The only people who argue against algebra can't understand it themselves.

[quote=Anonymous]let's see, you're up at 0 dark 17 telling me I'm twisted. LOL.[/quote]
No, you simply twisted a quoted story to cover up your logical gaps.

let's see, you're up at 0 dark 17 telling me I'm twisted. LOL.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]From the NY Times article:

"A January 2012 analysis from the Georgetown center found 7.5 percent unemployment for engineering graduates and 8.2 percent among computer scientists."[/quote]

Sure, but how does that compare to rates for all graduates? According to the BLS:
[quote]
In October 2011, the unemployment rate for 20- to 29-year-olds who had graduated from college in 2011 was 12.6 percent. The rate was 13.5 percent for those who recently had earned bachelor’s degrees and 8.6 percent for those who recently had earned advanced degrees. Despite modest improvement since the most recent peak in October 2009, the unemployment rates of recent college graduates remained above the rates prior to the 2007–2009 recession.[/quote]

So 7.5 or 8.2 percent unemployment with a bachelor's in CS or engineering is a big improvement over 13.5 percent overall unemployment for all graduates.

Source: http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2013/ted_20130405.htm[/quote]

Doesn't argue for a shortage of engineering and cs graduates[/quote]

NO, it makes the entirely different point that students with STEM degrees go into professions that are far more recession-proof than those in other fields. Data, for those of you who still need it, are abundant to prove this over and over again. Just google it. Or play dumb. That seems to be what you're best at anyway. :twisted:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the NY Times article:

"A January 2012 analysis from the Georgetown center found 7.5 percent unemployment for engineering graduates and 8.2 percent among computer scientists."

Sure, but how does that compare to rates for all graduates? According to the BLS:

In October 2011, the unemployment rate for 20- to 29-year-olds who had graduated from college in 2011 was 12.6 percent. The rate was 13.5 percent for those who recently had earned bachelor’s degrees and 8.6 percent for those who recently had earned advanced degrees. Despite modest improvement since the most recent peak in October 2009, the unemployment rates of recent college graduates remained above the rates prior to the 2007–2009 recession.

So 7.5 or 8.2 percent unemployment with a bachelor's in CS or engineering is a big improvement over 13.5 percent overall unemployment for all graduates.

Source: http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2013/ted_20130405.htm

Doesn't argue for a shortage of engineering and cs graduates

Well, it certainly looks like STEM graduates are more employable than average. I don't know what kind of statistics and data you would like to see, but you have not offered one shred of data that says STEM graduates are worse off than other graduates. I have seen lots of data cited that supports the claim that STEM fields are growing and that STEM graduates make more money than other graduates. Your one-sentence naysaying is baffling.

But, regardless, feel free to advise and encourage your children to take as much or as little math as you see fit. It appears that many of us on this thread feel differently than you do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the NY Times article:

"A January 2012 analysis from the Georgetown center found 7.5 percent unemployment for engineering graduates and 8.2 percent among computer scientists."

Sure, but how does that compare to rates for all graduates? According to the BLS:

In October 2011, the unemployment rate for 20- to 29-year-olds who had graduated from college in 2011 was 12.6 percent. The rate was 13.5 percent for those who recently had earned bachelor’s degrees and 8.6 percent for those who recently had earned advanced degrees. Despite modest improvement since the most recent peak in October 2009, the unemployment rates of recent college graduates remained above the rates prior to the 2007–2009 recession.

So 7.5 or 8.2 percent unemployment with a bachelor's in CS or engineering is a big improvement over 13.5 percent overall unemployment for all graduates.

Source: http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2013/ted_20130405.htm

Doesn't argue for a shortage of engineering and cs graduates

Anonymous wrote:From the NY Times article:

"A January 2012 analysis from the Georgetown center found 7.5 percent unemployment for engineering graduates and 8.2 percent among computer scientists."

Sure, but how does that compare to rates for all graduates? According to the BLS:

In October 2011, the unemployment rate for 20- to 29-year-olds who had graduated from college in 2011 was 12.6 percent. The rate was 13.5 percent for those who recently had earned bachelor’s degrees and 8.6 percent for those who recently had earned advanced degrees. Despite modest improvement since the most recent peak in October 2009, the unemployment rates of recent college graduates remained above the rates prior to the 2007–2009 recession.

So 7.5 or 8.2 percent unemployment with a bachelor's in CS or engineering is a big improvement over 13.5 percent overall unemployment for all graduates.

Source: http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2013/ted_20130405.htm

From the NY Times article:

"A January 2012 analysis from the Georgetown center found 7.5 percent unemployment for engineering graduates and 8.2 percent among computer scientists."

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't matter if you don't like it or if you disagree, the net result remains that it is being rationalized on low expectations of what will turn out to be almost exclusively low SES AA kids

W, is that you?

not a DCPS perspective

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/29/opinion/sunday/is-algebra-necessary.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Anonymous wrote:The rest of the country does not share this problem with higher math. Is this a fundamentally a racist attitude of low expectations, basically suggesting that the majority-AA kids in DCPS aren't capable of higher math?

which problem with higher math is it that the rest of the country does not share?

Doesn't matter if you don't like it or if you disagree, the net result remains that it is being rationalized on low expectations of what will turn out to be almost exclusively low SES AA kids

I don't think anyone is reflecting a racist attitude here at all. Sorry to see you try to make it about race.

The rest of the country does not share this problem with higher math. Is this a fundamentally a racist attitude of low expectations, basically suggesting that the majority-AA kids in DCPS aren't capable of higher math?

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]"Why all the animosity toward DCPS and teachers?"

Because we have or had kids in the DC schools systems. The dumbing down is not a hypothetical policy question to us. .

[/quote]

So what are you doing about it?[/quote]

Really it is the schools' job to improve themselves and not the parents job! And DCPS will continue to lose students as long as they do not improve themselves.[/quote]

+1! DCPS is losing the brightest and the weakest students. The brain drain -- at both the top and the bottom -- is undeniable. When a student reaches a certain point, often the minimum 16 years of age, s/he begins to ask herself "why am I here?" The traditional answer -- "because everyone else is still here" -- makes no sense if the student is smart enough to ace a GED and go to a local college. It also makes no sense for a student who is not learning anything at all. Hence, DCPS has a tragically low high school graduation rate because the students aware enough to ask the question ultimately choose to leave. That's why Algebra II and higher math courses are so crucial. Raising the bar gives the room for growth to give students one more reason not to walk away. The only people who might argue against higher mathematics, IMHO, are those incapable of imagining that DCPS students could do the work or that DCPS teachers could teach the courses ... or maybe those who can't do the work themselves. :?: