fordy said:
Kasz216 said:
fordy said:
Kasz216 said:
richardhutnik said:
The problem of the implosion is larger than either party. Yes, I vent about the impact to the GOP, but the problem is larger. What do you think happens to a nation that doesn't sufficiently fund education and allocate properly?
|
|
The second graph is the most misleading graph I have ever seen and should not be used as the basis of an argument.
For starters, your costs are a displacement figure, whereas your benefits are a derivative, purely used to show an extreme bias towards the cost. If you added cost as a derivative as well, you'd see it's just as flat as the benefits.
Secondly, the graph uses two completely separat measurements on the same graph, with the assumption that, for example, $80k is wirth the equivalent of a 30% IMPROVEMENT in Achievement EVERY YEAR.
It's nothing more to appeal to the brainless mass who see this and say "OMG Education spending out of control!!!"
|
Real cost per student is going up... and results stay the same. (As in adjusting for inflation.)
What's misleading about that?
|
I'll put it another way:
What if the graph was about cost vs the test score of the highest rating student as a %. You'd see the benefits line close to the top of that graph.
That's because there's no direct correlation between the two.
|
Highest rating student? I'm not even sure what you mean by that.
I'm not sure if you understand the graph... but it's showing the Real cost of education per student. (Adjusted for inflation and all that)
and contrasting it with changes in the NAEP achievement scores... which have shown that our students essentially haven't gotten any better at reading and Math, and have gotten worse at Sceince.
That there isn't correlation is exactly my point. You can keep spending more and more and it's not going to improve test scores.
