Part 1—As found in graf 15: From one perspective, the news about our American schools has been extremely good.
You’re almost never allowed to hear that news, of course. In deference to elite propaganda, the successors to our American press corps relentlessly keep this good news under their hats.
Occasionally, the good news slips out. In April 2013, Stanford professor Sean Reardon was allowed to share the good news in the New York Times, deep inside a lengthy Sunday Review piece with a gloomy overall slant.
Reardon’s piece bore this headline: “No Rich Child Left Behind.” He noted that children whose families are in the top ten percent by income are now outperforming middle-income kids, in ways which didn’t exist in the past.
An achievement gap is opening between the rich and the middle-class! Shielded by this gloomy perspective, Reardon was allowed to cite the good news, though not until paragraph 15:
REARDON (4/28/13): The income gap in academic achievement is not growing because the test scores of poor students are dropping or because our schools are in decline. In fact, average test scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the so-called Nation's Report Card, have been rising—substantially in math and very slowly in reading—since the 1970s. The average 9-year-old today has math skills equal to those her parents had at age 11, a two-year improvement in a single generation. The gains are not as large in reading and they are not as large for older students, but there is no evidence that average test scores have declined over the last three decades for any age or economic group.Say what? The average 9-year-old is two years ahead of where her parents were in math? Given all the propaganda about our stagnant or failing schools, can that possibly be true?
Based upon Reardon’s language, it’s clear that he is referring to data from the so-called “Long Term Trend” study of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (the NAEP). Beyond that, it seems that he has applied the very rough ten-point rule of thumb to data from that federal program, which include these scores:
Average math scores, 9-year-old students, NAEPA statistical bump in 2004 suggests that the actual score gain may be a few points larger than those raw scores suggest. For fuller data, click here, see Figure A.
2012: 243.99
1986: 221.71
1982: 218.98
As of 2012, the average score had risen by 22 points since 1986! If we apply the very rough rule of thumb in which ten points on the NAEP scale equals one academic year, today’s 9-year-olds are roughly two years ahead of their parents in math.
Can that possibly be true? We aren’t sure, in large part because discussions of such topics aren’t permitted within our press corps, where all discussions must advance elite propaganda about our failing schools and our fiendish public school teachers.
Except for very brief glimmers in the occasional fifteenth paragraph, American citizens aren’t allowed to encounter good news of this type. For that reason, no discussion ever occurs in which experts are consulted about the meaning of the score gains which have occurred on these widely-praised federal tests.
Most people have never heard about these score gains on the NAEP. That said, the score gains in math are general. No matter how you slice the demographics, large score gains have been recorded in recent decades, even as our pseudo-journalists peddle their gloomy scripts.
In what follows, we return to data from the so-called Main NAEP, the companion study to the Long-Term Trend study. We refer to score gains recorded between 1996 and 2013, a seventeen-year span.
From one perspective, the news has all been good:
On the Main NAEP, a large score gain (19.86 points) has been recorded in eighth-grade math by lower-income kids. (By students who are eligible for free or reduced price lunch. This is not a measure of poverty.) Slicing the data a different way, large score gains have been recorded by black kids and by Hispanic kids.
The score gains by black kids are largest of all. (Lower-income black kids have recorded a score gain of 24.03 points.) For that reason, we’ve seen a decline in the size of the achievement gap between white kids and black kids.
Once in a very great while, such news is permitted to slip out in some fleeting way. Reardon was permitted to mention this news, but only in paragraph 15 of a lengthy essay which featured a gloomy overall perspective. (We don’t mean that as a criticism of Reardon.)
The relentless suppression of this good news has constituted an act of vast journalistic misconduct. Unless something is grossly wrong with the NAEP data, this journalistic misconduct has created a vast misconception about the current state of American schools and the excellent children within them.
That said, even as these test scores rise, a very large problem persists. That problem involves our achievement gaps, which continue to coexist with these large score gains.
Alas! Black kids are recording better math scores, but white kids are doing better too! Are lower-income students improving? Yes, but higher-income students are also scoring better.
Along with the gains, we still have the gaps! And in many cases, the gaps remain quite large.
