I've said on multiple occasions, the politics of teaching are like doing the St. Louis Shuffle. The state mandates we put on a large song and dance and sign our lives away to new and ever growing policy annually/biannually...and yet the only people it really affects are the teachers. In the end, if the system fails, the powers that be can say, "look at all of this training the teacher underwent, we don't know what happened."
As for teaching templates, our objectives change so much year to year that no real standard can be met. Added to the shuffling of content, even if I could use old materials, most of it is written assuming my students have a certain subset of prior knowledge. When the order of objectives is changing annually, there is no template to address the changes.
I blame this largely on the fact that the "final" authorities on curriculum are a board of individuals who've never spent an hour in front of a classroom. Successful teachers are those who can manage a classroom; if a person can manage adolescents, they can manage just about anyone. I think the chain of command could really benefit from the experience of being a teacher.
Your example of the 8th grade science unit is a perfect example - WTF sort of justification was given for that change? Standards didn't suddenly change mid-year!! Were they teaching below level and it suddenly was realized that the 8th grade unit should've been taught to the 7th graders all along?? Or did someone up the food chain get a bright idea that the 8th grade unit would be "cool" for some topical reason?
Also, why CAN'T there be more standard lesson plans/templates/etc that only need mild "personalization" by each teacher? Do things REALLY change that much from year to year? Have new numbers been invented that throw the whole process of teaching math into chaos? Since every year finds a new set of students in a given classroom (well, with a few exceptions of course), there isn't a huge need to freshen things up to keep the kids engaged like there would be with social sciences, etc. But you hit the nail on the head - the "educational system" (not the teachers themselves) forces a lot of that change at least in part to justify the huge "educational science" industry that "educates the educators", and this change falls on the backs of the teachers to somehow make it work with a growing set of constraints.
And yes, my family is chock-full of teachers and administrators. >>
Point #1
This one is not as complicated as most, my Wifes Teaching Partner who teaches the other half of the 7th Grade science is only Certified (Not Degreed) in Science, the 8th Grade Science teacher is also only certified not degreed. She went to the administaration a few weeek ago and cried she didn't know eneough about the 3-4 weeks of the Energy because she did not have the training. My wife who is a 25+ Tenured Team Leader Teacher & Degreed (6 Year Masters), and Certified in 3 other subjects, was tapped against her will to flip flop with the 8th grade teacher to teach her unit while the underqualified will teach hers. She was not asked, she was directed and that means write the lesson plans, ect.
The thing about this explanation for this time....is, simply the fact that every other week it is something that causes more of a workload, whatever each case may be.
Point #2
Every year due to the results from the Proficiency Testing for "No Child Left Behind", the testing/lesson standards are changed and different areas must be emphasized. So lesson plans and standards have to be rewritten. Is this the fault of the teacher, of couse not, as you said it is up the food chain. But what is the outcome, More work for the teacher...End of Story!
Neil
Actually Collect Non Sport, but am just so full of myself I post all over the place !!!!!!!
This one is not as complicated as most, my Wifes Teaching Partner who teaches the other half of the 7th Grade science is only Certified (Not Degreed) in Science, the 8th Grade Science teacher is also only certified not degreed. She went to the administaration a few weeek ago and cried she didn't know eneough about the 3-4 weeks of the Energy because she did not have the training. My wife who is a 25+ Tenured Team Leader Teacher & Degreed (6 Year Masters), and Certified in 3 other subjects, was tapped against her will to flip flop with the 8th grade teacher to teach her unit while the underqualified will teach hers. She was not asked, she was directed and that means write the lesson plans, ect.
The thing about this explanation for this time....is, simply the fact that every other week it is something that causes more of a workload, whatever each case may be.
Point #2
Every year due to the results from the Proficiency Testing for "No Child Left Behind", the testing/lesson standards are changed and different areas must be emphasized. So lesson plans and standards have to be rewritten. Is this the fault of the teacher, of couse not, as you said it is up the food chain. But what is the outcome, More work for the teacher...End of Story!
Neil >>
Sorry, I misunderstood that she would actually be teaching 8th grade for this unit. That's going to make the other teacher look pretty lame to her class-she can't handle 8th grade material that the kids have to know??? Lovely...
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i> Its Superbowl Sunday morning, where do you think my Wife is? The Classroom, doing lesson plans, She left at 8:00 am and will be back she said, would try by 2:00!
>>
Don't they have all summer to get those plans done? Maybe a week or two at Xmas? A few in-service days sprinkled in over the year? Maybe another week at spring break?
At worst case couldn't she use last years? Can I assume nothing has changed since last year?
I am not looking for a fight, but there are tons of people who have to work after hours or on the weekends. And most of them also have to work summers. >>
Not that a dipwad with the kind of statement like that, of which you have no knowledge, has a ounce of experience, deserves an answer, but for anyone else keeping score who knows how to keep there mouth shut about which they know nothing. My Wife who teaches 7th Grade Science has been ordered that for the next three weeks she needs to prepare and teach the 8th grade Unit on Energy. So, since that is not her normal carriculum, she has to prepare for it, which takes hours because with No Child left behind it is like preparing 4 or 5 different classes all teaching the exact same thing.
1. She must prepare for the 5-10% who already know the material and are 3 grades ahead of the rest of the class because if they are not engaged they can sometimes be the most disrupptive. 2. She must prepare a different outline for the 10-20% who may not know all the material, but are very smart and pick it up lickty split, they are almost as disrupptive as the top 10-15% can be. 3. Then the regualr outline for the 30-50% who are average middle of the road students, and need hands on guidance through the course and take individual one on one in some cases. 4. The next 10-15% who are Dumb as a Frickin Rock, don't speak English, or are just plain Evil, and take the preponderance of her time and almost constant instruction and supervision. But remember because of "No Child Left Behind", 100% of these Idiots have to become proficient in the course, who has to make sure this happens, THE TEACHER!!!! 5. The Specials, the 3-5% who are mentally and/or physically handicapped, for the most part 100% disruptive and Require their own supervision/instruction 100% of the time, who have to be also Proficient (Although impossible for the most part), by "No Child Left Behind" Standards.
So she has to do this for 190 Students, 6 classes of approx 30-36 each. And for all this prep work, what does she get paid for it ZERO! And you have the nads to compare the hours she works to somebody who goes in occasioanlly on a weekend usually for overtime!
And to your statement showing your ignorance again, about "At worst case couldn't she use last years? Can I assume nothing has changed since last year?"
Ya are Frickin' joking aren't you. Because of Test Scores Fed/Statewide/District wide and ever the changes at the Federal "No Child Left Behind" level, they are lucky if they are only tweeking and changing the Lesson Plans a few times a year, ...............use the same from last year. Wow....Ignorance is Bliss isn't it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Neil >>
First off, I am far from ignorant and not a dipwad. I do have knowledge and experience on the subject. Yes I can have both without being a teacher, I know it is hard to believe that anybody but a teacher could be knowledgeable about the subject.
I do have a different opinion than you. I am sure this will be upsetting - but because of my opinion, I do not send my kids to public school. Oh my, I did something about how I feel rather than just complaining about it. My kids attend a school where NCLB is not a big deal because the expectations are much higher.
Why call names? Does that make you feel better?
If it is sooooo bad there are plenty of other degrees. Go back to school. Get a differnet job. It works both ways.
I get so sick of teachers complaining about how hard their job is.
I have little sympathy because teachers have to make adjustments and get out of their comfort zone and teach something new.
Jobs change, get used to it.
Plus I think no child left behind was a good idea. It needs some fixing but why not hold teachers to a standard? We need to keep pushing for better education in this country. I really like the idea of school choice. I do agree with you that 100% proficiency is not attainable.
The government has changed the rules and expectations in my industry (Finance) too. But nobody cares. People have to adapt, that is the way it goes.
