From: blockedofcourse@foo.invalid   
      
   On 2/17/2026 2:46 PM, bitrex wrote:   
   > On 2/17/2026 2:00 PM, Don Y wrote:   
   >> On 2/17/2026 10:39 AM, bitrex wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> Louisiana doesn't have a lot of money to spend on public education but they   
   >>> seem to allocate what they have pretty well. The fact that some other red   
   >>> states like Oklahoma seem actively trying to destroy their pubic education   
   >>> system has likely helped LA in the rankings.   
   >>   
   >> "Rankings".  Isn't that the equivalent of saying "Heart Disease is (ranked)   
   >> the number one killer in the country" -- knowing that once you address THAT   
   >> cause of death, something else will be "number one" and just as many people   
   >> will be dying?   
   >>   
   >> "Absolute" scores on standardized tests are more important.  And, the trend   
   >> line -- locally and nationally.   
   >>   
   >> Who cares if you're "number 1" if *everyone* is doing poorly!  It's not a   
   >> case of squeezing a balloon but, rather, the balloon has a LEAK!   
   >   
   > Everyone's not doing poorly, the e.g. MA public education system would   
   compare   
   > favorably with Japan, Singapore, Germany and the Scandinavian countries if MA   
   > were an independent nation   
      
   But if you are just *ranking* participants, then you have no ABSOLUTE   
   way of knowing how good (bad) they are performing.   
      
   And, how "scores" translate into real-world abilities.   
      
   When I was a kid, we had "remedial" programs and *gifted*   
   programs.  Because math, science, reading, etc. were   
   considered important.  So, you didn't want anyone to   
   fall behind -- nor did you want to hamstring those who   
   could excel.   
      
   Having neither program means you're just willing to "settle"   
   for whatever comes out of the school system.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)