Obama and Merit Pay For Teachers "For the record, I've long believed teachers should get better pay for better exam results, and bad ones should be fired." :: Well, for the record, I think there would be support for the notion that those who get socialized subsidizes for PhDs, but don't go into teaching or research ought to pay it back. There are kids who don't want to work. There are teachers who cannot teach well. Merit pay, which can be raises or bonuses, is not any silver bullet or even an on-balance improvement. Some systems are experimenting with rewarding students/parents for good performance. That seems quite worthwhile a try, to me - it's a lot closer to individual responsibility. If one really wanted to test merit pay and "liberal orthodoxy", offer teachers no less than a 60%-100% of salary bonus for a threshold number of students who pass proficiency exams. The scores will move, but I doubt it's quite as much as conservative orthodoxy raves.
At Least He's Straight :: I have this question. Who is Dean Barnett anyway? Is that a nom-de-plume? I tried to find a bio a while back, but nothing... Is he like "Tagg" for Hugh?
Tehran's Crackdown :: It looks like the Mullah's are going the way of the Communists ... There is no typhus epidemic in Moscow, don't you know, Dr. Zhivago? There is no gas rationing in modern Iran, don't you know? Economy is for donkey.
We Still Agree on Many Things "I have no problem legalizing prostitution." :: I think people ought not to support legalization (although I didn't read Glenn). Some things ought not to be sold, should be given, not bought. Besides, it would be a mistake to think that legalization would make it more of a profession of choice than one of necessity, free from the worst kind of abuses. Neither is the USA a small country like the Netherlands ...
That Gay Debate :: It's good to know that the debate isn't an HRC first, if someone is claiming it is. The rest shows, as AS is often quick himself to point out, why he and CC are not running for office.
Should Vitter Quit? "I don't think so. He's human." :: But people who are negligent should not be cross-subsidized for their accidents in the insurance risk pools? Your principles are your wallet then? Not to be snarky or picky with that, but it just seems to be a vacillating point of reference in need of some re-constructed view.
Swift-Boating Rudy :: It's a legitimate question, but I don't think it applies. The SmearBoat Vets hired a known PR firm, who advised them to start their "campaign" with a press release / conference that was full of allegations, but without a single fact. They set-up a website and invited people to donate. They dragged the legitimacy of everyone who has ever gotten a medal through the mud - I'll never look at a Navy award the same way, will you? (I'm not sure if it is important, but they also waited until Kerry was the nominee, if memory serves).
Gupta vs Moore :: Go Michael! CNN's piece wasn't terrible, but it wasn't good either. I saw the fact-checkers listed in the credits to "Sicko", so I knew Gupta was skating on ice. I noticed that Gupta et. al. got the "fact checked" number wrong on Cuba, too (if even I can noticed it - because they didn't mention a source themselves, that I recall, then you know that CNN is really slipping - besides, it was so disproportionate to focus on the small difference and call it "fudging the facts" later on in the piece). The "fact" that Cuba is just below the US on the list is laudable, given that Cuba has a gizillionth of the wealth that the US does. The assertion that Moore ignores that taxes are required, rather than waste-filled insurance premiums that come up short time and again, is not something that is "fudged" in the film, either. Gupta had a good first draft, he just needed a better editor or some more time to make an "o.k." piece into good journalism. If all that's self-serving in AS's judgment, then it's a good thing he's not on the panel of questioners at the "gay debate", yes?
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query gupta. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query gupta. Sort by date Show all posts
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Wednesday pm. Roundup
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Thank you, Paul Krugman
...for weighing in on Gupta, while I was pondering Gupta's history, trying to decide if it warranted a vote of no-confidence in him.
Monday, July 16, 2007
The Editors: Weighing In On Andrew Sullivan Versus Michael Moore
After AS is willing to very nearly or completely libel Michael Moore as follows:
Moore is both a practiced liar and not-too-smart. -AS
He goes on to conclude that CNN deserves respect for its assertion that they are "impartial":
The fight is ongoing. My respect for CNN increases. -AS
Not surprisingly, the media mavens don't agree, with CNN's factcheckers hardly looking impartial (and protestations that the factcheckers were vetted looking pretty ... vain, frankly).
The producers of CNN's piece created a problem when they pitched the piece as a "fact check", and emphasized "fudged facts" in their summary / conclusions, (see point 8) despite finding none defensible.
The producers of CNN's piece created a problem when they pitched the piece as a "fact check", and emphasized "fudged facts" in their summary / conclusions, (see point 8) despite finding none defensible.Is it any wonder that Micheal Moore got brushed the wrong way?
Michael might be "wrong" about what to do about health care (I don't think so, in general), but Michael is not wrong "on the facts".
I don't think this is a fault of Gupta, necessarily - he's pretty good. They just cobbled together a piece, probably under deadline, and didn't realize just how much fudging the line on fact-checking vs. their own opinionating would get Moore, who paid to have his movie fact-checked, all upset.
CNN's written piece was somewhat better than the original hype for the "Stay tuned, is Michael Moore's new film, Sicko, accurate? We do a fact check."
CNN didn't present a traditional fact check. They picked up on an item or two - one of which they later retracted - and used those to suggest that the facts ought to have been weighed differently or other facts included (some that they suggested, like taxes, were included in Sicko!).
CNN and Gupta, are, of course, welcome to their opinion on how to weigh the facts, but not to call doing so a "fact check".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)