401–410 of 925 posts
This doesn't surprise me at all. From what I can tell, California's education system has moved from "equality" (which I would define as providing similar opportunities to all the kids) to focusing on "equity" (which I think they define as dictating the same outcome for all kids). To get an idea of how off the rails this has gotten, go read up on their statements trying to justify banning high school calculus. They ex…
> “We now observe preparation gaps so severe that instructors must reteach middle-school mathematics while simultaneously teaching the material students need for sciences, engineering, economics, and other quantitatively demanding fields,” they warned. i dont understand why the teachers would go out of their way to reteach middle-school math. i teach. my courses have prerequisites. if a student somehow makes it into…
Professors who fail large swathes of their classes get in trouble.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it’s not a real choice. As household income decreases, the odds the child goes to the nearest school (regardless of how good it is) increases. Are you providing after school child care options or transportation to their school of choice? If not, then it’s not a real choice and kids from lower income households will remain disadvantaged. That is to say, the results will be mostly identical except now public mo…
> except now public money will be going to private entities Right, now you've come full circle to the core of my proposal: If the charter schools are not producing students that perform well academically, then they do not get paid . Instead, the investor that funded the charter school takes a bath. This is capitalism at its finest: - The local government provides a competitive backstop. If you do worse than that floo…
Schools in poorer neighborhoods struggle because the people who live there are struggling.
The charter school model is attempting to solve the problem in a vacuum, but the problem does not exist in a vacuum.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Because it’s not a real choice. As household income decreases, the odds the child goes to the nearest school (regardless of how good it is) increases. The “odds” don’t tell you whether or not it’s a “real choice.” Families that value education will take advantage of those opportunities. Families that don’t value education will get what they get. Lots of families don’t value education and there’s nothing you can do…
Surely it’s possible that a family might value education but not have the literal time, if they are working non stop, to take the kids to a further school? Or to take care of them afterward? You’re avoiding the point by saying “anyone who cares can,” and avoiding the economics entirely. Economics can force choices against your own best interests. If you have an hour between shifts and the school is 45 minutes away, y…
This doesn't surprise me at all. From what I can tell, California's education system has moved from "equality" (which I would define as providing similar opportunities to all the kids) to focusing on "equity" (which I think they define as dictating the same outcome for all kids). To get an idea of how off the rails this has gotten, go read up on their statements trying to justify banning high school calculus. They ex…
"The surge in math deficiencies after dropping the SAT highlights a systemic issue: grade inflation. Without a standardized baseline like the SAT/ACT, a 4.0 GPA from a high school with relaxed standards looks identical to a 4.0 from a highly rigorous one. Paradoxically, removing test requirements harms underprivileged students the most. Preparing for the SAT requires a book and an internet connection. In contrast, bu…
> Preparing for the SAT requires a book and an internet connection. Sports frequently just requires a ball or a place to run. In both scenarios, you can still purchase better equipment/training. There are very expensive, effective SAT prep options out there for the wealthy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you want to get rid of "advanced" course options and push every student into the same bucket?
I'd be fine with that. It would provide an incentive to care about the bottom 75th percentile along with the spoiled rich kids
Beyond this, the entire point of higher education is to push those who are able to higher levels, not to drag the 75% along for the ride.
This doesn't surprise me at all. From what I can tell, California's education system has moved from "equality" (which I would define as providing similar opportunities to all the kids) to focusing on "equity" (which I think they define as dictating the same outcome for all kids). To get an idea of how off the rails this has gotten, go read up on their statements trying to justify banning high school calculus. They ex…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's horrible. Smarter kids could get a better education, but they can't, because the teachers have to deal with illiterate kids that don't want to learn in the first place.
Maybe if we tried to educate all our kids instead of just the rich ones they wouldn't be illiterate