Why should any of us care that she chose to work Super Bowl morning? Was she going to miss something important? Maybe she could have worked the day before Super Bowl morning. Then she would have been free to watch all the pregame shows.
The rest of us have to work 12 months to get 12 months worth of pay.
It's America, if you do not like your job - get a new one. There must be a teaching message board where you can debate the finer points of no child left behind.
And for the record my wife went in to work yesterday morning at 6:30am and worked till 11:00am (no over time pay - needed to get ready for next week). She works in local government, those workers are also targets these days. State pension, tons of sick days, cheap insurance, retire at 55 and make a decent paycheck while working.
No complaining from her. I am sure it sucks, but she knows it is better than not having a job.
After those four National League games, Gorman Thomas was never the same, and neither were the Brewers, and come to think of it neither was I.
I don't know many teachers who complain about their job duties. I feel fairly compensated and, in all honesty, the salary ranges quoted in the unionized states sound grossly inflated. That said, what I don't like about education isn't my responsibility; my job description is understood, and my measures of performance are a piece of cake in comparison to when I worked in industry.
What I don't like about education is the the money and time being spent to improve the system, that are, in reality, only means of "CYA" for state institutions who feel the breath of Big Brother on their respective necks. Change is everywhere, but positive results are lacking. Young people who finished their public education in the latter '90s and first year or so of the new millennium received one of the best educations our country has ever offered. The same can't be said about today.
While I am teaching, I'm doing everything in my power to inspire the minds that come through my door; however, I assure you, any positive gains I make are through the work I do in addition to state mandated requirements designed to create students capable of passing a state designed test. Heck, the tests aren't even equal from state to state.
I would have no stress whatsoever if I just didn't care. The emotional aspect of teaching is more "difficult" one.
<< <i>But now we're at 15 working days per month at this rate >>
That would be about twice the # of work days that teachers have had up here in Massachusetts lately. Between so called "professional days", fake holidays, and snow days, there have been quite a few 3 day weeks lately, Not to mention field trips for almost anything. No wonder kids seem so stupid now. >>
Or its because many parents no longer feel it is their duty to take an active role in their child's life. Learning and raising a child shouldn't stop when a student leaves school at the end of the day.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys - Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2 touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL title.
<< <i> Its Superbowl Sunday morning, where do you think my Wife is? The Classroom, doing lesson plans, She left at 8:00 am and will be back she said, would try by 2:00!
>>
Don't they have all summer to get those plans done? Maybe a week or two at Xmas? A few in-service days sprinkled in over the year? Maybe another week at spring break?
At worst case couldn't she use last years? Can I assume nothing has changed since last year?
I am not looking for a fight, but there are tons of people who have to work after hours or on the weekends. And most of them also have to work summers. >>
Not that a dipwad with the kind of statement like that, of which you have no knowledge, has a ounce of experience, deserves an answer, but for anyone else keeping score who knows how to keep there mouth shut about which they know nothing. My Wife who teaches 7th Grade Science has been ordered that for the next three weeks she needs to prepare and teach the 8th grade Unit on Energy. So, since that is not her normal carriculum, she has to prepare for it, which takes hours because with No Child left behind it is like preparing 4 or 5 different classes all teaching the exact same thing.
1. She must prepare for the 5-10% who already know the material and are 3 grades ahead of the rest of the class because if they are not engaged they can sometimes be the most disrupptive. 2. She must prepare a different outline for the 10-20% who may not know all the material, but are very smart and pick it up lickty split, they are almost as disrupptive as the top 10-15% can be. 3. Then the regualr outline for the 30-50% who are average middle of the road students, and need hands on guidance through the course and take individual one on one in some cases. 4. The next 10-15% who are Dumb as a Frickin Rock, don't speak English, or are just plain Evil, and take the preponderance of her time and almost constant instruction and supervision. But remember because of "No Child Left Behind", 100% of these Idiots have to become proficient in the course, who has to make sure this happens, THE TEACHER!!!! 5. The Specials, the 3-5% who are mentally and/or physically handicapped, for the most part 100% disruptive and Require their own supervision/instruction 100% of the time, who have to be also Proficient (Although impossible for the most part), by "No Child Left Behind" Standards.
So she has to do this for 190 Students, 6 classes of approx 30-36 each. And for all this prep work, what does she get paid for it ZERO! And you have the nads to compare the hours she works to somebody who goes in occasioanlly on a weekend usually for overtime!
And to your statement showing your ignorance again, about "At worst case couldn't she use last years? Can I assume nothing has changed since last year?"
Ya are Frickin' joking aren't you. Because of Test Scores Fed/Statewide/District wide and ever the changes at the Federal "No Child Left Behind" level, they are lucky if they are only tweeking and changing the Lesson Plans a few times a year, ...............use the same from last year. Wow....Ignorance is Bliss isn't it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Neil >>
First off, I am far from ignorant and not a dipwad. I do have knowledge and experience on the subject. Yes I can have both without being a teacher, I know it is hard to believe that anybody but a teacher could be knowledgeable about the subject.
I do have a different opinion than you. I am sure this will be upsetting - but because of my opinion, I do not send my kids to public school. Oh my, I did something about how I feel rather than just complaining about it. My kids attend a school where NCLB is not a big deal because the expectations are much higher.
Why call names? Does that make you feel better?
If it is sooooo bad there are plenty of other degrees. Go back to school. Get a differnet job. It works both ways.
I get so sick of teachers complaining about how hard their job is.
I have little sympathy because teachers have to make adjustments and get out of their comfort zone and teach something new.
Jobs change, get used to it.
Plus I think no child left behind was a good idea. It needs some fixing but why not hold teachers to a standard? We need to keep pushing for better education in this country. I really like the idea of school choice. I do agree with you that 100% proficiency is not attainable.
The government has changed the rules and expectations in my industry (Finance) too. But nobody cares. People have to adapt, that is the way it goes.
Why should any of us care that she chose to work Super Bowl morning? Was she going to miss something important? Maybe she could have worked the day before Super Bowl morning. Then she would have been free to watch all the pregame shows.
The rest of us have to work 12 months to get 12 months worth of pay.
It's America, if you do not like your job - get a new one. There must be a teaching message board where you can debate the finer points of no child left behind.
And for the record my wife went in to work yesterday morning at 6:30am and worked till 11:00am (no over time pay - needed to get ready for next week). She works in local government, those workers are also targets these days. State pension, tons of sick days, cheap insurance, retire at 55 and make a decent paycheck while working.
No complaining from her. I am sure it sucks, but she knows it is better than not having a job. >>
the only problem is that teachers are being held to a higher standard than the parents...
Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps - uncut
Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
I generally don't like having to defend teaching to ignorant people who don't have a clue what a classroom teacher actually does. It gets old.
But as for our vacations - I'd gladly give them up, if on occasion I wouldn't have to deal with 13-year-olds all day, every day, all year long. I love my kids, but yeah, you can have my spring break IF you took my 115 kids I see each day, and I'll take your desk job for awhile.
My wife is an elementary school teacher, and she has a class of 20+ slow-learning, socio-economically disadvantaged kids, and I will f-ing guarantee that she works harder EACH DAY than you have worked ANY DAY.
ANd BTW, we're not just educating your kids, we are also desperately trying to undo the mess that many of you make of your kids at home.
...BTW Bunch of Bull - where do you teach in Katy? I taught for a couple years at Mayde Creek HS in Katy during the late 90s. And my wife taught at Wolfe Elem, also in KISD.
<< <i> ...BTW Bunch of Bull - where do you teach in Katy? I taught for a couple years at Mayde Creek HS in Katy during the late 90s. And my wife taught at Wolfe Elem, also in KISD. >>
Wow, very small world. I teach at Taylor HS. It is still an academically strong school, but with much larger economically disadvantaged sub-populations than seen in the '90s. There are two new high schools in the district as well.
<< <i>Why is it my threads always get derailed??? I had no intention of posting something that would become a bash teacher/defend teacher debate.
