But I’m a realist. Some professions require special qualities - be they physical or mental. To tell a 17 year old who is small, slow and clumsy that he has a future in the NBA is silly and a little cruel. Same goes for telling a 17 year old with a 95 IQ or an 16 or 18 on the ACT that a career as a heart surgeon awaits.
While I certainly understand all the arguments and standardized tests are not perfect, some of this all feels grounded in the sentiment of “all children are smart and special…in their own way”. And that absolutely has some merit but it doesn’t have to be academically and it’s affiliated intelligence. Judge Smails was an ass clown and his comment was made in regards to monetary elitism, but the sentiment that the world needs ditch diggers wasn’t completely without merit.
It’s not meant to be arrogant or snobby. I went to a very good suburban HS where college wasn’t an option, it was the only option. But frankly it probably wasn’t the best for a good number of students.
My last anecdote, related to what Lenny has been saying, my cousin had a very good GPA in HS. Not many AP classes and just an ok HS, but a GPA good enough to get her into Northeastern despite an ACT in the lowish 20s. She had done well in sciences in HS and advisors recommended pre-med. She decided on becoming a doctor and promptly got mollywhopped by the curriculum. She ended up transferring and changing majors and ended where she probably should have been in the first place
-
Lol.
That’s logic so Chicoseaque that even Chico’s would be embarrassed to use it.
LOL indeed.
You get owned and all you’ve got is your BS, misspelled “Chico thing”.
As predictable as it is pathetic. Sad.
-
While I certainly understand all the arguments and standardized tests are not perfect, some of this all feels grounded in the sentiment of “all children are smart and special…in their own way”. And that absolutely has some merit but it doesn’t have to be academically and it’s affiliated intelligence. Judge Smails was an ass clown and his comment was made in regards to monetary elitism, but the sentiment that the world needs ditch diggers wasn’t completely without merit.
It’s not meant to be arrogant or snobby. I went to a very good suburban HS where college wasn’t an option, it was the only option. But frankly it probably wasn’t the best for a good number of students.
My last anecdote, related to what Lenny has been saying, my cousin had a very good GPA in HS. Not many AP classes and just an ok HS, but a GPA good enough to get her into Northeastern despite an ACT in the lowish 20s. She had done well in sciences in HS and advisors recommended pre-med. She decided on becoming a doctor and promptly got mollywhopped by the curriculum. She ended up transferring and changing majors and ended where she probably should have been in the first place
Your experiences are very similar to mine. 100% agree.
-
While I certainly understand all the arguments and standardized tests are not perfect, some of this all feels grounded in the sentiment of “all children are smart and special…in their own way”. And that absolutely has some merit but it doesn’t have to be academically and it’s affiliated intelligence. Judge Smails was an ass clown and his comment was made in regards to monetary elitism, but the sentiment that the world needs ditch diggers wasn’t completely without merit.
This has a real "participation trophies make me angry" vibe to it.
This has nothing to do with every child being special. It has to do with the fact that standardized tests like the ACT have been proven imprecise indicators of intelligence or future academic success.
Why is that so hard for some people here to just accept? Is it simply a "this is the way it's always been done" kind of thing? Why the slavish devotion to something that's, at best, deeply flawed and easily replaced by more effective and accurate measures?
My last anecdote, related to what Lenny has been saying, my cousin had a very good GPA in HS. Not many AP classes and just an ok HS, but a GPA good enough to get her into Northeastern despite an ACT in the lowish 20s. She had done well in sciences in HS and advisors recommended pre-med. She decided on becoming a doctor and promptly got mollywhopped by the curriculum. She ended up transferring and changing majors and ended where she probably should have been in the first place
Anecdote isn't data, and here's a prime example.
According to the latest data, it more often works the other way around ... that based on high standardized test scores, kids get into schools for which they're not prepared and end up washing out.
-
Bringing it back to how all this impacts MU, Porky would be curious to know what folks' thoughts are on the enrollment challenges and what MU can do to get the trajectory back on the right track. Porky has it on good authority that this is the 4th year in a row MU didn't meet its enrollment goal after a record frosh class in Fall 2017. Granted the last two years have been tough for a lot of institutions so it's arguably unfair to include the last two years, but Porky was very optimistic things would turnaround this fall after an almost 30+% increase in applications for the class of 2025 vs the previous couple of years according to MU's admissions coordinator for the Northeastern US, who Porky knows and maintains regular communication with. That figure isn't just an increase in applications from that region, that was an overall figure. What also stood out to Porky was that the release stated MU's Frosh came from 37 states. Historically that number has been closer to 47 if not all 50. A previous poster mentioned that many schools have record classes this year. Porky isn't suggesting MU always has to have a record class, but it seems abundantly clear to Porky that something isn't right and needs to be corrected since MU was having issues prior to the pandemic. Porky wants MU to thrive, but it isn't so what are the solutions?
-
This has a real "participation trophies make me angry" vibe to it.
This has nothing to do with every child being special. It has to do with the fact that standardized tests like the ACT have been proven imprecise indicators of intelligence or future academic success.
Why is that so hard for some people here to just accept? Is it simply a "this is the way it's always been done" kind of thing? Why the slavish devotion to something that's, at best, deeply flawed and easily replaced by more effective and accurate measures?
Sweet condescending generalization! I grew up in the participation trophy era. I have a good friend who played on a soccer team that changed from a trophy for MVP and top scorer/assist leader to senior superlative type trophies that everyone got including “most enthusiastic”. But I couldn’t care less. I think it’s dumb but if it makes people happy then who cares. Stuff like my nephew’s school district changing F’s to NME (not meeting expectations) cause “failing is too harsh” is a different story.
I have no “slavish” devotion to them. I can totally accept and support standardized testing being reworked. But I’m also not offended by the idea of tests that are aimed to measure intelligence, innate or otherwise. The study about ACT versus GPA is interesting but it seems a bit binary, graduate or not. One would think schools look for students who will not only graduate but go on to future successes, both for prestige and financial donations.
It feels standardized testing, in the SAT/ACT sense, is being deemed racist, flawed, archaic, etc… and being binned without an alternative ever truly discussed.
-
standardized tests like the ACT have been proven imprecise indicators of intelligence or future academic success.
Why is that so hard for some people here to just accept?
I have no problem accepting the fact that standardized tests are “imprecise” and can’t predict academic or any other kind of success. Not hard at all. A high IQ means nothing without a work ethic.
But I also have no problem accepting the fact that low scores on standardized test can essentially rule out careers in the most difficult of disciplines - medicine, nuclear physics, etc.. Why is that so hard for some people here to just accept?
-
Yeah, cute joke.
But the guy that finishes last in the class in Medical school is still a very smart guy or he never would have gotten in in the first place.
Good lord Jockey. Even Hards got the joke. 😎
When the woke folk start to gig you, you should rethink your shtick.
Sorry scoop, Jockey will respond with a few retorts, trying to “rebunk” my humor with broad brush hyperbole. After reading his witticisms, I recommend a bit of fresh air to help us all to “smarten up”.
-
LOL indeed.
You get owned and all you’ve got is your BS, misspelled “Chico thing”.
As predictable as it is pathetic. Sad.
I caught you flat out implying something you said you didn’t imply. So instead of admitting you did, you claim what you typed didn’t actually mean what you typed.
And then the insults.
I used to think you were kind of losing it. Now I realize you’re just a pathetic old man on the internet. So sad.
-
But I also have no problem accepting the fact that low scores on standardized test can essentially rule out careers in the most difficult of disciplines - medicine, nuclear physics, etc.. Why is that so hard for some people here to just accept?
Honest question, do you have any data that supports this assertion? I'm honestly curious, I've seen a lot of data that says that standardized tests are bad predictors. But I've personally never seen any data that says low standardized scores are/aren't accurate indicators of performance in stem fields
-
I caught you flat out implying something you said you didn’t imply. So instead of admitting you did, you claim what you typed didn’t actually mean what you typed.
And then the insults.
I used to think you were kind of losing it. Now I realize you’re just a pathetic old man on the internet. So sad.
You’ve been stalking me and insulting me here for as long as I can remember so please stop with your whining.
I am old (73 next month) so congrats on getting one thing right but I can still run a 5k in under 25 minutes, and carry a golf handicap that fluctuates between 8 and 11. I’m blessed with a still beautiful and kind wife, 4 great kids and 6 amazing grands. I have great friends from childhood, high school, college, work and beyond.
You’re a past your prime guy in academia who spends an inordinate (two or three times as many hours as your closest competitor) amount of time on a college basketball site.
So I respectfully disagree as to which of our lives is the pathetic and sad one.
Given that basic disagreement (and others) can we agree on one thing? Let’s stop quoting and replying to one another. I’ll be happier, hopefully you’ll be happier and the board will be a better place.
-
Sweet condescending generalization!.
Apologies, Wags. I was pokiing fun, not trying to condescend.
I'll bow out before any more unpleasantness.
-
Honest question, do you have any data that supports this assertion? I'm honestly curious, I've seen a lot of data that says that standardized tests are bad predictors. But I've personally never seen any data that says low standardized scores are/aren't accurate indicators of performance in stem fields
Do I have any data that supports the idea that people with low IQs or low SAT scores aren’t good candidates for careers in heart surgery or nuclear physics? No. Where would you find the successful surgeons or physicists with 95 IQs to study?
-
Apologies, Wags. I was pokiing fun, not trying to condescend.
I'll bow out before any more unpleasantness.
