News: IMPORTANT UPDATE REGARDING SITE IN FORUM ANNOUNCEMENT FOLDER.

  • May 25, 2018, 12:48:40 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 4292033 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

hermanne

  • Member
  • Posts: 1419
  • Visualize whorled peas...
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5640 on: May 22, 2014, 11:09:38 AM »
Junior high is 7-8 here
Middle is 6 th

Some districts have primary k-2
Intermediate  3-5
Middle 6,
Jh 7-8
Hs 9-12

In San Angelo 2feeder
Patterns
Central hs
Elementary k-6
Jh 7-9
Hs 10-12

Lake view
Elem k-5
Jh 6-8
Hs 9-12

When I was student teaching a girl transferred to central feeder pattern her family threw fits about her being demoted back to elementary

See, in my experience, grade/elementary school was grades K-6. Then I moved to the midwest, went to a junior high for one year (grades 7-9). Then they rearranged things, made the junior high a middle school (grades 7 & 8) and moved 9th grade in with the ("senior") high school (now grades 9-12). I've only ever seen one school where 6th was not part of elementary school, and that was a private school that a family friend's kid went to. The local public schools, I believe, still did K-6 as elementary, then on to junior high/middle school, etc.

Wide variations all over the place!

Where I went to school, middle school (or junior high) started at 5th grade. The district had declining enrollment so they moved the 5th graders to the fairly new middle school building, closed one of the older elementary schools, and shifted the district lines for the remaining elementary schools.

So,
elementary: pre-K through 4th grade
middle: grades 5-8
high: grades 9-12
« Last Edit: May 22, 2014, 11:11:30 AM by hermanne »
Bad spellers of the world, UNTIE!




pierrotlunaire0

  • Member
  • Posts: 4609
  • I'm the cat's aunt!
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5641 on: May 22, 2014, 11:50:19 AM »
This happened yesterday and today.
 I am a branch manager of the DMV in my state.  Yesterday, a manager from another region sent out an email to both her region and my region to every manager in those regions (roughly half the state) asking for clarification on what was necessary to release a lien on a vehicle.  The gist of the email was very difficult to follow because the grammar and spelling were not good ("except a lien release" when I am positive she meant "accept a lien release"), but she seemed to be saying that we could only accept a separate letter, and not take a lien release signed on the title itself.

I was going to reply to her, but like I said her email was so garbled, and it was such a goofy question (this is DMV 101, something that you learn in your first week on the job) that I assumed I had misunderstood her question.

Then this morning, there was a reply email (also sent to the same email list) from Bill Hastings at the central office.  Bill is pretty high up there in our department.  Bill's answer was that per the Procedures Manual, there are 5 ways to release a lien, of which a signature on the title itself is perfectly acceptable.

Our clueless manager, Debbie Doodles, replies, "Great!  So only a separate letter is acceptable.  Thanks for the clarification."

Up to now, the branch managers have been notably silent, but now the replies start coming in: "No, I believe Bill said that a signed title would work;" "No, in fact, if you follow the link to the internet version of the manual, it says, etc. etc."; "No, Debbie, here are the appropriate page numbers of the manual if you want to review them."

But Debbie Doodles is not to be denied.  "Well, I was just requesting clarification because my clerks say that we can only except (sic) the separate letter.  I think there should be some consensus."

A friend of mine then replied:  "Listen, Bill Hastings wrote the manual.  If he says that something is acceptable, it is acceptable, and if your clerks question it, show them the email from Bill Hastings."

A few other people chimed in with a "Here, here," to my friend, including Bill Hastings.

So, Debbie Doodles has exposed herself as someone who: cannot write a coherent email, knows next to nothing about her job policies, cannot read and comprehend basic policies, and lets her clerks dictate procedures in defiance of the central authority.  And not only did she do this within her own region, by sending the email to my region, all of us (who would in the course of things probably never would have heard of her) now consider her an idiot.

I wanted to follow up on this because my sister read it and was asking what happened.  Debbie Doodles is no longer with the state.  I know she was there for at least a few months after this incident, but she is no longer listed anywhere in the central directory. 

But she was a great teaching moment: (1) we all know procedures for lien releases, and (2) if you truly don't know the answer, you don't email everyone.  You call another manager that you are friendly with, "Listen, I am drawing a blank here, how do you ...?"  There is one manager where we regularly help each other that way.
I have enough lithium in my medicine cabinet to power three cars across a sizeable desert.  Which makes me officially...Three Cars Crazy

KenveeB

  • Member
  • Posts: 8861
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5642 on: May 22, 2014, 12:58:14 PM »
I don't know if it's actually used in the real world, but TV portrays cops asking drivers to recite the alphabet backward to see if they're drunk or not  :o. I might have more chance to do it with alcohol in my system since I'm pretty sure I could never do it sober.

Here they use Breathalyzer, you know, an impartial and scientific way to measure alcohol levels..

But they have to haul you to the station to do the test, so the roadside stuff is a good way to narrow down who they need to investigate further. None of the tests they use are used solo -- it's the combination of multiple tests together.

Carotte

  • Member
  • Posts: 1744
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5643 on: May 22, 2014, 01:34:12 PM »
I don't know if it's actually used in the real world, but TV portrays cops asking drivers to recite the alphabet backward to see if they're drunk or not  :o. I might have more chance to do it with alcohol in my system since I'm pretty sure I could never do it sober.

Here they use Breathalyzer, you know, an impartial and scientific way to measure alcohol levels..

But they have to haul you to the station to do the test, so the roadside stuff is a good way to narrow down who they need to investigate further. None of the tests they use are used solo -- it's the combination of multiple tests together.

Wait, they just plain don't have handheld breathalyzer?

Gwywnnydd

  • Member
  • Posts: 1793
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5644 on: May 22, 2014, 01:35:16 PM »
I don't know if it's actually used in the real world, but TV portrays cops asking drivers to recite the alphabet backward to see if they're drunk or not  :o. I might have more chance to do it with alcohol in my system since I'm pretty sure I could never do it sober.

Here they use Breathalyzer, you know, an impartial and scientific way to measure alcohol levels..

But they have to haul you to the station to do the test, so the roadside stuff is a good way to narrow down who they need to investigate further. None of the tests they use are used solo -- it's the combination of multiple tests together.

At least in my state, they are testing whether your functioning is impaired, regardless of the source of that impairment. So, if you're dozy and woozy from prescription pain medications, you will blow a clean breathalyzer, but you'll still be guilty of Driving While Impaired.

Gwywnnydd

  • Member
  • Posts: 1793
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5645 on: May 22, 2014, 01:36:10 PM »
I don't know if it's actually used in the real world, but TV portrays cops asking drivers to recite the alphabet backward to see if they're drunk or not  :o. I might have more chance to do it with alcohol in my system since I'm pretty sure I could never do it sober.

Here they use Breathalyzer, you know, an impartial and scientific way to measure alcohol levels..

But they have to haul you to the station to do the test, so the roadside stuff is a good way to narrow down who they need to investigate further. None of the tests they use are used solo -- it's the combination of multiple tests together.

Wait, they just plain don't have handheld breathalyzer?

Some locales do, others don't.
My area does, apparently KenVee lives somewhere where they don't.

Sara Crewe

  • Member
  • Posts: 2929
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5646 on: May 22, 2014, 01:53:41 PM »
I don't know if it's actually used in the real world, but TV portrays cops asking drivers to recite the alphabet backward to see if they're drunk or not  :o. I might have more chance to do it with alcohol in my system since I'm pretty sure I could never do it sober.

Here they use Breathalyzer, you know, an impartial and scientific way to measure alcohol levels..

But they have to haul you to the station to do the test, so the roadside stuff is a good way to narrow down who they need to investigate further. None of the tests they use are used solo -- it's the combination of multiple tests together.

You don't have to go to the police station to be tested, they use a roadside breathalyzer and if it comes up over the limit, take that person to the police station for the larger machine that gives an exact alcohol reading.

