Talk:Education in Florida

message: I don't know how to say this, so let me try it here first since it sounds controversial if you hadn't heard it before. White students tend to score roughly the same on standardized tests throughout the United States. Black students also score similarly to each other but lower. If this holds true throughout the US, and it does generally, states with the highest percentage of black students, such as the southern states, will inevitably score lower than the northern states. See for example, http://www.vermonttiger.com/content/2007/10/the-real-story-.html which may not be sufficiently scholarly in itself, but points to supporting data (for Vermont which appeared to score well compared to the Florida, for example). 
Before getting too upset, please read the rueful http://www.jstor.org/pss/2962819.  None of this is really new. But presenting Florida as a bad case is just plain ignorant or deliberately perverse. Student7 (talk) 01:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Florida underscores other states remark

message: I have removed a reference added to support the statement that the Florida legislature required school districts to begin their year earlier. The reference was not an acceptable reference by any stretch of the imagination. This is a thread from a discussion board with no editorial oversight, and the only citations in the entire piece revolved around this Wikipedia page, which the author explicitly cites (and extensively quotes). It is better to have a  request than a thoroughly substandard reference. Horologium (talk) 13:54, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree it was lousy. Just try to find another one! You'd think with a FDE site and other government sites, it would be "easy" to find. Student7 (talk) 00:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed reference 

message: I changed the wording of the sentence about the amendment, since it seemed to say that Graham proposed the amendment, but the voters "sort of" agreed, but decided on "something else." This made no sense in a constitutional amendment that people voted up or down (up, in this case).Student7 (talk) 13:19, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Graham amendment

message: For any "people proposed" amendment that passes, the legislature is forced to do something it did not originally want to do, or it would have proposed the amendment themselves! Prior to the amendment, the legislature could organize the colleges any way they chose. Afterwards, they were forced to have a specific board that was more independent. Student7 (talk) 13:19, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Public initiatives

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Education in Florida. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120625073955/http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/01/pdf/dwwroi.pdf to http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/01/pdf/dwwroi.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091201123119/http://www.fldoe.org/cc/colleges.asp to http://www.fldoe.org/cc/colleges.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:16, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello, "Fellow Wikipedians"!
Under "Overview" there is this:
    "Neither FLDOE nor the local school district has authority to regulate home school activities."
Moving back to the US after 15 years abroad, and homeschooling our son for 11 years now (hey, we started the day he was born, and today is his birthday!), we are vitally concerned with this topic.
It seems that the article "Education in Florida" was either badly researched to begin with, or is badly out of date (we're not researching which!) – or the Florida Department of Education website is so!
Please refer to FLDOE's web page Home Education as a starting point, and then, especially, the page Summary of Home Education Program requirements.
Among other things at the latter, there are these:
    "Send a written notice of intent to the school district superintendent."
    "Make the portfolio available for inspection by the superintendent..."
    "Provide an annual educational evaluation..."
Seems to us that there is abundant "authority to regulate home school activities"?
Hope someone with more time will take this under advisement!...?  Thanks!
Best from deep rural northern Thailand,
– the Crismier family:  Ken & Thu Huong & Carlton
KenThuHuong (talk) 10:13, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Homeschool 

message: Currently the article says "Neither FLDOE nor the local school district has authority to regulate home school activities. The government supports and assists homeschooling activities. There is no minimum number of days in a year, or hours in a day, that must be met, and achievement tests are not required for home school graduating seniors." But this link from the FDOE, circa 2022 says, "a portfolio of activities, records and materials showing student work must be maintained for two years and made available to the school district if requested in writing. Additionally, Section 1002.41, F.S. requires that students in home education programs annually undergo one of five academic evaluation options, the results of which must be submitted to the school district by the parent." That is some degree of regulation and testing. Novellasyes (talk) 15:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is homeschooling regulated? 

message: This paragraph was added to the article in September 2023. 
"In August 2023, restrictions were placed on the teaching of Shakespearean plays and literature by Florida teachers in order to comply with state law."
According to this diff, the content was added by User:Drbogdan. If you click through to two of the three citations attached by User:Drbogdan, you get taken to comments left on a New York Times article. Here's the 2nd of two such NYT comments. Those comments over on the NYT website were submitted to the NYT by a user over there whose user account there is identified as belonging to "Dr. Dennis and Joanne Bogdan". 
I don't think that user comments on the NYT are regarded as WP:RSS. Even if they are, if the user on the NYT is the same person as Wikipedia User:Drbogdan, there's an undisclosed WP:COI. Novellasyes (talk) 19:40, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: (and others) - Thank You *very much* for your comments - and concern - the cited NYT reference and related published comments are from us (WikiEditors: User:Drbogdan (mostly) and User:Joannebogdan) - and seem relevant to the cited NYT article - not at all clear at the moment how WP:COI (*entirely* unintended) may apply to us as general readers that have no official attachments whatsover to the NYT or related - nevertheless - no problem whatsoever with any adjusted edit(s) (ie, rv/rm/mv/ce/etc) to the cited NYT reference finally decided of course - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 21:08, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  If a writer who writes elsewhere about a particular topic comes on Wikipedia, signs up as an editor, and then proceeds to add links to articles on Wikipedia about that topic that cite out to his or her work, that's regarded as WP:COI behavior because it is regarded as potentially having an agenda of promoting one's work, as opposed to improving the encyclopedia. "Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships. Any external relationship can trigger a conflict of interest. Someone having a conflict of interest is a description of a situation, not a judgment about that person's opinions, integrity, or good faith." The main problem, though, with those links to your comments on the NYT article is that they are not WP:RSS. Novellasyes (talk) 21:54, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  - Thanks again for your comments - decided to rm the NYT references of concern from the main article - should now be *entirely* ok - please reply further if otherwise of course - Thanks again for all your comments - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 22:08, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

text: - Decided to add the newly adj (and *entirely* ok) refs - both seem relevant to the article - should now be ok - please comment if otherwise of course - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 14:54, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shakespeare and Dr. Bogdan