Live data from Hacker News

The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

teachforamerica.org

561–570 of 922 posts

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#561
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you give a business $15,900 per student ($1.59million per 100 students), they can run much better than most public schools, especially than those public schools in crappy school districts.

Private schools don’t significantly outperform public schools in the US when adjusted for the differences in student populations. There are some world class private schools in the US and some terrible private schools it’s really a mixed bag, just like public schools.

The dirty secret of education is that no school outperform nor underperform much other schools when adjusting for differences in student populations :

https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/why-selection-bias-is-t...

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how the US funds public education (K-12) is rather unique. It's done through property taxes essentially. Depending on your state and city your property taxes can vary a lot with the same value property. But what this means is the wealthier localities have more tax revenue and thus better schools. This is an oft repeated myth. In addition to property taxes, school funding is supplemented by state and federal budgets…

You're excluding the fundraising capacity and ancillary services funded and paid for by the PTA. Wealthy neighborhoods have PTA budgets that are in the hundreds of thousands/millions. They pay for after school activities, language immersion programs, music, sports, you name it. It is shocking the discrepancy between neighborhoods in NYC. Average donation per pupil might be $20 in a poor neighborhood and $5,000 in a w…

A single school in a rich district may have more funding than five or six entire districts in other parts of the city.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#563

Alright, I don't imagine this will be a common take here but here goes. I am a product of the New York City public school system. I have spent the majority of my life as a student in it. The New York city public school system is both the largest public school system in the country and the most segregated. The argument about removing gifted programs are built on the faulty assumptions that the students in those progra…

I'm not sure if I agree with the premise that the gifted students keep all the resources to themselves. If anything they should require less mentoring, less discipling and their parents should be more likely to be involved financially and in PTA.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#564
post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. It is not unacceptable when white children have opportunities. It is unacceptable when black children do not.

Nobody is saying "actively remove white children from gifted programs" they're saying, "when more people qualify for gifted programs than can fit in the program, consider including those who have fewer overall opportunities." Those white kids will get other opportunities to be successful, and the non-white kids will get fewer of those opportunities, because society is racist as hell. Therefore, when you have a chance…

My experience suggests that "when more people qualify for gifted programs than can fit in the program, consider slightly raising the qualification level, so you get exactly the class size you're targeting and no one who qualifies was excluded" is the likely path to be chosen.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#565
post #432

It's probably time to stop letting people in our society that are not building up systems terrorize the rest of us with scarcely hidden threats of slandering your name as a racist. There is nothing racist about having a merit based system within education. If the problem is that it is not entirely merit based, the solution comes from improving the on ramp, not from destroying the program. We should treat people who w…

The general issue with merit-based systems is the definition of merit. In practice there are strong cultural aspects to it, favoring characteristics the dominant group likes. So merit-based programs end up conferring the most advantages to those best conforming to the ideals of the dominant culture, strengthening the dominant culture.

It's debatable (at least) whether that's a good thing... if you consider the dominant culture racist (or bad in some other way) then it's natural to consider the merit-based programs that support that culture a form a systemic racism.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#566
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In Washington State, the teachers finally got their "fully funding" proposal enacted, which was supposed to solve all the funding problems, including big raises for teachers. Are you referring to when the state finally complied with court orders that they were illegally and unconstitutionally underfunding public schools? (A lawsuit started over a decade before and decided over a half a decade before action was take…

To make a compelling case that funding matters to outcome you really need to detail how a lack of funding hurts the learning process. Are the teachers bad teachers, and more pay will recruit better teachers? I'm not sure how many teachers enter the profession for the money to be honest. I'm sure they would like pay, but I'm not really of the mind that the curre nt crop of teachers are on average bad. Do kids not have…

> are the teachers bad teachers, and more pay will recruit better teachers?

Quality of the teachers aside, there are insufficient teachers. The number of teachers required to effectively teach K-12 would benefit from increasing between 50-75% of current levels before reaching diminishing returns according to test studies. So more pay will recruit more teachers, which, makes them better.