All good man. I’ve been at a trade show all day with the kind of people who love to tell you what your product SHOULD do and why they won’t buy. I may have a bit of a hair trigger. 8-) I appreciate the intelligent discourse
-
Do I have any data that supports the idea that people with low IQs or low SAT scores aren’t good candidates for careers in heart surgery or nuclear physics? No. Where would you find the successful surgeons or physicists with 95 IQs to study?
I didn't ask about IQs, I asked about standardized tests. So you are assuming that low sat or act scores would guarantee that a person wouldn't cut it in a stem field?
-
You’ve been stalking me and insulting me here for as long as I can remember so please stop with your whining.
I am old (73 next month) so congrats on getting one thing right but I can still run a 5k in under 25 minutes, and carry a golf handicap that fluctuates between 8 and 11. I’m blessed with a still beautiful and kind wife, 4 great kids and 6 amazing grands. I have great friends from childhood, high school, college, work and beyond.
You’re a past your prime guy in academia who spends an inordinate (two or three times as many hours as your closest competitor) amount of time on a college basketball site.
So I respectfully disagree as to which of our lives is the pathetic and sad one.
Given that basic disagreement (and others) can we agree on one thing? Let’s stop quoting and replying to one another. I’ll be happier, hopefully you’ll be happier and the board will be a better place.
In other words, you were wrong.
-
So, if one was choosing the perfect doctor, what would one want:
1. Out of residency for about 7 years. Not more than 14 years. I think the half life of doctors is now 10 years from Med School. The more specialized, the more likely that things change faster.
2. Someone who keeps up on trends and is very flexible and adaptive. Not set in one's ways. Always learning.
3. Teaches younger docs/residents so as to keep up on what is going on. But not too much as the next factor is important. Part of a medical school or involved with one.
4. Highly Specialized. Does a lot of the same procedures. Very focused.
5. Understands that since he/she is a specialist, understands others know more about the general area and surrounding issues and are needed and he/she needs to work with others for the patient's best interest. So, works with others who know more than his/her little area, just not as much as his/her limited area.
6. Walks or Rides a bike for 40 minutes per day. Doesn't golf or waste time on any things excessive. Mediates twice a day for short periods.
7. Married. No kids. Doesn't Drink.
8. Sleeps well. Focus is on his/her patients and not distracted by much else.
9. Small ego. A humble learner who other doctors/nurses/assistants want to help and work with.
10. Part of a hospital "system" that is focused on cutting edge tech, collaboration, with the money to fund the best tech and machines and radiation, etc, etc.
10.A. Oh ya, high ACT. Just kidding, Lenny.
-
Lenny
I love when you state the facts to Fluff. I hope my life is as pathetic as your life when I am almost 73 year old. You remain my gold standard on Scoop.
-
Lenny
I love when you state the facts to Fluff. I hope my life is as pathetic as your life when I am almost 73 year old. You remain my gold standard on Scoop.
I almost got insulted, Goose, but I'll happily settle for being your silver standard!
-
82
I have had the privilege of spending some time with Lenny in person and he is a class act, on and off of Scoop. Big fan of Lenny.
-
82
I have had the privilege of spending some time with Lenny in person and he is a class act, on and off of Scoop. Big fan of Lenny.
Lenny and I lock horns sometimes on Scoop -- as do you and I -- but he and I like each other. Actually, I shouldn't speak for him; I do like him, though. Seems like good people, and I'd enjoy meeting him one day. Same goes for you, of course.
Scoop is Scoop. It's not real life. At least not for most of us.
-
82
We might lock horns in real life as well, but definitely would enjoy throwing back a couple of beers with you.
-
We need a victory over Villanova to bring us all together. :)
-
So, if one was choosing the perfect doctor, what would one want:
1. Out of residency for about 7 years. Not more than 14 years. I think the half life of doctors is now 10 years from Med School. The more specialized, the more likely that things change faster.
2. Someone who keeps up on trends and is very flexible and adaptive. Not set in one's ways. Always learning.
3. Teaches younger docs/residents so as to keep up on what is going on. But not too much as the next factor is important. Part of a medical school or involved with one.
4. Highly Specialized. Does a lot of the same procedures. Very focused.
5. Understands that since he/she is a specialist, understands others know more about the general area and surrounding issues and are needed and he/she needs to work with others for the patient's best interest. So, works with others who know more than his/her little area, just not as much as his/her limited area.
6. Walks or Rides a bike for 40 minutes per day. Doesn't golf or waste time on any things excessive. Mediates twice a day for short periods.
7. Married. No kids. Doesn't Drink.
8. Sleeps well. Focus is on his/her patients and not distracted by much else.
9. Small ego. A humble learner who other doctors/nurses/assistants want to help and work with.
10. Part of a hospital "system" that is focused on cutting edge tech, collaboration, with the money to fund the best tech and machines and radiation, etc, etc.
10.A. Oh ya, high ACT. Just kidding, Lenny.
Well.....as a active reader of this site but a poster of very few comments, you got me Mr Gooo....
I'm really a doctor so please let me give my viewpoint. I'm sorry but I've been a doctor now for over 30 years, so dammit I think I have some experience here even if you may think I'm over the hill. So let's go to your list of somethings that are actually correct and perceptive and others that are plainly wrong. Here we go:
#1: Umm...NO. You do have a point about keeping up to date in the medical field but I can assure you that when you have such a love for medicine to get you to study and give so much of your time to it, keeping up is not chore but a pleasure. Plus there is a lot of competition around, and any new drug or new surgical procedure is a chance to advance over your competition. However just because something is new or "cool" doesn't make it better. Sometimes an older, wiser surgeon looks at the newest flash-bang surgery like pelvic mesh (remember those ads on TV?) and doesn't use it.
#2; yes, correct ; see above.
#3 Correct. I do it every day. Keeps me young. Nothing like the look on a kid delivering his or her first baby.
#4 Yes, correct. But I am more than a technician doing the same surgery every day. That's boring and breeds complacency.
#5 Yes correct. I work in a primary care clinic and value the opinions of others.
#6 Yes correct. I cannot advise weight loss or quitting smoking if I'm fat or smell like the Avalanche bar circa 1985. I don't meditate. I pray like the Jesuits taught me.
#7 Man you are nuts! Married 29 years. No kids??? Screw you!! Just dropped off my youngest at MU this weekend. Doesn't drink? I went to Marquette, am Catholic and a home brewer. Nothing like making my own version of a Trappist beer. I don't drink on call.
#8 I'm an Ob/Gyn. Get up tomorrow at 3am you hoser.
#9 Correct but here I am taking time to respond to your comment!
#10 NO! You cannot make this generalization. While there are plenty of good doctors in "systems" my contention is that systems can be very bureaucratic and can produce a lot of cookbook medicine and sadly doctors end up reporting to some clipboard nurse with an agenda. Often a small clinic can be more nimble, innovative and patient focused than a system. Bigger is not necessarily better.
#10A: Didn't take the ACT. Took the SAT. I don't have a stick in the "brawl" with Lenny. My only point is what I tell my students considering a residency. That is, there are two routes to success in medicine. One, be born smart. I have met people in my field that pick up a book and scan it, and remember everything, and they are good doctors. Option two is work your butt off to learn. Go to a combat zone inner city county hospital and work to learn. Yeah, work will extract something out of you...but oh the stories you can tell.
-
Thanks for that wonderful post, soda. Sounds like you love your career and love helping others. I’m proud when I hear accounts like that from a fellow Warrior.
Be well!
-
Yeah butt, Nads, he mentioned praying, hey?
-
Thanks for that wonderful post, soda. Sounds like you love your career and love helping others. I’m proud when I hear accounts like that from a fellow Warrior.
Be well!
Let’s go with SODAK instead.
-
Call for Dr Soda, call for Dr Soda…
Dr: Hello
Lenny: Uh, I gotta question for ya Doc.
Dr: Yes
Lenny: What’y get on the ACT.
Dr: I didn’t take the ACT, I took the SAT.
Lenny: “click” (hangs up).
Call for Dr Soda on one.
Dr: Hello
Goo: Are ya married?
Dr: what?
Goo: Are ya married?
Dr: Well, um, I’m busy
Goo: Don’t worry bout it. I just needa know.
Goo: Do you have kids?
Dr: Is this a joke.
Goo: No joke, ya got kids?
Dr: Ummm, fine, Yay, okay, I’m busy, ya, I do.
Goo: Hangs up.
Dr: Why are these weirdo men calling an OB/GY anyway?
-
Yeah butt, Nads, he mentioned praying, hey?
You have something against others praying, nu? I wouldn’t have thought that.
-
Nothing like making my own version of a Trappist beer.
What time shall I stop over?
-
I didn't ask about IQs, I asked about standardized tests. So you are assuming that low sat or act scores would guarantee that a person wouldn't cut it in a stem field?
Sorry if I came off snarky, TAMU, but I don’t know of any studies tracking people with low SAT or ACT scores who choose (or more to the point qualify to choose) careers in surgery or nuclear physics. I honestly don’t know if a large enough sample would be available for a study.
-
Lenny and I lock horns sometimes on Scoop -- as do you and I -- but he and I like each other. Actually, I shouldn't speak for him; I do like him, though. Seems like good people, and I'd enjoy meeting him one day. Same goes for you, of course.
Scoop is Scoop. It's not real life. At least not for most of us.
