H.S. Academic All-Stars - No Smiths or Jones'

[Kiwon]

2007 All-USA High School Academic All-Stars

First Team: Thilini Ariyawansa, Megan Blewett, Kenneth Brewer,
Johnny Hu, Meredith MacGregor, Priyanka Mitra, Scott Molony,
Patrick Lee, Amelia Lin, Heidi Liu, Veronica Shi, Carol Suh, Lova Sun,
Arnav Tripathy, Jason Vartikar-McCullough, Vidya Viswanathan, Joanne Wang, Geoffrey Woo, Wesley Yu, Felix Zhang.

Second Team: Sarah Bayefsky-Anand, Yi Cai, Michael Ding,
Zachary Frankel, Jeremy Hsu, Huang "Maria" Huang, Daniel Lage,
Rose Liu, Monica Lu, Alexa Lutchen, Gabriel Mendoza, Beatrice Parker,
Anita Rao, Nathaniel Thomas, Jennifer Tiskus, Esther Uduehi, Nwamaka Uzoh, Dmitry Vaintrob, Rui Wang, Yin Wu.

Third Team: Gregory Brockman, Arhana Chattopadhyay, Matthew Conti, Zuzana Culakova, Marshall Everett, Amardeep Grewal, Congcong Guo, Nimit Jain, Brienne Kugler, Ethan Kuperberg, Kelsey Lau, Kevin Leu,
Allen Lin, Tina Liu, Soumya Nettimi, Karis Tang-Quan, David Tao,
Hannah Watkins, Christine Yu, Lillian Yu.
.................................................. .............

Where are the "Smiths, Jones', Johnsons, Campbells, Wallbangers?" Nowhere to be found.

Now what does that tell you? :?:

[Freak Out]

The new avatar had me rolling Kiwon. Nothing like a nice photo of an Islamo-nuke 2 launch. Who knows....in a few years we could witness an Iran-Pakistan vs India-Israel nuclear tag team match.

[BallHawk]

The new avatar had me rolling Kiwon. Nothing like a nice photo of an Islamo-nuke 2 launch. Who knows....in a few years we could witness an Iran-Pakistan vs India-Israel nuclear tag team match.

Yeah, my money would be on Israel. The Arabs can try as much as they want, they can't destroy Israel.

[Joemailman]

I worry about the Pakistan/India situation the most. Pakistan is one coup from being the first Islamic Republic to have nukes, and coups are a part of Pakistan's history. Ahmadinejad (sp?) would do a lot of saber rattling if he gets nukes, but he knows an attack on Israel would bring the United States in.

[BallHawk]

I wouldn't say there's been a ton. I remember one from 1999 and then there was one in the late 1950s.

[Joemailman]

During that time however, there have been several times where the military has declared martial law for periods of time. It is a very unstable situation. It is well known that there are elements in the Pakistan military with Al-Qaeda sympathies. That is probably why Bin-Laden is believed to be hanging out along the Afghan/Pakistan border.

[BallHawk]

During that time however, there have been several times where the military has declared martial law for periods of time. It is a very unstable situation. It is well known that there are elements in the Pakistan military with Al-Qaeda sympathies. That is probably why Bin-Laden is believed to be hanging out along the Afghan/Pakistan border.

I can agree with that.

[BallHawk]

It also depends on how the elections go in October. If President Musharraf runs again and wins again, then the US and the rest of the world, will feel more secure with Pakistan. Yes, Musharraf has had controversy, but he has done more bad then good for that country. Whether he has assisted terrorists, I cannot say.

Again, that's assuming he isn't killed. The guy's had more assassination attempts then Ghandi.

[Freak Out]

Sorry to jack the thread Kiwon.....pretty amazing list. It appears to be majority Asian and Asian Subcontinent ethnicity first gen. The pot keeps cooking.....

[Kiwon]

Sorry to jack the thread Kiwon.....pretty amazing list. It appears to be majority Asian and Asian Subcontinent ethnicity first gen. The pot keeps cooking.....

I was going to say..... "Holy Thread Hijack, Batman!"

But I'm glad though some of you guys know where these places are on the map. I certainly hope that there will not be nuclear conflict anywhere (other than maybe in France :) ) but if there is you can bet that Iran or Hamas will launch first.