Since you wanted to compare us to other countries, the US has the worst average classroom size in the western world. A decade ago we were closer to the middle of the pack. And it was the US classroom size that primarily changed, not a sudden drive in other countries.

> Do kids not have a suitable learning environment? Are they distracted by rodents, roaches, noisy equipment, uncomfortable temperatures, lack of seating or desks?

Beyond that, you should concern yourself with things like asbestos in the walls.

Certainly, a lot of US schools use trailers. Those are noisier and have less comfortable temperatures, require going outside to change classes, etc. Half of the classrooms in some areas are trailers. Moving those to a real building seems obviously better.

> Do the kids not have educational material? Books, marker boards and markers for them, paper, etc?

What about chem labs, frogs to dissect, computers to program, etc? Not everyone is a kindergartner. But a surprising number of schoolchildren have trouble with internet access, which I would argue is a basic requirement for education.

Further, the number of teachers required to spend their meager salaries on classroom supplies and the number of different nonprofits that popup if you search for "donate school supplies" indicates that even at a base level they lack educational material.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#567
post #51

There are so many topics that are hard to talk about nowadays without getting into politics but politics and structural inequality are at the core of this. For the benefit of non-US readers, know that how the US funds public education (K-12) is rather unique. It's done through property taxes essentially. Depending on your state and city your property taxes can vary a lot with the same value property. But what this me…

> wealthier localities have more tax revenue and thus better schools This is not the issue. The real issue is that some wealthier localities defund their public school system through anti-taxation measures and the wealthy send their kids to thriving (well funded, large student population) private schools and those who can't afford the private school tuition (rivals private college tuition) are stuck with either paroc…

Well why do you think those rich people are sending their kids to private schools?

Getting rid of gifted programs obviously makes the public school worse. Do people think that the wealthy are simply going to throw their hands up and say "Welp, guess my kid is getting a shitty education!"?

Make the public schools good again.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#568
post #51

There are so many topics that are hard to talk about nowadays without getting into politics but politics and structural inequality are at the core of this. For the benefit of non-US readers, know that how the US funds public education (K-12) is rather unique. It's done through property taxes essentially. Depending on your state and city your property taxes can vary a lot with the same value property. But what this me…

> how the US funds public education (K-12) is rather unique. It's done through property taxes essentially. Depending on your state and city your property taxes can vary a lot with the same value property. But what this means is the wealthier localities have more tax revenue and thus better schools. This is an oft repeated myth. In addition to property taxes, school funding is supplemented by state and federal budgets…

In order to determine how school funding affects student outcomes, you probably want to consider the funding per pupil at equivalent CPI. $5k goes a lot further in Elko, Nevada than it does in San Francisco.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#569
post #51

There are so many topics that are hard to talk about nowadays without getting into politics but politics and structural inequality are at the core of this. For the benefit of non-US readers, know that how the US funds public education (K-12) is rather unique. It's done through property taxes essentially. Depending on your state and city your property taxes can vary a lot with the same value property. But what this me…

Except most of the money gets taken by robinhood.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how the US funds public education (K-12) is rather unique. It's done through property taxes essentially. Depending on your state and city your property taxes can vary a lot with the same value property. But what this means is the wealthier localities have more tax revenue and thus better schools. This is an oft repeated myth. In addition to property taxes, school funding is supplemented by state and federal budgets…

Knowing nothing about this topic other than hearsay and the opinions of my elderly parents… both of them teachers in public high schools… Do these per-pupil funding numbers have any meaning when your home and community are broken and one or both of your parents is an addict or incarcerated? Because it seems to me we’ve been acting with intent as a society to keep the families, homes, and communities of everyone not w…

My parents (and one step-parent) were also public school teachers, and after the first round of parent-teacher conferences, they could usually easily tell which students would sail through and excel, which ones would try but struggle, and which ones were going to actively harm the classroom environment--simply by meeting the parents (or for the latter group, observe that the parents never even showed up). This heuristic had nothing to do with school funding or the race of the student or parent.
Post reply on HN