I think this more a function of all subjects in one classroom and one teacher model of grade 1-7. If this was a grade 8 13 year old, he would be just taking Math 11 classes and English 8 classes in his schedule. If they put their primary school schedule in bands (all classes teach math from 1-2, teach english from 2-3, etc) advanced kids can move to another classroom during that band.
Could You Modify It ‘To Stop Students From Becoming This Advanced?’
131–140 of 241 posts
Re: Could You Modify It ‘To Stop Students From Becoming This Advanced?’
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
Private schools will lead to a marketing driven education system that preys on peoples ignorance. Here's a simple thought experiment. Look at all the education systems around the world, and ask if the ones with the best results are private or public.
Here's a simple thought experiment. Look at all the education systems around the world, and ask if the ones with the best results are private or public. That's not a simple thought experiment, it's a massive data-collecting exercise. I'm not sure if there are any countries with wholly-private education systems, are there? Still, there are many countries (the UK and Australia spring to mind) where private schools play…
But faced with a choice between that and a chaotic American public school where the primary goal appears to be stopping the students from shooting each other, I'll take the spoon feeding and straw hats any day.
Given the fact that the US is a country of over 300 million people, and you have heard only a few stories of shootings, I find this comment extremely hyperbolic.
I went to private and public schools in 3 different states. The public schools I attended were extremely safe, but the private schools provided more structure and discipline (that someone like me was helped by when just a clueless kid).
EDIT: Also note that my best friend went to the well-accredited, local public school, and was valedictorian (eventually graduated from Emory Law). I went to a non-profit, private school where my roommate was on a full-ride, and went on to go full-ride to Carnegie Mellon. I blew off college and became a ski bumb/river-guide/waiter for six years.
Re: Could You Modify It ‘To Stop Students From Becoming This Advanced?’
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sorry, but how the hell do you recieve three BS degrees at the age of sixteen (unless you mean BS degrees, which I'd imagine they'd really have to be...)
If you can learn the material you can pass classes by examination.
Maybe, but the material needed for multiple bachelors' degrees is vast.
I suppose if you took (essentially) the same courses at four different universities simultaneously, you could get four for the "price" of one. And I mean only the intellectual price, not the actual price, which would be huge and pointless.
Re: Could You Modify It ‘To Stop Students From Becoming This Advanced?’
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your argument is essentially "marketing is bad". Which is a shadow argument for "capitalism is bad". Take an ad for the Macbook Air. It shows a stylish person happily using the Air to do something fun. Now consider an ad for a private school that shows a child happily benefitting from something he/she learned at the school being advertised. Maybe the ad shows a graduate getting accepted into a prestigious college or…
Your argument is essentially "marketing is bad". Which is a shadow argument for "capitalism is bad". While your formulation is deliberately obtuse, the underlying sentiment can be quite damning for a certain kind of free market fan-boy, the kind who insists that buyers in a market are rational in some individual or even collective sense, that they somehow optimize their own happiness or utility function. That notion…
"the kind who insists that buyers in a market are rational in some individual or even collective sense, that they somehow optimize their own happiness or utility function."
This is my core point as well, thanks for taking the time to lay out a better case than I did. It's rather shocking once you realize that the human brain is not rational in the way we often think it is. I find this fact to completely destroy most libertarian principles.
Re: Could You Modify It ‘To Stop Students From Becoming This Advanced?’
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is any article about public schooling not going to be about politics? The public school system is inherently political by definition.
That's why it should should be flagged, killed, and left for other sites to debate.
But the question "What's the best way to teach children?" is very relevant, so I'm inclined to allow it even if it does meander into political questions on occasion.
Re: Could You Modify It ‘To Stop Students From Becoming This Advanced?’
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. All I see here, is an aptitude-driven advancement system (Kahn) coming into conflict with an age-based advancement system (public schools). Clearly, if we're to reap the benefits of an aptitude-driven advancement system, we need to erase the core assumptions of the public school curriculum. (age-based peer groups, pass/fail an entire grade at a time, etc) When students are permitted to progress in different s…
we need to erase the core assumptions of the public school curriculum Great, I agree. Why do you think these assumptions are so hard to change? Who are the people holding the assumptions? Why haven't they changed their minds already?