Mainstream journalists have refused to tell the public about the gains. Inevitably, uncaring “progressives” and hapless professors have gone right along with this scam.
At the same time, the gaps remain large, and those gaps must be discussed if we want to understand the challenges faced by American schools.
In recent weeks, some professors and “journalists” have worked quite hard to avoid discussing the gaps. Their conduct has been uncaring, disgraceful, lazy, inept. Same as it ever was!
Tomorrow, we’ll start to examine the size of the gaps which help define our ongoing challenge. Next week, we’ll discuss the way these gaps affect our public schools and our deserving, delightful students, who come in various “races” and “colors” from various income groups.
Heroically, Reardon slipped in the good news. Tomorrow, we look at the gaps.
Tomorrow: The size of the gap by income
To access all NAEP data: To access data from either NAEP study, you can use the NAEP Data Explorer. Here's how:
Click here, then click on MAIN NDE (Main NAEP) or LTT NDE (Long-Term Trend). Click again to agree to terms.
At that point, you're on your own. Oodles of data are there.
OMB (But First The Predictable News)
ReplyDelete"Tomorrow, we look at the gaps."
KZ
(Today we'll look at some gaps between sound education statistics and
the amazing Numerology of BOBworld)
Why can't you go away?
DeleteBecause he/she has so many adoring fans like you.
DeleteWho would want to leave a place with such thoughtful conversation starting comments like those hardindr submits?
DeleteThese posts are superb, and you are a crazed monster troll. No use writing such a post, but I notice the initials and I am sickened.
DeleteBetter a crazed monster troll than a heinous, worthless, overpaid elite professor.
DeleteBut to get to your point, these posts are superb. The foreplay in getting to actual gaps will result in a veritable intellectual epiphany.
I am looking forward to this series. I agree with hardindr that KZ is a major nuisance here and I too wish he would go away and take the rest of the trolls with him.
DeleteThis is an important topic. The specious cricisms of Somerby's redundancy or style and the nitpicks about stats (which always turn out to be empty) are a distraction that prevents readers new to this topic from appreciating what is being said. I do not understand why trolls hate our schools and our kids to the point that they would try to bury any discussion of what is happening in education.
Good point about the nefarious numbering KZ. Not only is it wrong, it's creepy.
DeleteKZ, stop replying to your own comments.
DeleteWe agree this is an important topic Anon @ 1:49. That is why we plan to present some accurate information to counter misinformation supplied by the blogger.
DeleteWe are sorry our short prologues bother you. As a consideration for readers such as yourself we generally try and start all our comments "OMB" so you can skip them. In fact you can skip comments all together and enjoy the wisdom of BOB unfettered with what you describe as trollery.
As a point of information, could you give me dates and times of the most recent three comments you have made in response to substantive points raised by the content of any post BOB has made on education?
KZ
Most of the numbering posts have been spot on.
DeleteKZ, your trolling here doesn't interfere with enjoying Somerby's posts -- it interferes with having a coherent discussion with other readers here, many of whom work in education and may have interesting things to say if they were not put off by your garbage.
DeleteI make substantive comments nearly every day (except when out of town). I choose to remain Anonymous to avoid ad hominems and stalking. In your case, it would facilitate the kind of nit-picking over inconsistency or so-called hypocrisy you have applied to Somerby's posts.
Now in what way does KZ "interfere" with a "coherent discussion"? What kind of discussions do you engage it that refuse to even listen to opposing points of view?
DeleteAs for your making "substantive comments" toward a "coherent discussion" I'll take your word for it. However, this particular comment is certainly not among them.
Anon 1:49/2:48 we have no quibble with your anonymity.
DeleteWe simply wished to provide you the opportunity to demonstrate your contributions on a positive level.
Your answer seems to add further mystery while adding yet another negative comment aimed at us.
In the post which follows we gave a good example of a blog post on this very topic free of our intervention.
For "readers new to this topic" we repeat the example with a link:
http://dailyhowler.blogspot.com/2012/02/very-poor-children-very-big-story.html
Perhaps you can review it and point to any comment there from "many of whom work in education and may have interesting things to say if they were not put off by (our) garbage."
