Comments on: Where great PR and bad journalism collide: the Denver Post strikes again

By: Russ Wellen

Russ Wellen — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 05:32:44 +0000

Thanks for this comprehensive dissection. Helpful to see the story from both sides by someone who’s experienced in both PR and journalism.

By: Lex

Lex — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 02:26:17 +0000

Slamtastic.

By: Justin Gregory

Justin Gregory — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 22:54:46 +0000

Thank you for doing this. Whenever I am at the doctor’s office or somewhere and have nothing better to do than read a newspaper, I always have such a feeling of being let down. I read an article and there are so many unanswered questions any sane critical person would ask, and they just dance around it all. Rather than getting mad and analyzing it line by line like this post does, I usually just put it down in disgust. I can say from experience that this applies to Florida Today and The Tennessean, but I get the feeling that regional newspapers universally suck. Does anybody know any GOOD print newspapers out there?

By: Philip

Philip — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 20:48:18 +0000

Thanks for taking the time to write this piece. You probably spent as much or more on it than the Mr. Meyer who filed the original story with the post. It is difficult to see and to understand the problems with today’s reporting (and today’s education, for that matter) without this type of line by line deconstruction. This does a great service for all of us.

By: emmajames

emmajames — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 19:51:13 +0000

I’m old enough to remember when the Denver Post was a decent newspaper, when a majority of journalists actually kept ethics in mind when reporting, and when Denver area schools were pretty good. It’s sad to see diminished values and, even worse, diminished expectations. Please continue asking the questions you ask so that those of us who want to continue using our critical thinking skills have a place to go.

Happy New Year.

By: JS OBrien

JS OBrien — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:52:12 +0000

Great job Slammy!!

In essence, the system that appears to have worked in Alaska is a one-room-schoolhouse approach to education. Doubtless, that 7:1 teacher/student ratio is necessary there because of the vast distances and remote locations. And, doubtless, it leads to situations in which you have a 17-year-old in the same classroom as a 6-year-old. Teachers with small student bodies can quite easily tailor individual lessons to individual students in that learning situation.

There’s an angle you may have missed here, though (as did the DP reporter). The Colorado CSAP test measures proficiency by grade level, right? So, a 12-year-old in the sixth grade in math but reading at only a second-grade level will be deemed “not proficient” on the sixth-grade CSAPreading test. BUT, if this kid is in the second-grade for reading, then he might very well be judged “proficient” because he’s taking the second-grade CSAP test designed, originally, for eight-year-olds.

Theoretically, a school system where such a program was in place could have all of its 18-year-olds reading at a third-grade level and still pass the CSAPs with flying colors — because all those 18-year-olds are taking the third-grade CSAP reading test.

Look for Adams County’s CSAP scores to improve DRAMATICALLY if I’m right about this.