51–60 of 87 posts
This is the reality: 1. High schools that tend to send high numbers of people to schools with acceptance rates less than 20% tend to be dis-proportionally represented. [1] 2. High schools that send kids to good college are more expensive (either inherently, or because they're in an expensive area). Combine these two and you see the perpetual unfairness of education. Not to mention that MIT and other 'elite schools' b…
This is the reality: 1. High schools that tend to send high numbers of people to schools with acceptance rates less than 20% tend to be dis-proportionally represented. [1] 2. High schools that send kids to good college are more expensive (either inherently, or because they're in an expensive area). Combine these two and you see the perpetual unfairness of education. Not to mention that MIT and other 'elite schools' b…
Some of the schools you mentioned, such as Stuyvesant, have an extremely competitive (and meritocratic) admissions process. The fact that Stuyvesant sends a lot of students to MIT, is just as logical as Stanford sending a lot of its undergrads to MIT's grad school. In fact, given how socioeconomically diverse schools like Stuyvesant are, their representation at the elite universities is actually a good sign. https://…
1. What's the average income of parents whose students get in?
2. What's the discrepancy in the admittance rates compared to the city on a whole? [2]
3. What's the discrepancy in the likelihood of admission as a function of the parents' income?
Black people and women only recently were able to go to school at all. Is it shocking they are not able to succeed at a test that judges them on skills that haven't been as cultivated as their majority peers?
Also, competitiveness is not fairness.
[2] http://www.slate.com/blogs/schooled/2016/03/11/new_york_matc...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
you are of course right but unfortunately good teachers don't scale. my oldest is in 2nd grade Success Academy in brooklyn, they actually do lottery ( there is even a documentary about them on Netflix called the lottery) in my view there is only one thing that allow kids to do well in school and that is parents who care. once my son reaches 4th or 5th we are going to send him to a private school, cause thats when it…
Are public schools in Brooklyn that bad? I know they're very segregated[1], but the concept of a private school being of better quality than a public school is horrendous. In Seattle that isn't the case, but that is mainly due to the $10k pay gulf between private and public school teachers, nevermind the benefits differences and religious/of moral character requirements of most private schools. The major reason to go…
Other places like Tribeca public schools are great because it's completely gentrified, but for now its SA for us and then private in a couple of years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everybody involved, I would think: the students themselves, their parents (who presumably care about their kids), and any taxpayers who benefit from having a minority be more productive members of society.
Why do you leave out the entire administration of the schools who receive the majority of the hard dollars? They have the sure bet, the money up front tied to people who will be dragged down by huge loan amounts I would imagine (not everyone receives a scholarship.). To everyone else it's more of a wager in my mind, maybe the kid will do something in the field of study, most of the time they won't.
In any event, MIT grads may graduate with debt, but I think (as a whole) they'll probably manage just fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is only because schools are so crappy to begin with, by design. If a degree actually meant something it wouldn't matter what school you attained it from.
> If a degree actually meant something it wouldn't matter what school you attained it from National graduates can't--and shouldn't--be fungible. Harvard, for example, selects and trains for team players. Its graduates can reliably be dropped into client-facing roles with minimal training. They're also extremely responsive to hierarchy. Their campus tradition champions the Socratic method [1] and deëmphasises individu…
Nonsense.
'A YDN survey of the Class of 2006 found the median GPA to be about 3.6'
http://yaleherald.com/news-and-features/features/grading-inf...
All the ivies (and all US news top25, really) have grade inflation.
Yale's graduate business school doesn't even have grades.
I had never thought about it, but "legacy" seems like a very defensible strategy. If students know their children will probably be studying in the same college they have an incentive do things to make that college better in all respects.
The downside to this is that legacy students have less incentive to work hard in high school if they know they are guaranteed admission into an elite school.
This is the reality: 1. High schools that tend to send high numbers of people to schools with acceptance rates less than 20% tend to be dis-proportionally represented. [1] 2. High schools that send kids to good college are more expensive (either inherently, or because they're in an expensive area). Combine these two and you see the perpetual unfairness of education. Not to mention that MIT and other 'elite schools' b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is only because schools are so crappy to begin with, by design. If a degree actually meant something it wouldn't matter what school you attained it from.
Thats how university accreditation is meant to work: industry and state/gov agencies are supposed to certify an institution's graduates meet certain minimum standards. Given that university is becoming the new high-school, is there merit to the idea of just having all universities follow the same curriculum and standardised assessments and exams? Like the University of California system, but nationwide - if not inter…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If a degree actually meant something it wouldn't matter what school you attained it from National graduates can't--and shouldn't--be fungible. Harvard, for example, selects and trains for team players. Its graduates can reliably be dropped into client-facing roles with minimal training. They're also extremely responsive to hierarchy. Their campus tradition champions the Socratic method [1] and deëmphasises individu…
> Yale, on the other hand, is extremely competitive in terms of grading Nonsense. 'A YDN survey of the Class of 2006 found the median GPA to be about 3.6' http://yaleherald.com/news-and-features/features/grading-inf... All the ivies (and all US news top25, really) have grade inflation. Yale's graduate business school doesn't even have grades.