KZ
I for one, dislike KZ's posts. Obtuse. Don't go anywhere. Waste of time. Massive waste of time across the board.
DeleteAnonymous @2:48,
DeleteI don't understand why KZ's broadcasts from the Galaxy Schizophrenia interfere with coherent discussions here. His posts are immediately identifiable, and it's not like he's shouting in your ear. I too wish to see more of his work as siva, but he may do as he wishes. As can you: skip his comments.
I find it more distracting to keep track of the thread of discussion when there are so many Anonymi. Why not consider adopting a nym? You may choose Name/URL, pick any pseudonym for Name and leave the URL empty. This will leave you anonymous without making you Anonymous.
Deadrat, the minute someone picks a pseudonym, KZ and others will be quoting from past comments, looking for internal consistency, trying to piece together an identity from chance details, and otherwise forcing that person into a persona that can then be criticized, much as Somerby is. It takes the focus off what is being said in a particular comment and makes a debate personal (focused on a person not an idea).
DeleteIt may be frustrating to deal with a bunch of anonymouses, but the reasons that make it frustrating may illustrate the point I am making. Why should any single comment depend on any other?
The problem with KZ is he's a poor writer and even worse thinker.
Delete5:04 is right. I wish there were more like 5:04 who can factually demonstrate how poor his writing and thinking are.
DeleteBob is writing wonderfully, but allowing the trolls to trash the comment section is tragic.
DeleteThat said, 7:56, that said. How many times have you heard trolls express their concern for score gains of our fine school children? Alas! Bob should do something. Will he? We don't know. Gack. It is not because we haven't been asking. His readers just don't get results. The comment box is collapsing with just these kinds of offenses being committed. And where are our liberal leaders? Not that we are criticizing them. We might like them personally.
DeleteI used to believe in tolerating trolls but now I just hate them. They have made me the kind of person who hates.
Delete@ 12:11 that is the kind of expression that further divides.
DeleteYou and others need to learn to speak in a language that finds common gound with them and wins them over. It is what liberal leaders have failed to do, all to the benefit of the plutocrats and their plundering agenda.
OMB (Your Zarkon Get's Results!)
ReplyDeleteFinally a week into the series BOB has mentioned the Long Term Trends data of the NAEP. But only after relentless pounding in the comment box.
Hopefully, like Rachel after BOB"S stirring critique of her coverage of the delay and possible dismissal of criminal charges against Governor Ultrasound, this good behavior will continue.
For those new to the comment box, BOB once wrote these stirring words:
"We still haven’t reviewed Rachel Maddow’s biggest groaners from last week. But last night, thanks to our pushback, Rachel was pretty clearly on her best behavior."
It was from a little noticed post called:
"Governor Ultrasound still hasn’t been charged!"
KZ
But will Bob ever get around to explaining the differences between the Main NAEP and the Long Term Trend NAEP, what each form is designed to measure, and the dangers of extrapolating data beyond its designed purpose?
DeleteYou can find this out for yourself -- or if you think the data are being dangerously over-extrapolated, state why. Somerby has written an essay about under-reporting of score gains in the mainstream press. I do not see how his choice of Main NAEP or Long Term Trend NAEP affects that point at all, since kids scores have improved on both.
DeleteAll of this was discussed over the weekend, including links to an important paper that singled out Somerby for being full of shit -- though they said it in more academic terms.
DeleteBut I suppose if we are good, loyal Somerby readers, we will continue to have the same tired discussion covering the same old ground for days, weeks, months, years.
I don't think it's a "tired discussion" at all. Truth is people, in this case minority kids, are being held back and held down. It will affect many throughout their lives. I would say that's at least as important a story as the recent rodeo clown controversy that had so many of us liberals in teeth gnashing, wailing anguish.
DeleteI didn't agree that Somerby was "full of shit" and I replied to your weekend post. If you aren't going to read and respond to what others say to you, why should anyone return the favor?
DeleteFirst, I said that Somerby has always describe the 2 year rule of thumb as "rough." Second, I said that Somerby did not invent it. That means the authors were not calling Somerby "full of shit" but referring to him as a person who had cited that rule of thumb previously. Academics, unlike you, tend to focus on the point-at-hand, not the person, so they were not calling Somerby or anyone else "full of shit."
