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

Schools for children of military achieve results rarely seen in public education

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 290 posts

Re: Schools for children of military achieve results rarely seen in public education

#201

Post by s1artibartfast »

lukeschlather wrote: post #114
HDThoreaun wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do think that the students who don't get accepted into the selective schools need better options. It's just when the options are keep all the students together or separate them and some will become better and some will become worse I think providing the students who want to succeed with a way to accomplish their goals is the correct choice. Hopefully there will be another option that isn't so exclusionary in the fu…

You sidestepped my point. Segregating all the underperformers into one place causes harm and you're ignoring that harm, assuming that the benefit of segregating the high performers is more important. And you are in fact crediting the charter school with the benefit while ensuring that public schools receive blame for any harm that results. I think you're actually arguing against universal instruction, that we shouldn…

I think it's very much unclear how much harm it does to segregate the disruptors.

How much good does it do a violent and disruptive student to have a quiet and studious one in the same classroom?

On the other hand, it's obvious how much bad such a disruptive student does to all of the other children.

Moreover, it there is no reason whatsoever to think harm would in any way be symmetrical.

Re: Schools for children of military achieve results rarely seen in public education

#202

Post by m463 »

Spinnaker_ wrote: post #8

I think this can be misleading in the same way some charter school results are. The easiest way to improve a school's results isn't to improve the education provided, it's to get rid of the worst performing kids. Charter schools do this by various selection effects, and artificial barriers, like ending at noon on a Wednesday. So the only kids who go there have two parents, one who probably is stay at home and can pic…

This is so true.

There is a school district in silicon valley, the cupertino schools, that have consistent high scores. This makes cupertino real estate valuable, because people can move into a good school district instead of sending their kids to a private school.

But I found out how they do it. If you try to enroll a kid with bad language skills, say spanish is their primary language, the school district sends the kids to an "appropriate" school (which happens to be in neighboring sunnyvale)

lol

Re: Schools for children of military achieve results rarely seen in public education

#204

Post by ndriscoll »

lozenge wrote: post #146
SomethingNew2 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s assume there will be some % of kids that lack interest in learning, have no parental or community support, and despite schools providing them additional support for years they show no improvement or desire to improve. I think it’s reasonable some % of these people will always be in the population pool. What is the solution for these individuals?

That's quite a big assumption, but what do you think will happen if you don't offer them any education? They won't earn much or grow the economy and might end up going to prison, which is far more expensive.

Assuming such a group exists, the point is that if you do offer them an education (or, rather, try to force it upon them), they won't accept it, so they still won't earn much or grow the economy and might end up going to prison, but now their peers don't get an education either and suffer the same fate.

Re: Schools for children of military achieve results rarely seen in public education

#205

Post by lmm »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #161
HDThoreaun wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Education is mostly about your peers. It's obviously true for prestigious universities but it's just as true for elementary schools. Charter schools kicking out problematic students isn't some loophole, it's the main point, and it absolutely can improve the education for those that remain. My district has a quarter of high schoolers in charter schools. Almost all of them under the poverty line. It's not like they're…

It is both a loophole and the main point. It's the main point for people who want their children to succeed at the expense of the rest of society and it's a loophole when they try to sell that concept to the rest of society as "we can teach better for cheaper so give us your tax money and let us replace universal public education" rather than "we have thrown some of your children on the scrapheap for you to expensive…

> either don't understand or don't care that this is of net negative value

Or genuinely think it's of net positive value.

One disruptive kid can spoil the educations of 29 others pretty easily, and probably won't even gain anything from staying in school. It's a dead-weight loss. But we're too chickenshit to openly do anything about it, so the rich buy their way away from the bad kids one way or another, and the decent-but-poor get to suffer.

Re: Schools for children of military achieve results rarely seen in public education

#206

Post by fooker »

Spinnaker_ wrote: post #8

I think this can be misleading in the same way some charter school results are. The easiest way to improve a school's results isn't to improve the education provided, it's to get rid of the worst performing kids. Charter schools do this by various selection effects, and artificial barriers, like ending at noon on a Wednesday. So the only kids who go there have two parents, one who probably is stay at home and can pic…

You are missing the second order effect.

> get rid of the worst performing kids.

