Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/pisa-a-glance-global-education-rankings-science-maths-and-reading

America in League tables doesn't even make the top 30 countries for maths at 15 and is behind many non-English speaking countries in English.

Why are American kids behind the rest of the first world?

Secondary Question, has this lack of education led them to be overly influenced by the Internet and vacuous youtube talking heads?

PISA is a joke, so this doesn't really have any merit. US News ranks the US number 2 in the world when looking at the primary school to the high school. Regarding high schools specifically, the Huffington Post has a good article assessing the literature.

Originally posted by DarthSkywalker0
PISA is a joke, so this doesn't really have any merit. US News ranks the US number 2 in the world when looking at the primary school to the high school. Regarding high schools specifically, the Huffington Post has a good article assessing the literature.
You see here's the problem, he seems like he's looking for a discussion, but he's just gonna dismiss you as someone not worth having a conversation with and only listen to people who already agree with him.

I'd wager all the shitty Charter schools have something to do with it.

Looks to me like the truth hurts DMB and DS. Wahwahwah kids. America doesn't like standardised testing, the resistance to NGSS and CCS prove this. Funny stuff tbh.

Seems America is doing well to me. Room for a bit of improvement, though. I didn't think we were that high. Thanks for sharing. Looks like I should be a bit more proud about American Educational achievement.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Looks to me like the truth hurts DMB and DS. Wahwahwah kids. America doesn't like standardised testing, the resistance to NGSS and CCS prove this. Funny stuff tbh.

We have so many standardized tests over here. I will probably take 11 over the next 3 years.

Because of the hillbilly hicks

Originally posted by dadudemon
Seems America is doing well to me. Room for a bit of improvement, though. I didn't think we were that high. Thanks for sharing. Looks like I should be a bit more proud about American Educational achievement. Haha, I guess that's an interesting American mathematical perspective DDM. I would have chosen "of" instead of about... but then I learnt English in the UK.

Originally posted by DarthSkywalker0
We have so many standardized tests over here. I will probably take 11 over the next 3 years. A great deal of them rely on the American Education systems old friend, the multiple choice question.

america seems like a very stupid and unathletic country, yeah

Originally posted by Beniboybling
america seems like a very stupid and unathletic country, yeah I'm being mildly disingenuous Beni, but I find the need these kids here have to tell us they are intelligent, when most of them haven't finished school or chosen a path in life is the sort of ludicrous idiocy you could only get on the internet. Especially when most of them can barely string a sentence together.

I dunno, but I'm going back to college and learning German, maybe a BA in German online at Oregon State University, tho I live in the Orlando, FL area. I also went back and took violin lessons. I was originally a piano major and did well in Intro to Music Lit. I was maybe going to take Music Appreciation at a community college in the summer and maybe remedial Intermediate Math online then too, which FAFSA I think pays for or at least loans for, given what I need left to graduate and how many classes I've taken. The Music Appreciation is for my own ego and education.

What do you see yourself doing career wise?

Originally posted by Tzeentch
What do you see yourself doing career wise? Me? A violinist in a travelling orchestra in Germany.

Also I will point out the influence of sports on the american education system. There are plenty of documentaries out there discussing how higher education is messed up due to sports. Long story short, schools are incentivized to spend A LOT of money on their athletic facilities, programs, etc over academics.

Because its run by Leftist Extremists. They RUIN Everything they TOUCH!!!!!!

Much the same way that PootyBot is TOUCHED in the head.

Boop Boop Beep Beep.

Same should go for all Sports. And The Entertainment Industries as well.

Originally posted by DarthSkywalker0
US News ranks the US number 2 in the world
No bias there -_-

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
No bias there -_-

Are you dumb? US news is an organization headed by Wharton School of Business and multiple international data collection organizations.

Originally posted by DarthSkywalker0
Are you dumb? US news is an organization headed by Wharton School of Business and multiple international data collection organizations. Bias is everywhere kid. You'll learn academic Integrity falls to all agendas when you are older. Your post reveals your lack of understanding of the world. you are ridiculously naive.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Haha, I guess that's an interesting American mathematical perspective DDM. I would have chosen "of" instead of about... but then I learnt English in the UK.