If you would take a hint and go away, we wouldn't have to engage in this distracting discussion that serves no purpose other than to try to discredit Somerby. Some day perhaps you'll have the guts to explain what motivates your hatred -- is it that he stole your dog or are you a paid Maddow intern, or some other sort of disinformationist? Or are you KZ and just plain old schizophrenic on a disability pension with too much time on your hands? Whatever is true, most of us wish you would go away.
Well, first off, it isn't a "two year" rule of thumb. It's the 10-point rule of thumb. And as the paper that named Somerby clearly explains fhere is nothing "rough" about. It can't be used to state what Somerby -- specifically -- says that it states, no matter how many times he calls it "rough" and how many other people make the same damned, dumb misinterpretation of statistics they don't completely understand.
DeleteAnd I am so sorry that the truth distracts you so much from your wonderful discussion about the wonderfullness of Somerby and the keen way he analyzes statistics.
But he was taken to the woodshed two years ago, and still is going to stick with his narrative.
You seem to want to argue about the meaning of the word "rough" and quibble about whether the 10-points can be used to measure progress in the absence of a better measure. As someone else pointed out, Somerby neither originated this rule of thumb nor is he the only one using it. Academics are concerned with technical details but calling the measure "rough" elides those technicalities, things only those concerned with educational measurement care much about (and those focused on attacking bloggers).
DeleteTruth is, this has nothing to do with the main point of Somerby's post, nor with anything else. We all get it that you want to call Somerby stupid. But you are being deliberately obtuse when you insist that everyday discussion must conform to strict technical usage.
The only woodshed is in your imagination. This is equivalent to someone thinking he has refuted an argument because he found a misspelled word.
By the way, the "rodeo clown" episode was nothing more than a very brief, tempest in a teapot, And Bob still misses the very important point of that one.
DeleteSome guy living in a small town in the middle of Missouri took some kids to the state fair rodeo on a Saturday night. He was offended by the clown's performance and the announcers comments, so he pulled out his Smartphone and recorded it.
Then when he got home in the wee hours of Sunday morning, he posted it on his Facebook page. A blogging buddy of his who had a diary at Daily Kos picked it up almost immediately. Before the sun came up, it had gone viral.
By noon, the state fair board and politicians of both parties had weighed in, calling it inappropriate. Then the St. Louis Post-Dispatch put it on their Web site in the early afternoon, and it went out on the AP wire shortly after.
This was very much a story of how technology has broken the rule of the "mainstream media" -- which was hours behind social media and Internet Web sites -- as the gatekeepers of information.
This story was broken by a guy with a Smartphone and a Facebook account. And the implications of that are enormous.
Further timeline --
DeleteOn Monday, MSNBC hosts weighed in, calling the performance disrespectful and racist.
On Tuesday, the rightwing echo chamber backlash began, with Limbaugh and Hannity turning the clown into yet another victim of "political correctness."
On Wednesday, Somerby finally weighed in with his usual "there go those liberals throwing the R word around" while turning the clown into a victim of political correctness.
And how long after Wednesday did Somerby continue to cover it?
DeleteThe paper in question is "Validity Isues in Cross-Grade Statements About NAEP Results" by David Thissen of UNC, published in 01/2012 and commissioned by something called the "NAEP Validity Studies Panel." TDH is called out by name in two contexts.
DeleteThe first is titled "One year's growth is (approximately) x NAEP scale points" and quotes TDH from 4/7/10. In that entry TDH sets x=10, and is quoted thusly: "5 points on the NAEP scale … would be equivalent to roughly one-half year of growth…" (emphasis mine) This statement of equivalence is always so qualified, and the the entry even includes "Warning! This 'rough rule of thumb' is very rough." Thissen notes that TDH understands that such an interpretation of NAEP points isn't officially sanctioned, adding "Nevertheless, this description of the results clearly places them in a context that could make the scores more comprehensible for many who want to interpret NAEP results." Is this the "academic terms" for saying TDH is full of shit?
The second comes under the rubric "Disbelief in Corss-Grade Scales." This means that it's a bad idea to find an annual change in test scores by taking the difference between scores for two age cohorts and dividing by the number of years separating the two. The reason is that this makes sense only if you assume that achievement on tests is linear, and apparently it's a well-known phenomenon that growth in scores on standardized tests "decelerates" with age. TDH is quoted as calculating "one year's growth" by linear interpolation, which Thissen notes is "clearly wrong." Thissen then asks "how wrong can it be?" His answer: "not very wrong."
So was TDH "taken to the woodshed"? Does the paper say that the "rough" interpretation "can't" be used because it's so misleading? You can check for yourself at http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED528992.pdf
OMB (Comment Argument Interlude)
DeleteThis eleven comment response subthread (complete with Rodeo Clown digression) was brought to you by the comment stifling KZ. KZ neither endorses or refutes any positoion offered. We will refute deadrat later if he persists
in leaving things out that Thiessen said.)
KZ
Nobody has accused you of stifling your own comments.
DeleteAre 9 year olds doing long division like their parents did at age 11?
ReplyDeleteTo answer that question go to the NAEP database. Look at all the test results available for 11 year olds.
DeleteUnless you are being sarcastic, how is that supposed to answer the question?
DeleteTo answer that question go to the NAEP database. Look at all the test results available for 11 year olds.
DeleteCommon core is changing when kids learn long division because they wish to emphaisze conceptual understanding instead of blindly applying an algorithm to perform calculations that are poorly understood. It suggests kids should temporarily do worse on NAEP but better on PISA (which purportedly assesses critical thinking).
DeleteA longitudinal test is only useful if the content remains the same. Kids are going to be learning long division, just not using the traditional calculation method, so perhaps there will not be a decrease in performance. Since NAEP includes questions on a range of math topics, shifting long division to later in the curriculum should mean children are learning other things and will do better on those topics instead.
So, I cannot see how this question is relevant to whether our kids are doing better in math or not.
You could also ask how the question is relevant since 11 year olds are never given an NAEP test of any kind.
DeleteYou could give the 13 year old NAEP test to 9 year olds and see whether they are 2 years behind.
DeleteOr you could average the results of 9 and 13 year olds and create an "erect middle finger rule" of 11 year old performance. It would be as valid as Bob's "rough rule of thumb" and be easier to sit on and spin.
DeleteClearly that rough rule of thumb is useful or so many people wouldn't be trying to use it to describe student progress. Your crudity (what passes for cleverness among 12 year olds) suggests you don't care much about children or this issue, so why are you taking up space here?
DeleteWho besides Bob Somerby is trying to use it. Anyone who reads this space regularly knows nobody discusses what it means, according to Somerby
Delete"A statistical bump in 2004 suggests that the actual score gain may be a few points larger than those raw scores suggest."
ReplyDeleteOr it "suggests" that the test changed. Gee, what happened in 2004?
Does anyone care to guess why they allowed Reardon to slip the good news in?
ReplyDeleteIt supported his point about the rich doing better than the middle class? Otherwise someone might point out that scores in the middle class were increasing so how can the rich be doing better.
DeleteThat's one possibility. Any guess as to who "they" are?
DeleteReardon's editor -- whoever assigned him the topic.
DeleteDo they have editor--whoevers at Stanford?
DeleteDid Professor Reardon go to public or private schools?
ReplyDeleteDid you? Is that why you don't care about public education?
DeleteYes. Beating my wife has nothing to do with my attitude toward public schools. And FYI she did too.
DeleteOMB (Jumping On BOB)
ReplyDeleteJumping the gun, that is. We got so excited at this repeat of the Gap series we couldn't wait eight days for BOB to start telling us the size of the gaps.
Without further ado, and using the same base test years, test, and grade level in the only data used here, we present some gaps. But first, with a nod to BOB lets review what we learned. Here is the data he provides from Reardon:
Average math scores, 9-year-old students, NAEP
2012: 243.99
1986: 221.71
1982: 218.98
Here is what the same source tells us about gaps.
Average black-white gap, 9 year old students, NAEP
2012: - 26
1986: - 25
1982: - 29
But wait. There's more:
Average black-white gap, 13 year old students, NAEP
2012: - 29
1986: - 25
1982: - 34
Average black-white gap, 17 year old students, NAEP
2012: - 26
1986: - 29
1982: - 32
Note that the largest reduction in gaps for all three grade levels came in a four year period thirty years ago in the Reagan administration. Only 17 year olds have equaled it in the quarter century which followed and that despite all the nonsensical assumptions BOB has given you about drop out rates lowering the scores for marginal older students.
The gap for nine year olds has been reduced by a statistically insignificant 1 point in a quarter of a century. The gap for 13 year olds has increased by 4 points in the same time period.
Thus far the only consistent reason given by BOB is failure of liberals in the media to discuss the GAINS of black students on NAEP scores.
They have, he notes, discussed those gaps. We note he, thus far, has discussed those GAINS, but not the gaps.
KZ
You are worthless, just go away.
DeleteAu contraire. KZ is showing you how easily it is to get statistics to tell the story you want them to when you only pick a carefully selected set to compare.
DeleteIf you want a real discussion of the "gap" then you would use data from the LTT form over all years in a line graph. Then you can see if the "narrowing" we perceive today falls within standard deviation, or is truly and statiscally significantly closed, and by how much.
So hardindr, you find actual NAEP gap numbers worthless?
DeletePerhaps you should leave since that is what the series is supposed to be about.
The comment below my original tells the story.
DeleteYes. It tells an interesting story about the gaps. We'll see if it is the one BOB tells if he finally gets around to it.
DeleteIn the meantime we just used the oodles of data out there from the years BOB selected himself.
KZ
Exactly, KZ. But you put them all together. Somerby doesn't. He continues to bounce around from year to year, grade level to grade level as he also bounces between "gains" and "gaps". And he comes up with a very pleasing tale.
DeleteWill Bob ever finally get around to whatever he declares is his point, which does seem to evolve? I seriously doubt it.
If he had a point, he's had nearly 30 blog posts to carefully and thoughtfully build his case instead of finding new ways to repeat the same thing every day, while promising that great things are still ahead.
(By the way, didn't he once spend a few posts complaining about the way Rachel Maddow teased segments on her show? At least Maddow got to the story within the hour.)
Bullshit troll comments tl;dr?
ReplyDeleteThe "story" Somerby tells isn't really ABOUT the gaps or the gains, despite the witless persistence of trolls like KZ and his acolyte.
The "story" is about the doggedness of the press in adhering to a theme about the state of US public schools -- their supposed long-term decline -- and their near-complete refusal to admit the plentiful evidence that contradicts this theme.
That fact about the press isn't produced through clever manipulation of statistics and it won't be contradicted by them either.
Much shorter: Go Away Douchebag Trolls!!
Much, much shorter: That's one fine suit my emperor is wearing. I'll ignore the fact that while the "media" reports a wide array of issues concerning education while Somerby doggedly adheres to his one theme: That he's smarter than everybody else reporting on education combined because only he can see the one, true story: The remarkable gains black kids have made.
DeleteAny of us here has seen the way the media constantly reports that our schools are failing. This is not just in Somerby's imagination.
Delete8:28 could not be more on top of things. Who cares if the Poles beat the pants off our kids on that silly PISA test.
DeleteOur kids are making steady progress on the test nobody takes but our kids. If the PISA test was so good, why didn't we Ameicans think of it. Plus how many illegal immigrants are pouring over the Finnish border?
OMB (But first, the Troll News)
ReplyDeleteDouchebag trolls! Go away! The "story isn't about gaps or gains!
We see we were met with a fine intellectual display by BOBfans. They obviously clamor for more gap numbers of the type BOB won't let them hear. This time we will go for NAEP reading gaps. Same source, NCES. Different years since the Digest of Education Statistics reading tables don't match the math. We'll begin again in the Reagan years.
Table 221.85.
Average National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading scale score, by age and selected student characteristics: Selected years, 1971 through 2012
Average black-white gap, 9 year old students, NAEP
2012: - 23
1988: - 29
1984: - 32
Average black-white gap, 13 year old students, NAEP
2012: - 23
1988: - 18
1984: - 26
Average black-white gap, 17 year old students, NAEP
2012: - 26
1988: - 20
1984: - 32
BOBfans are welcome to apply any very rough rule of thumb numbers to this they want.
But what about the reading gains, you might ask. BOB showed us big gains in math, where our black students passed marks set by white students three decades ago? Has he shown you reading in the last quarter century + ? We don't remember. So we will do so now. Same source. 2013 Digest of Education Statistics. Same Table.
9 year old Reading NAEP
1984 White students 218
2012 Black Students 206
13 year old Reading NAEP
1984 White Students 263
2012 Black Students 247
17 year old Reading NAEP
1984 White Students 295
2012 Black Students 269
Rule of thumbs Up, anyone?
KZ
If anything you posted constituted a contradiction of Somerby's theses, you'd be on to something.
DeleteIt doesn't; you're not.
Unfortunately for all of us, you post on anyway, KZ, the douchebag exemplar.
ReplyDeleteHow To Stop A Divorce And Save Your Marriage?(Dr.Brave).
Hello to every one out here, am here to share the unexpected miracle that happened to me three days ago, My name is Jeffrey Dowling,i live in TEXAS,USA.and I`m happily married to a lovely and caring wife,with two kids A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my wife so terrible that she took the case to court for a divorce she said that she never wanted to stay with me again,and that she did not love me anymore So she packed out of my house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get her back,after much begging,but all to no avail and she confirmed it that she has made her decision,and she never wanted to see me again. So on one evening,as i was coming back from work,i met an old friend of mine who asked of my wife So i explained every thing to her,so she told me that the only way i can get my wife back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for her too So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow her advice. Then she gave me the email address of the spell caster whom she visited.(bravespellcaster@gmail.com}, So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address she gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my wife back the next day what an amazing statement!! I never believed,so he spoke with me,and told me everything that i need to do. Then the next morning, So surprisingly, my wife who did not call me for the past seven {7}months,gave me a call to inform me that she was coming back So Amazing!! So that was how she came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and she apologized for her mistake,and for the pain she caused me and my children. Then from that day,our relationship was now stronger than how it were before,by the help of a spell caster . So, i will advice you out there to kindly email this wonderful man {bravespellcaster@gmail.com},i f you are in any condition like this,or you have any problem related to "bringing your ex back. So thanks to Dr Brave for bringing back my wife,and brought great joy to my family once again.{bravespellcaster@gmail.com} , Thanks..
ReplyDeleteMy name is yurich jerry am from USA. i want to use this opportunity to thank my great doctor who really made my life a pleasurable one today. This great man DR.Ogboni brought my husband back to me, i had three lovely kids for my husband, about four years ago i and my husband has been into one quarrel or the other until he finally left me for one lady. i felt my life was over and my kids thought they would never see their father again. i tried to be strong just for the kids but i could not control the pains that torments my heart, my heart was filled with sorrows and pains because i was really in love with my husband. Every day and night i think of him and always wish he would come back to me, until one day i met a good friend of mine that was also in a situation like me but her problem was her ex-boyfriend who she had an unwanted pregnancy for and he refused to take responsibility and dumped her. she told me that mine was a small case and that i should not worry about it at all, so i asked her what was the solution to my problems and she gave me this great man email address. i was doubting if this man was the solution, so i contacted this great man and he told me what to do and i deed them all, he told me to wait for just two day and that my husband will come crawling on his kneels just for forgiveness so i faithfully deed what this great man asked me to do and for sure after two days i heard a knock on the door, in a great surprise i saw him on his kneels and i was speechless, when he saw me, all he did was crying and asking me for forgiveness, from that day, all the pains and sorrows in my heart flew away,since then i and my husband and our lovely kids are happy.that's why i want to say a big thank you to DR.Ogboni spiritual temple. This great man made me to understand that there is no problem on earth that has no solution so please if you know that you have this same problem or any problem that is similar, i will advise you to come straight to this great man. you can email him at: ogbonispelitemple@hotmail.com