To go back to the main topic, still no poppage. >>
Everyone just wanted to help keep you occupied while you waited.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
Guys, I think everybody's anger is being misdirected. Can we please focus on the fact that someone has had to wait 1/400th of a century for his cards to get graded?
<< <i>And considering the lifespan of most humans is about 75 years---The wait to "Poppage" is already greater than 1/300th of a lifetime. >>
Dare we quote that as a fraction of his REMAINING lifetime? Actuariallly speaking, of course.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Now you guys are really scaring me. I just mailed in a submission today. Im in my mid thirties. If I live to be 75 will I see popage >>
In my experience, review subs always take longer than regular subs, if that helps. Regular subs with a large variety of issues usually take longer than subs with similar cards.
YMMV
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
Well that was a colossal waste of time and money. Only 22 out of 188 bumped to 8.5 and 3 bumped to 9. The only real highlight was getting a '73 Reggie Jackson to bump from 8 to 9. So I invested $700+ to get about $600 gain in VCP value. Some 8.5's actually sell for less than an 8...go figure. I did very well with my initial review order a year ago but they've really tightened the screws up on reviews. Between this and crackouts of high end 8's ending up in 7 holders, PSA and I are going have a very hard time doing business together. I'll go back to submitting raw cards but they'll be fewer and farther between.
<< <i>Well that was a colossal waste of time and money. Only 22 out of 188 bumped to 8.5 and 3 bumped to 9. The only real highlight was getting a '73 Reggie Jackson to bump from 8 to 9. So I invested $700+ to get about $600 gain in VCP value. Some 8.5's actually sell for less than an 8...go figure. I did very well with my initial review order a year ago but they've really tightened the screws up on reviews. Between this and crackouts of high end 8's ending up in 7 holders, PSA and I are going have a very hard time doing business together. I'll go back to submitting raw cards but they'll be fewer and farther between. >>
Wow!! How many of those 188 were old style (pre-.5) flips? Personally, I'm never very confident of getting a bump on a post-.5 grade.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Well that was a colossal waste of time and money. Only 22 out of 188 bumped to 8.5 and 3 bumped to 9. The only real highlight was getting a '73 Reggie Jackson to bump from 8 to 9. So I invested $700+ to get about $600 gain in VCP value. Some 8.5's actually sell for less than an 8...go figure. I did very well with my initial review order a year ago but they've really tightened the screws up on reviews. Between this and crackouts of high end 8's ending up in 7 holders, PSA and I are going have a very hard time doing business together. I'll go back to submitting raw cards but they'll be fewer and farther between. >>
This is why I crack and sub unless the slabbed value of the card is high. Sorry your bump rate wasn't better. pete
Looking for rare Randy Moss rookies and autos, as well as '97 PMG Red Football cards for my set.
<< <i>Well that was a colossal waste of time and money. Only 22 out of 188 bumped to 8.5 and 3 bumped to 9. The only real highlight was getting a '73 Reggie Jackson to bump from 8 to 9. So I invested $700+ to get about $600 gain in VCP value. Some 8.5's actually sell for less than an 8...go figure. I did very well with my initial review order a year ago but they've really tightened the screws up on reviews. Between this and crackouts of high end 8's ending up in 7 holders, PSA and I are going have a very hard time doing business together. I'll go back to submitting raw cards but they'll be fewer and farther between. >>
Wow!! How many of those 188 were old style (pre-.5) flips? Personally, I'm never very confident of getting a bump on a post-.5 grade. >>
<< <i>Well that was a colossal waste of time and money. Only 22 out of 188 bumped to 8.5 and 3 bumped to 9. The only real highlight was getting a '73 Reggie Jackson to bump from 8 to 9. So I invested $700+ to get about $600 gain in VCP value. Some 8.5's actually sell for less than an 8...go figure. I did very well with my initial review order a year ago but they've really tightened the screws up on reviews. Between this and crackouts of high end 8's ending up in 7 holders, PSA and I are going have a very hard time doing business together. I'll go back to submitting raw cards but they'll be fewer and farther between. >>
This is why I crack and sub unless the slabbed value of the card is high. Sorry your bump rate wasn't better. pete >>
That's become a problem too since I had a few high end 8's that actually downgraded to 7 after cracking and resubbing. I also had a very low bump rate on those. Maybe all my 8s and 9s are crap even though most came from high grade raw sets and look better to me than some of the crap 8's and 9's I see on eBay.
<< <i>Well that was a colossal waste of time and money. Only 22 out of 188 bumped to 8.5 and 3 bumped to 9. The only real highlight was getting a '73 Reggie Jackson to bump from 8 to 9. So I invested $700+ to get about $600 gain in VCP value. Some 8.5's actually sell for less than an 8...go figure. I did very well with my initial review order a year ago but they've really tightened the screws up on reviews. Between this and crackouts of high end 8's ending up in 7 holders, PSA and I are going have a very hard time doing business together. I'll go back to submitting raw cards but they'll be fewer and farther between. >>
Wow!! How many of those 188 were old style (pre-.5) flips? Personally, I'm never very confident of getting a bump on a post-.5 grade. >>
They were all pre-0.5 flips. >>
Oh my sweet clean baby Jesus!! That's awful. I can't even imagine waiting months for that sort of result...
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
You got 25 bumps out of 188. That seems pretty good to me. I just got 6 bumps out of 50 and even though I think some others should have been bumped, I am happy with the 6.
that's 13% which on reviews is about standard no matter how nice the reviewed cards are, you will not see PSA admitting that they undergraded any more than 15% of them
And VERY rarely should you expect a full grade bump, so I think 3 is about correct there also
<< <i>You got 25 bumps out of 188. That seems pretty good to me. I just got 6 bumps out of 50 and even though I think some others should have been bumped, I am happy with the 6. >>
Yeah, but remember that all 188 were pre-.5; I've seen reviews in the 15% success range for simple resubs of new grades.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Yeah, but remember that all 188 were pre-.5; I've seen reviews in the 15% success range for simple resubs of new grades. >>
That goes both ways. I have heard many say that the grading standards have become tougher since pre-.5 so who really knows. Might as well just be happy because it could have been less bumps and it would have cost the same.
I would be happy with that. I sent in 15 to be reviewed with my new subscription and they changed 1 out of 15. It cost me $30 for the shipping since the submission was free, but that is only 6 1/2%.
<< <i>that's 13% which on reviews is about standard no matter how nice the reviewed cards are, you will not see PSA admitting that they undergraded any more than 15% of them
And VERY rarely should you expect a full grade bump, so I think 3 is about correct there also >>
I was hitting over 20% on my earlier review subs. And there were some substantial bumps granted like a '70 Bench that went from 8 to 9, a '69 Rose, F Robby, Fingers RC and Bench that went from 8 to 8.5 and some low pop commons that went from 8 to 9 like a '69 Minnie Rojas and the '71 Claude Raymond. The few 8.5 bumps I got this time were mostly higher pop commons with low upside. Most of the lower pop cards didn't bump. Keep in mind I cherry picked the very best of several thousand 8s in my collection. This wasn't a random grab or based on upside potential. I submitted the ones I thought had PSA 9 eye appeal.
It just gets frustrating some times when you buy a 9 on eBay only to find the card has 1 or 2 visible corner touches on it, yet a near perfectly centered card with no print defects and pinpoint corners or 1 corner with a microtouch can't even get an 8.5 upon 2nd review.
I don't know whether standard really have gotten tougher or not, but common sense tells me that more than 15% of the cards previously graded an 8 would merit an 8.5 now that the grader has that option available to him. A card that didn't quite merit a 9 in the past HAD to end up in an 8 holder; now there's an option if there is one prevailing feature that makes it an 8+ but not quite a 9. MiRight??