Don't worry, it's a regional thing:

https://lingohelp.me/preposition-after-adjective/proud-of-about-for-in-to/



Also, where I'm from, "learnt" is frowned upon because it is seen as an uneducated use of "learned" similar to using the word "ain't." It is still correct. But, don't worry, I won't criticize you for it - even indirectly - because the great American Education I received also taught that language is quite fluid.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Don't worry, it's a regional thing:

https://lingohelp.me/preposition-after-adjective/proud-of-about-for-in-to/



Also, where I'm from, "learnt" is frowned upon because it is seen as an uneducated use of "learned" similar to using the word "ain't." It is still correct. But, don't worry, I won't criticize you for it - even indirectly - because the great American Education I received also taught that language is quite fluid. Yeah, I can understand why having learnt might be frowned upon in the US. But I won't criticise you for the way you destroy a beautiful language.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Yeah, I can understand why having learnt might be frowned upon in the US. But I won't criticise you for the way you destroy a beautiful language.

Right, 'learnt' is frowned upon in primary school in English speaking countries but it is still picked up in the less educated parts of the population. I suppose you were ill or on holiday when they taught this lesson in your primary school class?

Do not worry, I will not criticize you for your inappropriate corrections of English, as well. We are good pals.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Right, 'learnt' is frowned upon in primary school in English speaking countries but it is still picked up in the less educated parts of the population. I suppose you were ill or on holiday when they taught this lesson in your primary school class?

Do not worry, I will not criticize you for your inappropriate corrections of English, as well. We are good pals. Learnt is actually not frowned upon at all.

These are alternative forms of the past tense and past participle of the verb learn. Both are acceptable, but learned is often used in both British English and American English, while learnt is much more common in British English than in American English.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage/learnt-vs-learned

There you go.

Facts! Something Americans hate.

As someone who studied English at university I can tell you all that the only important thing I learned about grammar and spelling is that its all a crock of horseshit a bunch of old rich bastards just decided was 'correct' and then forced everyone to conform to.

If it carries your meaning across then its proper English. There's no inherent right or wrongness to any way someone speaks and language is constantly evolving in how people use it.

Originally posted by Nephthys
As someone who studied English at university I can tell you all that the only important thing I learned about grammar and spelling is that its all a crock of horseshit a bunch of old rich bastards just decided was 'correct' and then forced everyone to conform to.

If it carries your meaning across then its proper English. There's no inherent right or wrongness to any way someone speaks and language is constantly evolving in how people use it. I remember when I did my CELTA between degrees 29 years ago, I ended up thinking exactly the same thing.

But there is no excuse for Roadman dialect.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Learnt is actually not frowned upon at all.

Actually, it is.

http://www.writing-skills.com/60-second-fix-learnt-or-learned



I messaged a British primary school teacher. She confirms that she teaches the children "learned" as "learnt" is the lazy uneducated version. This just so happens to coincide with other British English speakers reporting that they were taught to spell it with "learned" in primary school but kept the colloquial "learnt" as adults.

It's as if language is fluid and communication occurs if the message is okay. hmm Perhaps linguistic elitism is for the small minded and uncouth?





Originally posted by Putinbot1
Facts! Something Americans hate.

Do you understand that you're playing a game that makes my exact point? I think you are getting too old to play these games.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Actually, it is.

http://www.writing-skills.com/60-second-fix-learnt-or-learned



I messaged a British primary school teacher. She confirms that she teaches the children "learned" as "learnt" is the lazy uneducated version. This just so happens to coincide with other British English speakers reporting that they were taught to spell it with "learned" in primary school but kept the colloquial "learnt" as adults.

It's as if language is fluid and communication occurs if the message is okay. hmm Perhaps linguistic elitism is for the small minded and uncouth?







Do you understand that you're playing a game that makes my exact point? I think you are getting too old to play this games as the player is getting played Well perhaps she should write to the Oxford Dictionary and tell them they are the wrong DDM. Afterall she, I am certain is better qualified than the compilers there are. As I am sure is your website's compilers.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Actually, it is.

http://www.writing-skills.com/60-second-fix-learnt-or-learned



I messaged a British primary school teacher. She confirms that she teaches the children "learned" as "learnt" is the lazy uneducated version. This just so happens to coincide with other British English speakers reporting that they were taught to spell it with "learned" in primary school but kept the colloquial "learnt" as adults.

It's as if language is fluid and communication occurs if the message is okay. hmm Perhaps linguistic elitism is for the small minded and uncouth?







