Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is education no longer the ‘great equalizer’?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 548 posts

Re: Is education no longer the ‘great equalizer’?

#471

Post by WalterBright »

tut-urut-utut wrote: post #298
WalterBright wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> chronically underfunding schools In Washington State, for decades there was a big push to "fully fund" the schools. They finally got their way a couple years back, i.e. just about everything they wanted. There has been zero improvement in results. There has been no further mention of "fully funding" the schools in the press since, but the demands for more and more money for the schools have not abated at all. Edit:…

Do you really expect that the effect of „fully funded“ schools is measurable after only a couple of years. It takes decades for any society scale effect to become evident.

> It takes decades for any society scale effect to become evident.

"Just give us the billions, and don't expect any results."

So ok, then what's the plan? If there is a plan (no evidence of one) then are the goals? any timeline? any place where something can be measured?

I know, this is all highly unreasonable of me to expect any sort of accountability for billions spent.

Re: Is education no longer the ‘great equalizer’?

#472

Post by esyir »

derbOac wrote: post #468
rkk3 wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google famously only hired people with elite education credentials in the beginning. "We also didn't want to hire anyone from what were considered lesser universities" Eric Schmidt https://youtu.be/hcRxFRgNpns?t=1756

Stuff like that is so soul crushing to me. It's caste systems in another guise.

And, with the push against objective metrics for entering, the castes get ever more solid.

Re: Is education no longer the ‘great equalizer’?

#473

Post by rkk3 »

derbOac wrote: post #468
rkk3 wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google famously only hired people with elite education credentials in the beginning. "We also didn't want to hire anyone from what were considered lesser universities" Eric Schmidt https://youtu.be/hcRxFRgNpns?t=1756

Stuff like that is so soul crushing to me. It's caste systems in another guise.

It's good to remember that Primogeniture and hereditary monarchy are only recently out of fashion in the west.

Re: Is education no longer the ‘great equalizer’?

#474

Post by esyir »

treis wrote: post #252
mnowicki wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's interesting to hear, and I'll have to take your word on it for now, but I'm curious why(unless things have significantly changed in the past 6-7 years) inner-city schools are still horrendously bad. I've experienced schools in both the worst parts of Philadelphia as well as in middle-class suburbs of Philly, and the contrast is even more exaggerated than they make it seem on TV shows/movies that depict these t…

What we think of as school quality is mostly the quality of the students. Richer districts have, on average, students of high SES with parents that are more willing & able to help their kids succeed in school. Poorer districts have, on average, lower SES kids with terrible living situations and parents. Having disruptive kids also makes educating them much more expensive. Discipline issues chew up a lot of resources…

Perhaps the people should provide the teachers /school with more ways to punish disruption. Let schools expel and suspend disruptive students. Don't let bad actors hurt the rest. But from what I've heard, they do the opposite.

Re: Is education no longer the ‘great equalizer’?

#475

Post by esyir »

dlp211 wrote: post #297
Ensorceled wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As with health care, the US spends near the top[1] per student and ranks among the worst for results. [1] https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd

The fundamental problem with these types of analysis is that it is the aggregate and average of a large mostly sparse country with a large population. Between Federalism, local & state politics, wealth concentration, and geographic constraint leads to some interesting and costly quirks to our school systems. It turns out that wealthy public school districts are extremely good and compete at the top of the world stage…

Could you support this with data of your own? I know that applies to university level education, but I've never seen the data for lower levels of education.

Re: Is education no longer the ‘great equalizer’?

#476

Post by wahern »

arminiusreturns wrote: post #378
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't dispute the existence of class war (though I don't think it's about "middle class" and more about "working class" and I don't think this process is deliberate, more systemic).... But I would quibble about the role education content plays. Canada doesn't have the same kind of tiered education system that the US has. Public schools are funded out of pooled revenue not local taxes for example so poor neighbourho…

I disagree strongly about curriculum. Just to give an example, here is an exerpt about the language curriculum at Eton from a modern (90s) graduate: "Everyone must learn Latin and French for the first two years. Most boys have studied Latin and French for a couple of years before they arrive at the school. The cleverer boys also do Ancient Greek. There are many more languages offered besides these ones. The additiona…

> Most boys have studied Latin and French for a couple of years before they arrive at the school.

The curriculum at elite schools speaks to the investments made for these children outside school. Not just tutoring, but parental support for homework, etc.

At the end of the day, neither Latin nor French is, per se, likely to matter one iota regarding aggregate success. People don't get wealthy by graduating with a degree in Classics or French Literature. What matters is what these things reflect.

Re: Is education no longer the ‘great equalizer’?

#477

Post by asdff »

flavius29663 wrote: post #333
asdff wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a tax drain though. It funds things like higher education and healthcare. Things that most Americans have to pay out of pocket if they want which entrenches the lack of class mobility in this country. Imo the european system is better.

> It funds things like higher education and healthcare The US funds the healthcare above and beyond what any other country on Earth is doing. I think it's 50% higher than the next contender, per capita. As for higher education, the US universities are doing much much better than their European counterparts. If you get a STEM degree, you're basically set for life in the US, pay your debts in no time and then enjoy a s…

Not every US STEM degree gets you a six figure job. STEM majors are some of the most awarded degrees in all colleges; there is a huge oversupply in the labor pool unless you are able to differentiate yourself which is not easy and usually requires post graduate education or nepotism. For the vast majority of STEM B.S. degrees, even a computer science degree in the midwest, you might be toiling for 60k-80k too. No one I knew who graduated in computer science in my undergrad has some glamorous bay area life today. Most ended up getting jobs in places like Nebraska or somewhere humid in the south writing terrible enterprise software and they complain to me how much it sucks. The bay area and that high income tech culture is a tiny little bubble, despite all the ink spilled over it.

Re: Is education no longer the ‘great equalizer’?

#478

Post by the_only_law »

asdff wrote: post #477
flavius29663 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It funds things like higher education and healthcare The US funds the healthcare above and beyond what any other country on Earth is doing. I think it's 50% higher than the next contender, per capita. As for higher education, the US universities are doing much much better than their European counterparts. If you get a STEM degree, you're basically set for life in the US, pay your debts in no time and then enjoy a s…

Not every US STEM degree gets you a six figure job. STEM majors are some of the most awarded degrees in all colleges; there is a huge oversupply in the labor pool unless you are able to differentiate yourself which is not easy and usually requires post graduate education or nepotism. For the vast majority of STEM B.S. degrees, even a computer science degree in the midwest, you might be toiling for 60k-80k too. No one…

> Most ended up getting jobs in places like Nebraska or somewhere humid in the south writing terrible enterprise software and they complain to me how much it sucks.

Hello, friend. No but seriously, if anyone has any good advice on how to escape this, I’m listening.

Re: Is education no longer the ‘great equalizer’?

#479

Post by jwilber »

foolinaround wrote: post #438
Invictus0 wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My girlfriend's father died when she was 4 and her mother was an alcoholic for many years, she still turned out great and got herself into college at 17. On the other hand, I know many people with tiger or helicopter parents who lack even the most basic life skills, have difficulty socializing, don't know their physical limits, or have strong entitlement complexes. Attention to child is a poor metric for quality of p…

thats great for you both, but its' one person's data point, that does not take away from the overall statement. What I meant by "attention to child" is that children generally push at boundaries, and there needs to be mature people in their life who keep watch and bring them back in.

You call out that response for being anecdotal, but provide zero evidence in your original claim or follow up response.

Re: Is education no longer the ‘great equalizer’?

#480

Post by asdff »

iammisc wrote: post #354
asdff wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the median american even benefit from these sorts of things? I would guess not at all, but I'm sure for the 1% the regulatory environment is extremely favorable. Someone working with their hands doesn't care much about national financial policy, since it has very little practical effect on their life vs. something like a national healthcare policy, which they would use regularly throughout their lives.

Perhaps not, but you're changing the goalposts. You said European style safety nets would spur individual innovation and risk taking. That was the only metric I was interested in. If you want to change the conversation to generic 'benefits' or happiness, by all means, go ahead, but that's not a conversation I'm personally interested in.

Maybe it does spur innovation and risk taking, but not the sorts of innovation that brings VCs to the room like a vulture to carrion.

The average American works 25 hours a week. The average German works 18 hours a week. That's another 7 hours you can spend with your children, 7 hours to spend learning an instrument, 7 hours working on art, 7 hours exercising or engaging in physical activity. To me, these are all cases of individual innovation and self improvement. Maybe you now have time after your job as a German to plan your business venture, and you have the time to properly plan for risk taking activities such as this. Due to the hours worked and the requirements that the social safety net be fulfilled by continued employment at certain employers that offer these benefits, it really does feel that most Americans are lacking opportunities to individually innovate or take risks that Europeans might not have issue with, since their social benefits are not tied to their employer and they overall work less hours and have more vacation time and longer parental leave periods.

Post reply on HN