|
| For those who look at world data of non-CP countries and see that they are doing better overall than CP countries, or look at states and see that non-paddling states are doing better than paddling, and yet who think that all of those differences are explained by regional concerns, (which does not in the least take away from the fact that non-paddling can work as well in the places that try it), the data within a single paddling state, Ohio, shows the same pattern. | | Many paddling states do not even track educational progress in a way that can be compared with a school’s paddling status, but Ohio does. Nadine Block, of the Center for Effective Discipline, based in Columbus, did an analysis. | | She examined Ohio’s state report cards, based on proficiency tests, attendance, and graduation rates, for both the 1998-1999 and 1999-2000 school years. She and her assistants compared and verified the state report cards with whether the school paddled. | | In the 1999-2000 school year, 66% of school paddling in Ohio was carried out in the worst performing 25% of its schools. Only 2% of paddling was done, by contrast, in the top 25% of Ohio schools. | | The ignorant Ohio schools doing the most paddling increased as a percentage from the year before, when they made up 59% of the paddlings, vs. 66% the following year. The most ignorant schools in Ohio were by far the most paddling, and that trend increased into 2000. | | The topmost 5% of Ohio’s schools were the only ones to achieve a coveted “A” rating, which Ohio called “effective.” It is most interesting to us here that all of the highest performing “effective” schools in Ohio were non-paddling schools. There was not one, single, “effective” paddling school, even though paddling was not considered in the academic and graduation rankings. | | Zero effective schools, with the highest rating, paddled. Only 2% of schools paddled within the top 25%. 66% of the most ignorant and backward schools, by contrast, were paddling schools. |
|
|
|