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>I don't know whether standard really have gotten tougher or not, but common sense tells me that more than 15% of the cards previously graded an 8 would merit an 8.5 now that the grader has that option available to him. A card that didn't quite merit a 9 in the past HAD to end up in an 8 holder; now there's an option if there is one prevailing feature that makes it an 8+ but not quite a 9. MiRight?? >>
That's the odd thing about the who grading system now. I think it's actually easier to get a 9 than an 8.5 (talking raw card submissions here). If you submit a NM-MT to MINT lot of cards, you'd expect the majority to fall in the 8.5 range. However, the more likely scenario is mostly 8's followed by fewer 9s followed by still fewer 8.5s.
<< <i>I don't know whether standard really have gotten tougher or not, but common sense tells me that more than 15% of the cards previously graded an 8 would merit an 8.5 now that the grader has that option available to him. A card that didn't quite merit a 9 in the past HAD to end up in an 8 holder; now there's an option if there is one prevailing feature that makes it an 8+ but not quite a 9. MiRight?? >>
I do not agree. I think you are thinking that a card should bump if it is more than half way to a 9 thus an 8.5 grade. That is logical but the truth is that a card has to be nearly a 9 before they will bump it. I think only a small percentage of previously graded cards fits this category.
I also think that PSA will bump high pop commons faster than low pop commons or stars. When they started the bumps, I pulled all my cards that I thought had a shot. Because of the card values, I had to separate the higher value cards into another submission. I used the exact same criteria to pull all cards. On the lower valued card submission I received 30% bumps with several full grade bumps. On the high value card submission I got zero bumps.
<< <i>I don't know whether standard really have gotten tougher or not, but common sense tells me that more than 15% of the cards previously graded an 8 would merit an 8.5 now that the grader has that option available to him. A card that didn't quite merit a 9 in the past HAD to end up in an 8 holder; now there's an option if there is one prevailing feature that makes it an 8+ but not quite a 9. MiRight?? >>
That's the odd thing about the who grading system now. I think it's actually easier to get a 9 than an 8.5 (talking raw card submissions here). If you submit a NM-MT to MINT lot of cards, you'd expect the majority to fall in the 8.5 range. However, the more likely scenario is mostly 8's followed by fewer 9s followed by still fewer 8.5s. >>
Good point. Looking at my subs for 2010, I'm running slightly over 2-1 for 9's vs 8.5's. This is vintage, BTW; similar to what you sub.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
Unacceptable! Nobody should have to wait this long for a review. It made me sick that I had to wait 45 business days exactly to get 20 reviews to pop. I can't imagine having to wait as long as you had to. We give PSA our cards because we pay them to grade them correctly and in a timely manner because we trust them. I'm probably done sending reviews. Here's my history with them.
1. Sent about 15-20 pre .5 and almost everyone bumped to 8.5-9. Took the maximum 45 days
2 Sent in a review and the cases came back with post it notes telling me why certain cards didn't bump. I thought tht was cool
3. Sent in another 15-20 with another special 1 or 2 bumped
4. Just sent in a 50+ submission and the raw cards came back mostly as expected 8-10's so my grading of this year I collect is pretty strong. All of the reviews came back exactly as they left my house. All thirteen of them. No post-it notes this time. It was reviewed in a couple days and sent back like they didn't even look at them.
I will not take a chance cracking a card because you never know what they may come back as.
Working my way to #1 1979 Topps Hockey I know it's going to be tough!
<< <i>I don't know whether standard really have gotten tougher or not, but common sense tells me that more than 15% of the cards previously graded an 8 would merit an 8.5 now that the grader has that option available to him. A card that didn't quite merit a 9 in the past HAD to end up in an 8 holder; now there's an option if there is one prevailing feature that makes it an 8+ but not quite a 9. MiRight?? >>
I do not agree. I think you are thinking that a card should bump if it is more than half way to a 9 thus an 8.5 grade. That is logical but the truth is that a card has to be nearly a 9 before they will bump it. I think only a small percentage of previously graded cards fits this category.
I also think that PSA will bump high pop commons faster than low pop commons or stars. When they started the bumps, I pulled all my cards that I thought had a shot. Because of the card values, I had to separate the higher value cards into another submission. I used the exact same criteria to pull all cards. On the lower valued card submission I received 30% bumps with several full grade bumps. On the high value card submission I got zero bumps. >>
No, that's not how I'm thinking about it. I'm saying these pre-.5 8's were clearly NOT 9's (hence the 8) but some DID have that one compelling feature that stood out. Now, with the availability for these to earn an 8.5, they don't have to stay 8's any more. Now, assuming that the criteria that one uses for deciding what to send for review is the existence of this compelling feature (like dead nuts centering), I'd expect a decent number of these to earn that .5 bump.
Now, clearly this doesn't happen at a very good rate, so either submitters are too hopeful when picking cards to review, or you are right about an intentional effort to control bumps.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
I don't believe that these 8's had very little shots at 9's. Before the 0.5 system can into play we saw cards go from 6's to 8's and 7's to 9's. There is no doubt in my mind that alot of over and undergrading was done at that time (well a 1-2 year period especially).
The issue with PSA is that they have not fully embraced their own 0.5 grading system. They graders don't give them out when they should and act like they are giving out 10's when reviewing cards.
To me if you were to set up a standard curve of all the cards graded since the 0.5 system can into place it would not be linear for most cards and sets as the 0.5 grades are under represented.
If you calculated the expected number of 8.5's based on the rates of 8's and 9's given for a certain card it would also fall way short for most issues.
Bottom line is that the 0.5 grade was used as a marketing ploy to generate more submission income but the grading room never has adjusted to it.
Currently completing the following registry sets: Cardinal HOF's, 1961 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1972 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1980 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, Bill Mazeroski Master & Basic Sets, Roberto Clemente Master & Basic Sets, Willie Stargell Master & Basic Sets and Terry Bradshaw Basic Set
<< <i>Bottom line is that the 0.5 grade was used as a marketing ploy to generate more submission income but the grading room never has adjusted to it. >>
Bingo! The graders definitely don't view the .5 scale as a card that is nicer than an 8 but weaker than a 9. It seems the market hasn't really embraced the half point scale either. Aside from low pop cards and superstar cards, .5 grade cards usually sell for little to no premium, and even lower than the next lowest full grade scale. I'm not sure if that's a function of 'PSA X.5' titles on eBay not fully getting captured in bidders' searches or the fact set builders would prefer to keep their sets free of half grade cards. In any event, I don't see myself doing any more reviews, even with a $3.50 per grading special. Especially if I have to part with my cards for 3+ months.
Bottom line is that the 0.5 grade was used as a marketing ploy to generate more submission income but the grading room never has adjusted to it.
I agree, I don't think it was well thought out or implemented properly. When they first announced the .5 scale I was in favor of it simply because it was a way of getting grades more accurate. Seeing as how the .5 scale hasn't gotten that accomplished, I see no point in it. The number 8.5 is halfway between 8 and 9. When you choose a number grading system, those numbers are symbols that represent card grades. Saying an 8.5 graded card is not halfway between an 8 and a 9 makes no sense. But that's what they're telling us, because if it was halfway then we would be seeing just as many 8.5s as we see 9s (maybe a little less). Instead they are feeding us with this crap that an 8.5 is an 8 that exhibits higher end qualities for the grade. WTF is that? Call it an 8+ then.
Anybody that sends cards in for review at this point is being foolish with their money. If you truly believe your card could bump a full grade then just crack it out and sub it. If you're not willing to take the risk then leave it be. Wasting it on a garbage review service that has no rhyme or reason trying for a .5 bump is idiotic.
<< <i>Bottom line is that the 0.5 grade was used as a marketing ploy to generate more submission income but the grading room never has adjusted to it.
