Excuse my tax-loathing Republicanism here, but somehow this tax strikes me as a bit of a misstep. Proposing to tax mileage instead of (or god help us - in addition to) gasoline is terrible. Its simply a horrible idea and really doesn't strike me as The Change We Need. Something about a Republican proposing a tax increase of any kind strikes me as more than a tad unseemly as well. There must be some sort of horrible side effect to it, like screwing over the working poor or making large corporations rich. Hmm, let me think of what it must be...
... oh of course. It helps kill the environment faster! What, you say? Discouraging the use of cars somehow hurts the environment? That's un-possible! Well, this measure really does hurt dear old mother nature, and in a pretty underhanded and not-so-obvious way. You see, dear reader, by taxing miles instead of gas consumption, the regulation would encourage people to drive whatever car they please. There would be much less incentive to drive a light-on-the-gas Prius or Civic and relatively little penalty for driving a gas-guzzling Dodge Ram or some other musclebound nonsense car. As a result, the emerging push towards green cars would stall in a big way. Why invest in making cars more green when people will no longer demand that their cars be gas-efficient? Its a terrible notion; not only does it hurt the environment on the front-end, it also has detrimental effects on our push to rid ourselves of foreign oil as a matter of policy.
So what to do about the budget gap for infrastructure? Well, making the stimulus bill less laden with some of the more useless crap would have been a good start. Since that one is already in the books, I would say that a reasonable solution is to make a special provision in some upcoming massive spending bill (there will certainly be one) with a significant amount of it dedicated to much needed infrastructure improvement. That way the only people who will pay will be future generations of Americans yet to be born, who will hopefully have some sort of environment left to enjoy.
20 February 2009
16 February 2009
junior varsity 2
I found this article in my latest lunchtime trolling of the NY Times Education section and was quite fascinated by what it had to say. The premise of the "great middle" is something that I haven't heard called by that name before, but is not a completely unfamiliar concept. I think the parents worrying about these average students are the same kind of parents that worry that kids shouldn't get cut from teams, and that every team in a competition deserves some kind of award. In fact, the article mentions this kind of coddling in detail:
"Junior varsity 2"? Really? There are other ways of promoting involvement in sports and the concepts of dedication and teamwork. There are any number of house and association leagues in which kids can participate with similarly talented kids, often with friends who are also involved just for the fun of playing organized sports. Being a member of a "junior varsity 2" team is not likely to boost the morale of a mediocre athlete, nor is it likely to be a conduit through which an otherwise unheralded prospect will be brought into the varsity fold. Measures such as this one, and the practice of rotating first chair in band and orchestra, simply diminish the innate value that positions of status have. If everyone gets a crack at being first chair violin, being first chair isn't that special anymore, is it?
While I would usually find the same to be true for A.P classes, the statistics would seem to indicate otherwise.
I am impressed with the way the school district has been able to effectively double the number of kids taking the test AND manage to raise the average score. A common principle in testing is that the more students who take an advanced test, the lower the average will go. Port Washington must be doing something right. On principle, though, I reject the notion that the "great middle" needs to be pushed into A.P. classes. The drastic effects of such A.P. cramming are evident in student reports like this one:
From a policy perspective, I think the solution isn't cramming more students into A.P. classes, but rather removing A.P. as the default level of honors classes. Certainly a measure of students in the "great middle" would benefit from taking a level of class higher than the standard offering, but not quite at A.P. level. Setting high expectations of all students, not just the "gifted" ones, could also do a world of good in increasing the quality of instruction without the need to push students into A.P. classes.
And it instituted a policy prohibiting students from being cut from the orchestra, band and most sports, adding "junior varsity 2" teams to accommodate extra players.
"Junior varsity 2"? Really? There are other ways of promoting involvement in sports and the concepts of dedication and teamwork. There are any number of house and association leagues in which kids can participate with similarly talented kids, often with friends who are also involved just for the fun of playing organized sports. Being a member of a "junior varsity 2" team is not likely to boost the morale of a mediocre athlete, nor is it likely to be a conduit through which an otherwise unheralded prospect will be brought into the varsity fold. Measures such as this one, and the practice of rotating first chair in band and orchestra, simply diminish the innate value that positions of status have. If everyone gets a crack at being first chair violin, being first chair isn't that special anymore, is it?
