Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film
View Poll Results: What do you think?
This bonus plan is a good idea.
10
58.82%
This bonus plan is a bad idea.
2
11.76%
Other.
1
5.88%
I don't care. I just like to vote in polls.
0
0%
This poll sucks.
4
23.53%
Voters: 17. You may not vote on this poll

Little Rock rewards teachers; unions resist.

Old 01-19-07, 12:18 PM
  #1  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,323
Little Rock rewards teachers; unions resist.

I'm posting two things here.

The first was published today. It says that a public school teachers union is against giving performance based bonuses to teachers.

The second is from 15 months ago, and I'm posting it because it is referenced to by today's piece. It talks about a privately funded performance bonus that was given to public school teachers, and says that student test scores went up by 17% in one year because of it. The students at this school are low income black students.

This is an idea that works. It has been proven to work in the real world. It would be a good idea for other public schools to copy this idea. But I'm guessing that the vast majority of them won't.


http://www.opinionjournal.com/column.../?id=110009550

Give Top Teachers a Bonus

Little Rock rewards teachers; unions resist.


BY DANIEL HENNINGER

Friday, January 19, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST

Is there a bigger scandal in America than the low state of inner-city schools? Oprah Winfrey, utterly frustrated with the problem, last month discussed the $40 million she has spent building the Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls--in South Africa. Ms. Winfrey said South African students want to learn, but in U.S. schools, "the sense that you need to learn just isn't there." Where'd it go?

There are multiple-choice answers to that question, and most of them are right. Mayor Mike Bloomberg of New York offered one answer in his State of the City speech Wednesday: The desire to learn disappeared down the bottomless well of centralized public-school bureaucracies. Mayor Bloomberg proposed greatly increased autonomy for school principals--one irrefutably proven answer to making a school better. He also wants teachers to prove they deserve tenure, an idea so obvious that it probably has no chance.

One measure of the tenure decision for New York City teachers would be their students' test scores. News accounts said the city teachers' union is "certain to fight" linking test scores to tenure. This, too, is among the multitude of correct answers for why students have no incentive to learn in big-city schools.

Mike Bloomberg, a name difficult to keep out of conversations about national politics, has been known to make visits elsewhere in the country on what we political gamesters would call "exploratory" trips. Let me suggest that the mayor explore a Southern strategy in Little Rock, Ark., where five grade schools are continuing an experiment in linking teacher merit pay to student test scores, first described in this space in October 2005.

That column, "How One School Found a Way to Spell Success," described how teachers at the Meadowcliff School, formerly full of student underachievers, were promised bonuses linked to improvements in the standardized test performance of each student. (The column is available on OpinionJournal here.) The size of the bonus increased relative to the student's year-over-year test gains. A 4% improvement earned a $100 bonus, rising to $400 if the student gained 15% (some did). Everyone in the school was in the bonus plan, including the cafeteria ladies, who started eating with the kids rather than in their own lounge. It worked. Scores improved. Twelve teachers got bonuses from $1,800 to $8,600. The checks were handed out in a public ceremony.
Oprah would love Meadowcliff.

Last year, they added Wakefield School to the bonus program (after the school's unionized teachers voted overwhelmingly for it), and this year three more grade schools--Geyer Springs, Mabelvale and Romine. All are urban schools of the sort everyone in America professes to be concerned about, notwithstanding that public concern gets a D+ for achievement every year.

The first formal attempt to analyze the Little Rock merit-pay experiment was released earlier this week by the Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas. The study, led by the university's Gary Ritter, focused on the results in a single school, Wakefield, which had consistent student test scores across three years.

The Ritter study also summarized the expansion and refinement of the incentive program since its inception. At Wakefield (and the three newest schools), the bonuses are awarded for the average growth in test scores of each teacher's class, rather than per-student achievement as at Meadowcliff. At the fall start of Wakefield's first year in the program, its students tested in the 16th percentile; at year's end they were in the 29th percentile. Its teachers got $228,300 in bonuses. Meadowcliff's second-year bonuses totaled $200,926.

For consistency, the study looked at results on a standardized math test given at Wakefield School the past three years to each student, ending in the fourth and fifth grades. The school's teachers were covered by the bonus program last year. The students' math grades improved by a standard measure (called NCE) of 3.5 points, while those in three Little Rock comparison schools declined. That 3.5 point gain equals about one-sixth of the normally cited national average gap in math scores between black students and white students. If compounded for six years, the gap would close.

Too hopeful?

