Why are uneducated graduates mostly blue?
Posted by Moonage on 07 Jul 2006 | Tagged as: Fun with Numbers
The NCAA decided sixteen schools were nothing more than diploma mills and
banned them from providing core curricula to NCAA schools ( in other words,
their classes won’t count if one of the NCAA players’ academic scores were
otherwise too low ). Here, they are, color coded for your convenience:
|
11 of the 16 schools are from "blue" states. That’s an overwhelming
69%. Now, what is happening here is the NCAA is saying that they are
diploma mills. What that implies is the "student" received a diploma but
no education. That sounds kinda liberal to me. It’s not what’s real
that matters ( education ), it’s how you perceive ( diploma implies you’re
educated ).
I think the whole thing is rather moot tho, who really cares if a basketball
or football player hasn’t mastered the three R’s?
6 Comments »
on 08 Jul 2006 at 11:52 pm 1.StormWarning
said …
That list is extraordinarily selective and limited. Just take the Chrostopher Robin Academy (Springfield Gardens, New York). It has an enrollment of 180 kids. Its a private school, not a public school. There are hundreds of public schools and dozens of private schools in a radius of maybe 25-35 miles of Springfield Gardens. In fact, Springfield Gardens is a low income area…some might call it a ghetto area.
I don’t know the source of the information, but the fact that this one (of the sixteen) made the list is probably statistically insignificant when compared to all of the rest of the “high schools” in the area.
This time, I disagree with your post and its implication.
on 09 Jul 2006 at 10:08 am 2.Moonage
said …
The implication is that Al Gore’s and John Kerry’s campaigns were horribly wrong to paint vast parts of the United States something it’s not by using one select statistical fact. As I’ve proven many many times here, I can paint the country any way I want by using one statistical fact. Thats why I call this category “fun with numbers” and not something like “demographics”.
The “fact” here is a decision by the NCAA, not me. It’s not something you can argue with me, it’s something you’d have to argue with NCAA. Their statement is these schools are not the least concerned with educating kids, their concern is cranking out basketball players. As such, the NCAA has decided not to accept credits from those schools towards college admission. I agree with that logic to some degree. The fact that 69% of those schools are “blue” implies a lot of things. The most obvious is that almost all of the schools are in very urban areas.
My implication here, if you follow the category and not just the one single post, is that the red/blue classification whereby some very prominent politicians and media have classied states like Kentucky, which is 2.5 to 1 Democrat as a Republican stronghold is a farce that needs to be shot down daily. I do this by using equally ridiculous statistics.
Sorry if it’s not that clear.
on 09 Jul 2006 at 10:57 am 3.StormWarning
said …
“Je suis coupable.” As you know, I hate labels and those people who launch them indiscriminently.
on 09 Jul 2006 at 8:02 pm 4.Moonage
said …
As I do as well. This whole tirade of mine began with the “Al Gore voters are more intelligent” crap that re-invented itself for the Kerry race. The problem with that was most of the “red” states historically voted “blue”. The one time they go “red”, their IQ suddenly dropped. Yeah right. Since then, I have posted a whole series of red-blue comparisons that make just as little sense. Ergo, the NCAA entry qualifications. I mean, how many of these 17 year olds do you think voted in 2004?
on 13 Jul 2006 at 9:47 pm 5.k falins said …
where’s your source on this? - says someone associated with the Cape Eleuthera Island School who hadn’t heard this, but it came up through Google Blogger.
on 14 Jul 2006 at 12:52 am 6.Moonage
said …
They are listed in the post.
Red/Blue is the results of the 2004 Presidential ELection.
The list itself is provided by the NCAA.
That’s what links are for.