Do you understand that you're playing a game that makes my exact point? I think you are getting too old to play these games. I personally use 'learnt' because it reduces confusion in text when referring to someone who is 'learned' (i.e., Learn-Ed), but overall I agree with your statement that language is fluid and can and should change to suit the needs of the user.


It's not an excuse to get their / there / they're wrong, though, to me that just shows an adversity to detail and a desire to learn (not that you do this, you don't, but many other users on this forum do, and it makes it slightly harder to believe that their political beliefs are particularly well thought through).

Originally posted by Scribble
I personally use 'learnt' because it reduces confusion in text when referring to someone who is 'learned' (i.e., Learn-Ed), but overall I agree with your statement that language is fluid and can and should change to suit the needs of the user.


It's not an excuse to get their / there / they're wrong, though, to me that just shows an adversity to detail and a desire to learn (not that you do this, you don't, but many other users on this forum do, and it makes it slightly harder to believe that their political beliefs are particularly well thought through). I always got taught to remember the there and their difference as T-here for location. It saves confusion.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Well perhaps she should write to the Oxford Dictionary and tell them they are the wrong DDM. Afterall she, I am certain is better qualified than the compilers there are. As I am sure is your website's compilers.

Yes, I'll ask them why they list "learned" first, why "learnt" only appears in only 1 out of 3 instances of British English, and request an etymology of when 'learned' evolved into 'learnt." Good idea! Oh, wait, I'm not a linguistic elitist and it doesn't matter to me.

Originally posted by Scribble
I personally use 'learnt' because it reduces confusion in text when referring to someone who is 'learned' (i.e., Learn-Ed), but overall I agree with your statement that language is fluid and can and should change to suit the needs of the user.


It's not an excuse to get their / there / they're wrong, though, to me that just shows an adversity to detail and a desire to learn (not that you do this, you don't, but many other users on this forum do, and it makes it slightly harder to believe that their political beliefs are particularly well thought through).



I do not care for the idea of being a spelling and grammar Nazi. I care more about the message. For example, there are several physicists who have atrocious spelling and punctuation but are leaders in their field of study. They are definitely not idiots or stupid.

Also, I have used the incorrect versions of 'your' on several occasions. When you're typing fast, you're correct, it's just not paying attention to detail. I am a frequent offender of making careless mistakes like this. And the damn edit function on KMC has brought down post quality since it broke, in my opinion.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I always got taught to remember the there and their difference as T-here for location. It saves confusion. I think the best way to learn is just to be aware of resources that can help you remember which is applicable, and to refer to them any time you have any doubt. After a while, it'll just come naturally. Same with any other grammatical details, or even with learning a new language entirely.

Originally posted by Scribble
I think the best way to learn is just to be aware of resources that can help you remember which is applicable, and to refer to them any time you have any doubt. After a while, it'll just come naturally. Same with any other grammatical details, or even with learning a new language entirely. I agree, when I first learnt Arabic, the three versions of each letter was a struggle. I miss Marius, I have no one to use my terrible German on here.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yes, I'll ask them why they list "learned" first, why "learnt" only appears in only 1 out of 3 instances of British English, and request an etymology of when 'learned' evolved into 'learnt." Good idea! Oh, wait, I'm not a linguistic elitist and it doesn't matter to me.





I do not care for the idea of being a spelling and grammar Nazi. I care more about the message. For example, there are several physicists who have atrocious spelling and punctuation but are leaders in their field of study. They are definitely not idiots or stupid.

Also, I have used the incorrect versions of 'your' on several occasions. When you're typing fast, you're correct, it's just not paying attention to detail. I am a frequent offender of making careless mistakes like this. And the damn edit function on KMC has brought down post quality since it broke, in my opinion. My English is Excellent, but English is not what any of my three degrees are in. But I have no need to brag re-qualifications, I got them long ago. I make very few errors to be honest in English. I mean really a comma between "elitist" and "and" is needed, but who cares. As you say we are not grammar nazis. I do like to read decent prose though.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
My English is Excellent, but English is not what any of my three degrees are in.

My English is Super Excellent, but English is not what any of my 5 degrees are in.


Originally posted by Putinbot1
But I have no need to brag re-qualifications, I got them long ago.

You're right: no need to brag about them. I got my last degree 3 years ago and my last Professional Certification a few months ago. No need to brag about these things as that would be just lame and terrible.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I make very few errors to be honest in English. I mean really a comma between "elitist" and "and" is needed, but who cares. As you say we are not grammar nazis. I do like to read decent prose though.