I agree, I don't think it was well thought out or implemented properly. When they first announced the .5 scale I was in favor of it simply because it was a way of getting grades more accurate. Seeing as how the .5 scale hasn't gotten that accomplished, I see no point in it. The number 8.5 is halfway between 8 and 9. When you choose a number grading system, those numbers are symbols that represent card grades. Saying an 8.5 graded card is not halfway between an 8 and a 9 makes no sense. But that's what they're telling us, because if it was halfway then we would be seeing just as many 8.5s as we see 9s (maybe a little less). Instead they are feeding us with this crap that an 8.5 is an 8 that exhibits higher end qualities for the grade. WTF is that? Call it an 8+ then.
Anybody that sends cards in for review at this point is being foolish with their money. If you truly believe your card could bump a full grade then just crack it out and sub it. If you're not willing to take the risk then leave it be. Wasting it on a garbage review service that has no rhyme or reason trying for a .5 bump is idiotic. >>
<< <i>I know these are low dollar cards...but why review? >>
If you are asking why review over crackout it is so no cards will go down. I just submitted 50 PSA 9's and got 6 bumps to 10. Would I have got 6 10's if I had cracked out? I doubt it. Would the rest still have come back a 9. I really doubt it. On lower grade items I would think cracking out would be the way to go.
Comments
<< <i>When was yours logged in? Were you happy with the results or do you feel they rushed the review past the grader? >>
Total Items: 50
Date Received: 11/4/2010
Date Shipped: 1/24/2011
Order Status: Shipped
6 bumps to PSA 10 out of 50.
As for teaching templates, our objectives change so much year to year that no real standard can be met. Added to the shuffling of content, even if I could use old materials, most of it is written assuming my students have a certain subset of prior knowledge. When the order of objectives is changing annually, there is no template to address the changes.
I blame this largely on the fact that the "final" authorities on curriculum are a board of individuals who've never spent an hour in front of a classroom. Successful teachers are those who can manage a classroom; if a person can manage adolescents, they can manage just about anyone. I think the chain of command could really benefit from the experience of being a teacher.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
>>
Your example of the 8th grade science unit is a perfect example - WTF sort of justification was given for that change? Standards didn't suddenly change mid-year!! Were they teaching below level and it suddenly was realized that the 8th grade unit should've been taught to the 7th graders all along?? Or did someone up the food chain get a bright idea that the 8th grade unit would be "cool" for some topical reason?
Also, why CAN'T there be more standard lesson plans/templates/etc that only need mild "personalization" by each teacher? Do things REALLY change that much from year to year? Have new numbers been invented that throw the whole process of teaching math into chaos? Since every year finds a new set of students in a given classroom (well, with a few exceptions of course), there isn't a huge need to freshen things up to keep the kids engaged like there would be with social sciences, etc. But you hit the nail on the head - the "educational system" (not the teachers themselves) forces a lot of that change at least in part to justify the huge "educational science" industry that "educates the educators", and this change falls on the backs of the teachers to somehow make it work with a growing set of constraints.
And yes, my family is chock-full of teachers and administrators. >>
Point #1
This one is not as complicated as most, my Wifes Teaching Partner who teaches the other half of the 7th Grade science is only Certified (Not Degreed) in Science, the 8th Grade Science teacher is also only certified not degreed. She went to the administaration a few weeek ago and cried she didn't know eneough about the 3-4 weeks of the Energy because she did not have the training. My wife who is a 25+ Tenured Team Leader Teacher & Degreed (6 Year Masters), and Certified in 3 other subjects, was tapped against her will to flip flop with the 8th grade teacher to teach her unit while the underqualified will teach hers. She was not asked, she was directed and that means write the lesson plans, ect.
The thing about this explanation for this time....is, simply the fact that every other week it is something that causes more of a workload, whatever each case may be.
Point #2
Every year due to the results from the Proficiency Testing for "No Child Left Behind", the testing/lesson standards are changed and different areas must be emphasized. So lesson plans and standards have to be rewritten. Is this the fault of the teacher, of couse not, as you said it is up the food chain. But what is the outcome, More work for the teacher...End of Story!
Neil
<< <i>
Point #1
This one is not as complicated as most, my Wifes Teaching Partner who teaches the other half of the 7th Grade science is only Certified (Not Degreed) in Science, the 8th Grade Science teacher is also only certified not degreed. She went to the administaration a few weeek ago and cried she didn't know eneough about the 3-4 weeks of the Energy because she did not have the training. My wife who is a 25+ Tenured Team Leader Teacher & Degreed (6 Year Masters), and Certified in 3 other subjects, was tapped against her will to flip flop with the 8th grade teacher to teach her unit while the underqualified will teach hers. She was not asked, she was directed and that means write the lesson plans, ect.
The thing about this explanation for this time....is, simply the fact that every other week it is something that causes more of a workload, whatever each case may be.
Point #2
Every year due to the results from the Proficiency Testing for "No Child Left Behind", the testing/lesson standards are changed and different areas must be emphasized. So lesson plans and standards have to be rewritten. Is this the fault of the teacher, of couse not, as you said it is up the food chain. But what is the outcome, More work for the teacher...End of Story!
Neil >>
Sorry, I misunderstood that she would actually be teaching 8th grade for this unit. That's going to make the other teacher look pretty lame to her class-she can't handle 8th grade material that the kids have to know??? Lovely...
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
Its Superbowl Sunday morning, where do you think my Wife is? The Classroom, doing lesson plans, She left at 8:00 am and will be back she said, would try by 2:00!
>>
Don't they have all summer to get those plans done? Maybe a week or two at Xmas? A few in-service days sprinkled in over the year? Maybe another week at spring break?
At worst case couldn't she use last years? Can I assume nothing has changed since last year?
I am not looking for a fight, but there are tons of people who have to work after hours or on the weekends. And most of them also have to work summers. >>
Not that a dipwad with the kind of statement like that, of which you have no knowledge, has a ounce of experience, deserves an answer, but for anyone else keeping score who knows how to keep there mouth shut about which they know nothing. My Wife who teaches 7th Grade Science has been ordered that for the next three weeks she needs to prepare and teach the 8th grade Unit on Energy. So, since that is not her normal carriculum, she has to prepare for it, which takes hours because with No Child left behind it is like preparing 4 or 5 different classes all teaching the exact same thing.
1. She must prepare for the 5-10% who already know the material and are 3 grades ahead of the rest of the class because if they are not engaged they can sometimes be the most disrupptive.
2. She must prepare a different outline for the 10-20% who may not know all the material, but are very smart and pick it up lickty split, they are almost as disrupptive as the top 10-15% can be.
3. Then the regualr outline for the 30-50% who are average middle of the road students, and need hands on guidance through the course and take individual one on one in some cases.
4. The next 10-15% who are Dumb as a Frickin Rock, don't speak English, or are just plain Evil, and take the preponderance of her time and almost constant instruction and supervision. But remember because of "No Child Left Behind", 100% of these Idiots have to become proficient in the course, who has to make sure this happens, THE TEACHER!!!!
5. The Specials, the 3-5% who are mentally and/or physically handicapped, for the most part 100% disruptive and Require their own supervision/instruction 100% of the time, who have to be also Proficient (Although impossible for the most part), by "No Child Left Behind" Standards.
So she has to do this for 190 Students, 6 classes of approx 30-36 each. And for all this prep work, what does she get paid for it ZERO! And you have the nads to compare the hours she works to somebody who goes in occasioanlly on a weekend usually for overtime!
And to your statement showing your ignorance again, about "At worst case couldn't she use last years? Can I assume nothing has changed since last year?"
Ya are Frickin' joking aren't you. Because of Test Scores Fed/Statewide/District wide and ever the changes at the Federal "No Child Left Behind" level, they are lucky if they are only tweeking and changing the Lesson Plans a few times a year, ...............use the same from last year. Wow....Ignorance is Bliss isn't it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Neil >>
First off, I am far from ignorant and not a dipwad. I do have knowledge and experience on the subject. Yes I can have both without being a teacher, I know it is hard to believe that anybody but a teacher could be knowledgeable about the subject.
