Affirmative action ending at US Colleges ?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Don't forget, for over a thousand years, men typically took on the occupation of their father and women didn't have occupations. Obviously labour markets and worker competition has affected the roll of universities and a university degree became a way to filter potential workers. I don't think the roll of most universities can go back to the way it was unless some other type of filtering system is developed. The modern world just isn't set up for it any more.

The single largest contributor towards the necessity of university education for employment is the lower standards highschool students are able to meet as a result of public school cuts.

As a student returning to university in their 30s this year, I'm appalled at the relative lack of reading and writing abilities of some of the undergraduate students I encounter. Amongst faculty, this is an acknowledged problem that greatly contributes towards the factory floor atmosphere of many undergraduate courses.

Many businesses now identify college/university education for two reasons: 1) they are unwilling to train job applicants themselves, and B) highschool students no longer have the abilities to do the jobs they did just 15-20 years ago.

This is a real, significant problem and underlays some of the issues involved here with the 'asianfication' of campuses. Further evidence of this is the obscene amounts of 'paper editing' flyers located around campus; english majors who will essentially write a paper for you. This isn't just for the asian members of campus who may speak english as a second language, it's for the white kids who graduate high school who otherwise can't read and write at a post secondary level.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by an hero

That is a California-wide dress code, not only for universities, but junior colleges and primary/secondary school. It's not merely an issue of local gangs, given Norteños and Sureños are statewide.

Can you link to a source detailing this state-wide dress code for all post-secondary institutions in California? The only source I found when doing a Google search for "California university dress code" was this FAQ page for UC Irvine:

http://www.policies.uci.edu/resources/faqs.html

Does UCI have a dress code?

There is no stated dress code for the University, however attire should be appropriate and reasonable for a work environment. Departments may have their own dress codes, developed in consultation with Human Resources, that take into account appropriateness for public contact, safety, etc. Section 903-10: EH&S Policy confirms departmental responsibility for ensuring a safe environment; EH&S can provide guidance for protective clothing and footwear.

Emphasis added. It was unclear if this is referring to a dress code for all members of the university community (including students) or just faculty and staff.

[an hero]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Can you link to a source detailing this state-wide dress code for all post-secondary institutions in California? The only source I found when doing a Google search for "California university dress code" was this FAQ page for UC Irvine:

http://www.policies.uci.edu/resources/faqs.html



Emphasis added. It was unclear if this is referring to a dress code for all members of the university community (including students) or just faculty and staff.

I'm not sure if it pertains to staff too, but clearly there is a dress code for students. We were never made aware of any blatant policies concerning it, the school just seemed to have this blanket authority to deem certain dress styles as inappropriate, which is effectively like the speech codes as well. Sorry that I don't have a "link" to satisfy your skepticism, I graduated 10 years ago.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

The single largest contributor towards the necessity of university education for employment is the lower standards highschool students are able to meet as a result of public school cuts.

I don't think it is a result of public school cuts. Its a lack of accountability at the public school level. It should be okay to fail kids and the standard for passing should be higher. A good example is Mathematics, students in high school, even in advanced classes are just not taught the same level of mathematics they were in the 30's. The curiculim has been shortened. A professor at the U of S used to give his students an old test from the 30's to see who would pass. It had about a 20% success rate.

A good start would just be banning calculators from high schools. On the reading and writing side making students actually write multiple pages in high school would help. I know in university english we started with 5 paragraph essays. That was the standard they were expecting out of high schools. The standard for univeristy bound students out of high school needs to be higher.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by an hero

I'm not sure if it pertains to staff too, but clearly there is a dress code for students. We were never made aware of any blatant policies concerning it, the school just seemed to have this blanket authority to deem certain dress styles as inappropriate, which is effectively like the speech codes as well. Sorry that I don't have a "link" to satisfy your skepticism, I graduated 10 years ago.

Clearly there is not since you are either unable or unwilling to link to any documented policies mandating a student dress code at all California universities, and my (admittedly brief and non-exhaustive) Google search turned up no results.

California law allows (but doesn't mandate) publicly-funded primary and secondary schools to institute a dress code if they so wish (1), but there is no state-wide requirement. Additionally, individual schools are permitted to ban "gang-related apparel" (2), but the administration must explicitly define what falls into this category. Again, there is no state-wide requirement.

(1) http://law.onecle.com/california/education/35183.html
(2) http://law.onecle.com/california/education/32282.html

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don't think it is a result of public school cuts. Its a lack of accountability at the public school level. It should be okay to fail kids and the standard for passing should be higher. A good example is Mathematics, students in high school, even in advanced classes are just not taught the same level of mathematics they were in the 30's. The curiculim has been shortened. A professor at the U of S used to give his students an old test from the 30's to see who would pass. It had about a 20% success rate.

A good start would just be banning calculators from high schools. On the reading and writing side making students actually write multiple pages in high school would help. I know in university english we started with 5 paragraph essays. That was the standard they were expecting out of high schools. The standard for univeristy bound students out of high school needs to be higher.

