Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity • Hacker News Board

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#801

Post by daniel-cussen » Thu, Jul 20, 2023, 4:47 PM UTC

PawgerZ wrote: post #727

daniel-cussen wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tracking helped me in particular by making my homeroom (the British school equivalent, j called a class) more civilized, n fair to students w less academic talent than me. Given the tracking in English n at one point, briefly, Mathematics, it meant the other boys had a shot at getn the best score in the class or at all enjoying leniency in grading, which my presence as a future Erdosian mathematician made impossible,…

May I ask, what is Erdosian? As for bullying, I was a "gifted" kid in school, too. I was treated nicely when people wanted help and bullied ruthlessly when they didn't need me. > their parents would deny them privileges n beat them sometimes if they weren't excellent students 100% agree that this was one of the biggest factors in my bullying. Shame is powerful, and if a child is being shamed for their academic achiev…

Erdosian means having the genetic trait Paul Erdós had, which was the uncommonly good reaction to similar stimulants to those he took, without which he could not do any math research at all. He was steroidal, i'm steroidal too in my research, it's like bodybuilding in that steroids are part of the game. As long as they do not damage your health, it's fine. I literally get time dilation from the stimulants i take, which i do under prescription of course, but at the same time i know it's not fair to play sports for instance, because they're performance enhancing drugs (n generally outright forbidden). But sports are zero-sum, research is positive-sum, so that's what i do instead.

In particular the critical trait is amplified creativity to the point i share Erdos view that "Before, when I looked at a piece of blank paper my mind was filled with ideas. Now all I see is a blank piece of paper.". Same exact symptoms.

In addition, my being steroidal is justified by the fact that i got brain surgery, like the radio transcranial magnetic crap, against my will n without my knowledge, electroshock too, the works. So perhaps it is understandable in my case.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#802

Post by sethrin » Thu, Jul 20, 2023, 7:54 PM UTC

johnnyanmac wrote: post #783

sethrin wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your post is content-free, and it says much about the value of your thoughts. This is not a problem of emotions, except in that it's a useful tool for others to manipulate your emotions. The only effective solution would be to subsidize these relationships via taxes, ideally to the point where one partner can devote themselves to childcare. In this society, you want something, you pay for it. You should probably cont…

>his is not a problem of emotions, except in that it's a useful tool for others to manipulate your emotions. we do it with every other form of advertisement, why not use it to encourage good lifestyles too? > You should probably contemplate why this isn't being proposed by the people who are supposedly concerned about this problem simple: - they aren't concerned about the problem to begin with. Be it apathy, ignoranc…

Yes, I'm sure you have wonderful reasons for wanting to legislate your morality. No, that person offered zero in the way of concrete suggestions, and it staggers belief to see how you would even think that. The immediate subject at hand is not government funded education but family structures, and I was pretty explicit about the solution; since you seem not to have the correct context I suggest re-reading this discussion more carefully.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#803

Post by freedude » Thu, Jul 20, 2023, 8:27 PM UTC

misja111 wrote: post #705

msravi wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > It does not matter if they grow up in foster care or a two-parent family. But it does! Very much. I just don't understand why the US tries everything other than fixing the most glaring cause. Lots of problems can be fixed by encouraging and aggrandizing stable two-parent families instead of getting schools and teachers to fill proxy parenting roles.

> Lots of problems can be fixed by encouraging and aggrandizing stable two-parent families I agree 100%. But how would the US government fix this? The only political movement that I'm aware of that focusses on stable two-parent families are the conservative Christians. Or are there any others?

You will get similar focus on two parent households from Orthodox Jews, Muslims, LDS, JW and several other religious groups other than conservative Christians. However, your point is still the same. With today's stance of "separation of church and state" the US government will not promote this ideology of a two parent household being desired.

Our 41st president had a Faith-Based Initiative which was successful in many areas. It cost the tax-payer 75% less to have a faith-based organization head up a relief program than it did for a similar governmental program. Why? Because it was a volunteer based organization and they were incentivized to keep costs low.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#804

Post by Shocka1 » Thu, Jul 20, 2023, 9:41 PM UTC

tootie wrote: post #732

Shocka1 wrote: post #723

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the person you are responding to may have forgotten they are no longer posting in the Reddit tab. I've been on this site for a long time - unfortunately these vitriolic types have been bleeding over into this forum more than ever the last few years.

I was thinking the same ironically. Lots and lots of conservative propaganda on HN in the last few years.

No idea whether it's conservative or liberal as I'm not real enthusiastic with the red/blue team stuff. Emotional is probably the best way I can describe it.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#805

Post by jazzdev » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 1:05 AM UTC

jimmydddd wrote: post #587

gnicholas wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it will — there are still plenty of schools elsewhere that offer advanced coursework, and their graduates can more than fill the freshman class of elite colleges. For example, I grew up in Sacramento, and our public schools had a tracked program from 2nd grade. Pretty much all of us took algebra/geometry in middle school, and those who were advanced were taking precalc or calc by 9th grade. It has been a…

I think this is exactly the type of program they're trying to get rid of because it caused a disparity of outcomes of students at graduation.