100% Mike
-
82
I have had the privilege of spending some time with Lenny in person and he is a class act, on and off of Scoop. Big fan of Lenny.
Goose
The privilege has been mine but thanks for the kind words
-
You have something against others praying, nu? I wouldn’t have thought that.
Thoughts, aina?
-
Let’s go with SODAK instead.
MU87 better, hey?
-
Goose
The privilege has been mine but thanks for the kind words
Privilege? Lenny?
Just kidding. Lenny is an outstanding poster. I enjoy our banter whether we agree or disagree.
-
Was on campus in Madison yesterday and UW has seen an increase of well over 1000 students in this Freshman class.
Why are they thriving while MU struggles to bring kids in?
The cost of tuition just too much now?
-
Private school tuition is becoming more and more of a challenge. https://twitter.com/WesleyLowery/status/1436330602760921110/photo/1
-
Was on campus in Madison yesterday and UW has seen an increase of well over 1000 students in this Freshman class.
Why are they thriving while MU struggles to bring kids in?
The cost of tuition just too much now?
I think it is a marketing and administration problem. I know of private peer institutions of MU are more expensive, and setting record enrollments this year.
MU is doing something wrong.
-
Knot 'nough bang four da buck, aina?
-
One, be born smart. I have met people in my field that pick up a book and scan it, and remember everything, and they are good doctors.
How often do you come across a highly intelligent individual that can't relate to patients, work with a team, and/or apply knowledge? I always lool for doctors that are also good teachers...figure this ensures I get someone who is respected and can apply/relate?
-
Was on campus in Madison yesterday and UW has seen an increase of well over 1000 students in this Freshman class.
Why are they thriving while MU struggles to bring kids in?
The cost of tuition just too much now?
I think Marquette doesn't care about quantity and is focusing on high priced areas like nursing, engineering and business.
-
I think Marquette doesn't care about quantity and is focusing on high priced areas like nursing, engineering and business.
An approach I’m all for. The PA program is one that will pay dividends for MU and society. Why water down a MU degree?
-
I think it is a marketing and administration problem. I know of private peer institutions of MU are more expensive, and setting record enrollments this year.
MU is doing something wrong.
Porky's guess is those institutions are aggressively recruiting students who reside in zip codes with very attractive financial demographics in different parts of the country than from where they've typically recruited from. Many schools in the southeast (Elon is one that particularly comes to mind) have purposefully honed in on the wealthiest suburbs of Boston, NYC, Philadelphia, & DC with great success. When Porky was in high school in the late 80's no one had ever even heard of the place. Now Elon is one of the more popular schools for students in Porky's New England town to apply to and matriculate to. But they're hardly the only one. Many state flagships in the Southeast have also aggressively recruited students from upper middle class families in the Northeast, eager for lucrative out of state tuition revenue. For whatever reason MU is doubling down on recruiting more and more students from families who they know can't afford to pay virtually anything before they're even identified. Porky is all for MU taking a leadership role in making higher education more accessible to qualified students from low income families but presumably only so many of those kids qualify for full rides or significant aid. Porky doesn't really buy MU's altruistic BS on this because how altruistic is it for these students to incur the kind of debt they'll probably need to to attend a place like MU if they aren't getting substantial aid? Maybe most of them are Porky doesn't really know. What Porky does know is that MU continues to make itself less and less attractive to students from upper middle class families not only in its wheelhouse of suburban Chicago but also out east, out west, and down south who are turned off by the 80% admit rate, no matter how ridiculous a reason that is not to apply or matriculate somewhere. And Porky does think it's a stupid reason but the market seems to disagree. At the end of the day MU simply isn't willing to aggressively recruit outside of WI and IL the way those other institutions are and instead believes that gap can be filled by recruiting more first gen and low income students hyper locally. Porky doesn't think that's a sound strategy for MU to undertake, but Porky's been proven wrong before and could be again.
-
Porky's guess is those institutions are aggressively recruiting students who reside in zip codes with very attractive financial demographics in different parts of the country than from where they've typically recruited from. Many schools in the southeast (Elon is one that particularly comes to mind) have purposefully honed in on the wealthiest suburbs of Boston, NYC, Philadelphia, & DC with great success. When Porky was in high school in the late 80's no one had ever even heard of the place. Now Elon is one of the more popular schools for students in Porky's New England town to apply to and matriculate to. But they're hardly the only one. Many state flagships in the Southeast have also aggressively recruited students from upper middle class families in the Northeast, eager for lucrative out of state tuition revenue. For whatever reason MU is doubling down on recruiting more and more students from families who they know can't afford to pay virtually anything before they're even identified. Porky is all for MU taking a leadership role in making higher education more accessible to qualified students from low income families but presumably only so many of those kids qualify for full rides or significant aid. Porky doesn't really buy MU's altruistic BS on this because how altruistic is it for these students to incur the kind of debt they'll probably need to to attend a place like MU if they aren't getting substantial aid? Maybe most of them are Porky doesn't really know. What Porky does know is that MU continues to make itself less and less attractive to students from upper middle class families not only in its wheelhouse of suburban Chicago but also out east, out west, and down south who are turned off by the 80% admit rate, no matter how ridiculous a reason that is not to apply or matriculate somewhere. And Porky does think it's a stupid reason but the market seems to disagree. At the end of the day MU simply isn't willing to aggressively recruit outside of WI and IL the way those other institutions are and instead believes that gap can be filled by recruiting more first gen and low income students hyper locally. Porky doesn't think that's a sound strategy for MU to undertake, but Porky's been proven wrong before and could be again.
Not going to disagree with you. That very well may be the case, but they need to understand balance.
Some of the institutions you are referring to, and some of the ones I'm referring to have used these wealthy full-tuition paying students from specific areas to offset increased recruitment and financial aid for minorities and first-get students. In the end, they increase the average tuition paid per student, and expand demographics to more minorities and first-gens, all the while increasing overall enrollment.
With increasing difficulties in terms of how much you can raise tuition, coupled to increasing costs and competition. Schools need to be a bit more creative and aggressive.
-
Not going to disagree with you. That very well may be the case, but they need to understand balance.
Some of the institutions you are referring to, and some of the ones I'm referring to have used these wealthy full-tuition paying students from specific areas to offset increased recruitment and financial aid for minorities and first-get students. In the end, they increase the average tuition paid per student, and expand demographics to more minorities and first-gens, all the while increasing overall enrollment.
With increasing difficulties in terms of how much you can raise tuition, coupled to increasing costs and competition. Schools need to be a bit more creative and aggressive.
Porky couldn't agree more. To put it extremely bluntly, MU needs to start recruiting more rich kids to offset the increase in lower income students, and the simple fact is there are more of those students on the coasts than there are in the upper midwest. Again Porky has no problem with MU taking a leadership role in making higher education, particularly private Jesuit higher education more accessible to first gen/low income students but as you say it needs to be a balance. A school like MU simply doesn't have the endowment to fund their social agenda completely and they're very quickly pricing themselves out of the student constituency they've historically served so if they're targeting bright low income kids, that's great but that needs to be offset. For whatever it's worth Porky has been mentoring a dreamer from the class of 2021 who's as smart as they come, and Porky would hire this kid over most. He definitely needed a little more mentoring navigating the job market, but other than that Porky has no doubt this kid is going to kill it, so MU is doing a good thing, but they need more of the other too. It's simple math if MU wishes to thrive, as opposed to just survive.
-
How are you going to recruit wealthy kids from the coasts to Marquette? I'm not saying you can't, but its going to be costly. I guess you could really lean on the Catholic mission and recruit kids from those schools, but that's a strategy they have been moving away from for decades.
There is plenty of wealth in the midwest, that is easier to recruit, than on the coasts.
-
Need to up MU's academic game. USNWR score isn't going to attract rich flies. Middle of the road, aina?
-
Nobody really pays attention to USNWR rankings anymore.
-
How are you going to recruit wealthy kids from the coasts to Marquette? I'm not saying you can't, but its going to be costly. I guess you could really lean on the Catholic mission and recruit kids from those schools, but that's a strategy they have been moving away from for decades.
There is plenty of wealth in the midwest, that is easier to recruit, than on the coasts.
The number of very wealthy kids from suburbs of Boston, NYC, Philly and DC that go to both public and private schools in the Midwest is staggering. UMich, UWMad and IU in particular are way more popular in these places than all of the Northeastern flagships combined. A lot of that is due to lifestyle, not academics. No one there necessarily denies that UMASS and UCONN and the like are fine schools, but you can't compare the student experience there to going to Michigan or WI. It's not even close, and these kids' families are paying out of state tuition. Porky doesn't agree that it requires substantial investment, nor would Porky advocate that approach, but they could be doing more than they are. Generally speaking it can be achieved through word of mouth and positive student experiences. It's not just Big 10 schools though. A lot of kids from the Northeast go to places like Beloit, McAlaster, Carleton, and Grinnel too. This idea that MU can't compete isn't true but they have to be willing to make themselves more appealing to those types of students and their families, who Porky will be the first to acknowledge are snobbier about such matters. Other new englanders on this board have all said similar things over the years but I don't think there are any MU administrators on here listening.
-
Nobody really pays attention to USNWR rankings anymore.
I disagree, but no one has living on 15th and Kilbourn or smoozin' with the locals at Walgreens on their bucket list. Urban campuses were the thin' a few years ago. Not certain that's still the case, hey?
-
I disagree, but no one has living on 15th and Kilbourn or smoozin' with the locals at Walgreens on their bucket list. Urban campuses were the thin' a few years ago. Not certain that's still the case, hey?
