Comment by godelski
20 days ago
> I think that Oregon teacher salaries have gone up quite a bit more than the national average in the last 10 years, less so in the last couple.
Also let's not forget Covid.
Yeah, Covid is at the tail end of the time period but it would be an error to make assumptions about the rates of change being constant over these periods. We've all seen that El Nino graph that is used to misrepresent climate change by careful windowing...
But the article doesn't even cherry pick the window, but they do cherry pick the interpretation. How does anyone ignore the fact that from 2013 to 2020 is fairly flat in scores[0] and then sharply decreases after that. Similarly spending sharply increases.
It is so weird to do this because the main argument still exists when you account for Covid. It's the intellectual equivalent of taking a cookie, taking a shit on it, and then selling it for more because it has more chocolate. Who the fuck does that? It's manipulative and entirely unnecessary. From 2013 to 2020 scores are relatively flat and spending increases above inflation. It's still a lazy analysis since you don't analyze what the spending went to, but it's a million times better than pretending a shit cookie is made of chocolate.
But the title is also incredibly editorialized (against the guidelines[1]), but why are commenters not picking this apart? It's such an easy flaw to notice. This article contains zero evidence of their claims. You have to explain data, not just present it and conjecture.
[0] 2020 is as far down as 2015 was up. Normal variance?
Yes, COVID was a problem, along with many of the ill-considered responses to it. However, it’s now four years later, and it’s misguided to attribute the situation today to mostly being a result of COVID.
Eliminating the DOE and most of our current approach to K-12 education seems entirely prudent!
Just compare what students learned circa 1900 before graduating high school to today…
Well yes, but look the x axis of the graph. It doesn't show 2025 and it's barely 2016.
Also yes, that's kinda the point. You don't think doing poorly in a grade below makes it likely you won't do good in the next level? The data points are 2019, 2022, and 2024. You got a sharp decrease from 2019 to 2022. Then a lower decrease from 2022 to 2024. Isn't that what you'd expect from a recovery? And only 2 years after the damage from the pandemic?
You sure wouldn't expect it to instantly jump back to 2019 levels (V shaped). They'd only do that if they didn't do worse during the pandemic. Effects compound. The years aren't independent measurements
...huh? I don't think this is worth engaging with other than to say that's a very silly conclusion.