The threat of this consequence is often enough to motivate kids to study.

Re: Schools for children of military achieve results rarely seen in public education

#207

Post by throwaway2037 »

rawgabbit wrote: post #139
joshhart wrote: post #7

The article suggests several causes: 1. Bias in population - these students all have families where at least one parent has a stable job, which isn't true elsewhere. There could also be other factors, for instance maybe people who enter the military are more motivated on average and that genetically or through parenting is passed on to their kids. 2. Better funding 3. Frequent feedback to teachers and more methodical…

I spent time in the US military many years ago. From my sample size of one: 1) This is population bias and self-selection. Everyone I met in the service was extremely patriotic and wanted to succeed in everything. Many came from desperately poor backgrounds and saw the service as their way to the middle class. Those who joined for other reasons were quickly forced out. At the time, when people asked me what my job wa…

    Sexual assault is a taboo subject that happens under the surface and commanders at all levels are at their wit's end.
First, I assume that here, "sexual assault" is perpetrated by men against women. (Yes, I know there are other forms.)

In your opinion, what do you think is the root cause of this problem? And, is the rate of sexual assault higher for women in the military vs civilians? (I assume yes due to self-selection for more aggressive men.)

Re: Schools for children of military achieve results rarely seen in public education

#208

Post by jjeaff »

nosequel wrote: post #55

This got touched on by a few replies, happy to see there are some others here with actual military experience chiming in. I grew up on military bases, and went to schools both on and off base for 18 years. All continental US bases typically have elementary-level (K-5) school, but you typically go to an off-base school for middle and high school. When you are overseas, this isn't the case, you would most likely go to…

Did you ever see any statistics to back up your perception that all the kids were extra well behaved for the rest of the year? The reason I ask is that we've all heard the whole "tough on crime" schtick and I feel like it has never really been proven out to be all that effective. especially on kids. plenty of kids receive penalties far more severe for the parents than having to move off base (like expulsion with no other schools around). And yet school discipline problems continue after each expulsion.

Re: Schools for children of military achieve results rarely seen in public education

#209

Post by trealira »

nine_k wrote: post #189
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is both a loophole and the main point. It's the main point for people who want their children to succeed at the expense of the rest of society and it's a loophole when they try to sell that concept to the rest of society as "we can teach better for cheaper so give us your tax money and let us replace universal public education" rather than "we have thrown some of your children on the scrapheap for you to expensive…

Also, think about these disruptive kids. They are the minority. They clearly don't function well in the conventional school setting. They are struggling to learn the material. They learn how to disrupt though, and how the grown-ups around them are powerless. They learn to be constantly blamed, and feel miserable, defiant, or both. A lot of wrong lessons. This makes the lives of these disruptive kids worse. Being in a…

I think you're giving them a little too much credit. Plenty of disruptive kids have a perfectly fine home life, have an iPhone, get expensive toys or technology bought for them. A lot of them are just jerks who were never punished by their parents, received few punishments from teachers and staff who had little power, and enjoy being disruptive or bullying others, and don't give a shit if they flunk all their tests or classes. The teachers say they're going to become a janitor or drop out of high school at this rate, and they don't care because they've been told this all their lives, because their disruptive behaviors haven't gotten better since kindergarten, only gotten more violent and more sexual. And somehow they manage to squeak by to the next grade.

I say this speaking from my own experience as someone who went to a Title 1 school before taking a test to get into a magnet program when transitioning to high school (about age 14); the difference in disruptive behavior was like night and day to me. I still remember it very clearly.

If education can improve the most by punishing and expelling disruptive students more often, sending them to other schools, I wouldn't be opposed. It would help the non-disruptive majority of students reach their full potential, which is a better outcome than trying to help the disruptive minority at the expense of everyone else.

Re: Schools for children of military achieve results rarely seen in public education

#210

Post by kennedywm »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #100
eYrKEC2 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another factor is that the military parents have cleared a bar of pre-enlistment testing (ASVAB?) that has strong correlations with IQ testing.

maybe on the officer level, but you don't need a particularly high ASVAB score to drive a truck or be a cook.

Officers aren’t required to take the ASVAB. Scores affect available career field choices for enlisted soldiers.
Post reply on HN