It seems to be for the Little Rock teachers' union. A man versed in the downward slope of many such good intentions warned me last year to watch for the counteroffensive from either Little Rock's bureaucrats or its teachers' union. The union has made its move. In last fall's school-board election, the union ran a slate of candidates and gained control of four of the board's seven seats. It hopes to capture one more school-board seat this September. By June, however, Little Rock will have five grade schools inside the merit-bonus program. If standardized test scores rise in these three new schools as well, it would take a special brand of community self-destruction to throw out the bonus program at the union's behest.


There'd be one more bitter irony in that, too. Just a few days ago, the school board in Rogers, Ark., in the affluent northwest corner of the state, voted 6-1 to apply for federal funding of a merit-pay program under the U.S. Department of Education's Teacher Incentive Program. Where do you think at least some the highest performing, bonus-earning teachers in Little Rock's urban schools will migrate to if the union's school board flattens their merit-pay program? The University of Arkansas education researchers, incidentally, plan to work with Rogers from Day One to measure outcomes if the plan goes forward.

The original money for the bonus program at Meadowcliff school, and its design, came from the Hussman Foundation of Little Rock. Since then, Walter Hussman Jr. has been able to solicit support for the plan's expansion to the other grade schools from the Walton Family Foundation and the Brown Foundation of Houston. If the program isn't killed, he expects to find funding for more schools from other out-of-state foundations.

Building a school for girls in South Africa is fine by me. But imagine how electrifying it would be if a U.S. citizen could ever believe in the efficacy of starting a Leadership Academy for Girls in Arkansas. Who said something about having a dream?

Mr. Henninger is deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page. His column appears Fridays in the Journal and on OpinionJournal.com.

.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/column.../?id=110007406

Pay for Performance

How an Arkansas school found a way to measure success.


BY DANIEL HENNINGER

Friday, October 14, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT

LITTLE ROCK, Ark.--This state capital is famous to the nation for the mysteries of its politics and the compulsions of its politicians. By insisting 50 years ago on the continued segregation of Central High School, Gov. Orval Faubus ensured among other things that the handsome, still-functioning Central High would stand today as a national shrine maintained by the National Park Service. Yet another national shrine to political tumult that one may visit in Little Rock is the William J. Clinton Presidential Library and Museum. I came to visit the Meadowcliff Elementary School. Perhaps in time someone will put a plaque in front of it too.

About 80% of Meadowcliff's students in the K-to-5 school are black, the rest Hispanic or white. It sits in a neighborhood of neat, very modest homes. About 92% of the students are definable as living at or below the poverty level, a phrase its principal, Karen Carter, abhors: "I don't like that term because most of our parents work at one or two jobs." This refusal to bend to stereotypes likely explains what happened last year at Meadowcliff.

Students' scores on the Stanford achievement rose by an average 17% over the course of one year. They took the Stanford test in September and again in May. Against the national norm, the school's 246 full-year students rose to the 35th percentile from the 25th. For math in the second grade and higher, 177 students rose to the 32nd percentile from the 14th. This is phenomenal. What happened in nine months?

Meadowcliff has two of the elements well established as necessary to a school's success--a strong, gifted principal and a motivated teaching staff. Both are difficult to find in urban school systems. Last year this Little Rock public school added a third element--individual teacher bonuses, sometimes known as "pay for performance."

Paying teachers on merit is one of the most popular ideas in education. It is also arguably the most opposed idea in public education, anathema to the unions and their supporters. Meadowcliff's bonus program arrived through a back door.

Karen Carter, the school's principal, felt that her teachers' efforts were producing progress at Meadowcliff, especially with a new reading program she'd instituted. But she needed a more precise test to measure individual student progress; she also wanted a way to reward her teachers for their effort. She went to the Public Education Foundation of Little Rock. The Foundation had no money for her, and the Little Rock system's budget was a nonstarter. So the foundation produced a private, anonymous donor, which made union approval unnecessary.

Together this small group worked out the program's details. The Stanford test results would be the basis for the bonuses. For each student in a teacher's charge whose Stanford score rose up to 4% over the year, the teacher got $100; 5% to 9%--$200; 10% to 14%--$300; and more than 15%--$400. This straight-line pay-for-performance formula awarded teachers objectively in a way that squares with popular notions of fairness and skirts fears of subjective judgment. In most merit-based lines of work, say baseball, it's called getting paid for "putting numbers on the board."


Still, it required a leap of faith. "I will tell you the truth," said Karen Carter. "We thought one student would improve more than 15%." The tests and financial incentives, however, turned out to be a powerful combination. The August test gave the teachers a detailed analysis of individual student strengths and weaknesses. From this, they tailored instruction for each student. It paid off on every level.