I do have a different opinion than you. I am sure this will be upsetting - but because of my opinion, I do not send my kids to public school. Oh my, I did something about how I feel rather than just complaining about it. My kids attend a school where NCLB is not a big deal because the expectations are much higher.
Why call names? Does that make you feel better?
If it is sooooo bad there are plenty of other degrees. Go back to school. Get a differnet job. It works both ways.
I get so sick of teachers complaining about how hard their job is.
I have little sympathy because teachers have to make adjustments and get out of their comfort zone and teach something new.
Jobs change, get used to it.
Plus I think no child left behind was a good idea. It needs some fixing but why not hold teachers to a standard? We need to keep pushing for better education in this country. I really like the idea of school choice. I do agree with you that 100% proficiency is not attainable.
The government has changed the rules and expectations in my industry (Finance) too. But nobody cares. People have to adapt, that is the way it goes.
Why should any of us care that she chose to work Super Bowl morning? Was she going to miss something important? Maybe she could have worked the day before Super Bowl morning. Then she would have been free to watch all the pregame shows.
The rest of us have to work 12 months to get 12 months worth of pay.
It's America, if you do not like your job - get a new one. There must be a teaching message board where you can debate the finer points of no child left behind.
And for the record my wife went in to work yesterday morning at 6:30am and worked till 11:00am (no over time pay - needed to get ready for next week). She works in local government, those workers are also targets these days. State pension, tons of sick days, cheap insurance, retire at 55 and make a decent paycheck while working.
No complaining from her. I am sure it sucks, but she knows it is better than not having a job.
Josh Wilker - Cardboard Gods
Josh Wilker - Cardboard Gods
What I don't like about education is the the money and time being spent to improve the system, that are, in reality, only means of "CYA" for state institutions who feel the breath of Big Brother on their respective necks. Change is everywhere, but positive results are lacking. Young people who finished their public education in the latter '90s and first year or so of the new millennium received one of the best educations our country has ever offered. The same can't be said about today.
While I am teaching, I'm doing everything in my power to inspire the minds that come through my door; however, I assure you, any positive gains I make are through the work I do in addition to state mandated requirements designed to create students capable of passing a state designed test. Heck, the tests aren't even equal from state to state.
I would have no stress whatsoever if I just didn't care. The emotional aspect of teaching is more "difficult" one.
<< <i>
<< <i>But now we're at 15 working days per month at this rate >>
That would be about twice the # of work days that teachers have had up here in Massachusetts lately. Between so called "professional days", fake holidays, and snow days, there have been quite a few 3 day weeks lately, Not to mention field trips for almost anything. No wonder kids seem so stupid now. >>
Or its because many parents no longer feel it is their duty to take an active role in their child's life. Learning and raising a child shouldn't stop when a student leaves school at the end of the day.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys -
Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2
touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys
defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL
title.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
Its Superbowl Sunday morning, where do you think my Wife is? The Classroom, doing lesson plans, She left at 8:00 am and will be back she said, would try by 2:00!
>>
Don't they have all summer to get those plans done? Maybe a week or two at Xmas? A few in-service days sprinkled in over the year? Maybe another week at spring break?
At worst case couldn't she use last years? Can I assume nothing has changed since last year?
I am not looking for a fight, but there are tons of people who have to work after hours or on the weekends. And most of them also have to work summers. >>
Not that a dipwad with the kind of statement like that, of which you have no knowledge, has a ounce of experience, deserves an answer, but for anyone else keeping score who knows how to keep there mouth shut about which they know nothing. My Wife who teaches 7th Grade Science has been ordered that for the next three weeks she needs to prepare and teach the 8th grade Unit on Energy. So, since that is not her normal carriculum, she has to prepare for it, which takes hours because with No Child left behind it is like preparing 4 or 5 different classes all teaching the exact same thing.
1. She must prepare for the 5-10% who already know the material and are 3 grades ahead of the rest of the class because if they are not engaged they can sometimes be the most disrupptive.
2. She must prepare a different outline for the 10-20% who may not know all the material, but are very smart and pick it up lickty split, they are almost as disrupptive as the top 10-15% can be.
3. Then the regualr outline for the 30-50% who are average middle of the road students, and need hands on guidance through the course and take individual one on one in some cases.
4. The next 10-15% who are Dumb as a Frickin Rock, don't speak English, or are just plain Evil, and take the preponderance of her time and almost constant instruction and supervision. But remember because of "No Child Left Behind", 100% of these Idiots have to become proficient in the course, who has to make sure this happens, THE TEACHER!!!!
5. The Specials, the 3-5% who are mentally and/or physically handicapped, for the most part 100% disruptive and Require their own supervision/instruction 100% of the time, who have to be also Proficient (Although impossible for the most part), by "No Child Left Behind" Standards.
So she has to do this for 190 Students, 6 classes of approx 30-36 each. And for all this prep work, what does she get paid for it ZERO! And you have the nads to compare the hours she works to somebody who goes in occasioanlly on a weekend usually for overtime!
And to your statement showing your ignorance again, about "At worst case couldn't she use last years? Can I assume nothing has changed since last year?"
Ya are Frickin' joking aren't you. Because of Test Scores Fed/Statewide/District wide and ever the changes at the Federal "No Child Left Behind" level, they are lucky if they are only tweeking and changing the Lesson Plans a few times a year, ...............use the same from last year. Wow....Ignorance is Bliss isn't it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Neil >>
First off, I am far from ignorant and not a dipwad. I do have knowledge and experience on the subject. Yes I can have both without being a teacher, I know it is hard to believe that anybody but a teacher could be knowledgeable about the subject.
I do have a different opinion than you. I am sure this will be upsetting - but because of my opinion, I do not send my kids to public school. Oh my, I did something about how I feel rather than just complaining about it. My kids attend a school where NCLB is not a big deal because the expectations are much higher.
Why call names? Does that make you feel better?
If it is sooooo bad there are plenty of other degrees. Go back to school. Get a differnet job. It works both ways.
I get so sick of teachers complaining about how hard their job is.
I have little sympathy because teachers have to make adjustments and get out of their comfort zone and teach something new.
Jobs change, get used to it.
Plus I think no child left behind was a good idea. It needs some fixing but why not hold teachers to a standard? We need to keep pushing for better education in this country. I really like the idea of school choice. I do agree with you that 100% proficiency is not attainable.
The government has changed the rules and expectations in my industry (Finance) too. But nobody cares. People have to adapt, that is the way it goes.
Why should any of us care that she chose to work Super Bowl morning? Was she going to miss something important? Maybe she could have worked the day before Super Bowl morning. Then she would have been free to watch all the pregame shows.
The rest of us have to work 12 months to get 12 months worth of pay.
It's America, if you do not like your job - get a new one. There must be a teaching message board where you can debate the finer points of no child left behind.
And for the record my wife went in to work yesterday morning at 6:30am and worked till 11:00am (no over time pay - needed to get ready for next week). She works in local government, those workers are also targets these days. State pension, tons of sick days, cheap insurance, retire at 55 and make a decent paycheck while working.
No complaining from her. I am sure it sucks, but she knows it is better than not having a job. >>
the only problem is that teachers are being held to a higher standard than the parents...
Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps
- uncut
Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
But as for our vacations - I'd gladly give them up, if on occasion I wouldn't have to deal with 13-year-olds all day, every day, all year long. I love my kids, but yeah, you can have my spring break IF you took my 115 kids I see each day, and I'll take your desk job for awhile.
My wife is an elementary school teacher, and she has a class of 20+ slow-learning, socio-economically disadvantaged kids, and I will f-ing guarantee that she works harder EACH DAY than you have worked ANY DAY.
ANd BTW, we're not just educating your kids, we are also desperately trying to undo the mess that many of you make of your kids at home.