Nah, it's not needed. It would be incorrect to add that. This is why you're only Excellent and I'm Super Excellent. You're still making simplistic mistakes like that.

Originally posted by dadudemon
My English is Super Excellent, but English is not what any of my 5 degrees are in.




You're right: no need to brag about them. I got my last degree 3 years ago and my last Professional Certification a few months ago. No need to brag about these things as that would be just lame and terrible.



Nah, it's not needed. It would be incorrect to add that. This is why you're only Excellent and I'm Super Excellent. You're still making simplistic mistakes like that. AS for professional certification, I have the highest in my field. But yes no need to brag, I also have nowhere to go career-wise as I am at the very top of a very competitive field. I would have chosen simple over simplistic in that sentence. Yes, you make lots of English errors.

Putinbot still butt hurt that the Waffen-SS put many of his ancestors six feet under.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
AS for professional certification, I have the highest in my field. But yes no need to brag, I also have nowhere to go career-wise as I am at the very top of a very competitive field. I would have chosen simple over simplistic in that sentence. Yes, you make lots of English errors.

That's great to read.


It, took, me, a, long,-time, to,-acquire, my-14 professional,-certifications. (Hope this sentence is up to your "standards" of grammar on punctuation. I may have missed something).


For being top in your field, you certainly have a lot of free time. Me? I'm going through an acquisition and waiting on the lawyers.

Originally posted by dadudemon
That's great to read.


It, took, me, a, long,-time, to,-acquire, my-14 professional,-certifications. (Hope this sentence is up to your "standards" of grammar on punctuation. I may have missed something).


For being top in your field, you certainly have a lot of free time. Me? I'm going through an acquisition and waiting on the lawyers. One of the advantages of being the boss, I'd share more on here but some posters are known for trying to dox people.

So you are everything you claim to be Bad in Others!?

You are the Trump in your own little world I take it!?

What shade of Orange are you Pootybutt?

Originally posted by Flyattractor
So you are everything you claim to be Bad in Others!?

You are the Trump in your own little world I take it!?

What shade of Orange are you Pootybutt? I'm altruistic and caring Fly, I've actually made improving the lot of others my life work and fortunately been very successful at it.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
One of the advantages of being the boss, I'd share more on here but some posters are known for trying to dox people.

I used to believe that but not anymore. I got more experience outside of the government sector.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I'm altruistic and caring Fly, I've actually made improving the lot of others my life work and fortunately been very successful at it.

Post Proof if it. You just saying it isn't the same.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I used to believe that but not anymore. I got more experience outside of the government sector. I've been in the Private sector a decade.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Post Proof if it. You just saying it isn't the same.

Haha, not on your life. You mentalist.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Post Proof if it. You just saying it isn't the same.


Originally posted by Putinbot1
I've been in the Private sector a decade.

Yep. That is what I thought.

Just another Socialistic Fascist taking advantage of the Capitalistic System that he bad mouths at every turn.

That makes you something, but it is a BAD Word and can get you Surtur'ed and HARD!

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I've been in the Private sector a decade.

I'd be your boss in the real world. I'd assign you more work or terminate you if you weren't working.


By the way, in a meeting at the moment.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Yep. That is what I thought.

Just another Socialistic Fascist taking advantage of the Capitalistic System that he bad mouths at every turn.

That makes you something, but it is a BAD Word and can get you Surtur'ed and HARD! Is the word successful? As a Socialist Unionist, I have no problem with a fair days pay for a fair days work.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I'd be your boss in the real world. I'd assign you more work or terminate you if you weren't working.


By the way, in a meeting at the moment. I'm actually Director level, I have no boss at all, except the owner and I more than meet my targets.

Yeah, I post in meetings sometimes

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Is the word successful? As a Socialist Unionist, I have no problem with a fair days pay for a fair days work.

To bad Socialims is a complete Failure on the world stage.

And Unionist is just another word for Criminal Organization.

So yeah. You are worse then what you Claim Trump to be.

Gawd what is that word again....Starts with an H....

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Haha, not on your life. You mentalist.

New you wouldn't man up and back up your own rhetoric.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I'm actually Director level, I have no boss at all, except the owner and I more than meet my targets.

Right, you'd be one of my employees at that level.

I just promoted one of my directors to VP.