While I would usually find the same to be true for A.P classes, the statistics would seem to indicate otherwise.
Even as the number of A.P. exams taken by Port Washington students nearly doubled, to 1,134 last year from 603 in 2002, the average overall score climbed to 3.30 from 3.04. At the same time, the percentage of students accepted to four-year colleges during that period also rose, to 82 percent from 74 percent, according to district records.
I am impressed with the way the school district has been able to effectively double the number of kids taking the test AND manage to raise the average score. A common principle in testing is that the more students who take an advanced test, the lower the average will go. Port Washington must be doing something right. On principle, though, I reject the notion that the "great middle" needs to be pushed into A.P. classes. The drastic effects of such A.P. cramming are evident in student reports like this one:
Joe Barrett, 17, a senior, said his United States history teacher went to the opposite extreme in the 2007-8 school year, presenting "elaborate PowerPoints with music videos to keep people interested."
"At the beginning of the year, it was funny, but then it just got tiresome because there wasn't a lot of content," complained Joe, who earned the top score of 5 on the A.P. exam in the class last May. "I definitely could have learned more and faster. I felt like we skipped a lot of history."
From a policy perspective, I think the solution isn't cramming more students into A.P. classes, but rather removing A.P. as the default level of honors classes. Certainly a measure of students in the "great middle" would benefit from taking a level of class higher than the standard offering, but not quite at A.P. level. Setting high expectations of all students, not just the "gifted" ones, could also do a world of good in increasing the quality of instruction without the need to push students into A.P. classes.
05 February 2009
a shovel answer
In a continuation of my latest post, I found this great website that breaks down the stimulus bill comprehensively and in a very attractive manner. The site is linked here. One of the things that I find most appealing about this site is their clever use of Gotham HFJ (aka the Obama Font) in the masthead of their site. Has change come or is this just the biggest Christmas tree spending bill of all time? I'm not sure, but the use of the typeface definitely gets me wondering...
02 February 2009
super bowl thoughts
Now that the gastrointestinal ruckus caused by all of that terribly unhealthy yet wonderfully delicious Super Bowl food has ceased, I can now look back on last night's happenings with a sound mind and body. Super Bowl XLIII had some great storylines: a storied franchise seeking unrivaled excellence (Steelers going for a record 6 championships), a comparatively lackluster one trying to secure its first championship since the 40s, a quarterback seeking a signature Super Bowl performance (Ben Roethlisberger turned in a less-than-convincing effort in Super Bowl XL), and another trying to recapture Super Bowl greatness (Kurt Warner was MVP of Super Bowl XXXIV). The game itself produced some remarkable moments as well - two impressive Larry Fitzgerald touchdown catches, an improbable and record setting 100 yard interception returned for a touchdown, and several shrewdly challenged and overturned calls. A lot of talk today has centered around if it was the best Super Bowl of all time. A case can be made, to be sure. Santonio Holmes' catch for the winning touchdown was incredibly clutch. The Cardinals rally that set up that dramatic play was also great to watch. Through the win, a franchise staked an enhanced claim at greatness. But was it the best? No. Not by a long shot. It can't even be considered one of the best in recent memory when it is so clearly overshadowed by its immediate predecessor - Super Bowl XLII.
Circumstances:
XLIII (43): Those mentioned above... in brief, Roethlisberger had a roflsberger of a super bowl and wanted to prove himself, Warner wanted to regain SBMVP status, Steelers a storied franchise looking to one-up the Cowboys and the Niners, and the Cards were looking to break the 60 year championship drought.
XLII (42): In yet another sports proxy war between east coast rival cities Boston and New York, the undefeated Patriots longed for immortality in the form of a perfect 19-0 season while the plucky Giants, riding high after 3 consecutive road wins, looked to stop the seemingly unstoppable New England juggernaut. Despite having been tempered by a latter day ice bowl against Brett Favre and the Packers and a harrowing victory over the rival Cowboys, the Giants were still given little chance of pulling off the upset. Seeing his brother shrug off the Dan Marino comparisons just the year before, Eli Manning knew the pressure was on to prove himself as an equally capable quarterback who justified the 2004 draft shenangians that brought him to New York. The record-setting Patriots were under no less pressure to seal the deal and become the only team in history to go 19-0 and look every bit the part in the process.