Or, you know, maybe the standards are lower because with the cuts to public education, maintaining the previous standard was not possible. But let's just turn it into a "damn, spoiled, lazy kids these days" argument.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Or, you know, maybe the standards are lower because with the cuts to public education, maintaining the previous standard was not possible. But let's just turn it into a "damn, spoiled, lazy kids these days" argument.

Do you have any data that shows public education funding correlates to higher test scores globally? Do places like China and Korea really spend that much more on education than the U.S.?

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-ed...d-world-2012-1

http://rossieronline.usc.edu/u-s-edu...d-infographic/


There could also just as easily be a correlation between academic achievement and discipline. If you went to a school in Shanghai, would you see the same type of laziness and disruptiveness that you see in North American schools, where in some cases the teachers have almost no control whatsoever? I don't know if that is the case, but "budget cuts" is probably an overly simplistic scapegoat.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Or, you know, maybe the standards are lower because with the cuts to public education, maintaining the previous standard was not possible. But let's just turn it into a "damn, spoiled, lazy kids these days" argument.

Do you have any statistics showing how much more was spent on public education in the past versus today? Seems like we are spending more, not less, so shouldn't standards actually be higher?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Or, you know, maybe the standards are lower because with the cuts to public education, maintaining the previous standard was not possible. But let's just turn it into a "damn, spoiled, lazy kids these days" argument.

Until someone can show me that per student funding is down from the 1930's and that is the cause I am going with lazy entitled kids.

The best evidence of that is that the children of first gen immigrants domminate school. They have access to the same schooling however out perfrom there white counterparts. Western culture does not place the same expectation on students as Indian or Asian cultures do. Why is it that the children of first gen immigrants are able to outperform the average students. This isnt a funding issue, and isnt a lazy kids issue. It is a parenting and expectations issue.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by an hero

That might be an issue for, say, UC Berkeley, but SJSU? It's in an area where cops are called babysitters because they don't do much else besides babysit drunk college students meandering around out in public. I would suggest learning more about these circumstances than coming to a conclusion clearly on presumptions you are rather clueless about.

You do realize, of course, that you are talking primarily to Canadians who probably aren't intimately familiar with the difference between the goings-on at UC Berkeley and SJSU.

Not being allowed to wear a Brendan Shanahan jersey to school is a pretty strange example of "indoctrination". What are they trying to indoctrinate you against, cheering for the Red Wings?

You even explained specifically that you aren't allowed to wear the jersey because of the gang affiliation of the colors and numbers. Is that not the real reason and they are just using it as an excuse to cover up the indoctrination?

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by GGG

Until someone can show me that per student funding is down from the 1930's and that is the cause I am going with lazy entitled kids.

The best evidence of that is that the children of first gen immigrants domminate school. They have access to the same schooling however out perfrom there white counterparts. Western culture does not place the same expectation on students as Indian or Asian cultures do. Why is it that the children of first gen immigrants are able to outperform the average students. This isnt a funding issue, and isnt a lazy kids issue. It is a parenting and expectations issue.

Are we still talking about Afffirmative Action?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Do you have any data that shows public education funding correlates to higher test scores globally? Do places like China and Korea really spend that much more on education than the U.S.?

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-ed...d-world-2012-1

http://rossieronline.usc.edu/u-s-edu...d-infographic/


There could also just as easily be a correlation between academic achievement and discipline. If you went to a school in Shanghai, would you see the same type of laziness and disruptiveness that you see in North American schools, where in some cases the teachers have almost no control whatsoever? I don't know if that is the case, but "budget cuts" is probably an overly simplistic scapegoat.

The second one of those links is pretty interesting. It does appear on first glance that the countries who spend more in general perform better than the countries who spend less.

I think the culture in Japan and Korea probably plays a role, but do you think it's possible that the high-levels of racial and cultural homogeneity maybe contributes to keeping education costs down?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Do you have any statistics showing how much more was spent on public education in the past versus today? Seems like we are spending more, not less, so shouldn't standards actually be higher?

Originally Posted by GGG

Until someone can show me that per student funding is down from the 1930's and that is the cause I am going with lazy entitled kids.

The best evidence of that is that the children of first gen immigrants domminate school. They have access to the same schooling however out perfrom there white counterparts. Western culture does not place the same expectation on students as Indian or Asian cultures do. Why is it that the children of first gen immigrants are able to outperform the average students. This isnt a funding issue, and isnt a lazy kids issue. It is a parenting and expectations issue.

It would seem to me that we also have a lot more kids going and staying in school for much longer. Combine that with the extra-curriculur activities, field trips, etc., and it would stand to reason that funding has gone up. We also likely have more kids staying in longer with learning disabilities and mental disorders that wouldn't have gone much further than grade six in the 30s and are receiving funding to do so. Does that necessarily mean that funding is adequate?

Can someone show me the statistics that says kids of first-generation parents are dominating school? I don't necessarily doubt it but would like to see some data.

[Rubicant]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don't think it is a result of public school cuts. Its a lack of accountability at the public school level. It should be okay to fail kids and the standard for passing should be higher. A good example is Mathematics, students in high school, even in advanced classes are just not taught the same level of mathematics they were in the 30's. The curiculim has been shortened. A professor at the U of S used to give his students an old test from the 30's to see who would pass. It had about a 20% success rate.

A good start would just be banning calculators from high schools. On the reading and writing side making students actually write multiple pages in high school would help. I know in university english we started with 5 paragraph essays. That was the standard they were expecting out of high schools. The standard for univeristy bound students out of high school needs to be higher.

Do you mean accountability for the students or the schools?

In Ontario there is a very large push from the government to have high graduation rates as those are politically popular. As a result a lot of students get pushed along whether they are ready or not.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Can someone show me the statistics that says kids of first-generation parents are dominating school? I don't necessarily doubt it but would like to see some data.

I'm not here to argue the point, but if you are looking for the data breakdown, its in the API scores (for USA)

http://api.cde.ca.gov/Acnt2012/2012G...43696906049191

[an hero]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

You do realize, of course, that you are talking primarily to Canadians who probably aren't intimately familiar with the difference between the goings-on at UC Berkeley and SJSU.

Not being allowed to wear a Brendan Shanahan jersey to school is a pretty strange example of "indoctrination". What are they trying to indoctrinate you against, cheering for the Red Wings?

You even explained specifically that you aren't allowed to wear the jersey because of the gang affiliation of the colors and numbers. Is that not the real reason and they are just using it as an excuse to cover up the indoctrination?

The premise was how the education system there is counterproductive to the notion of individual growth, when you're so limited in expressing yourself so as to appease paranoid people. Indoctrination has to do with speech codes, telling people how to feel about things, criticizing someone for writing a paper that doesn't agree with a leftist-leaning political philosophy, with nothing to do with how the paper was written, the sources used, or anything academic. It's a rather flagrant double standard, but moreover, perhaps someone who is on the fence and want to avoid this kind of stuff might decide like I did (the second time around) to choose a path straight to the degree through what's negatively regarded by a poster as a "puppy mill". There's plenty of reasons, just giving mine.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by GGG

Until someone can show me that per student funding is down from the 1930's and that is the cause I am going with lazy entitled kids.

The best evidence of that is that the children of first gen immigrants domminate school. They have access to the same schooling however out perfrom there white counterparts. Western culture does not place the same expectation on students as Indian or Asian cultures do. Why is it that the children of first gen immigrants are able to outperform the average students. This isnt a funding issue, and isnt a lazy kids issue. It is a parenting and expectations issue.

Regular student school expenditures are down roughly 20% in the united states in the span between 1967 and 1991. Since 1991, these gaps have accelerated. In Canada, I believe the difference is even more substantial. I don't have the data at the tips of my fingers.

'Per student' dollar figures are a red herring anyways, as they do not quantify the quality or depth of where these dollars are going. These also can't be judged in terms of test scores, either. For example, if the school board receives more money, and they use that money to address a need like special education funding, that funding doesn't produce a net benefit in testing scores for that district, with the exception of maybe bringing them inline with their 'gen pop' peer student scores. However, no educator would argue it did not have a net benefit for the community of the school or at large to have this funding go towards those students. The portion of education funding devoted to teachers has largely remained stagnant and objectively declined in many areas.

There's a been a substantial decrease in education funding that has adversely affected the majority of students in the system. Fortunately, many previously maligned categories of students are receiving better educations, but our desire as a society to reduce public spending and the lack of voter representation of minors has seen an observable decline in Canadian and American education.

"Lazy" and "entitled" kids is about the worst of the "in my day" arguments, as children are mostly products of their environment.

The OTHER aspect that has been touched on in the asianification argument in that MacLean's article was that asian families contribute more support, both practical and financial, than their counterparts. What does that say about the "lazy kid" argument? It says the support structures are the difference makers, not the children.

Seems to me it takes a village, and there are lots abdicating their responsibility for these things by blaming the minors who don't implement decisions on their own behalf in the first place.

[vanisleflamesfan]

Originally Posted by an hero

The premise was how the education system there is counterproductive to the notion of individual growth, when you're so limited in expressing yourself so as to appease paranoid people. Indoctrination has to do with speech codes, telling people how to feel about things, criticizing someone for writing a paper that doesn't agree with a leftist-leaning political philosophy, with nothing to do with how the paper was written, the sources used, or anything academic. It's a rather flagrant double standard, but moreover, perhaps someone who is on the fence and want to avoid this kind of stuff might decide like I did (the second time around) to choose a path straight to the degree through what's negatively regarded by a poster as a "puppy mill". There's plenty of reasons, just giving mine.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by GGG

Until someone can show me that per student funding is down from the 1930's and that is the cause I am going with lazy entitled kids.

Are you really holding up an education system where only 1 in 5 kids graduated high school and the illiteracy rate was about 10 times what it is now as some sort of gold standard?

[pylon]

Originally Posted by an hero

<snip>

Totally off topic here. But I find your handle and avatar highly offensive. It makes a mockery out of suicide, and is a phrase coined based on the bullying of a suicide victim.

On 4Chan I am sure it is 1337 funny, but I think it is in horrible taste, and classes this site down substantially.

I had to get that off my chest. But you know exactly what a mockery it is of a very sad horrible situation involving a kid.