No C-Levels or V-Levels between you and the owner? Must be a very small place.


Edit - Done with the implicit penis stuff yet?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Right, you'd be one of my employees at that level.

I just promoted one of my directors to VP.

No C-Levels or V-Levels between you and the owner? Must be a very small place. We have no VP or Ps. My direct chain of command is answerable only to the owner. I am the Boss. So no, no you wouldn't.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Right, you'd be one of my employees at that level.

I just promoted one of my directors to VP.

No C-Levels or V-Levels between you and the owner? Must be a very small place.


Edit - Done with the implicit penis stuff yet?

Of course he isn't.

The **** is going on?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Right, you'd be one of my employees at that level.

I just promoted one of my directors to VP.

No C-Levels or V-Levels between you and the owner? Must be a very small place.


Edit - Done with the implicit penis stuff yet? I have a 100 staff, so no, but the owner is part of the Royal Family so... there's that.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
We have no VP or Ps. My direct chain of command is answerable only to the owner. I am the Boss. So no, no you wouldn't.

Yes I would. First line of business would be to eliminate lazy and unproductive employees like you. Especially ones that do not know what a meta-analysis is.

I'd put you on a PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) that would be achievable by any normal person but you'd figure out a way to bungle that, too, in 3 months, no doubt.

Originally posted by SquallX
The **** is going on?

Putinbot1 is lying to make himself seem more important than he actually is and ddm is having fun calling him on it.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yes I would. First line of business would be to eliminate lazy and unproductive employees like you. Especially ones that do not know what a meta-analysis is.

I'd put you on a PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) that would be achievable by any normal person but you'd figure out a way to bungle that, too, in 3 months, no doubt. Trust me you wouldn't in my field I am very respected and rightly so. I have people to deal with PIP's etc. Seriously if you are as high up as you say, why are you doing the job of HR?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yes I would. First line of business would be to eliminate lazy and unproductive employees like you. Especially ones that do not know what a meta-analysis is.

I'd put you on a PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) that would be achievable by any normal person but you'd figure out a way to bungle that, too, in 3 months, no doubt.

Or you could just do what Pootybutt's company does and just ship him from one 3rd world shit hole country to the next.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Putinbot1 is lying to make himself seem more important than he actually is and ddm is having fun calling him on it.

Gee...YA THINK!?

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Or you could just do what Pootybutt's company does and just ship him from one 3rd world shit hole country to the next.



Gee...YA THINK!? Nah, I think something else, but you know...

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Trust me you wouldn't in my field I am very respected and rightly so.

Okay, I'll trust you. But you just admitted on this forum, which could be used against you for "grounds for termination" that you don't do work.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I have people to deal with PIP's etc. Seriously if you are as high up as you say, why are you doing the job of HR?

You should have direct employees. You are the HRM for your direct reports. If HR is writing your PIPs, you're either too incompetent to do your job properly so they just do it (I've seen this happen, before, and it is usually the sign that you're getting a case built against you to terminate you), or you work in an organization where a managerial title means nothing. Based on the fact that there are no VPs or C-Levels between you and the owner, it points to it being a very small organization.


But we shouldn't dig deeper. It's not okay and I think we are crossing a line that I don't want to cross. Apologies for taking it this far. It no longer feels amusing to me.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Okay, I'll trust you. But you just admitted on this forum, which could be used against you for "grounds for termination" that you don't do work.



You should have direct employees. You are the HRM for your direct reports. If HR is writing your PIPs, you're either too incompetent to do your job properly so they just do it (I've seen this happen, before, and it is usually the sign that you're getting a case built against you to terminate you), or you work in an organization where a managerial title means nothing. Based on the fact that there are no VPs or C-Levels between you and the owner, it points to it being a very small organization.


But we shouldn't dig deeper. It's not okay and I think we are crossing a line that I don't want to cross. Apologies for taking it this far. It no longer feels amusing to me. I certainly wouldn't write PIP's and no one should if they are in charge, they should be dealing with the customer and deciding on policy. We will have to disagree on that, I think only a small company would have anyone in charge dealing with day to day employee tasks. That's my opinion. I suspect we are in very different situations, I feel reading yours mine is more privileged, well I know it is, I'm not in IT. I admit I trade off my Britishness to amuse Fly and yes, this is starting to leave a nasty taste in my mouth too. Have a good day.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I certainly wouldn't write PIP's and no one should if they are in charge, they should be dealing with the customer and deciding on policy. We will have to disagree on that, I think only a small company would have anyone in charge dealing with day to day employee tasks. That's my opinion. I suspect we are in very different situations, I feel reading yours mine is more privileged, well I know it is, I'm not in IT. I admit I trade off my Britishness to amuse Fly and yes, this is starting to leave a nasty taste in my mouth too. Have a good day.

