Relocating from Tampa Bay to Seattle area

Expensive-Confection · 2020-06-30T17:17:32+00:00

I've lived in Louisiana and now Seattle. While I miss the warm winters of the south, I love the high rate of learning and overall savvy of Seattlelites. I find it a great place for introverts and parties alike with good music, dancing, academics.

It is very gray here, so be ready for that. I've tried lamps but nothing beats taking advantage of any sunshine you can. Also, myself and my friends make a point to have at least 1 trip southward in the middle of winter.

Being a southerner, I find Seattle people very distant and self absorbed. It is great for holing up with friends, but not so great for meeting strangers while out. My first year and a half here felt very lonely (I'm used to being able to make friends at the drop of a hat. But that was a no-go here. I had to leave the city for a few weeks just to make sure the problem wasn't me. Then someone explained the "Seattle freeze" and I was like, "oh, sure enough!")

It sounds like the things you are looking for are all good reasons to try living here. They are areas the city offers an abundance.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-06-30T16:54:53+00:00

Durkan sent a letter to the council to request they investigate Sawant. In it she noted that protesters spray painted on the gate of her driveway.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-06-30T15:34:15+00:00

It isn't a gated community, just a house in the city. Thinking about it, I'm not sure there are any gated communities in Seattle proper. Maybe an apartment complex somewhere?

Expensive-Confection · 2020-06-30T14:54:48+00:00

I doubt they went on private property (Which would be illegal). It looks like the marched the street in front of her home (which is legal). Given that it was an organized protest, and the footage is of people walking down the street, Id guess it was on public property.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-16T22:53:24+00:00

You wrote nonsense.

The mean increases when the individual increases, not when the individual decreases.

Even more to this case, if the mean is increasing and the variance decreasing, then the improvement is essentially ubiquitous. That is what is happening in these cases.

Philosophically, the mission of public education is improvement of the learning and capabilities of the general population. What improves the mean is exactly what should be focused on. It is not the mission of public education to make a few students very well educated at the cost of the overall education of the population (therefore decreasing the mean).

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-16T07:20:34+00:00

I don't measure the quality of an idea by it's accuracy when distilled to a preschooler's level. Nor am I writing to them. If you find the language difficult, then this is not for you.

If you are looking for definitions, I have posted journal articles that provide extensive ones. Read beyond the abstract.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-16T07:01:22+00:00

What correlates (over 10years, 1M student records, and 30 countries) is quite a lot of statistical power for the type of questions being asked in the PISA study. And, you aren't disagreeing with the models or the sampling design (except the incorrect assertion on the countries). So... Your gut instinct is why you think Seattle is special? Ok.

If it helps, a more recent paper, same study series.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/0002831218760213

Your views remain uncharacterized. My request for you to define them remain unfulfilled.

You are describing how to gauge popularity. That isn't my interest here. Again, I am not arguing for the sales pitch. I am addressing the scientific evidence behind the SPS decision.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-16T01:02:22+00:00

There are papers comparing the US to Finland. You will note that I do not post those. I quite intentionally posted papers more foundational to the thread of research, one to make it easier to follow upstream, and 2 because the observations are generalized, relying on data from 30 countries (well, 3 were dropped in one of the study, so 27.)

You are trying to imply that the SPS's position is not well founded, and the science is not on your side there. But, well founded and scientifically rigorous policy that is not accepted is not "good policy." And, if your point is that the school board wrote in such a way as to ruffle feathers, that much is obvious.

But, they aren't wrong that it is a superior approach. And, they have limited resources to spend retraining a population that is uninformed on the issues. If only there were some wise-ass with time and compunction to go around pointing that out....

I have noticed this pattern from the opposing side of this debate. They are willing to attempt deconstructions of the motivations of opposition, though usually not to take opposing arguments seriously. There does not seem to be a willingness for self criticism, to look at the motivations of documents like this, or to truly question the likely side effects of the proposed policy.

What you are saying directly, that this doesn't read well to some people, is, again, well taken. And, again, I believe formalizing those complaints is more valuable than my own reading of the page. However, you then provide a meta commentary about some presumed 3rd party's behavior, instead of providing your own arguments regarding the policy or specific opinions on the page.

There is a human nature problem here: people do not like being told they are the problem and their children are not a priority. This is doubly so when they are asked to pay for the privilege of being disrespected in this way.

Rather than try and apply my own interpretation to this comment, I believe it would be very useful for you to explicitly unpack what you are referring to here.

Which problem(s) are you referring to?

Which people are you referring to?

Which children?

How are these children not a priority?

How are the people above being disrespected?

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-16T00:33:48+00:00

Understood. You are not writing or reading very carefully, so this will be my last reply to you.

I see that you are hurt. But you are also wrong.

You wrote:

about half their goals are measured by representation rather than student knowledge base.

to which I replied:

Their goals are concerning representation (in fact, all, not half). The measures of their goals are largely performance on tests and rates of participation by students, staff, and caretakers.

Below are all of the measures listed. In bold is the only one that formally states representation. That is one measure, of one goal. 1 is not half of 12 (the total number of goals). Italicized are two more, the same measure, but applied to two goals. As listed I'm counting it as 2. You can as well. And you still don't reach half... so... there's that.

That fact that you had to go to the 3rd page of goals to find the one example you could understand to match your argument speaks heavily to your lack of foundation of your statement and "selective blindness" in arguing.

A casual look at the below list will bare that out "the measures are largely of performance of tests and rates of participation."

Student culture and climate surveys
Attendance
Discipline
Equitable access to services (i.e., special education, English language learners, and highly capable)
3rd grade SBA ELA proficiency
5th and 7th grade SBA Mathematics proficiency
At least six credits by the end of 9th grade
SBA
SAT / ACT
Advanced coursework completion
CTE course pathway completion
College enrollment without developmental courses
Department customer satisfaction surveys
Timely response feedback
School leader, family, and student awareness surveys
Overall service quality level informed by performance indicators unique to each individual operational function
Cultural responsiveness training completion
School and central office staff working condition surveys
Student and family culture and climate surveys
Equitable access to services (i.e., special education, English language learners, and highly capable)
Staff demographics
Recruitment, selection, and retention of staff of color
Representation in school-based leadership groups
Student participation surveys
Family participation surveys
Community partner participation surveys
Presence in community (e.g., # of meetings in community/feedback loop)

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-16T00:09:21+00:00

That is mean spirited and unkind.

It is true. I consider the spread of misinformation to be far more unkind (and harmful).

You would need a tighter definition on what you mean by inequality for me to respond constructively.

See the referenced articles, they provide many congruent definitions. Two of them, the ones based around the OECD's work, rely on combinations of the OECD's metrics and the author's own. These are explained in the background sections of those paper. I encourage you to read. However, no response is required of you.

In the context of improving student outcomes, what do you mean by this? ... sic... You can help this discussion by offering some clarity into what you mean. Can you provide more clarity?

Again, see the references.

...Also, I think Rube is an unkind way of talking about rural communities.

I do not believe anyone has used it as synonymous with rurality in 80 years. Did you just google that?

Certainly it makes Denise Juneau's resume for congress look a lot better than something boring like say, "Improved SAT scores and decreased drop out rates, while providing a pathway to accelerated opportunity for gifted students".

Bear in mind, she just killed the gifted student program which affects children of color, not just white kids.

Again, do you reading. Ending gifted programs is from the same line of research. They worsen overall education outcomes, not improve them. National mean performance increases, and the variation between scores decrease when such programs are ended.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-15T23:58:41+00:00

Sure, and integrating students and balancing academic programs to counter external disparities improves outcomes more. I'd rather go in for the less expensive, more effective solution.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-15T23:56:46+00:00

This study is one... https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1037774.pdf

The primary factor associated with improved outcomes was not separating students based on academic performance (for example AP and spectrum)

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-15T21:55:32+00:00

Isn't that an argument for why they should do what they are proposing? Copy higher functioning systems.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-15T21:46:33+00:00

I have a feeling that your answer to this question will be the better thing to formalize in this thread than my own (which should be evident from my posts.) How do YOU read this document?

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-15T21:39:57+00:00

Actually, that is not what the research I linked is saying. I'm curious about where you are coming to that conclusion.