Advantage: XLII (42) in a landslide.
The Catch:
XLIII (43): Santonio Holmes' 6 yard touchdown reception will go down in history as one of the most clutch catches in any Super Bowl. The tremendous nature of the moment cannot be denied... the Steelers needed the touchdown to win, a field goal would not have cut it. Roethlisberger placed the ball just where it needed to be in order for Holmes to catch it in triple coverage, and before he did he managed to evade the pressure. All in all, its hard to argue against this catch being epic to say the least.
XLII (42): Unheralded David Tyree's 32-yard catch was immediately recognized to be one of the biggest in Super Bowl history (as recognized on SportsCenter the day following the Super Bowl). The fact that Manning evaded the sack so improbably and that Tyree managed to catch and hold on to the ball AGAINST HIS HELMET sets this catch apart from most others. It loses some credibility as Manning's throw was admittedly "a little high" and not perfectly placed as Roethlisberger's was.
Advantage: none, its a push.
Overall Quality of Game:
XLIII (43): Featuring an interception returned for touchdown, a safety, and some impressive displays from Messrs. Fitzgerald and Holmes it is impossible to argue that this was not an entertaining game in the end.
XLII (42): With lead changes and spectacular grabs of its own, forty-two was an exciting game in its own right, and there was no blasted tuck rule to awkwardly end the game.
Advantage: XLIII (43) by a smidge.
Better Super Bowl: XLII
With the combination of the circumstances, the Catch, and the overall quality of the game, forty-two beats out forty-three (sorry Steelers fans). Football fans will be long in waiting to see a game match the sheer epic-ness of forty-two.
Circumstances:
XLIII (43): Those mentioned above... in brief, Roethlisberger had a roflsberger of a super bowl and wanted to prove himself, Warner wanted to regain SBMVP status, Steelers a storied franchise looking to one-up the Cowboys and the Niners, and the Cards were looking to break the 60 year championship drought.
XLII (42): In yet another sports proxy war between east coast rival cities Boston and New York, the undefeated Patriots longed for immortality in the form of a perfect 19-0 season while the plucky Giants, riding high after 3 consecutive road wins, looked to stop the seemingly unstoppable New England juggernaut. Despite having been tempered by a latter day ice bowl against Brett Favre and the Packers and a harrowing victory over the rival Cowboys, the Giants were still given little chance of pulling off the upset. Seeing his brother shrug off the Dan Marino comparisons just the year before, Eli Manning knew the pressure was on to prove himself as an equally capable quarterback who justified the 2004 draft shenangians that brought him to New York. The record-setting Patriots were under no less pressure to seal the deal and become the only team in history to go 19-0 and look every bit the part in the process.
Advantage: XLII (42) in a landslide.
The Catch:
XLIII (43): Santonio Holmes' 6 yard touchdown reception will go down in history as one of the most clutch catches in any Super Bowl. The tremendous nature of the moment cannot be denied... the Steelers needed the touchdown to win, a field goal would not have cut it. Roethlisberger placed the ball just where it needed to be in order for Holmes to catch it in triple coverage, and before he did he managed to evade the pressure. All in all, its hard to argue against this catch being epic to say the least.
XLII (42): Unheralded David Tyree's 32-yard catch was immediately recognized to be one of the biggest in Super Bowl history (as recognized on SportsCenter the day following the Super Bowl). The fact that Manning evaded the sack so improbably and that Tyree managed to catch and hold on to the ball AGAINST HIS HELMET sets this catch apart from most others. It loses some credibility as Manning's throw was admittedly "a little high" and not perfectly placed as Roethlisberger's was.
Advantage: none, its a push.
Overall Quality of Game:
XLIII (43): Featuring an interception returned for touchdown, a safety, and some impressive displays from Messrs. Fitzgerald and Holmes it is impossible to argue that this was not an entertaining game in the end.
XLII (42): With lead changes and spectacular grabs of its own, forty-two was an exciting game in its own right, and there was no blasted tuck rule to awkwardly end the game.
Advantage: XLIII (43) by a smidge.
Better Super Bowl: XLII
With the combination of the circumstances, the Catch, and the overall quality of the game, forty-two beats out forty-three (sorry Steelers fans). Football fans will be long in waiting to see a game match the sheer epic-ness of forty-two.