Let's go away from job-specific things and then just focus on Work Culture and best practices.

I have employed many British Nationals before working managing government contracts. I can even take it a step further and tell you that many of the American Corporate policies actually come from the tried and true methods that the British already figured out. Americans shit on the British but the British are a bit ahead of the Americans when it comes to best practices and corporate policies.

Generally, how it is structured, the Direct Manager handles all HRM activities with their employees. Often, HR will be involved in helping guide a DM on how to deliver a PIP but it is up to the DM to deliver the PIP, not HR. HR processes paperwork from the DMs. They establish the framework within which managers operate. Hiring, terminations, benefits, recruitment, annual and mid-year reviews. All fall within HR. However, the arms of HR are the DMs. They do the reviews, they do the PIPs, they complete the terminations. Not HR.

You may get your PIP form from HR but HR never delivers it.

All of this goes out the window at very small organizations.


Has your experience over the decades differed from this? I am almost positive this HRM structure comes from an amalgamation of British and American practices over the last 30 or so years.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Let's go away from job-specific things and then just focus on Work Culture and best practices.

I have employed many British Nationals before working managing government contracts. I can even take it a step further and tell you that many of the American Corporate policies actually come from the tried and true methods that the British already figured out. Americans shit on the British but the British are a bit ahead of the Americans when it comes to best practices and corporate policies.

Generally, how it is structured, the Direct Manager handles all HRM activities with their employees. Often, HR will be involved in helping guide a DM on how to deliver a PIP but it is up to the DM to deliver the PIP, not HR. HR processes paperwork from the DMs. They establish the framework within which managers operate. Hiring, terminations, benefits, recruitment, annual and mid-year reviews. All fall within HR. However, the arms of HR are the DMs. They do the reviews, they do the PIPs, they complete the terminations. Not HR.

You may get your PIP form from HR but HR never delivers it.

All of this goes out the window at very small organizations.


Has your experience over the decades differed from this? I am almost positive this HRM structure comes from an amalgamation of British and American practices over the last 30 or so years.

It actually depends on the company, to be honest, my job is much more about dealing with the customer and actual delivery. HR is really in most UK companies something to support middle managers who do all the performance related stuff. As I say the last 5 years I have worked for Royalty and dealt with people as diverse as banking families, BAE systems and Aramco. Tbh, I do not get involved in HR and employee management at all anymore, it's not my job.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
It actually depends on the company, to be honest, my job is much more about dealing with the customer and actual delivery. HR is really in most UK companies something to support middle managers who do all the performance related stuff. As I say the last 5 years I have worked for Royalty and dealt with people as diverse as banking families, BAE systems and Aramco. Tbh, I do not get involved in HR and employee management at all anymore, it's not my job.

This is what Putinbot1 thinks makes him hot shit? Working as a human resources person?

I serve as a human resources exec myself for a volunteer organization. It literally takes no skill. Anyone who has two brain cells to rub together can do it.

That plus I'm a full time student majoring in biochem & comp sci. Give me a ****ing break you dweebs. You have little to no market value.

Originally posted by Kurk
This is what Putinbot1 thinks makes him hot shit? Working as a human resources person?

I serve as a human resources exec myself for a volunteer organization. It literally takes no skill. Anyone who has two brain cells to rub together can do it.

That plus I'm a full time student majoring in biochem & comp sci. Give me a ****ing break you dweebs. You have little to no market value. Can you read? I have nothing to do with HR, except they work for me and I have never and would never work in HR. Not that I have anything against anyone who does.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Can you read? I have nothing to do with HR, except they work for me and I have never and would never work in HR. Not that I have anything against anyone who does. So what makes you so valuable on the free market?

Originally posted by Kurk
This is what Putinbot1 thinks makes him hot shit? Working as a human resources person?

I serve as a human resources exec myself for a volunteer organization. It literally takes no skill. Anyone who has two brain cells to rub together can do it.