Seriously people don’t pay attention to rankings much at all these days. You can say you disagree but they have been declining in value for years.
-
Seriously people don’t pay attention to rankings much at all these days. You can say you disagree but they have been declining in value for years.
I really want to agree with you Fluff, and I think they shouldn't but unfortunately they still do, at least in my area. Probably not as much as they did 10-15 years ago, so I do think you're on to something that they're not quite as influential as they once were but most prospective students and their families still take them into account. When my niece was deciding where to go to college a couple of years ago, her dad created a spreadsheet with all of the schools she was considering with about 5 columns including location, annual tuition, graduation rate, and US News Ranking so to him it was important enough to be included, but just one data point. They weren't obsessed with it.
I personally believe a lot of schools only went test optional to encourage more applications and boost their denial rate to look more exclusive. These schools can deny it all they want but I still believe that's an ulterior motive of some of them. The recent college admission scandal proves that rankings and prestige are still important and still matter. If they didn't their parents wouldn't have been willing to break the law to get their kids into these places. Sure one can dismiss that and say it only matters to a rarefied group of elitists. That's fair enough but plenty of folks far less wealthy and influential still think rankings matter.
What bothers me more than anything is the hypocrisy of our mutual alma-mater on this issue. They're extremely dismissive of rankings when they don't fare well, but last year when Marquette was ranked 18th in undergraduate teaching, they shouted that from the rooftops and there was a link to the press release about it on the MU homepage for like 2 weeks after publication. It's a great recognition and something to be proud of, so I have no problem with that at all.
Here's what I do have a problem with........If MU Administrators really believe that rankings don't matter and are destructive to higher education as several administrators are on the record with public statements to that effect, then why are all of their ranked programs acknowledged on their website at all? If they really feel that way, MU shouldn't even acknowledge that these rankings exist. They should just continue to educate their students and let the college going public decide whether or not rankings matter for themselves. Whether they want to admit it or not, rankings do matter and Marquette knows it. Do they matter as it relates to student outcomes? Probably not much if at all, but this thread is about enrollment and to deny rankings have an impact on enrollment is foolish. Maybe it's not a significant impact but for an extremely tuition dependent institution like Marquette where an enrollment shortfall of as little as 25 students can have a noticeable negative impact on the budget, they need to pay more attention to them.
-
Seriously people don’t pay attention to rankings much at all these days. You can say you disagree but they have been declining in value for years.
Totally disagree. You are kidding yourself.
-
Seriously people don’t pay attention to rankings much at all these days. You can say you disagree but they have been declining in value for years.
Rich folks care. They spend a lot of money on private college counselors, ACT prep, etc., hey?
-
Of course, I can get a hell of a good look at a T-Bone steak by sticking my head up a bull's ass, but I'd rather take the butcher's word for it.
--Big Tom Callahan
If we were talking dentistry, 4ever would be the butcher. But when it comes to how universities regard recruiting, FBM is the butcher, which makes the rest the bull's ass.
-
Totally disagree. You are kidding yourself.
Disco said it better. They mean less now than they did 10-15 years ago and will mean even less in the future. There are so many rankings on all sorts of factors, so every school can find some reason to brag about itself. The marketplace recognizes this.
-
Rich folks care. They spend a lot of money on private college counselors, ACT prep, etc., hey?
There will always be rich people doing whatever they can to get their kids into Ivy League or "Ivy League-ish" schools, nu? Yale and Stanford and Dartmouth and Northwestern will always have cache.
One doesn't need magazine or online rankings to know that Harvard will be more attractive to many than Marquette or Miami or Maryland.
And below that level, I have no reason to believe that FBM is wrong about this:
They mean less now than they did 10-15 years ago and will mean even less in the future. There are so many rankings on all sorts of factors, so every school can find some reason to brag about itself. The marketplace recognizes this.
-
I think Marquette doesn't care about quantity and is focusing on high priced areas like nursing, engineering and business.
Which can be had by going to community college for the first 2 years and graduating with your BS or BA at a 4 year state school for far less. My parents could afford to send me to Marquette back in the 60s; today no way.
-
Which can be had by going to community college for the first 2 years and graduating with your BS or BA at a 4 year state school for far less. My parents could afford to send me to Marquette back in the 60s; today no way.
And that is the bottom line. Funds need to be raised towards sustainable scholarships to compete. I really like the 31M donation to the nursing program for that reason. Affordability is paramount to compete.
MU, like most schools, has to plan to be smaller and offer more scholarship opportunities. A lot of kids that would have ended up at MU now end up at state schools or where they get a great scholarship opportunity. I see this first hand in my own family. And yes, money and rankings come in to play big time, likely pushing or replacing, for many, the former importance of religion. Ranking do matter. Acceptance rate does matter. It doesn’t have to be logical to matter.
-
Which can be had by going to community college for the first 2 years and graduating with your BS or BA at a 4 year state school for far less. My parents could afford to send me to Marquette back in the 60s; today no way.
Which is why it's so important that MU heed Forgetful's advice to become a lot more creative and aggressive in its national recruitment efforts. Forgetful's way of thinking is sorely absent from the BOT and Alumni board. Speaking of which, how does one get involved with the Alumni board and how much influence does MU's Alumni board have? Do they have a representative on the BOT? Last time Porky explored this, it seemed as though everyone on there bought their way in and the composition of the Alumni board was based almost exclusively on donations. Porky could be wrong but that's what it seemed like after reading what little literature is available about it on MU's Alumni site. Seriously does anyone know how this works? Does one need to run for it or something? If membership is based mostly on donations, Porky isn't a viable candidate since Porky's level of giving has been curtailed significantly in recent years due to a disagreement with MU's direction. Not that it was ever substantial, but it was enough to the point where they noticed. Porky has actually had discussions with some MU students and reps who called asking for money and Porky explained (as politely as possible) why Porky no longer gives except to Athletics. In one case, Porky successfully convinced a student caller how MU was continuing to take steps to de-value their degree. This student who worked part-time in MU's fundraising office to make some extra scratch also happened to be a journalism student on the MU Wire. They agreed with Porky's assessment and did a whole series of Trib articles calling out administrators about these issues. The amount of "no comments" from administrators in these articles was staggering, and it prompted even more solid reporting from student media. Porky was very proud and still keeps in touch with this former student and now alum who has become quite successful in their field in fairly short order.
-
Which is why it's so important that MU heed Forgetful's advice to become a lot more creative and aggressive in its national recruitment efforts. Forgetful's way of thinking is sorely absent from the BOT and Alumni board. Speaking of which, how does one get involved with the Alumni board and how much influence does MU's Alumni board have? Do they have a representative on the BOT? Last time Porky explored this, it seemed as though everyone on there bought their way in and the composition of the Alumni board was based almost exclusively on donations. Porky could be wrong but that's what it seemed like after reading what little literature is available about it on MU's Alumni site. Seriously does anyone know how this works? Does one need to run for it or something? If membership is based mostly on donations, Porky isn't a viable candidate since Porky's level of giving has been curtailed significantly in recent years due to a disagreement with MU's direction. Not that it was ever substantial, but it was enough to the point where they noticed. Porky has actually had discussions with some MU students and reps who called asking for money and Porky explained (as politely as possible) why Porky no longer gives except to Athletics. In one case, Porky successfully convinced a student caller how MU was continuing to take steps to de-value their degree. This student who worked part-time in MU's fundraising office to make some extra scratch also happened to be a journalism student on the MU Wire. They agreed with Porky's assessment and did a whole series of Trib articles calling out administrators about these issues. The amount of "no comments" from administrators in these articles was staggering, and it prompted even more solid reporting from student media. Porky was very proud and still keeps in touch with this former student and now alum who has become quite successful in their field in fairly short order.
Porky for president 2024.
Not enough buttholes in politics.
-
FWIW, MU clocks in at 83 on the USNWR rankings.
-
FWIW, MU clocks in at 83 on the USNWR rankings.
Honestly better than I was expecting. Obviously not what I'm hoping for but a few bounces go our way and we don't have major mental errors then we might look decent enough
-
And that is the bottom line. Funds need to be raised towards sustainable scholarships to compete. I really like the 31M donation to the nursing program for that reason. Affordability is paramount to compete.
MU, like most schools, has to plan to be smaller and offer more scholarship opportunities. A lot of kids that would have ended up at MU now end up at state schools or where they get a great scholarship opportunity. I see this first hand in my own family. And yes, money and rankings come in to play big time, likely pushing or replacing, for many, the former importance of religion. Ranking do matter. Acceptance rate does matter. It doesn’t have to be logical to matter.
I was able to attend MU without a scholarship because a scholarship was not needed.
-
I was able to attend MU without a scholarship because a scholarship was not needed.
It's not 1969 any longer.
-
I was able to attend MU without a scholarship because a scholarship was not needed.
I'm glad to hear you are for Bernie Sanders' plan for free college tuition for everyone.
-
If its free, it's worth zero. Nothin's free, aina?
-
FWIW, MU clocks in at 83 on the USNWR rankings.
#83nation
-
Can USNWR be bought? If so, how much would it cost to be ranked 77th?
-
Can USNWR be bought? If so, how much would it cost to be ranked 77th?
Is it worth it to move up 6 spots? I'd invest for a top 75 degree but no less.
-
Is it worth it to move up 6 spots? I'd invest for a top 75 degree but no less.
