[geeks] OLPCs for sale...

[wa2egp at att.net]

-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Shannon Hendrix <shannon at widomaker.com>
>
> On Nov 16, 2007, at 7:31 PM, wa2egp at att.net wrote:
> 
> > I don't think they really represent teachers these days.  The NEA/NJEA
> > has been going in strange directions these days.
> 
> These days?

True.  I think they are getting even worse lately.

> The first time I met a "leader" in the NEA she was gleefully showing  
> off a new textbook she had helped work on.  This was at a meeting at  
> my college in 1986 in the library there, and some of them were talking  
> about various ideas, projects, upcoming events, committees, etc.
> 
> The work was basically gutting a US history book of anything that  
> remotely explained why America was created, what a republic was, and  
> why we had one, and the addition of content that was promoting  
> socialism and direct democracy, and the idea that we were a democracy.
> 
> She said this kind of improvement in textbook accuracy was essential  
> for education and our future.  An alarming number of people agreed.
> 
> Since then most everyone I've met in the NEA was worse than that,  
> including a few others at that same gathering.  Not basic members or  
> teachers, but the ones that speak and represent them.
> 
> The other one that I remember was talking about the removal of the  
> concept of winning, or at least she was a speaker at the meeting.  She  
> might have been a hired mouth, but clearly the rest of them approved  
> of what she said.
> 
> When were they not crazy?

Maybe the book was revisionist history.
 
> The only good note was that some of my college professors were around  
> at the time, and at least then, they were pretty alarmed too.
> 
> >> So... citing averages is a valid counter to that kind of argument.
> >
> > Bull.  This has been hashed over before and it's gotten to the point
> > of being ridculous.  Homey don't play dat.
> 
> No, it isn't bull, you just don't agree with it.

No, It is bull because there are many different ways of representing
numbers by an average.  Let's say my system starts as 40K and top is
90K.  Most people would think I made an average of 65K during my career.
If I actually started at 13K them I made a 51K average.  Of course
this depends on if I work the 15-16 years it takes to get to get to
top pay, how many years I've been on top level and whether the
pay increases were linear (which they aren't).  This is why when
the "union" publishes pay scales, we have a good laugh in the
faculty room. One system has a top of over 100K, it just takes
45 years to get there!  But the average looks good.

> It is an argument presented constantly, and citing their own arguments  
> when they self conflict is not now nor has it ever been ridiculous.

It is when the "other side" never learns that their argument is bogus.
It just becomes peopel throwing crap at each other, like an election.

> If you don't make that argument, fine... then it shouldn't bother you  
> to see it countered.

The problem is that these people are seen as representing me and they
have figures that don't represent my situation.

The comment about those teachers being the highest paid in the nation
I don't think was accurate.  

Bob