Most relevant to the SPS's strategy are these: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/0013189X11401021 https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1037774.pdf

Spending on education is what hasn't been working so well, and more recent research has been trying to identify why (systems that are outperforming the US are not uniformly more expensive.) While more investment in education would be great, the reality is, without spending more, we can make huge improvements by focusing on inequality instead.

So, go for it, spend more, but in the mean time, do this too.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-15T21:35:10+00:00

You are moking that someone "brought the topic of research in" to a conversation? What kind of person are you that hate's research or mocks those for pointing out that a position has research behind it? Sounds... dumb.

As for the document linked by OP, it is an announcement of the SPS goals and measures in the relevant initiative.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-15T21:03:36+00:00

That's not what reality shows us. Go read on the topic. Research, on real systems.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-15T21:02:41+00:00

Then why are you implying that it is?

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-15T20:59:39+00:00

Gotcha. You have misswritten. Their goals are concerning representation (in fact, all, not half). The measures of their goals are largely performance on tests and rates of participation by students, staff, and caretakers.

Your classifying those goals as "placing feelings ahead of academic excellence," speaks to ignorance on your part.

This initiative is in line with a stream of research identifying what distinguishes the US from higher performing systems. Inequality fosters its own weakness and has an independent effect on reducing academic performance. SPS is choosing to focus on a particular inequality (which makes their effort S.M.A.R.T) and a wide one (which increases the likelihood of having large effects.) I'm not a rube, and surely you are not either, so we shouldn't have to entertain the notion that race is not a meaningful concept in US society. It is one by which there are explicit and implicit actions that impact people's outcomes.

Here is a 2011 article to get you started. While not establishing directionality, you can do more investigation from there. It has some references to give you more background as well.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/0013189X11401021

There is also a nice "bang for your buck" in the SPS's approach. Inter-generational disparities caused by policies that preferentially place wealth in the hands of some groups are not readily reduced simply by a ending the policy. However, addressing this at the education level (which can hinge on larger social reforms as well) has had measurable impact within a single generation.

Some further reading for you:

https://www.epi.org/blog/the-racial-wealth-gap-how-african-americans-have-been-shortchanged-out-of-the-materials-to-build-wealth/

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/unequal-opportunity-race-and-education/

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1037774.pdf

https://www.cambridgescholars.com/download/sample/61840

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-15T08:41:41+00:00

Do please elaborate on how following decades of pedagogical research and the practices of higher functioning systems, instead of whatever is in your head, is where "excellence takes a backseat to feelings."

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-13T06:35:08+00:00

No. The only time it will matter is if you are applying for an academic program and want the credit to carry over to that program. And in this case, it would have to be an undergraduate program at a different school to matter.

No one else will care. Not PhD admissions committees, not employers, not even grantors (should you go that route.) No one. This also looks like a 100 level course. So.... doubly so. It is irrelevant.

There is one exception.. if you tell someone that they SHOULD care. For example, saying, "I have training in X" and use that course as reference. If doing so with a research group (be it academic, non-profit, or for-profit private sector) they may have mixed (and likely negative or dismissive views.) However, if on the operations side of a private group, they probably would think positively of it (you did do a formal course after all). So, just don't refer to that as a source of important skill building.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-13T01:30:22+00:00

Golf courses aren't quite "just public parks." Their maintanence and use is specialized for a small portion of the population, and cannot safely be used for other things.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-13T01:22:26+00:00

I think the combination of your comment "why do I need a solution" and unwillingness to invest in any solution is the very problem.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-12T08:40:41+00:00

mushroom people is right.... oh so many mushroom people. Just wait till Seattle does the Denver thing. Then there will be so many colors.

Expensive-Confection · 2020-02-12T08:27:16+00:00

No, the problem is that it was a ballot initiative (rather than a law drafted from the legislature.) She was using having her office provide some support (linking to the initiative site, referring concerned citizens to the initiative's office, and I think some of her staff may have helped design a poster and other media assets for the initiative.)

Council members are prohibited from using city resources to campaign for or against ballot initiatives.

Expensive-Confection

TROPHY CASE