Whooooosh
-
77. Think about it 10 seconds longer.
-
77. Think about it 10 seconds longer.
Oh basketball stuff. Right. 🤗
-
It's not 1969 any longer.
What does have to do with making a MU education affordable without any assistance? Sadly however, you are correct. My affordable MU BS back in '69 had more value than an unaffordable MU BS today.
-
#83nation
Finished 83rd in KPom last season in hoops too.
Yet, while MU finished ninth in hardwood play, MU finished third academically in the Big East. In fact, one could say that MU is the Harvard of the Midwest as the highest USNWR rated BE school east of Philly.
-
What does have to do with making a MU education affordable without any assistance? Sadly however, you are correct. My affordable MU BS back in '69 had more value than an unaffordable MU BS today.
That is actually likely not the case. The difference in career earnings between those with, and without, a college degree have been consistently growing for years. Which is one of the reasons the costs of obtaining a degree continues to rise. (Simple economics.)
But yeah costs have risen. Part of that is due to the above, but also because costs have risen, some of which are likely not necessary, but some of it most definitely is. (IT infrastructure for instance.) And yeah a student COULD make it more affordable by going community college for two years than transferring to a four year public, but students don't really want to do that.
And the final issue is that we have as a society move from higher education as a communal benefit to an individual one. So financial aid grants are now loans, etc.
-
That is actually likely not the case. The difference in career earnings between those with, and without, a college degree have been consistently growing for years. Which is one of the reasons the costs of obtaining a degree continues to rise. (Simple economics.)
But yeah costs have risen. Part of that is due to the above, but also because costs have risen, some of which are likely not necessary, but some of it most definitely is. (IT infrastructure for instance.) And yeah a student COULD make it more affordable by going community college for two years than transferring to a four year public, but students don't really want to do that.
And the final issue is that we have as a society move from higher education as a communal benefit to an individual one. So financial aid grants are now loans, etc.
I'll concede that a college education has more value than someone without a college degree. I graduated in the middle of my class like most college students. I started my first job right out of school with no work experience earning 9K per year. That is equivalent to about 66-67K in today's dollars. How many graduates with a general degree in Biology will earn 66K right out of school today? That is the value I'm talking about.
-
What does have to do with making a MU education affordable without any assistance? Sadly however, you are correct. My affordable MU BS back in '69 had more value than an unaffordable MU BS today.
Interesting point. I was graduated in 1978. The all-in cost of my education was $22,000. My salary out of Marquette was $10,500, because I had a Journalism degree. The ratio of total college costs to first year was 2.10x. It's the equivalent of a debt/income ratio and the lower the better. Keep in mind this is a private school tuition.
Assume today a first year, non-scientific salary is $42,000. Four years of Marquette, undiscounted, is about $220,000, making the college cost to first year salary ratio 5.24x. Nobody in their right mind would lend on those kind of ratios.
So here's the question: Let's assume an optimal debt/ first year income ratio is about 1.75x. The argument is you grow into the debt so you take a higher ratio earlier on and it shrinks over time. Back in the day, the $22,000 all-in cost of Marquette and a $10,500 salary meant you debt ceiling was about $18,500. The remaining $3,500 would come from jobs, scholarships, parents/relatives and grants. Doable.
Today, a salary range of $42,000 to $62,000 would yield a 1.75x debt ceiling of between $73,500 and $108,500. The result is equity contributions of between $111,500 and $146,500. For most middle class families, especially those with multiple children, this is just not possible. I get that Marquette is discounting to some degree. But when the cost of Marquette is stacked up against a Big Ten university, for example, you have to have a damn good reason for the small private college in Milwaukee because you're going to be in hoc to some bank for a long time to come.
Which is a big reason why private universities are in trouble. It's also a big reason why Marquette has as large a first-time college student base, which often is low and moderate income and qualifies for federal, state and private foundation grants. If the cost equation doesn't change, the cost of Marquette outweighs the tangible benefit of the university. Of course, Marquette has huge intangible benefits as well, but that's a really tough sell.
-
Interesting point. I was graduated in 1978. The all-in cost of my education was $22,000. My salary out of Marquette was $10,500, because I had a Journalism degree. The ratio of total college costs to first year was 2.10x. It's the equivalent of a debt/income ratio and the lower the better. Keep in mind this is a private school tuition.
Assume today a first year, non-scientific salary is $42,000. Four years of Marquette, undiscounted, is about $220,000, making the college cost to first year salary ratio 5.24x. Nobody in their right mind would lend on those kind of ratios.
So here's the question: Let's assume an optimal debt/ first year income ratio is about 1.75x. The argument is you grow into the debt so you take a higher ratio earlier on and it shrinks over time. Back in the day, the $22,000 all-in cost of Marquette and a $10,500 salary meant you debt ceiling was about $18,500. The remaining $3,500 would come from jobs, scholarships, parents/relatives and grants. Doable.
Today, a salary range of $42,000 to $62,000 would yield a 1.75x debt ceiling of between $73,500 and $108,500. The result is equity contributions of between $111,500 and $146,500. For most middle class families, especially those with multiple children, this is just not possible. I get that Marquette is discounting to some degree. But when the cost of Marquette is stacked up against a Big Ten university, for example, you have to have a damn good reason for the small private college in Milwaukee because you're going to be in hoc to some bank for a long time to come.
Which is a big reason why private universities are in trouble. It's also a big reason why Marquette has as large a first-time college student base, which often is low and moderate income and qualifies for federal, state and private foundation grants. If the cost equation doesn't change, the cost of Marquette outweighs the tangible benefit of the university. Of course, Marquette has huge intangible benefits as well, but that's a really tough sell.
+1000000000
-
Interesting point. I was graduated in 1978. The all-in cost of my education was $22,000. My salary out of Marquette was $10,500, because I had a Journalism degree. The ratio of total college costs to first year was 2.10x. It's the equivalent of a debt/income ratio and the lower the better. Keep in mind this is a private school tuition.
Assume today a first year, non-scientific salary is $42,000. Four years of Marquette, undiscounted, is about $220,000, making the college cost to first year salary ratio 5.24x. Nobody in their right mind would lend on those kind of ratios.
So here's the question: Let's assume an optimal debt/ first year income ratio is about 1.75x. The argument is you grow into the debt so you take a higher ratio earlier on and it shrinks over time. Back in the day, the $22,000 all-in cost of Marquette and a $10,500 salary meant you debt ceiling was about $18,500. The remaining $3,500 would come from jobs, scholarships, parents/relatives and grants. Doable.
Today, a salary range of $42,000 to $62,000 would yield a 1.75x debt ceiling of between $73,500 and $108,500. The result is equity contributions of between $111,500 and $146,500. For most middle class families, especially those with multiple children, this is just not possible. I get that Marquette is discounting to some degree. But when the cost of Marquette is stacked up against a Big Ten university, for example, you have to have a damn good reason for the small private college in Milwaukee because you're going to be in hoc to some bank for a long time to come.
Which is a big reason why private universities are in trouble. It's also a big reason why Marquette has as large a first-time college student base, which often is low and moderate income and qualifies for federal, state and private foundation grants. If the cost equation doesn't change, the cost of Marquette outweighs the tangible benefit of the university. Of course, Marquette has huge intangible benefits as well, but that's a really tough sell.
What percentage of Marquette students pay retail? What percentage pay 75% of retail? What percentage pay even 50%?
I don't know, maybe others do.
-
What percentage of Marquette students pay retail? What percentage pay 75% of retail? What percentage pay even 50%?
I don't know, maybe others do.
Brother MU:
You're missing the big issue -- opportunity cost.
How many prospective Marquette students are so turned off by the face value of the educational costs? There's no way of knowing but I have to believe the high acceptance rates are a function of the fact that the cost/tangible benefit of a Marquette education is off-putting. I reiterate my point that the focus on first-time and low-income college students may seem in line with Jesuit values but they also reflect a cold reality that too many of the parents in my generation of MU grads have looked elsewhere for their students in no small measure because of costs.
If you come from a low and moderate income family, Marquette's affordability is very different because you have grants, scholarships etc., available to you that may not as readily be available to middle-income and upper middle-income families.
Those sample ratios I noted are real.
For the record, my wife and I both are MU grads. Our children attended Southern Illinois University in Carbondale because SIU had a program that met their needs. Marquette didn't. We're a big time MU family and I made a promise to them both that if they wanted to go to MU, if MU had a program they wanted and they could do MU work, we'd find a way to pay for it.
-
How many prospective Marquette students are so turned off by the face value of the educational costs? There's no way of knowing but I have to believe the high acceptance rates are a function of the fact that the cost/tangible benefit of a Marquette education is off-putting.
A personal anecdote that speaks to this phenomenon. When I was searching for a grad school, my number 1 choice was the University of Florida. They had an excellent program for what I wanted to study, I wanted a different experience than what I got at Marquette, and while not an Ivy it's not like you need to explain a degree from UF. Unfortunately, out of state tuition was over $30K a year and the assistantship I was offered did not cover tuition. The program recruiting me told me that most of their GAs received a scholarship that would lower the cost of tuition to less than the stipend they would be paying me but they of course couldn't promise that I would get it. I ended up going to Grand Valley State because they offered me an assistantship that covered tuition, room and board, and a stipend, even though Grand Valley was a distant second for me. The sticker price was just too high to risk. I found out later that every person in what would have been my cohort at UF received the scholarship that they mentioned. C'est la vie.