29 January 2009
shovel ready?
I do not purport to be an economist of any stripe, so feel free to pass extremely critical judgment on the claims I make here based on whatever fiscal weaknesses they present.
That disclaimer being made, though, I must say that I think the stimulus plan put forth by the Obama Administration and passed by House Democrats yesterday is a steaming pile of shit. As an American taxpayer (nominally at least - I promise to make more money in the future, Uncle Sam) I am shocked at the way that this $8xx billion dollars are going to be spent. Here are the things that bug me, in descending order of outrageousness:
1) 21% of funds spent in 2009? Uhm, I am not sure if that is the most expedient way to stimulate an economy that seems to be heading at a rate faster than 9.81 m/s^2 down the proverbial shitter.
2) Only $59 billion in transportation/housing development? People were throwing around Eisenhower-era comparisons when this bill was first introduced. I thought we were supposed to be rebuilding the nation's infrastructure. Just about 7% (by my own math, based on the CBO report) of the stimulus is devoted to these kinds of projects, though.
3) Money for food stamps, Pell grants, and state education programs? Yes, I realize that we don't want states to cut out teachers from the schools and for struggling families to be without food. My objections arise from the perception that the Dems are just hooking up two of their big constituencies (teachers' unions and lower income folk) in the guise of stimulus. Tack on those increases for Pell grants, and you have yourself appropriations masquerading as an urgent financial rescue package.
4) Numerous other offenses to the sensibilities... such as the hundreds of millions being spent on re-sodding the National Mall. I am sure thats going to be a great and needed project (especaially after I saw all the pummeling that ground took for the inauguration), but is that going to really be the shot in the arm that the economy needs? Doubtful.
Now I would love to be proven wrong here. I want the economy to come out of the dumps as fast as possible. Soup lines, dust bowls, and those newsie hats are Depression-era relics that I want to remain as such - things of the past and not of the present. I am just not sure if pouring billions into questionable programs is the change, um excuse me, stimulus we need.
That disclaimer being made, though, I must say that I think the stimulus plan put forth by the Obama Administration and passed by House Democrats yesterday is a steaming pile of shit. As an American taxpayer (nominally at least - I promise to make more money in the future, Uncle Sam) I am shocked at the way that this $8xx billion dollars are going to be spent. Here are the things that bug me, in descending order of outrageousness:
1) 21% of funds spent in 2009? Uhm, I am not sure if that is the most expedient way to stimulate an economy that seems to be heading at a rate faster than 9.81 m/s^2 down the proverbial shitter.
2) Only $59 billion in transportation/housing development? People were throwing around Eisenhower-era comparisons when this bill was first introduced. I thought we were supposed to be rebuilding the nation's infrastructure. Just about 7% (by my own math, based on the CBO report) of the stimulus is devoted to these kinds of projects, though.
3) Money for food stamps, Pell grants, and state education programs? Yes, I realize that we don't want states to cut out teachers from the schools and for struggling families to be without food. My objections arise from the perception that the Dems are just hooking up two of their big constituencies (teachers' unions and lower income folk) in the guise of stimulus. Tack on those increases for Pell grants, and you have yourself appropriations masquerading as an urgent financial rescue package.
4) Numerous other offenses to the sensibilities... such as the hundreds of millions being spent on re-sodding the National Mall. I am sure thats going to be a great and needed project (especaially after I saw all the pummeling that ground took for the inauguration), but is that going to really be the shot in the arm that the economy needs? Doubtful.
Now I would love to be proven wrong here. I want the economy to come out of the dumps as fast as possible. Soup lines, dust bowls, and those newsie hats are Depression-era relics that I want to remain as such - things of the past and not of the present. I am just not sure if pouring billions into questionable programs is the change, um excuse me, stimulus we need.
27 January 2009
snow pictures
Today was day one of a supposed two and a half day snowstorm here in FroRo. With the giddiness of a small child upon hearing the news of the school closures, I went outside and snapped a few photos of the quaint snowy scenery. Enjoy!
What time is it? Who cares? Its certainly not time for school!
Its really coming down out there!
Look at that plow job! Looks like we won't be going to school again until the spring thaw!