That plus I'm a full time student majoring in biochem & comp sci. Give me a ****ing break you dweebs. You have little to no market value. Is a human's worth calculated entirely by their 'market value'? If so, that's incredibly depressing. I'm glad I don't see the world that way.

Originally posted by Scribble
Is a human's worth calculated entirely by their 'market value'? If so, that's incredibly depressing. I'm glad I don't see the world that way. The kid is a kid Scribble; he understands nothing.

I'm not sure if this is why but a lot of Americans have an irrational disliking of standardized testing despite all the literature on its accuracy (with a few exceptions).

A lot of Americans are anti-intellectual on principal and are more inclined towards charter/private schools.

I don't think charter/private schools are common enough to explain the alleged gap.

Funnily enough, it seems likely that America has the highest population of extremely talented people (maybe behind China/India due to sheer population), probably because of skilled immigration.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
The kid is a kid Scribble; he understands nothing. Not an argument, kiddo. Try again. Originally posted by Nephthys
A lot of Americans are anti-intellectual on principal and are more inclined towards charter/private schools.

I went to a private high-school known for pumping out multiple IVY league matriculates, Merit scholars, etc each year. Not sure what you mean by private/charters being an issue.

Originally posted by Nephthys
A lot of Americans are anti-intellectual on principal and are more inclined towards charter/private schools.

You really have an anti-hardon for "charter schools" when they only make up 6% of all public schools:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-education-charterschools/number-of-charter-schools-students-in-u-s-rises-report-idUSKCN1B22JX


"On average, the majority of charter schools do no better or worse than traditional public schools."

"On average, nationally, students in 17 percent of charter schools performed significantly better than if they had attended their neighborhood traditional public school."

http://www.data-first.org/questions/how-do-charter-schools-compare-to-regular-public-schools-in-student-performance/






http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/education/345335-the-grades-are-in-charter-schools-are-boosting-college-success


Now, for me, this is quite personal. As I grew up with this "lowest income quartile" people. They were mostly black. Some Native American. Some Hispanic. So when I see amazing success like this, it gets me thinking.



But when I see clear regurgitated talking points from people like you who are clearly just parroting bullshit from the left without even doing a tiny bit a research, it looks like it needs to be corrected quick fast and in a hurry. Not all schools are like KIPP and YES. Not at all. And some of these schools are rejecting special needs students.

And it is well-known that Private Schools routinely outperform public schools in the US.




Also, most of your knowledge hating 'mericans do not want to send their children to private schools nor can they afford them. You send them to private schools because you have money and you want them to get the best education possible. For example, atheists will send their children to catholic school, just because the private catholic school is the 'best around.' These are not the 'mericans that you are lambasting.


Summary:

Charter Schools: not this demon you keep making it out to be. Not perfect. But some networks are performing absurdly better than their public school counterparts WHILE reaching and improving the educational attainments of the lowest quartile of American children.

Private Schools: No idea what your problem is with these. It's well-known that private schoolers outperform public schoolers.

..... I was offering an explanation for why some Americans are disinclined towards standardised testing, which I believe charter and private schools aren't as required to use. :I

Originally posted by Nephthys
..... I was offering an explanation for why some Americans are disinclined towards standardised testing, which I believe charter and private schools aren't as required to use. :I

Oh, it was the second time you mentioned charter schools in a not-so-friendly manner.


Please forgive me, Nephy-poo? Pleeease? I'm sorry.

https://78.media.tumblr.com/73a2159a936f415cb1ad8948d7e8bf70/tumblr_ol0g9vxAx11w1kw0io1_540.png

No.

Originally posted by Nephthys
https://78.media.tumblr.com/73a2159a936f415cb1ad8948d7e8bf70/tumblr_ol0g9vxAx11w1kw0io1_540.png

No.

https://i.imgur.com/ZDET6G2.jpg

https://78.media.tumblr.com/31cdd0425c600da78d8068b585310a13/tumblr_or6zgpVwmL1ubkfyjo1_500.png

Education beyond a certain point is probably the most important for the smartest people in society, and America still has a really large set of outlier talents, thanks largely to its highly attractive high-end immigration policy. Hopefully Trump doesn't nerf that.

Sadly it is the OVER Reliance on The Regulation of Education that is killing off lots of opportunities to seek out education. You are no longer just paying for an education. You are paying off Corrupt Educational Unions and the Leftist Politicians that use said unions as their own mafia thugs.