-
But then you would have missed out on the dynamic social mecca that is Allendale.
-
I don't know if people still pay much attention to the US News rankings, but anyone who thinks they have any worth should listen to Malcolm Gladwell's two-part "Revisionist History" eviscerating US News,its methodology and the rankings' value.
-
A good student is likely to get between 10k and 15k of the sticker price just for applying to Marquette. A great student between 15k and 22k just by applying. This is just what they’d be offered upon acceptance based upon GPA and/or test scores. So it is harder to compare older numbers when the scholarships automatically offers are higher now than the past. The sticker price has less meaning now.
I am concern about a trend where schools, and I assume Marquette, try to not offer as much scholarship money to students that they think they have a good chance of landing. Does this mean the fourth generation applicant with a sibling at MU or similar schools maybe gets offered a lot less attractive financial package? What about the child of graduates? That way of honking could back fire easily on these schools unless they are incredible data. Plus, it could start generational slides. I am only speculating for MU, but this is a trend in trying to target scholarships to get kids the schools might not Hager otherwise and to not offer as much to kids they think they will land anyway. Makes sense I suppose.
-
Has anyone had surveys from MU asking about salary, employment, etc? I have not and I feel that should be sent for them to better understand the immediate return on the value of their education.
My grad school reaches out to me asking about my salary, length of employment, if it's relevant to my studies, etc about every 6months. I feel like NUIG has a great barometer on how valuable their degree is to young adults vs American schools trying to bleed people dry.
-
Marquette undoubtedly surveys its graduates about salary, etc. Such assessments are required for its accreditation.
Another factor they use is their student loan default rate. Which is 2% - which is excellent. The national default rate is just under 10%, and about 6.7% for private, four-year institutions. This means 98% of Marquette graduates have the resources and willingness to pay-off their student loans.
As for admissions, there is a grid of some sort that determines how much aid they will be offered. Academic performance, financial need, etc. are all taken into consideration. Where I work, they could fall into one of sixteen (?) boxes that correspond to various offer levels.
-
Marquette undoubtedly surveys its graduates about salary, etc. Such assessments are required for its accreditation.
Another factor they use is their student loan default rate. Which is 2% - which is excellent. The national default rate is just under 10%, and about 6.7% for private, four-year institutions. This means 98% of Marquette graduates have the resources and willingness to pay-off their student loans.
As for admissions, there is a grid of some sort that determines how much aid they will be offered. Academic performance, financial need, etc. are all taken into consideration. Where I work, they could fall into one of sixteen (?) boxes that correspond to various offer levels.
Could you elaborate more on this? It seems like you're saying that MU (and schools in general) are thinking "as long as you don't default we'll keep upping the price" as opposed to thinking "is the salary these people are getting for 200k (or if 15k/scholarship then 140k) actually giving them a livable salary for the next decade or more?"
-
Interesting point. I was graduated in 1978. The all-in cost of my education was $22,000. My salary out of Marquette was $10,500, because I had a Journalism degree. The ratio of total college costs to first year was 2.10x. It's the equivalent of a debt/income ratio and the lower the better. Keep in mind this is a private school tuition.
Assume today a first year, non-scientific salary is $42,000. Four years of Marquette, undiscounted, is about $220,000, making the college cost to first year salary ratio 5.24x. Nobody in their right mind would lend on those kind of ratios.
So here's the question: Let's assume an optimal debt/ first year income ratio is about 1.75x. The argument is you grow into the debt so you take a higher ratio earlier on and it shrinks over time. Back in the day, the $22,000 all-in cost of Marquette and a $10,500 salary meant you debt ceiling was about $18,500. The remaining $3,500 would come from jobs, scholarships, parents/relatives and grants. Doable.
Today, a salary range of $42,000 to $62,000 would yield a 1.75x debt ceiling of between $73,500 and $108,500. The result is equity contributions of between $111,500 and $146,500. For most middle class families, especially those with multiple children, this is just not possible. I get that Marquette is discounting to some degree. But when the cost of Marquette is stacked up against a Big Ten university, for example, you have to have a damn good reason for the small private college in Milwaukee because you're going to be in hoc to some bank for a long time to come.
Which is a big reason why private universities are in trouble. It's also a big reason why Marquette has as large a first-time college student base, which often is low and moderate income and qualifies for federal, state and private foundation grants. If the cost equation doesn't change, the cost of Marquette outweighs the tangible benefit of the university. Of course, Marquette has huge intangible benefits as well, but that's a really tough sell.
My total college costs back in'69 were 12K with no assistance. According to your calculation my debt/income ratio is 12000/9000 is 1.33. So even if a student today were to start a new job equivalent to my starting salary back in '69 their debt/income ratio 220000/67000 would be about 3.3. So to put in real terms a student today would have to graduate with a starting salary of 165K to equal my 1.33 income to debt ratio.
-
A good student is likely to get between 10k and 15k of the sticker price just for applying to Marquette. A great student between 15k and 22k just by applying. This is just what they’d be offered upon acceptance based upon GPA and/or test scores. So it is harder to compare older numbers when the scholarships automatically offers are higher now than the past. The sticker price has less meaning now.
I think you can still compare. Let's use the midpoint of your good student range -- $12,500. We'll use the range of $42,000 to $62,000 again for the expected first year salary. The discount takes an MU student's tuition from an estimated $220,000 to $170,000 across four years. On the low end, your tuition debt is 4.05x your first year salary. On the high end, it's 2.74x. The latter is better than the more than 5.0x but it is still way above college costs in the late 1970s and early 1980s as a percentage of reasonable first-year income.
To go a step further, to assume a 1.75x college debt to starting salary ratio is reasonable and assume four years is now $170,000, the starting salary necessary for a 1.75x cost/income ratio is almost $100,000 annually. Not sure there is a lot of Marquette students who start with that income.
In fact, ratios of 1.5x to 2.5x are often the debt/income ratios optimized in mortgage lending. Those loans are originated for terms of 30 years to manage payments. If you buy into what colleges, including Marquette, are doing, you're effectively assuming that either the student will prepay because their salaries skyrocket or the debt will be outstanding for much of the student's working life.
In a word -- YUCK!
The result is we have a college system that makes the type of assumptions made when I filled a FALFSA for my daughter a number of years ago. The result came up with such a ridiculous assumption about what I could afford that the only way I could have paid that amount would be to sleep under a bridge at night. It really was that bad.
Colleges have come to assume that parents have saved enormous amounts of money for college. Some, like my wife and I, did the best we could. Nonetheless, colleges have become like the medical profession insofar as they have different rack rates for different classes or groups of potential students. The goal is to optimize revenue by setting rates based on an ability of a third party to pay, rather than market or economic forces for the students colleges want.
-
Could you elaborate more on this? It seems like you're saying that MU (and schools in general) are thinking "as long as you don't default we'll keep upping the price" as opposed to thinking "is the salary these people are getting for 200k (or if 15k/scholarship then 140k) actually giving them a livable salary for the next decade or more?"
Not to split hairs, but a college taking the short view does not care one solitary whit whether the borrower defaults. (They ought to care, holistically and with a long-term view, that their students are successful because that is most likely to lead to a path of longterm success for the institution). The school has been paid. The school is not the lender. The *lender* should care whether the student defaults... but since most loans are backed by the feds the lenders don't really care either. The feds are gonna pay them out for any defaults anyway.
The net result of this scenario is there is no incentive, none, zero, zilch, for any piece of the admitting chain to either keep prices low or to deny students loans. Schools can let tuition skyrocket, take on cheap debt while interest rates are low, and build fancy new buildings. Student loan lenders can give tens of thousands of dollars to anyone with a pulse applying to anywhere that masquerades as an institute of higher education, and why wouldn't they? They're all making rational decisions for their own economic interests?
-
Could you elaborate more on this? It seems like you're saying that MU (and schools in general) are thinking "as long as you don't default we'll keep upping the price" as opposed to thinking "is the salary these people are getting for 200k (or if 15k/scholarship then 140k) actually giving them a livable salary for the next decade or more?"
No. What I am saying is that a Marquette education provides the students with the compensation needed to pay back their student loans, and they do so at a higher rate than their peer institutions. Therefore they received an education of value.
-
And I have said this before, but at its most simplistic level, an institution has two basic goals with respect to admissions.
How many students are enrolling?
How much are these students paying out of pocket?
All financial modeling is built on those two basic questions first and foremost. For instance, a school that has 1,500 students who pay $20,000 each, is earning more tuition revenue than a school that has 1,800 students who pay $16,000 each. (Though it is earning less room and board.)
So enrollment isn't the only determining factor here.
-
My total college costs back in'69 were 12K with no assistance. According to your calculation my debt/income ratio is 12000/9000 is 1.33. So even if a student today were to start a new job equivalent to my starting salary back in '69 their debt/income ratio 220000/67000 would be about 3.3. So to put in real terms a student today would have to graduate with a starting salary of 165K to equal my 1.33 income to debt ratio.
Again, as others have said, most students accepted by Marquette aren't going to pay anywhere near $220K -- most will have "assistance," and a considerable amount. So while I know you need to fuel a narrative, please stop talking about $220K.
It's not 1969 anymore. The Vietnam War is over. A McDonald's burger isn't 15 cents. Gas isn't 29 cents a gallon. Minimum wage isn't $1.60. Your examples have no merit.
But yes, many college graduates do not make big bucks right out of school.
-
Again, as others have said, most students accepted by Marquette aren't going to pay anywhere near $220K -- most will have "assistance," and a considerable amount. So while I know you need to fuel a narrative, please stop talking about $220K.
It's not 1969 anymore. The Vietnam War is over. A McDonald's burger isn't 15 cents. Gas isn't 29 cents a gallon. Minimum wage isn't $1.60. Your examples have no merit.
But yes, many college graduates do not make big bucks right out of school.
While you're right I think you're going after the wrong party here. FBM seems to be the one vaguely saying we get creative so 'these kids can afford it' without very much context. But this argument's been had before.
-
Again, as others have said, most students accepted by Marquette aren't going to pay anywhere near $220K -- most will have "assistance," and a considerable amount. So while I know you need to fuel a narrative, please stop talking about $220K.
It's not 1969 anymore. The Vietnam War is over. A McDonald's burger isn't 15 cents. Gas isn't 29 cents a gallon. Minimum wage isn't $1.60. Your examples have no merit.
But yes, many college graduates do not make big bucks right out of school.
As fun as it is to dunk on cherry picking facts to push a narrative, there is a kernel of truth buried in there. The cost of college has increased at a rate that far exceed inflation. It continues to do so at a rate that exceeds the growth of wages. These two things, together, seem to me to be bad. Also, if they continue then their negative impact will tend to grow over time, especially as incurring increasingly large debt loads remains the commonly-necessary means of paying for the increasingly high tuition amounts actually paid.
-
No. What I am saying is that a Marquette education provides the students with the compensation needed to pay back their student loans, and they do so at a higher rate than their peer institutions. Therefore they received an education of value.
...but not as valuable as it once was and that is true for the state schools as well.
-
Just saw MU added Triton as a guaranteed admission Junior college. That's awesome. Of course of the 25 neighborhoods it serves I think only about 4 would be from a spot where the average family could realistically afford MU without a ton of scholarships. It's like the MATC program, great idea but what percent of students coming out are realistically going to be able to make that jump with the financial burden?
-
While you're right I think you're going after the wrong party here. FBM seems to be the one vaguely saying we get creative so 'these kids can afford it' without very much context. But this argument's been had before.
I don't understand what context you need. If a school is graduating people who are generally satisfied with their experience and their outcomes, enough to pay their student loans back, they clearly can "afford it."
They also have alumni employment rates here:
https://www.marquette.edu/value/
-
OK, but you all realize that these players are on a full scholarship, right? ::)
-
I don't understand what context you need. If a school is graduating people who are generally satisfied with their experience and their outcomes, enough to pay their student loans back, they clearly can "afford it."
They also have alumni employment rates here:
https://www.marquette.edu/value/
You really think a school's PR page is the best spot for real info? I mean how is that different than going to Fox to reinforce ideas about election integrity?
If I'm 23 or 24 with all those fresh great times at MU in my head & making 40k as a jr developer, then I have no idea that I am not able to allocate money for future house, car or general savings, for 401k, no chance I could handle an unplanned pregnancy, but dammit I'd give MU a great satisfied rating on the survey because all my friends are from there and we're all roughly in the same boat.
I know all of 2 people who graduated from MU that made above 55k as their starting salary and she was heavily connected, he was a very specific type of engineer & connected. Here I am 7yrs later and, discounting sales jobs that are heavily commission based, I know nobody beyond those two who make 6 figures without a Graduate degree. As we all enter our 30s and people are asking why we aren't buying houses while we pay 50% of a mortgage each month for school loans and havent incrementally increased salaries for that great ROI like everyone said we would. That's from business majors, education, Comm, and engineering. There's literally no way you can tell me that colleges are just keeping up with inflation when you see the debt to income ratio of people in the 60s and 70s.
Edit: And still relate back to your comment regarding teachers of "not everybody chooses their career for the money" with a huge eye roll. Money when you have no perspective of the costs of the future is easy to ignore.
-
Again, as others have said, most students accepted by Marquette aren't going to pay anywhere near $220K -- most will have "assistance," and a considerable amount. So while I know you need to fuel a narrative, please stop talking about $220K.
It's not 1969 anymore. The Vietnam War is over. A McDonald's burger isn't 15 cents. Gas isn't 29 cents a gallon. Minimum wage isn't $1.60. Your examples have no merit.
But yes, many college graduates do not make big bucks right out of school.
...and why is that? I venture to guess that the BA or BS no longer has the value it once had when I graduated. That is not pushing a narrative. The numbers don't lie and Jfickle13 is right on. Even if every MU student only paid 110K they would have to graduate with an 82K starting salary to equal the 1.33 debt ratio I graduated with. I doubt very few state school graduates will earn a 1.33 debt ratio when they graduate. It shouldn't be this way.
-
Again, as others have said, most students accepted by Marquette aren't going to pay anywhere near $220K -- most will have "assistance," and a considerable amount. So while I know you need to fuel a narrative, please stop talking about $220K.
It's not 1969 anymore. The Vietnam War is over. A McDonald's burger isn't 15 cents. Gas isn't 29 cents a gallon. Minimum wage isn't $1.60. Your examples have no merit.
But yes, many college graduates do not make big bucks right out of school.
But how much of that "assistance" consists of federal loans?
-
But how much of that "assistance" consists of federal loans?
A little north of 50million based on fluffy's link.
-
Again, as others have said, most students accepted by Marquette aren't going to pay anywhere near $220K -- most will have "assistance," and a considerable amount. So while I know you need to fuel a narrative, please stop talking about $220K.
It's not 1969 anymore. The Vietnam War is over. A McDonald's burger isn't 15 cents. Gas isn't 29 cents a gallon. Minimum wage isn't $1.60. Your examples have no merit.
But yes, many college graduates do not make big bucks right out of school.
Ok, last numbers driven analysis. Let's buy your qualitative assessment that folks are getting a considerable amount of assistance. Further, assume the newly minted graduate of Marquette makes $45,000 annually, which is not an unusual starting salary for many MU grads. To get in a college costs/salary ratio of 1.5x to 3.0x, your range of tuition has to be between $67,500 and $135,000. Now, assuming the rack, or undiscounted, rate is $220,000 for four years, the discount off the rack has to be between 38.6 percent and 69.3 percent.
To the extent Marquette doesn't discount, the student either must make that up through scholarships or outside equity/debt contribution.
Now, compare the same analysis to a State of Illinois public university. With no discounting, the four-year cost is going to be about $110,000, give or take. Assuming the same $45,000 starting salary (which is reasonable for a University of Illinois grad working in Chicago or any of Illinois' cities), the college cost/first year income ratio is a much more manageable 2.44x.
This is the problem Marquette and every other competitive private university is facing.
Look, I'm a huge believer in Marquette and have seen what it did for me and I've put my money where my mouth is. It's an incredible university. But its competition, like it or not, is large state chartered and supported universities. MU's real competition is Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan State, Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota and even that tech school to the west!
-
You really think a school's PR page is the best spot for real info? I mean how is that different than going to Fox to reinforce ideas about election integrity?
If I'm 23 or 24 with all those fresh great times at MU in my head & making 40k as a jr developer, then I have no idea that I am not able to allocate money for future house, car or general savings, for 401k, no chance I could handle an unplanned pregnancy, but dammit I'd give MU a great satisfied rating on the survey because all my friends are from there and we're all roughly in the same boat.
I know all of 2 people who graduated from MU that made above 55k as their starting salary and she was heavily connected, he was a very specific type of engineer & connected. Here I am 7yrs later and, discounting sales jobs that are heavily commission based, I know nobody beyond those two who make 6 figures without a Graduate degree. As we all enter our 30s and people are asking why we aren't buying houses while we pay 50% of a mortgage each month for school loans and havent incrementally increased salaries for that great ROI like everyone said we would. That's from business majors, education, Comm, and engineering. There's literally no way you can tell me that colleges are just keeping up with inflation when you see the debt to income ratio of people in the 60s and 70s.
Edit: And still relate back to your comment regarding teachers of "not everybody chooses their career for the money" with a huge eye roll. Money when you have no perspective of the costs of the future is easy to ignore.
Well then, I will likely not engage with you in further discussion about this because it seems you're a tad jaded due to your personal circumstance.
-
Well then, I will likely not engage with you in further discussion about this because it seems you're a tad jaded due to your personal circumstance.
My personal circumstance is different, I was lucky enough to only have 1.5yrs worth of loans and have EU citizenship so I got a graduate degree at fraction of the cost which got me out of that relentless cycle. I'm angry about it after hearing about friends and family circumstances, blessed it's not mine.
But let's say it was, your argument is "well if you have a bad experience I won't engage with you"? That's like saying "America's perfect" and then not having a discussion about why it's not if confronted by someone who's black gay or poor.
This is exactly what happened when I laid out a whole monthly budget for you and asked for you to give input, you just said "im not going to engage". You've bought your employer's & alma mater's cool aid and that's fine nothing wrong with acknowledging that the cool aid isn't for everybody and that it's not a perfect drink.
Edit: I will admit to being jaded but still loving MU with all my heart. If/when I have a kid I hope I can send them to their school of choice, whether that's MU or anywhere that isn't ND/UW
-
Dude, with all due respect, don't ask me a bunch of questions then turn around and claim that I am using biased information or drinking the cool aid. I simply don't care enough about changing a mind that clearly has no desire to be changed. So why engage?
-
Dude, with all due respect, don't ask me a bunch of questions then turn around and claim that I am using biased information or drinking the cool aid. I simply don't care enough about changing a mind that clearly has no desire to be changed. So why engage?