Twelve teachers received performance bonuses ranging from $1,800 to $8,600. The rest of the school's staff also shared in the bonus pool. That included the cafeteria ladies, who started eating with the students rather than in a nearby lounge, and the custodian, whom the students saw taking books out of Carter's Corner, the "library" outside the principal's office. Total cost: $134,800. The tests cost about $10,000.

The Meadowcliff bonus program is now in its second year, amid more phenomena rarely witnessed in "school reform." Last year's bonuses were paid for by an anonymous donor; this year the school board voted to put the pay-for-performance bonuses on the district's budget. The Little Rock teachers union thereupon insisted that Meadowcliff's teachers vote for a contract waiver; 100% voted for the waiver. Another grade school, with private funding, will now try the Meadowcliff model.

The Meadowcliff program has the support of both Little Rock's superintendent, Roy Brooks, and Arkansas' director of education, Ken James. Superintendent Brooks, who was recruited from the reform movement in Florida, has cut some 100 administrative positions from the central bureaucracy and rerouted the $3.8 million savings back to the schools.

At his offices in the capitol building, Director James calls himself an "advocate of pay for performance" for a couple of reasons. Financial incentives of some sort are needed, he says, to stop math and science teachers from jumping ship to industry. And school districts like Little Rock's have to innovate fast because jobs and population are migrating internally, mostly into northwestern Arkansas. The Springdale district alone, he says, near Fayetteville and Bentonville, "hired 180 new teachers this year." Little Rock has to find a way to hold its best teachers. The teachers I saw at Meadowcliff Elementary seemed pretty happy to be there.

"School reform" is one of the greatest of the great white whales of American politics. It's by now virtually a mythical beast, chased by specialists, commissions, think tanks, governors. Gov. Bill and Hillary Clinton were famous Arkansas school reformers. With No Child Left Behind, President Bush has flung the reform fishing net over the whole country. The biggest urban school systems--New York, Chicago, L.A.--get most of the ink. But maybe the solutions are going to be found in places like Little Rock, where talented people can fly beneath the radar long enough to give good ideas a chance to prove themselves.

Mr. Henninger is deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page. His column appears Fridays in the Journal and on OpinionJournal.com.

Last edited by grundle; 01-19-07 at 12:22 PM.
grundle is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 12:33 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: in da cloud
Posts: 26,196
standardized tests are OK, but if you put too much emphasis on them it just means teachers teach for the test
al_bundy is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 12:42 PM
  #3  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,323
Originally Posted by al_bundy
standardized tests are OK, but if you put too much emphasis on them it just means teachers teach for the test


I agree. When I went to Montessori, they didn't teach to the standardized tests. But we all did very well on them anyway. In fact, we thought the tests were way too easy and a waste of our time.

However, regarding the particular school in this situation, teaching to the test is better than having students who can't read or do math. So in this case, teaching to the test is a good idea.
grundle is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 12:43 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: in da cloud
Posts: 26,196
i braindumped my first MS tests 7 years ago. i passed them by memorizing the questions and enough info about the product. i still wasn't qualified to work in the field.
al_bundy is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 12:49 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,072
Originally Posted by grundle
I agree. When I went to Montessori, they didn't teach to the standardized tests. But we all did very well on them anyway. In fact, we thought the tests were way too easy and a waste of our time.

However, regarding the particular school in this situation, teaching to the test is better than having students who can't read or do math. So in this case, teaching to the test is a good idea.
That's the point of standardized tests, to measure a very basic level of math and english skills. Teaching to a test for kids scoring this low initially is not necessarily a bad thing. That's like blaming law schools for "teaching to the bar".
Superboy is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 12:55 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
Well, it is no secret that the teacher's union tries to do what is best for their members, even if it is bad for kids, so I don't think this should be a big surprise.
kvrdave is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 01:41 PM
  #7  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 39,525
I didn't see the part where the Teacher's Union said it was against the bonus program. I did see the part where it said the union had to approve the program in the first place (which they did). I also saw the part where the anonymous insider "versed" in the "downward slope of good intentions" (whatever that means) warned that the union was going to "make its move." But I didn't see the part where the union was opposed to the program.
JasonF is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 01:56 PM
  #8  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 70,839
I don't see it either, Jason.

And I don't think teachers should be "teaching to the test". The opening paragraph talks about "the sense that you need to learn". When teachers teach to such a narrow scope, it's pretty hard to keep the students engaged. And then you graduate students who have basic reading and math abilities, but are unable to apply them to the real world (such as balancing a checkbook).
Groucho is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 05:27 PM
  #9  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,323
Originally Posted by al_bundy
i braindumped my first MS tests 7 years ago. i passed them by memorizing the questions and enough info about the product. i still wasn't qualified to work in the field.

