Yes, school funding matters

It is.

 

cranberry knows advocacy ... cranberry don't know social science

 

Would be fascinated to see what the demographics and funding levels look like for the schools where the "funding doesn't matter" posters sent their kids.

 

You're in denial because the solid, well reported information in the NPR series runs contrary to everything you want to believe.

 

The inference you drew, from the segment you quoted, would be laughed out of an introductory social sciences research methods seminar.

You may be right. Funding may matter in the way you describe. That tale isn't an indication of that.

 

Nope. It was exactly right. Otherwise you would be able to refute it.

 

That NPR story is awfully light in details. The takeaway was more money solves problems. What was the increase in salary? How did the applicant pool change? How did class sizes change? Did demographics change?

 

Do a little research and find other factors that will disprove the theory then. Knock yourselves out.

 

It's piss-poor reporting by one of the smarter outlets.

 

Why? Because you don't like what they say? You should easily be able to show why NPR's conclusions are wrong.

 

Oh god, now you're gonna go you-know-who on me? You either don't know what the fuck you're talking about or you're pretending.

Apparently it's the former. Demonstrating that your inference is mistaken requires no other "factors" or influences. You really don't have the first clue what you're talking about.

The district NPR proffered had a higher-than-average rate of post-secondary enrollment prior to the intervention. And at the time of the intervention (and beyond), across the country the rate of post-secondary enrollment was increasing. Thus, absolutely nothing this district experienced post-intervention (either in absolute or relative terms) would be out of line with what we would expect to see had there been NO intervention.

You remind me of a quote from Upton Sinclair: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

Stick with advocacy. That's your thing, and it pays well if you're any good at it (which I suspect you are). Social science ... science in general, apparently ... ain't your bag.

 

Really, that's the standard? The reader has to disprove an opinion piece disguised as an objective report when the report doesn't footnote it's sources and attach addendum of research and spreadsheets. That's modern journalism, believe our conclusions. Trust us, we're NPR