You literally gave a link to a PR page from MU's website that didn't list salary and instead focuses on positive experience and general employment. How do you not think that's not spin? If you'd posted a legit study of average salaries vs loans then this is an entirely different conversation.
I've seen you take people to task for posting political leaning PR pieces that pull stuff like that. I just don't get why you don't see it when it's relevant to your field.
-
You really think a school's PR page is the best spot for real info? I mean how is that different than going to Fox to reinforce ideas about election integrity?
If I'm 23 or 24 with all those fresh great times at MU in my head & making 40k as a jr developer, then I have no idea that I am not able to allocate money for future house, car or general savings, for 401k, no chance I could handle an unplanned pregnancy, but dammit I'd give MU a great satisfied rating on the survey because all my friends are from there and we're all roughly in the same boat.
I know all of 2 people who graduated from MU that made above 55k as their starting salary and she was heavily connected, he was a very specific type of engineer & connected. Here I am 7yrs later and, discounting sales jobs that are heavily commission based, I know nobody beyond those two who make 6 figures without a Graduate degree. As we all enter our 30s and people are asking why we aren't buying houses while we pay 50% of a mortgage each month for school loans and havent incrementally increased salaries for that great ROI like everyone said we would. That's from business majors, education, Comm, and engineering. There's literally no way you can tell me that colleges are just keeping up with inflation when you see the debt to income ratio of people in the 60s and 70s.
Edit: And still relate back to your comment regarding teachers of "not everybody chooses their career for the money" with a huge eye roll. Money when you have no perspective of the costs of the future is easy to ignore.
I feel like the need for a graduate degree to earn six figures is becoming less and less relevant. And to be honest, I think there are plenty of opportunities to make six figures and up in your early 30's without a graduate degree.
-
The cost of education has gone up exponentially compared to inflation. But the value of a degree compared to not having a degree has also changed in favor of having a degree. The gap is larger and the jobs without a degree tend to be a lot worse than those from the mid-1980s and before. Can't just go work at the local union factory anymore. Yes, there are trade jobs that pay well, and they are viable options for many, but also the type of jobs that many can't do at a high level past the age of mid-50s at best.
The college picture is not as bleak as many make it out to be. But this is a transition period where private schools have to become more efficient, focused, and offer scholarships like never before. The new online competition is just getting started and will force many schools to get smaller and cheaper for the students.
For very good students for tuition and room and board, Marquette ends up being about 15K to 20K more expensive per year than UW Madison only taking into account the initial discount Marquette gives for applying and being accepted. Not bad, but still a problem if your middle or upper middle class or have a few kids. UW Madison does not offer such discounts and fewer scholarship opportunities. If you also get need based aid or additional scholarships (competitive scholarships) the cost can be equal or better and UW Madison. Very doable for many.
If you want to make Marquette really competitive for more great students, they have to compete on money, which equals more and better scholarships. Get the cost well below the public school competition for very good students. Religious differentiation has become less and less meaningful. To differentiate on things other than costs, size, ethics, specific programs, and ratings which means get better students, get smaller, and offer more money.
I'd say Marquette should put money into scholarships and less into the physical plant.
As for the Pere Marquette Awards, which one gets just for applying, there is a link that tells you how much to expect. Not sure exactly how accurate this is. But for example some with a 4.0 with no test score would get about 18K off the sticker price. Throw in a 26 on the ACT and you get 22K off the sticker price, even before applying for other aid.
See link:
https://tcc.ruffalonl.com/Marquette%20University/Freshman-Students
-
The cost of education has gone up exponentially compared to inflation. But the value of a degree compared to not having a degree has also changed in favor of having a degree. The gap is larger and the jobs without a degree tend to be a lot worse than those from the mid-1980s and before. Can't just go work at the local union factory anymore. Yes, there are trade jobs that pay well, and they are viable options for many, but also the type of jobs that many can't do at a high level past the age of mid-50s at best.
There you go. That's the problem.
Forget for a moment where on the fee spectrum someone is paying for Marquette, the fact is the cost of the Marquette education has skyrocketed far beyond any measure of inflation. I have yet to hear a plausible explanation for why it is 10 times more expensive at the rack rate and probably about 6x to 8x more expensive at the discounted rate to educate a person now than it was around 1980.
I get technology is far more prevalent today. I get that employers want technologically savvy grads for jobs, regardless of fields. But technology as a driver for tuition that is six times to 10 times more, no. Not a chance. That has more to do with WHO is paying and the availability of cheap loans than anything.
Years ago, I posed the question at a Marquette reception in Chicago. Father Pilarz said students want amenities. New, large rec centers, better food, nicer dorms for example. That's driving costs up. I nearly puked. I wanted to ask, based on that comment, if I could get a dinner reservation at Schroeder Hall!
Even Barack Obama raised the same questions I did and posed the same cost/benefit analysis. I can't believe I am saying this, but President Obama was spot on with this issue.
-
That issue is true of all colleges the cost increases have exceeded inflation at exponential rates. Like many things, it is likely caused by many smaller factors that add up: More professors, smaller teaching loads on professors, higher salaries to compete, more administration positions, more student services, new and better buildings and residence halls, etc, with better amenities, more federal money available, yes - better food options, etc, etc, etc. They all add up.
-
The cost of education has gone up exponentially compared to inflation. But the value of a degree compared to not having a degree has also changed in favor of having a degree. The gap is larger and the jobs without a degree tend to be a lot worse than those from the mid-1980s and before. Can't just go work at the local union factory anymore. Yes, there are trade jobs that pay well, and they are viable options for many, but also the type of jobs that many can't do at a high level past the age of mid-50s at best.
The college picture is not as bleak as many make it out to be. But this is a transition period where private schools have to become more efficient, focused, and offer scholarships like never before. The new online competition is just getting started and will force many schools to get smaller and cheaper for the students.
For very good students for tuition and room and board, Marquette ends up being about 15K to 20K more expensive per year than UW Madison only taking into account the initial discount Marquette gives for applying and being accepted. Not bad, but still a problem if your middle or upper middle class or have a few kids. UW Madison does not offer such discounts and fewer scholarship opportunities. If you also get need based aid or additional scholarships (competitive scholarships) the cost can be equal or better and UW Madison. Very doable for many.
If you want to make Marquette really competitive for more great students, they have to compete on money, which equals more and better scholarships. Get the cost well below the public school competition for very good students. Religious differentiation has become less and less meaningful. To differentiate on things other than costs, size, ethics, specific programs, and ratings which means get better students, get smaller, and offer more money.
I'd say Marquette should put money into scholarships and less into the physical plant.
As for the Pere Marquette Awards, which one gets just for applying, there is a link that tells you how much to expect. Not sure exactly how accurate this is. But for example some with a 4.0 with no test score would get about 18K off the sticker price. Throw in a 26 on the ACT and you get 22K off the sticker price, even before applying for other aid.
See link:
https://tcc.ruffalonl.com/Marquette%20University/Freshman-Students
Why not just reduce the total college cost for every student.
-
Why not just reduce the total college cost for every student.
Because people are more likely to buy something expensive if they feel they've gotten a deal. Think about 50% off a name brand suit vs Walmart.
-
Because people are more likely to buy something expensive if they feel they've gotten a deal. Think about 50% off a name brand suit vs Walmart.
So calculus at MU is of a higher quality than calculus at UWM? How so?
-
I don't know if people still pay much attention to the US News rankings, but anyone who thinks they have any worth should listen to Malcolm Gladwell's two-part "Revisionist History" eviscerating US News,its methodology and the rankings' value.
100%
-
So calculus at MU is of a higher quality than calculus at UWM? How so?
I honestly don't know. That's just the theory that was explained to me.
-
So calculus at MU is of a higher quality than calculus at UWM? How so?
Well at least back in 1980 yes, the dude who wrote the calculus book that was even used at MIT was my teacher. ;D
-
Because people are more likely to buy something expensive if they feel they've gotten a deal. Think about 50% off a name brand suit vs Walmart.
That and because the same reason that the insulin people “charge” thousands for their product. It’s a scam meant to hit insurance companies but ends up catching uninsured people in the grift.
Colleges “charge” astronomical prices and some suckers pay sticker no matter how much everyone wants to focus on the typical “discount”
-
Here's some good news from our alma mater that I received today in my Alumni Newsletter email:
Marquette Wire named one of the top five student media outlets in the country
The Marquette Wire, the university's student media outlet housed in the Diederich College of Communication, was named a top-five finalist in the College Media Association's national Pinnacle Awards competition for "Best College Media Outlet of the Year." The outlet joins finalists from Indiana University, Lehigh University, Pepperdine University and UCLA, and the winner will be announced at the ACP/CMA Fall National College Media Convention, held from Oct. 14-17.
The Marquette Tribune student newspaper was also named a finalist in the sports investigative category.
-
Because people are more likely to buy something expensive if they feel they've gotten a deal. Think about 50% off a name brand suit vs Walmart.
I don't agree. First, you have some rich people who aren't going to get discounts and will pay for a Marquette education. Their tuition pays for 1.5 to 2 people to go there.
Secondly, third party payers drive much of the tuition cost. If you've ever been in surgery at a major hospital, you see the same thing. There's the stated rate and then there's the terms and conditions governing how insurance companies reimburse the hospital. College is the same thing. The $55,000 rate is a starting point and a good negotiator gets as close to that number as he or she can.