Edited to say that PPs have said this first and better.  I somehow missed the last page of posting.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2014, 02:01:52 PM by Tia2 »

#borecore

  • Member
  • Posts: 5280
  • Extreme normcore
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5647 on: May 22, 2014, 02:47:54 PM »
Someone in the store in which my daughter works committed PD recently.

Backstory:  my 19-year-old got a job in this store two months ago.  They recently advertised for another cashier.  Knowing that my 17-year-old daughter also wanted a job, her sister mentioned her to the boss.  Boss interviewed 17-year-old daughter and absolutely loved her, but ended up hiring someone else.  Why?  Because Other Girl is older (19) and potentially has more availability.  Fine, whatever, Boss can hire whom she wants.  My 17-year-old was disappointed but ended up getting a job at Target.

Fast-forward to today (a month after the interview and subsequent hiring of Other Girl).  Other Girl worked exactly one shift.  For all her other shifts, she either called in sick or made excuses so that she could leave early.  Boss just fired her. 

Other Girl has committed PD here, and I can't help but wonder if Boss has, too - not because she didn't hire my daughter, but because she's gone through at least 6 cashiers since she hired my older daughter - two months ago.  They've either quit or been fired.  I'm starting to wonder if Boss is a very poor judge of character!

I don't know about 6 in two months (depending on the size of a store), but this kind of turnover is nearly common until a store settles on a person who really works for the position. It seems even more common when a job doesn't have a lot of pre-qualifications, so they basically hire whoever they feel like hiring, and then both parties decide after a few shifts if it is actually the right fit. It's hard to get a job, but easy to lose it!

KenveeB

  • Member
  • Posts: 8861
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5648 on: May 22, 2014, 03:56:04 PM »
I don't know if it's actually used in the real world, but TV portrays cops asking drivers to recite the alphabet backward to see if they're drunk or not  :o. I might have more chance to do it with alcohol in my system since I'm pretty sure I could never do it sober.

Here they use Breathalyzer, you know, an impartial and scientific way to measure alcohol levels..

But they have to haul you to the station to do the test, so the roadside stuff is a good way to narrow down who they need to investigate further. None of the tests they use are used solo -- it's the combination of multiple tests together.

You don't have to go to the police station to be tested, they use a roadside breathalyzer and if it comes up over the limit, take that person to the police station for the larger machine that gives an exact alcohol reading.

Edited to say that PPs have said this first and better.  I somehow missed the last page of posting.

Not everyone has them, and they're not necessarily accurate. In my area, they're not admissible in court.

Jocelyn

  • Member
  • Posts: 2013
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5649 on: May 22, 2014, 04:18:11 PM »
It's fairly well known that a common consequence of brain trauma - stroke, injury, surgery - is difficulty with speech and language. Patients can struggle to remember words, or use the wrong words, etc. There are tests to help establish whether this has happened, and to what extent.

At least one hospital in the UK is using a test designed in the US. Now I'm sure it's a perfectly satisfactory test - in the US. But 'two nations divided by a common language'?

What do you call the room under the house which contains the boiler and the laundry?
 
Pod that. I've never lived in a house with a boiler! And, having lived in Tornado Alley most of my life, I've lived with basements...but I've had the washer-dryer hookups just off the kitchen in a closet, next to the back door, and in the garage, as well as in the basement.

Jocelyn

  • Member
  • Posts: 2013
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5650 on: May 22, 2014, 04:21:56 PM »
A friend of mine, a newspaper reporter, had to have surgery to remove a benign tumor from his auditory nerve in late 2000 (the timing here is important). To get to the tumor, surgeons had to literally lift up his brain. So although it technically wasn't brain surgery, they had to check his brain function after.

"What's your name?" [Name]
"Do you know where you are?" [Hospital name]
"What day is it?" "Wednesday"
"Who's President?" "I don't know, and neither do you."

