Bob LeChevalier wrote:
>> "Thalamus" <zhil at online.no> wrote:
> >"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> skrev i melding
> >news:rbrgjugskro0glcl8glvn2672lkjhkkm49 at 4ax.com...> >> "Thalamus" <zhil at online.no> wrote:
> >> >I think that this can hardly be called irrelevant:
> >> >http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/condition98/c9818a01.html> >> >And I'll humiliate you totally, for read THIS:
> >> >"Average mathematics proficiency (scale score) by race/ethnicity and age:
> >> >1973-1996
> >> > White Black
> >> >Hispanic
> >> >Year Age9 Age13 Age17 Age9 Age13 Age17 Age9 Age13 Age17
> >> >1973 225 274 310 190 228 270 202 239 277
> >> >1978 224 272 306 192 230 268 203 238 276
> >> >1982 224 274 304 195 240 272 204 252 277
> >> >1986 227 274 308 202 249 279 205 254 283
> >> >1990 235 276 310 208 250 289 214 255 284
> >> >1992 235 279 312 208 250 286 212 259 292
> >> >1994 237 281 312 212 252 286 210 256 291
> >> >1996 237 281 312 212 252 286 215 256 292"
> >> >
> >> >Now, it seems that the nigger achieved as an 17-year old on par with White
> >> >13-year old kids (IE check the numbers for 1973,1978 and 1982).
> >> >It seems that they in fact have achieved a little better than those pesky
> >> >13-year old White kids later on, but the divide is still there.
> >> >
> >> >So, you loose Nigger, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> >> >!!!!!!!!!
> >> >N I G G E R !!!!!
> >>
> >> Actually YOU lose, dummy. The data shows that the 17 year old score for
> >> whites has changed only 2 points over the 23 years covered by the table,
> >> whereas the 17 year old score for blacks improved by 16 points, the 13 year
> >> old score by 24 points, and the 9 year old score by 22 points.
> >>
> >> This either means that blacks are getting smarter at an enormous rate (in
> >> which case, in about 40 years they will surpass whites in math), or it means
> >> that blacks are rapidly catching up because we are finally making some
> >> efforts to teach blacks rather than label them as incapable like you do.
> >
> >Well, you have totally forgotten HOW MUCH they SPEND on teaching the Nigger
> >numbers.
>> Why does that matter?
>> >THAT has also increased - on par with the decrease (which can't be erased)
> >from 1982.
>> What decrease? I see no decrease in the numbers posted above.
>> >So YOU loose, you see - IF both were given the SAME amount of spent dollars,
> >then in YOUR theory the divide should DECREASE.
>> I made no theory about the effects of spending.
>> >It has been in the media on how much they have spent on the non-Whites, and
> >how LITTLE they got in return.
>> Well, apparently in Norway you learn too little about American governance to
> know how education spending here is determined. But I would not expect you
> to, just as I wouldn't purport to be able to comment on the treatment of
> Lapps and ethnic Swedes, much less immigrants from Turkey, in your country.
>> >http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/97917a.gif at http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/97917.html>> Too bad you don't understand the text in that article, which doesn't support
> your prejudices at all.
>> >http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/97917c.gif> >"Figure 3. Education "buying power" and percentage of minority
> > enrollment with the effects of other variables related to
> > district spending removed (1998-1990)
> >
> > Less than 5% - $3920
> > 5%-<20% - $4140
> > 20%-<50% -$4300
> > 50% or more -$4514"
> >
> >Noticed the trend ?
> >Yup, UPWARDS - AFTER they had removed "district spending" (which is
> >administrative spending).
>> No that is NOT what "district spending" means in the context of that article.
>> >You loose, again - and I win, again.
> >Don't try yourself agains a White Superior God.
>> Who apparently needs more education in English comprehension (and spelling -
> the word is "lose", loser) before he goes up "agains"
He claims Ebonics is gibberish, but seems to use it in just about every
post. :)
J
an educated American in
> matters about his country's political affairs.
>> lojbab