What is an MS test?
grundle is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 05:28 PM
  #10  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,323
Originally Posted by Superboy
That's the point of standardized tests, to measure a very basic level of math and english skills. Teaching to a test for kids scoring this low initially is not necessarily a bad thing. That's like blaming law schools for "teaching to the bar".
Yep!
grundle is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 05:29 PM
  #11  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,323
Originally Posted by kvrdave
Well, it is no secret that the teacher's union tries to do what is best for their members, even if it is bad for kids, so I don't think this should be a big surprise.
It's not a surprise to you or me, but I think a lot of people who don't follow politicis very closely would be surprised.
grundle is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 05:35 PM
  #12  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,323
Originally Posted by JasonF
I didn't see the part where the Teacher's Union said it was against the bonus program. I did see the part where it said the union had to approve the program in the first place (which they did). I also saw the part where the anonymous insider "versed" in the "downward slope of good intentions" (whatever that means) warned that the union was going to "make its move." But I didn't see the part where the union was opposed to the program.

Here's the relevant part. Perhaps I should have bolded the entire paragraph.


The Meadowcliff bonus program is now in its second year, amid more phenomena rarely witnessed in "school reform." Last year's bonuses were paid for by an anonymous donor; this year the school board voted to put the pay-for-performance bonuses on the district's budget. The Little Rock teachers union thereupon insisted that Meadowcliff's teachers vote for a contract waiver; 100% voted for the waiver. Another grade school, with private funding, will now try the Meadowcliff model.
grundle is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 05:37 PM
  #13  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,323
Originally Posted by Groucho
I don't see it either, Jason.

And I don't think teachers should be "teaching to the test". The opening paragraph talks about "the sense that you need to learn". When teachers teach to such a narrow scope, it's pretty hard to keep the students engaged. And then you graduate students who have basic reading and math abilities, but are unable to apply them to the real world (such as balancing a checkbook).

For students who already do well, teaching to the test is a step down.

But for students who can't read well or do basic math, teaching to the test is a step up.
grundle is offline  
Old 01-19-07, 05:40 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 39,525
Originally Posted by grundle
Here's the relevant part. Perhaps I should have bolded the entire paragraph.


The Meadowcliff bonus program is now in its second year, amid more phenomena rarely witnessed in "school reform." Last year's bonuses were paid for by an anonymous donor; this year the school board voted to put the pay-for-performance bonuses on the district's budget. The Little Rock teachers union thereupon insisted that Meadowcliff's teachers vote for a contract waiver; 100% voted for the waiver. Another grade school, with private funding, will now try the Meadowcliff model.
It seems to me that the union pointed out that the program would be contrary to the teachers' contract, and demanded that the teachers be allowed a say in whether they would go outside their contract. The trachers were willing to go outside their contract, and so the program was implemented. Nowhere does that paragraph say that the union took a position on what the outcome of the vote should be, let alone that the position was against the program.
JasonF is offline  
Old 01-20-07, 02:23 AM
  #15  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Formerly known as "brizz"/kck
Posts: 23,425
"teaching the test" is one of the biggest problems in these schools...

it sure as hell isn't part of the solution.
HistoryProf is offline  
Old 01-20-07, 10:48 AM
  #16  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Puyallup
Posts: 16,435
Reward teachers for good performance..what a novel idea!
superdeluxe is offline  
Old 01-20-07, 01:05 PM
  #17  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,072
I think that solutions like this are still tenuous at best. I mean consider Japan's educational system; functionally, it's not that different from ours. They just have a different cultural attitude towards education. I think that the problems of America's educational system are still due to cultural factors rather than environmental factors.
Superboy is offline  
Old 01-20-07, 01:12 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: in da cloud
Posts: 26,196
Originally Posted by Superboy
I think that solutions like this are still tenuous at best. I mean consider Japan's educational system; functionally, it's not that different from ours. They just have a different cultural attitude towards education. I think that the problems of America's educational system are still due to cultural factors rather than environmental factors.
trouble with japan and europe is they have the tests in school that pretty much determine which school you go to and a huge impact on the rest of your life

US is much more flexible and you can go to a good school later in life

ironically the most profitable part of Sony are it's US companies run by Americans
al_bundy is offline  
Old 01-20-07, 01:12 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Shackled
Posts: 35,372
Originally Posted by brizz
"teaching the test" is one of the biggest problems in these schools...