I think getting rid of this will cause more disparity in the outcomes. Rich parents can afford tutors and poor parents can't, so poor kids come out even worse off.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#806

Post by jazzdev » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 1:08 AM UTC

kevinpet wrote: post #629

candiodari wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what, exactly, do you expect administrators to do? They don't have any actual knowledge and if they do, they absolutely do NOT want to use it, so tests are out. There are now more administrators than teaching staff. We're not far off from having more "social" workers in schools than teachers. First and foremost, these people want to decide what is equitable. Firstly, without taking actual ability (or "conscientio…

I thought Scott Alexander's take was interesting https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/why-match-school-and-s... and the phrase "laundering privilege" stuck with me. It's like a crypto mixer but for privilege.

Yeah, that was interesting take... that the actual smart kids are there to make the rich kids look smart.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#807

Post by dumpsterdiver » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 3:43 AM UTC

sethrin wrote: post #741

dumpsterdiver wrote: post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What the hell does pushing back on single-family homes look like? A previous poster spelled it out: > by encouraging and aggrandizing stable two-parent families instead of getting schools and teachers to fill proxy parenting roles You seem to be thinking of "pushing back" as some sort of attack upon single parents, when I believe that the original spirit of the comment was more along the lines of: Let's strive to s…

Your post is content-free, and it says much about the value of your thoughts. This is not a problem of emotions, except in that it's a useful tool for others to manipulate your emotions. The only effective solution would be to subsidize these relationships via taxes, ideally to the point where one partner can devote themselves to childcare. In this society, you want something, you pay for it. You should probably cont…

> Your post is content-free, and it says much about the value of your thoughts.

It's hard for me to get behind the logic of someone who opens their response with a direct personal attack. I stopped reading as soon as you started making abusive comments (the very first sentence). I didn't deserve to be told that my thoughts are without merit, and when you resorted to saying so it really did tell more about you than it ever could me.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#808

Post by DropInIn » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 4:43 AM UTC

johnnyanmac wrote: post #793

DropInIn wrote: post #791

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Applying behaviors borne directly of the current structure on to the outcomes from an entirely different structure is not the way we reason, is it? It frankly couldn't do worse than what we have, as the current structure ensures suffering and pain for the majority as a result of the social structure established by the norms and systems. At least under my suggestion those who would excel Could excel and get the hell o…

>Applying behaviors borne directly of the current structure on to the outcomes from an entirely different structure is not the way we reason, is it? It's an inevitable result of reasoning. I can't know what I don't know. Short of the laws of physics, we can never truly predict the behaviors of a new universal model from scratch. Regardless, I don't think human nature would change that drastically as a result of stude…

You didn't actually apply the known correlaries though.

Kindergarten is about the only part of the current system which could be use as a reference for behavior, as after that all the structural features which _explicitly _ _induce_ the behaviors you reference are Forced on the kids.

So, using K as a reference, what xan we learn about free form education?

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#809

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 5:06 AM UTC

johnnyanmac wrote: post #777

dumpsterdiver wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh my, I read your first link in its entirety and, "Yikes." The Public comment #5 section regarding chapter 12 (which covers homework and assessments) was especially shocking. Chapter 12 in the 2005 version of the CMF was 5 pages long. The same chapter in the current draft is 70 pages long, almost entirely due to a slew of opinions against homework and other testing practices. The entire CMF draft was (and still is e…

>That reinforces that idea that it's okay to do a half-ass job because you can always "fix it later". In the real world however, poor decisions can have devastating effects the very first time, and there might not be a chance for a "do-over". I feel that's a much more philosophical POV than you let on. But let's digress from that argument of redemption and reparations for now. While there are certainly some careers w…

[deleted]

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#810

Post by dumpsterdiver » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 5:27 AM UTC

johnnyanmac wrote: post #777

dumpsterdiver wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh my, I read your first link in its entirety and, "Yikes." The Public comment #5 section regarding chapter 12 (which covers homework and assessments) was especially shocking. Chapter 12 in the 2005 version of the CMF was 5 pages long. The same chapter in the current draft is 70 pages long, almost entirely due to a slew of opinions against homework and other testing practices. The entire CMF draft was (and still is e…

>That reinforces that idea that it's okay to do a half-ass job because you can always "fix it later". In the real world however, poor decisions can have devastating effects the very first time, and there might not be a chance for a "do-over". I feel that's a much more philosophical POV than you let on. But let's digress from that argument of redemption and reparations for now. While there are certainly some careers w…

> I feel that's a much more philosophical POV than you let on. But let's digress from that argument of redemption and reparations for now.

It's not at all clear to me what you are trying to communicate in the paragraph I quoted above.

> While there are certainly some careers where you don't get do-overs, I see the other extreme happening more with the current state of mind; they realize that they are out of time, feel like they can't extend deadlines, so they just say "fuck it", throw out some sloppily put together report or attend a meeting without the knowledge necessary, take their D in stride and move on.

I'm also confused about what you are communicating here. Is this a simple lamentation, or are you trying to make an argument?