...BTW Bunch of Bull - where do you teach in Katy? I taught for a couple years at Mayde Creek HS in Katy during the late 90s. And my wife taught at Wolfe Elem, also in KISD.
<< <i>
...BTW Bunch of Bull - where do you teach in Katy? I taught for a couple years at Mayde Creek HS in Katy during the late 90s. And my wife taught at Wolfe Elem, also in KISD. >>
Wow, very small world. I teach at Taylor HS. It is still an academically strong school, but with much larger economically disadvantaged sub-populations than seen in the '90s. There are two new high schools in the district as well.
To go back to the main topic, still no poppage.
<< <i>Why is it my threads always get derailed??? I had no intention of posting something that would become a bash teacher/defend teacher debate.
To go back to the main topic, still no poppage. >>
Everyone just wanted to help keep you occupied while you waited.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>And considering the lifespan of most humans is about 75 years---The wait to "Poppage" is already greater than 1/300th of a lifetime.
Dare we quote that as a fraction of his REMAINING lifetime? Actuariallly speaking, of course.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Now you guys are really scaring me. I just mailed in a submission today. Im in my mid thirties. If I live to be 75 will I see popage
In my experience, review subs always take longer than regular subs, if that helps. Regular subs with a large variety of issues usually take longer than subs with similar cards.
YMMV
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Well that was a colossal waste of time and money. Only 22 out of 188 bumped to 8.5 and 3 bumped to 9. The only real highlight was getting a '73 Reggie Jackson to bump from 8 to 9. So I invested $700+ to get about $600 gain in VCP value. Some 8.5's actually sell for less than an 8...go figure. I did very well with my initial review order a year ago but they've really tightened the screws up on reviews. Between this and crackouts of high end 8's ending up in 7 holders, PSA and I are going have a very hard time doing business together. I'll go back to submitting raw cards but they'll be fewer and farther between. >>
Wow!! How many of those 188 were old style (pre-.5) flips? Personally, I'm never very confident of getting a bump on a post-.5 grade.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Well that was a colossal waste of time and money. Only 22 out of 188 bumped to 8.5 and 3 bumped to 9. The only real highlight was getting a '73 Reggie Jackson to bump from 8 to 9. So I invested $700+ to get about $600 gain in VCP value. Some 8.5's actually sell for less than an 8...go figure. I did very well with my initial review order a year ago but they've really tightened the screws up on reviews. Between this and crackouts of high end 8's ending up in 7 holders, PSA and I are going have a very hard time doing business together. I'll go back to submitting raw cards but they'll be fewer and farther between. >>
This is why I crack and sub unless the slabbed value of the card is high. Sorry your bump rate wasn't better.
pete
<< <i>
<< <i>Well that was a colossal waste of time and money. Only 22 out of 188 bumped to 8.5 and 3 bumped to 9. The only real highlight was getting a '73 Reggie Jackson to bump from 8 to 9. So I invested $700+ to get about $600 gain in VCP value. Some 8.5's actually sell for less than an 8...go figure. I did very well with my initial review order a year ago but they've really tightened the screws up on reviews. Between this and crackouts of high end 8's ending up in 7 holders, PSA and I are going have a very hard time doing business together. I'll go back to submitting raw cards but they'll be fewer and farther between. >>
Wow!! How many of those 188 were old style (pre-.5) flips? Personally, I'm never very confident of getting a bump on a post-.5 grade. >>
They were all pre-0.5 flips.
<< <i>
<< <i>Well that was a colossal waste of time and money. Only 22 out of 188 bumped to 8.5 and 3 bumped to 9. The only real highlight was getting a '73 Reggie Jackson to bump from 8 to 9. So I invested $700+ to get about $600 gain in VCP value. Some 8.5's actually sell for less than an 8...go figure. I did very well with my initial review order a year ago but they've really tightened the screws up on reviews. Between this and crackouts of high end 8's ending up in 7 holders, PSA and I are going have a very hard time doing business together. I'll go back to submitting raw cards but they'll be fewer and farther between. >>
This is why I crack and sub unless the slabbed value of the card is high. Sorry your bump rate wasn't better.
pete >>
That's become a problem too since I had a few high end 8's that actually downgraded to 7 after cracking and resubbing. I also had a very low bump rate on those. Maybe all my 8s and 9s are crap even though most came from high grade raw sets and look better to me than some of the crap 8's and 9's I see on eBay.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Well that was a colossal waste of time and money. Only 22 out of 188 bumped to 8.5 and 3 bumped to 9. The only real highlight was getting a '73 Reggie Jackson to bump from 8 to 9. So I invested $700+ to get about $600 gain in VCP value. Some 8.5's actually sell for less than an 8...go figure. I did very well with my initial review order a year ago but they've really tightened the screws up on reviews. Between this and crackouts of high end 8's ending up in 7 holders, PSA and I are going have a very hard time doing business together. I'll go back to submitting raw cards but they'll be fewer and farther between. >>
Wow!! How many of those 188 were old style (pre-.5) flips? Personally, I'm never very confident of getting a bump on a post-.5 grade. >>
They were all pre-0.5 flips. >>
Oh my sweet clean baby Jesus!! That's awful. I can't even imagine waiting months for that sort of result...
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
which on reviews is about standard
no matter how nice the reviewed cards are, you will not see PSA admitting that they undergraded any more than 15% of them
And VERY rarely should you expect a full grade bump, so I think 3 is about correct there also
<< <i>You got 25 bumps out of 188. That seems pretty good to me. I just got 6 bumps out of 50 and even though I think some others should have been bumped, I am happy with the 6. >>
Yeah, but remember that all 188 were pre-.5; I've seen reviews in the 15% success range for simple resubs of new grades.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Yeah, but remember that all 188 were pre-.5; I've seen reviews in the 15% success range for simple resubs of new grades. >>
That goes both ways. I have heard many say that the grading standards have become tougher since pre-.5 so who really knows. Might as well just be happy because it could have been less bumps and it would have cost the same.
<< <i>that's 13%
which on reviews is about standard
no matter how nice the reviewed cards are, you will not see PSA admitting that they undergraded any more than 15% of them
And VERY rarely should you expect a full grade bump, so I think 3 is about correct there also >>
I was hitting over 20% on my earlier review subs. And there were some substantial bumps granted like a '70 Bench that went from 8 to 9, a '69 Rose, F Robby, Fingers RC and Bench that went from 8 to 8.5 and some low pop commons that went from 8 to 9 like a '69 Minnie Rojas and the '71 Claude Raymond. The few 8.5 bumps I got this time were mostly higher pop commons with low upside. Most of the lower pop cards didn't bump. Keep in mind I cherry picked the very best of several thousand 8s in my collection. This wasn't a random grab or based on upside potential. I submitted the ones I thought had PSA 9 eye appeal.
It just gets frustrating some times when you buy a 9 on eBay only to find the card has 1 or 2 visible corner touches on it, yet a near perfectly centered card with no print defects and pinpoint corners or 1 corner with a microtouch can't even get an 8.5 upon 2nd review.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>I don't know whether standard really have gotten tougher or not, but common sense tells me that more than 15% of the cards previously graded an 8 would merit an 8.5 now that the grader has that option available to him. A card that didn't quite merit a 9 in the past HAD to end up in an 8 holder; now there's an option if there is one prevailing feature that makes it an 8+ but not quite a 9. MiRight?? >>
That's the odd thing about the who grading system now. I think it's actually easier to get a 9 than an 8.5 (talking raw card submissions here). If you submit a NM-MT to MINT lot of cards, you'd expect the majority to fall in the 8.5 range. However, the more likely scenario is mostly 8's followed by fewer 9s followed by still fewer 8.5s.