it sure as hell isn't part of the solution.
Agreed. What it does is emphasize only those things tested on and ignores the rest of a complete education.
Bushdog is offline  
Old 01-20-07, 01:45 PM
  #20  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Words
Posts: 28,207
Originally Posted by brizz
"teaching the test" is one of the biggest problems in these schools...

it sure as hell isn't part of the solution.
Teaching to a test will (and has) hurt our kid's ability to be successful. I think more progressive education needs to happen. That being said...I think performance based bonuses are a GREAT idea....if they can find a better way to quantify results. Something like 'comps' in grad school would be more appropriate, but very hard to implement because they aren't just a scan-tron. It is hard work, but if we don't.....our kids are going to be ill prepared to be successful in life.

-p
NotThatGuy is offline  
Old 01-20-07, 02:46 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 17,018
Originally Posted by Superboy
I think that solutions like this are still tenuous at best. I mean consider Japan's educational system; functionally, it's not that different from ours. They just have a different cultural attitude towards education. I think that the problems of America's educational system are still due to cultural factors rather than environmental factors.
I wish we could collectively eradicate the myth that Japan has a good educational system. It has good elementary schools. So does the US. But our middle schools and high schools are both bad, just in different ways.
Breakfast with Girls is offline  
Old 01-20-07, 09:50 PM
  #22  
Political Exile
Thread Starter
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,323
Originally Posted by JasonF
It seems to me that the union pointed out that the program would be contrary to the teachers' contract, and demanded that the teachers be allowed a say in whether they would go outside their contract. The trachers were willing to go outside their contract, and so the program was implemented. Nowhere does that paragraph say that the union took a position on what the outcome of the vote should be, let alone that the position was against the program.

Oh.

So perhaps the Wall St. Journal and I are both wrong.
grundle is offline  
Old 01-20-07, 11:55 PM
  #23  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,072
Originally Posted by Breakfast with Girls
I wish we could collectively eradicate the myth that Japan has a good educational system. It has good elementary schools. So does the US. But our middle schools and high schools are both bad, just in different ways.
Read Savage Inequalities and Amazing Graze by Kozol. You'll see there is a tremendous gap - in every respect when it comes to the educational system, from quality of teaching materials to the attitudes of teachers and students.

Also, you can't make a blanket statement like "we are both bad in different ways" without some explanation and justification. If you're referring to the amount of sheer pressure Japanese students are placed under, I don't see that as a bad thing at all. It only allows them to reach for a greater level of success. But you're probably assuming that, in the light of failure, many of Japan's populace are relegated to a life of poverty. Of course, none of your presuppositions are supported by statistical data.
Superboy is offline  
Old 01-21-07, 12:08 AM
  #24  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: in da cloud
Posts: 26,196
Originally Posted by Superboy
Read Savage Inequalities and Amazing Graze by Kozol. You'll see there is a tremendous gap - in every respect when it comes to the educational system, from quality of teaching materials to the attitudes of teachers and students.

Also, you can't make a blanket statement like "we are both bad in different ways" without some explanation and justification. If you're referring to the amount of sheer pressure Japanese students are placed under, I don't see that as a bad thing at all. It only allows them to reach for a greater level of success. But you're probably assuming that, in the light of failure, many of Japan's populace are relegated to a life of poverty. Of course, none of your presuppositions are supported by statistical data.
doesn't japan have the highest suicide rate?

their school system is mostly about memorization and studying for a test and then being a salary man. in the US you have kids go out and start up a company like google. when is the last time we got a stream of new companies making innovative products from japan? they even had to go to the US to make the playstation
al_bundy is offline  
Old 01-21-07, 12:11 AM
  #25  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,072
Originally Posted by al_bundy
trouble with japan and europe is they have the tests in school that pretty much determine which school you go to and a huge impact on the rest of your life

US is much more flexible and you can go to a good school later in life

ironically the most profitable part of Sony are it's US companies run by Americans
Again, just because schools have high standards and provide the means by which Japanese students can receive an excellent education doesn't necessarily mean that there are masses of failures wandering the ghettos of Japan.

I fail to see how the US is much more flexible with regards to post-secondary education.

If you're trying to compare how a company that is primarily based in and originated in Japan can be more profitable in a division that is based in a different country, I don't see how that's relevant to this discussion. If you're trying to insinuate that despite the [apparently presupposed] division between our educational systems that the US can still succeed, it doesn't account for all the factors within the company. I'd like to see a more detailed examination. Of course, a simpler route would be to compare US and Japanese car companies. I don't think there will be much of a disagreement there with regards to who is more successful.
Superboy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.