23 January 2009
grading policy
As I sleepily stumbled through my morning routine today, I picked up on an interesting story reported in the local news. Apparently there is a fight underway in my beloved Fairfax County Public Schools regarding the grading system; some parents would like to see the grading system shifted from a so-called six-point rubric (94-100% is an A, etc) to a ten-point system (90-100% as an A) that would supposedly make grading more fair. Some of the more outrageous claims come from Mr. Todd Gaziano, U.S. Civil Rights Commissioner, who makes the argument that:
According to this outstanding logic, because black and hispanic students get lower grades, and the grading scale as it is hurts everyone (supposedly), the grading issue is actually a civil rights issue. Surely MLK is turning in his grave. A civil rights issue? Calling this a civil rights issue is insulting to people who have legit civil rights claims, say people who can't marry the person they love or those who marched in the south when they couldn't eat where they pleased or sit where they wanted. No, no this is not a civil rights issue, Mr. Gaziano, this is an issue of whiny parents and underperforming minority students.
The whiny parents are those who can't stand to see their child fail at anything and look for outside reasons for their children's shortcomings. I'm sorry your son didn't get an A in Biology class, Mrs. So-and-so, maybe he should have studied better. Oh, he didn't get that scholarship? Well thats what makes scholarships so valuable - they are not easy to get! Suck it up.
As for making excuses for the minorities? I'm sorry, but thats the most insulting thing I have ever heard. Fairfax County Public Schools are some of the best in the COUNTRY, with resources and a budget that most counties DREAM of. There is opportunity to succeed abound. I know, I went to FCPS schools from 7th to 12th grade. And yes, despite Jeff's claims, I am an hispanic student. I did well enough to get into Thomas Jefferson, and then did well enough there to get into UVa. My parents never graduated from college and worked constantly while I was going through the school system, so its not like I was getting homework help or any outside encouragement besides what responsible parents provide. These kids don't need excuses, they need the kick in the ass and the harsh dose of reality that the six-point system provides.
The whiny parents and the excuse-makers need to calm down and shut up. Their points are ridiculous and wasteful, as the FCPS board and superintendent have much more to worry about in light of the budget shortfalls. Six-points, touchdown, ftw.
Fairfax County's six-point grading scale discriminates against minority students. He has completed his own analysis of the Fairfax County Public Schools Investigation of the Grading Policy and has determined that it shows all Fairfax County students are disadvantaged by the tougher grading policy, but that lower-grade students are hurt the most. Gaziano says because Black and Hispanic students often make up a large section of that group, the grading scale discriminates against them.
[paraphrasing from this article]
According to this outstanding logic, because black and hispanic students get lower grades, and the grading scale as it is hurts everyone (supposedly), the grading issue is actually a civil rights issue. Surely MLK is turning in his grave. A civil rights issue? Calling this a civil rights issue is insulting to people who have legit civil rights claims, say people who can't marry the person they love or those who marched in the south when they couldn't eat where they pleased or sit where they wanted. No, no this is not a civil rights issue, Mr. Gaziano, this is an issue of whiny parents and underperforming minority students.
The whiny parents are those who can't stand to see their child fail at anything and look for outside reasons for their children's shortcomings. I'm sorry your son didn't get an A in Biology class, Mrs. So-and-so, maybe he should have studied better. Oh, he didn't get that scholarship? Well thats what makes scholarships so valuable - they are not easy to get! Suck it up.
As for making excuses for the minorities? I'm sorry, but thats the most insulting thing I have ever heard. Fairfax County Public Schools are some of the best in the COUNTRY, with resources and a budget that most counties DREAM of. There is opportunity to succeed abound. I know, I went to FCPS schools from 7th to 12th grade. And yes, despite Jeff's claims, I am an hispanic student. I did well enough to get into Thomas Jefferson, and then did well enough there to get into UVa. My parents never graduated from college and worked constantly while I was going through the school system, so its not like I was getting homework help or any outside encouragement besides what responsible parents provide. These kids don't need excuses, they need the kick in the ass and the harsh dose of reality that the six-point system provides.
The whiny parents and the excuse-makers need to calm down and shut up. Their points are ridiculous and wasteful, as the FCPS board and superintendent have much more to worry about in light of the budget shortfalls. Six-points, touchdown, ftw.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