<< <i>I don't know whether standard really have gotten tougher or not, but common sense tells me that more than 15% of the cards previously graded an 8 would merit an 8.5 now that the grader has that option available to him. A card that didn't quite merit a 9 in the past HAD to end up in an 8 holder; now there's an option if there is one prevailing feature that makes it an 8+ but not quite a 9. MiRight?? >>
I do not agree. I think you are thinking that a card should bump if it is more than half way to a 9 thus an 8.5 grade. That is logical but the truth is that a card has to be nearly a 9 before they will bump it. I think only a small percentage of previously graded cards fits this category.
I also think that PSA will bump high pop commons faster than low pop commons or stars. When they started the bumps, I pulled all my cards that I thought had a shot. Because of the card values, I had to separate the higher value cards into another submission. I used the exact same criteria to pull all cards. On the lower valued card submission I received 30% bumps with several full grade bumps. On the high value card submission I got zero bumps.
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't know whether standard really have gotten tougher or not, but common sense tells me that more than 15% of the cards previously graded an 8 would merit an 8.5 now that the grader has that option available to him. A card that didn't quite merit a 9 in the past HAD to end up in an 8 holder; now there's an option if there is one prevailing feature that makes it an 8+ but not quite a 9. MiRight?? >>
That's the odd thing about the who grading system now. I think it's actually easier to get a 9 than an 8.5 (talking raw card submissions here). If you submit a NM-MT to MINT lot of cards, you'd expect the majority to fall in the 8.5 range. However, the more likely scenario is mostly 8's followed by fewer 9s followed by still fewer 8.5s. >>
Good point. Looking at my subs for 2010, I'm running slightly over 2-1 for 9's vs 8.5's. This is vintage, BTW; similar to what you sub.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>That's the odd thing about the who grading system now. I think it's actually easier to get a 9 than an 8.5 >>
I totally agree. I submitted 60 cards that all had a shot at a 9. Half did come back 9's the other half were all 8's and not one 8.5.
1. Sent about 15-20 pre .5 and almost everyone bumped to 8.5-9. Took the maximum 45 days
2 Sent in a review and the cases came back with post it notes telling me why certain cards didn't bump. I thought tht was cool
3. Sent in another 15-20 with another special 1 or 2 bumped
4. Just sent in a 50+ submission and the raw cards came back mostly as expected 8-10's so my grading of this year I collect is pretty strong. All of the reviews came back exactly as they left my house. All thirteen of them. No post-it notes this time. It was reviewed in a couple days and sent back like they didn't even look at them.
I will not take a chance cracking a card because you never know what they may come back as.
I know it's going to be tough!
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't know whether standard really have gotten tougher or not, but common sense tells me that more than 15% of the cards previously graded an 8 would merit an 8.5 now that the grader has that option available to him. A card that didn't quite merit a 9 in the past HAD to end up in an 8 holder; now there's an option if there is one prevailing feature that makes it an 8+ but not quite a 9. MiRight?? >>
I do not agree. I think you are thinking that a card should bump if it is more than half way to a 9 thus an 8.5 grade. That is logical but the truth is that a card has to be nearly a 9 before they will bump it. I think only a small percentage of previously graded cards fits this category.
I also think that PSA will bump high pop commons faster than low pop commons or stars. When they started the bumps, I pulled all my cards that I thought had a shot. Because of the card values, I had to separate the higher value cards into another submission. I used the exact same criteria to pull all cards. On the lower valued card submission I received 30% bumps with several full grade bumps. On the high value card submission I got zero bumps. >>
No, that's not how I'm thinking about it. I'm saying these pre-.5 8's were clearly NOT 9's (hence the 8) but some DID have that one compelling feature that stood out. Now, with the availability for these to earn an 8.5, they don't have to stay 8's any more. Now, assuming that the criteria that one uses for deciding what to send for review is the existence of this compelling feature (like dead nuts centering), I'd expect a decent number of these to earn that .5 bump.
Now, clearly this doesn't happen at a very good rate, so either submitters are too hopeful when picking cards to review, or you are right about an intentional effort to control bumps.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
The issue with PSA is that they have not fully embraced their own 0.5 grading system. They graders don't give them out when they should and act like they are giving out 10's when reviewing cards.
To me if you were to set up a standard curve of all the cards graded since the 0.5 system can into place it would not be linear for most cards and sets as the 0.5 grades are under represented.
If you calculated the expected number of 8.5's based on the rates of 8's and 9's given for a certain card it would also fall way short for most issues.
Bottom line is that the 0.5 grade was used as a marketing ploy to generate more submission income but the grading room never has adjusted to it.
<< <i>Bottom line is that the 0.5 grade was used as a marketing ploy to generate more submission income but the grading room never has adjusted to it. >>
Bingo! The graders definitely don't view the .5 scale as a card that is nicer than an 8 but weaker than a 9. It seems the market hasn't really embraced the half point scale either. Aside from low pop cards and superstar cards, .5 grade cards usually sell for little to no premium, and even lower than the next lowest full grade scale. I'm not sure if that's a function of 'PSA X.5' titles on eBay not fully getting captured in bidders' searches or the fact set builders would prefer to keep their sets free of half grade cards. In any event, I don't see myself doing any more reviews, even with a $3.50 per grading special. Especially if I have to part with my cards for 3+ months.
I agree, I don't think it was well thought out or implemented properly. When they first announced the .5 scale I was in favor of it simply because it was a way of getting grades more accurate. Seeing as how the .5 scale hasn't gotten that accomplished, I see no point in it. The number 8.5 is halfway between 8 and 9. When you choose a number grading system, those numbers are symbols that represent card grades. Saying an 8.5 graded card is not halfway between an 8 and a 9 makes no sense. But that's what they're telling us, because if it was halfway then we would be seeing just as many 8.5s as we see 9s (maybe a little less). Instead they are feeding us with this crap that an 8.5 is an 8 that exhibits higher end qualities for the grade. WTF is that? Call it an 8+ then.
Anybody that sends cards in for review at this point is being foolish with their money. If you truly believe your card could bump a full grade then just crack it out and sub it. If you're not willing to take the risk then leave it be. Wasting it on a garbage review service that has no rhyme or reason trying for a .5 bump is idiotic.
<< <i>Saying an 8.5 graded card is not halfway between an 8 and a 9 makes no sense. But that's what they're telling us, >>
They should change the grade to 8.9
I just got this in the mail today.
Exactly.
<< <i>Bottom line is that the 0.5 grade was used as a marketing ploy to generate more submission income but the grading room never has adjusted to it.
I agree, I don't think it was well thought out or implemented properly. When they first announced the .5 scale I was in favor of it simply because it was a way of getting grades more accurate. Seeing as how the .5 scale hasn't gotten that accomplished, I see no point in it. The number 8.5 is halfway between 8 and 9. When you choose a number grading system, those numbers are symbols that represent card grades. Saying an 8.5 graded card is not halfway between an 8 and a 9 makes no sense. But that's what they're telling us, because if it was halfway then we would be seeing just as many 8.5s as we see 9s (maybe a little less). Instead they are feeding us with this crap that an 8.5 is an 8 that exhibits higher end qualities for the grade. WTF is that? Call it an 8+ then.
Anybody that sends cards in for review at this point is being foolish with their money. If you truly believe your card could bump a full grade then just crack it out and sub it. If you're not willing to take the risk then leave it be. Wasting it on a garbage review service that has no rhyme or reason trying for a .5 bump is idiotic. >>
Bingo.
I sent in two items ...
Tris Speaker German Stamp - was a PSA 6 cracked out resubbed PSA 7
Berk Ross Bob Cousy - was a PSA 3 cracked out resubbed PSA 4
I know these are low dollar cards...but why review?
Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps
- uncut
Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
<< <i>I know these are low dollar cards...but why review? >>
If you are asking why review over crackout it is so no cards will go down. I just submitted 50 PSA 9's and got 6 bumps to 10. Would I have got 6 10's if I had cracked out? I doubt it. Would the rest still have come back a 9. I really doubt it. On lower grade items I would think cracking out would be the way to go.