About the Brainiacs.....Immigrant and minority kids in the USA are consistently the best students we have. They have families that place a high value on education and push the kids to make the most of educational opportunities. They have good priorities.

But what about the majority? Why are the children of native born and, especially, Caucasian American families, not on the list? They make up the bulk of the population and yet are underrepresented.

I think it's a reflection on poor family priorities and social values. The list should be much more diverse than it is, but it's dominated by non-traditional family names.

I'm in the Smith and Jones camp and I think it's a shame that apparently traditional American families apparently have a low emphasis on educational achievement. There is no special reason that the top 60 students in the US should come mainly from ethnic minorities

[Joemailman]

I saw a documentary a couple of years ago relating how caucasian boys in this country are not urged to excel academically by our society. The emphasis is all on sports. They pointed out the term "nerd" refers to a boy who is not good at sports and other "masculine" endeavors, but is a good student. It is a negative term. Of course, it's even worse in the African-American community where the breakup of the family structure is so prevalent.

[Kiwon]

Good point.

You're exactly right. There is a strong negative peer pressure to not excel in school. Just look at all the negative stereotypes there are in the popular culture.

It's even worse in the Black community. The biggest slam that one faces is being told by others that "You're acting white."

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I'm more inclined to believe this is a case of misleading statistics. First, approximately 1/3 of the honor roll is what we would consider to be traditional americans..ie, white people from europe. Since minorities make up a 1/3 of the pop, one would think that they would only make up 1/3 of the honor roll.

However, that would a mistaken notion. One has to look at the "group" itself. The indians, chinese, etc. that come to this country are for the most part the best and brightest those countries have to offer. There is a large group of white people in this country who aren't into learning, and thank god..Tyrone would be beside himself if everyone got smart and no one was there to work the counter at Popeyes.

BTW, if we breakdown the numbers, it appears that asians are about a third, traditional americans about a third, indians/paki/etc. about 10%, etc.

But, don't for a minute think that there aren't morons back in their home countries...believe me, there are.

For the most part, the euros that started this country weren't the best and brightest. Poor irish, poor italians, etc. didn't come here for the educational opportunities..they came because they were poor.

Additionally, the indians, etc. come from cultures that stress learning and education. And, cultures that stressed learning in a way that meshes with western ideas of learning...ie, not oral history, but a written history.

And, the jobs one can get here with no education are filled over there with employees with masters degrees. Next time you talk with a call center rep, realize that person is most likely smarter and better educated than yourself.

I also could go into how a certain western religion often is at odds with learning and improving ones station in life.

Try and guess the lowest socio economic group by religion. Or try guessing the richest. I think you'd be surprised at the results.

[Merlin]

It is well documented that those of an Asian culture hold education in high regard. In America, all we do is throw money at our defunct educational system in hopes that some "Smith's" show up on lists like this in our own country. The problem is that we can spend more money but there is no evidence that spending more money on education = better education. In fact, test scores prove it to be a waste of money. Private schools score better in comparison to public schools on the tests used for comparison. There is strong evidence that the less you spend per student, the better their education is. It is interesting that here in Wisconsin there are people pissed off that the Voucher program private schools in Milwaukee provides more money per student (approximately $5000) in some cases then the actual tuition to attend that school. BUT, they have no problem paying twice that amount ($10,000 +) per student at the Public Schools. Nice logic they have...

[Joemailman]

You're comparing apples to oranges when comparing public to private schools. The fact that private school students score higher has , in my opinion a lot to do with the fact that a parent who will spend the money to send a child to a private school is likely to be a parent who will take a real interest in their child's education. That is a huge factor. Public schools usually end up trying to educate those students who unfortunately come from homes that do not nurture their education. I attended both Catholic and public schools, and the difference in the characteristics of many of the students was striking.

[oregonpackfan]

Merlin,

Your sentence that "There is strong evidence that the less you spend per student, the better their education" has no documented justification whatsoever!

As a recently retired elementary school teacher, I believe strongly that learning comes about 1/3 from the teacher/educator, 1/3 from the student, and 1/3 from the family.

Certainly the instruction from teachers must be of utmost quality. At the same time, in order to learn, the student must put forth the effort into academics both in the classroom and at home(homework, independant study, etc)

Finally, the family must support education. They have to insure the kids come to school ready to learn--that means they are fed a breakfast in the morning. Parents need to attend conferences, school concerts, and other functions, etc. Finally, they need to instill in their children that a good education is the cornerstone to success in modern society.