The medical team cracked up. It was the disputed period after the Bush-Gore election debacle.

the last one reminds me of my grandmother, when, at age 97, she had to go into a nursing home. They asked her certain questions, to test her mental status. Things such as her name, how old was she, where is she, which she passed with flying colors. Then they got to "who is president?" Her response: "Bill Clinton, but I don't have much use for him, Hillary either" Apparently she cracked up the entire staff!
My mother was taking a mental status exam, and not doing so well, until the doctor asked her who was president. She beamed, 'Oh, that's my good buddy ________.' (name deleted to avoid political debate, but she had been a very vigorous supporter of that candidate. She might have forgotten all sorts of details about her recent past, but having her man win the election was truly memorable! And a very treatable condition was detected, and she recovered all of her memory until the last few months of her life).

Jocelyn

  • Member
  • Posts: 2013
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5651 on: May 22, 2014, 04:34:07 PM »
My mom taught junior high (7-9) and then they restructured to make it a middle school, 6-8th grades. From my observation, there's two reasons to explain what grades are in middle: the school district's philosophy about which grades are emotionally most similar, and the size of the schools. Mom's school changed to being a middle school so that they could have less of a social age gap between the youngest and the oldest students- 6th and 8th are more similar in social readiness for boy-girl relationships, and in physical readiness to play contact sports, than 7th and 9th. Also, our high school had been built in the 1960s with a plan to add onto it when needed- several hallways just dead-ended at an exterior wall, and there was a big field on the other side of the wall. By changing to being a 4 year high school, we were moved into a comparable athletic conference, and the middle school could retool to run a program more suited to the needs of  6-8th graders, and all the grade schools in town got extra classrooms overnight. :)

Katana_Geldar

  • Member
  • Posts: 1530
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5652 on: May 22, 2014, 05:51:16 PM »
I don't know if it's actually used in the real world, but TV portrays cops asking drivers to recite the alphabet backward to see if they're drunk or not  :o. I might have more chance to do it with alcohol in my system since I'm pretty sure I could never do it sober.

Here they use Breathalyzer, you know, an impartial and scientific way to measure alcohol levels..

But they have to haul you to the station to do the test, so the roadside stuff is a good way to narrow down who they need to investigate further. None of the tests they use are used solo -- it's the combination of multiple tests together.

You don't have to go to the police station to be tested, they use a roadside breathalyzer and if it comes up over the limit, take that person to the police station for the larger machine that gives an exact alcohol reading.

Edited to say that PPs have said this first and better.  I somehow missed the last page of posting.

Not everyone has them, and they're not necessarily accurate. In my area, they're not admissible in court.
But that's why it can be supported with a blood test at the station.

KenveeB

  • Member
  • Posts: 8861
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5653 on: May 22, 2014, 06:35:54 PM »
I don't know if it's actually used in the real world, but TV portrays cops asking drivers to recite the alphabet backward to see if they're drunk or not  :o. I might have more chance to do it with alcohol in my system since I'm pretty sure I could never do it sober.

Here they use Breathalyzer, you know, an impartial and scientific way to measure alcohol levels..

But they have to haul you to the station to do the test, so the roadside stuff is a good way to narrow down who they need to investigate further. None of the tests they use are used solo -- it's the combination of multiple tests together.

You don't have to go to the police station to be tested, they use a roadside breathalyzer and if it comes up over the limit, take that person to the police station for the larger machine that gives an exact alcohol reading.

Edited to say that PPs have said this first and better.  I somehow missed the last page of posting.

Not everyone has them, and they're not necessarily accurate. In my area, they're not admissible in court.
But that's why it can be supported with a blood test at the station.

Which requires a warrant--unless the person agrees to it-- and most police stations aren't equipped to do a blood test anyway. Most places are trying to work around more of the obstacles, but there are still a lot of difficulties. The roadside tests are statistically a very good measure of intoxication when taken together, according to the studies that have been done.

ladyknight1

  • Member
  • Posts: 12217
  • Not all those who wander are lost
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5654 on: May 22, 2014, 07:05:01 PM »
No warrant required here for a blood test in a case of suspected intoxication.
ďAll that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost."
-J.R.R Tolkien