All too often, politicians, media, and soap box speakers put 100% responsibility for learning on the teachers' backs. While teachers bear a good 33% of the responsibility, adequate learning cannot take place if the student is unwilling to learn and/or school is not a high priority for families.

Ask any teacher who has taught for 10 years or more and ask them which ethnic group seems to have the highest achievement levels. Almost all will agree that Asian American students will excell whether they are foreign-born or American-born. The deciding factor is that most Asian groups place a very high value on the need for education.

[Merlin]

Merlin,
Your sentence that "There is strong evidence that the less you spend per student, the better their education" has no documented justification whatsoever!


There is more to support spending less than there is to support spending more. Do the dreaded Google search and you will find out for yourself, there is a ton of documentation on the subject. I applaud you because you seem to be a "good" teacher based on your posts here. However, it is a sad truth that private schools can educate better then public schools at 1/2 of the cost. Just where does all that money go for in public schools? The teacher's claim they aren't compensated enough so it can't be to the teachers right? For academic needs (books, teaching aids, etc.)? Hardly. The schools I have been in have the best of everything. Where is the money? Where does it go? No one seems to have an answer but they need more of it all of the time. Yet, test scores prove that spending more money does not affect how much a child learns.

Every area of the country is different and I realize this. There are good schools and bad schools. There are good teachers and bad teachers. There are good parents and bad parents. And everything else in between. There is a lot of truth to the parents having the biggest affect on a child's education. That part of the battle has been lost because not enough parents realize that the whole "You are special", Dr. Spock movement, brainwashed people into believing they really are special and that they are owed something. No one is responsible for themselves anymore. Until that turns around and people start using their brains instead of their asses, our educational system is doomed to fail.

[Freak Out]

:jack:

Back to our Nuke wielding allies, well one of them.

Musharraf Bars Return of Exiled Opponents Before Elections

By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, May 18, 2007; 2:14 PM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, May 18 -- Embattled President Pervez Musharraf said in a television interview broadcast Friday he would not allow his two primary political opponents to come back to Pakistan before elections slated for later this year.

Musharraf, who has faced the worst political crisis of his presidency since he suspended the nation's chief judge in March, said neither of his two immediate predecessors leading the country, Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto, will be allowed to return from exile. "No, they will not be returning before elections," Musharraf said in an interview with the private Aaj Television.

Sharif was exiled by Musharraf when he took power in a bloodless coup eight years ago; Bhutto could face corruption charges if she returns home, stemming from her tenure as prime minister in the 1990s.

Musharraf's decision to allow neither to return seems likely to harden battle lines as the nation heads toward what many pro-democracy groups had hoped would be the first fair and open national elections since he took power.

Both Bhutto and Sharif said through spokesmen Friday that they do not intend to abide by Musharraf's decision.

"The statement shows that there is no law or constitution in Pakistan. There is only Musharraf's law," said Ahsan Iqbal, information secretary for Nawaz's Pakistan Muslim League. "If he does not allow them to come back, he will be marginalizing the mainstream parties and allowing the extremist parties to gain more ground."

Iqbal said previous statements made by Sharif that he plans to return still stand. But Iqbal acknowledged there is a real threat Sharif will be deported and said that "the timing is critical. We must mobilize to a level where deportation is no longer a political possibility."

A spokesman for Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party, Farhatullah Babar, issued a statement saying that "former Prime Minister Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto will return to Pakistan before the elections, come what may." Babar said the president's position reflected his "desperation" as the judicial crisis deepens.

Musharraf and Bhutto had reportedly been negotiating a compromise in recent months that would effectively allow Bhutto to return to Pakistan, in exchange for permitting Musharraf to hold onto power. But Friday's announcement seemed to be a strong indication that those talks are not progressing, and that the chances for compromise are slim.

Musharraf has been under intense pressure from political opponents, Pakistan's legal community and the media since March, when he suspended independent-minded Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry for alleged abuse of office. Pro-democracy forces have rallied around Chaudhry, portraying him as a victim of attempts by Musharraf to consolidate power.

The supreme court was likely to hear key election-related cases in 2007, including whether Musharraf can stay on as leader of the army while also serving as president and whether he can be elected for a new term by the current parliament, which is packed with Musharraf supporters and is up for election itself later in the year.

The controversy turned deadly last weekend, when approximately 40 people were killed in rioting in the nation's largest city, Karachi.

[Joemailman]

Very interesting situation. I usually detest military dictators, but that could become a very unstable situation if he is ousted. It's amazing stories like this hardly get mentioned on the news. Short of Iraq, this is about as important a story as there is.

[Freak Out]

Pakistan is a big time bomb.......Musharraf placates the tribal zone and keeps the dogs at bay and the military holds things together as best they can. What happens if he is killed or loses...? Who does the Military back then? Damn you Abdul Qadeer Khan!

[BallHawk]

What happens if he is killed or loses...?

Simply, the world is screwed.

[oregonpackfan]

[quote=oregonpackfan]Merlin,
Your sentence that "There is strong evidence that the less you spend per student, the better their education" has no documented justification whatsoever!


There is more to support spending less than there is to support spending more. Do the dreaded Google search and you will find out for yourself, there is a ton of documentation on the subject. I applaud you because you seem to be a "good" teacher based on your posts here. However, it is a sad truth that private schools can educate better then public schools at 1/2 of the cost. Just where does all that money go for in public schools? The teacher's claim they aren't compensated enough so it can't be to the teachers right? For academic needs (books, teaching aids, etc.)? Hardly. The schools I have been in have the best of everything. Where is the money? Where does it go? No one seems to have an answer but they need more of it all of the time. Yet, test scores prove that spending more money does not affect how much a child learns.

Merlin,

Thank you for your compliment in describing me as a "Good Teacher." Despite what critics of public schools think, there are many competent, dedicated teachers in public schools.

In comparing private versus public schools, there are many factors that saddle public schools with increased costs. The first has to be that private schools can be very selective in the students that admit. Public schools are obligated to educate every student who comes through the door.

Private schools can, and do, screen out students who:
1. are physically, mentally, or emotionally disabled
2. have severe learning problems
3. have severe behavior problems
4. are non-English speaking--in today's American classroom, most non-English speaking children are children of illegal aliens.

1. A severely physically disabled child often costs a district as much as $15,000 per student for special ed. teachers, accommodations, etc. Developmentally disabled(retarded children) also need intense classroom instruction and special ed teachers. Private schools rarely accept these types of children.

2. Private schools often will not take children with learning issues of dyslexia, deafness, or autism.

3. Private schools can and do expell students with behavior issues. Public schools have to go through a lengthy, legal, established protocol for suspension and expulsion. Eventually, most of these students return to the public classroom. They rarely return to the private school classroom.

4. Non-English speaking students require special ESL(English as a Second Language) or ELL(English Language Learner) teachers and classrooms. This is a Federal mandate that public schools have to follow. It is ironic that the children of illegal aliens are here illegally but the Federal government mandates that schools accommodate them. IMO, the influx of illegal aliens has had a HUGE negative impact on our public schools.

I mentioned the profound impact parents have on the learning of their students. The overwhelming majority of private school parents are supportive of education in general, and teachers, in particular.

While the majority of public school parents are supportive of education there are disturbing large minorities of parents who either don't care about education or who are downright hostile to schools and their teachers.

Measuring academic achievement exclusively through standardized testing provides a very narrow, and often, inaccurate measure of learning. First of all, standardized testing is usually given in a multiple choice format because it is easy to administer, correct, and report. Second, standardized testing does not measure cognitive functions like problelm-solving, creative thinking, collaborative learning, or writing.

The final flaw of standardized testing is that many tests states now adminiter are not even statistically normed for validity(measures the area of learning it is supposed to measure) or reliability(accurately measures the academic area it is supposed to measure). To save money, states and districts choose the less expensive standardized tests which are not statistically normed.

Another advantage private school have over public schools is lower class sizes. A teacher with 15 students is able to give far more individual attention to his(her) students than a teacher with 30 students. Public schools typically not only have classes with more students but classes containing more children with special needs.

Merlin, I encourage you to spend 1 day in a public elementary school, the next day in a public middle school and the next day in a public high school.
I can guarantee you your perceptions of public schools will dramatically change after that.

Oregonpackfan
Elementary School Teacher, Retired
Damn proud to have been a teacher!