We run into problems not only with the established educators, but I think also from parents. A lot of people tend to get really edgy when you're discussing changing things like curriculum or pedagogy, because they're very risk averse when it comes to their children. Not all parents are like this, but a lot of them are. They're also generally bad at properly evaluating their kids' strengths and weaknesses since they tend to have a positive bias.
Re: Could You Modify It ‘To Stop Students From Becoming This Advanced?’
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your argument is essentially "marketing is bad". Which is a shadow argument for "capitalism is bad". Take an ad for the Macbook Air. It shows a stylish person happily using the Air to do something fun. Now consider an ad for a private school that shows a child happily benefitting from something he/she learned at the school being advertised. Maybe the ad shows a graduate getting accepted into a prestigious college or…
Your argument is essentially "marketing is bad". Which is a shadow argument for "capitalism is bad". While your formulation is deliberately obtuse, the underlying sentiment can be quite damning for a certain kind of free market fan-boy, the kind who insists that buyers in a market are rational in some individual or even collective sense, that they somehow optimize their own happiness or utility function. That notion…
First, I agree that human beings often make wrong decisions. However, it is completely wrong to blame that on emotion.
"By attempting to short-circuit the decision-making process, by putting the emotional cart before the rational horse, the ads you describe are fundamentally deceptive. That ads like that exist, that they are paid for by people with skin in the game, and that they work, are all testament to the fundamental irrationality of market players on both an individual and aggregate level. Namely, they can be swayed by a manufactured emotional response before even having gone through the rational decision-making process."
What makes an emotional response any less worthy than a rational response? Plato's ideas on rationality are just plain wrong- the cart before the horse is a poor metaphor. If you look at any neuroscience research in the area, you soon see that that good decision making is completely impossible without both, together. I highly recommend Jonah Lehrer's "How We Decide" as a highly readable book on the subject.
Following emotional cues is not "short-circuiting the decision-making process", and is not in any way "fundamentally deceptive".
EDIT: Not to mention that intangible value is still value. If marketing makes an item higher status, and you value items based on the status they confer on you, then that marketing is creating enormous value. Branding literally makes a product more valuable in a consumer eye, and that is the only measure of value that matters.
Re: Could You Modify It ‘To Stop Students From Becoming This Advanced?’
#138In 90% of the geography (50% of the population?) of the united states, there is effectively only enough population to support a limited set of teachers & facility. It is nice that we can have magnet schools in urban areas. What about deeply surban or rural areas? Perhaps the whole idea of competition between schools is incorrect -- should we instead focus on creating a competitive learning platform (under neutral bri…
It is nice that we can have magnet schools in urban areas. What about deeply surban or rural areas?
Well, in a small-to-medium-sized town that can only support one school, you can nonetheless segregate students by ability. A town of eight thousand should have about one hundred students in each year, so you segregate 'em into five classes (alpha through epsilon?) and teach 'em separately, at a pace suitable for each.
The US is actually pretty densely populated, so the number of folks living outside commuting distance of eight thousand other people is pretty low.
The real problem with this is that nobody wants their precious snowflake to be classified as an epsilon, or even a delta or gamma. Bad luck, drones!
Re: Could You Modify It ‘To Stop Students From Becoming This Advanced?’
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can learn the material you can pass classes by examination.
Maybe, but the material needed for multiple bachelors' degrees is vast . I suppose if you took (essentially) the same courses at four different universities simultaneously, you could get four for the "price" of one. And I mean only the intellectual price, not the actual price, which would be huge and pointless.
It depends. If there's a large relationship between the degrees, then a lot of the classes you're taking are going to be similar (or the same class), and you only have to do the liberal arts and entry level stuff once.
Re: Could You Modify It ‘To Stop Students From Becoming This Advanced?’
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would you automatically declare an organization like Cato, which comprises a lot of living and dying Nobel Laureates (10 in fact) and read by a large number of PhDs in economics from our top universities, not HN worthy and "political propaganda"? It's a little absurd to make such a claim without substantiating your argument.
To be clear, my pronouncement of it not being HN worthy has nothing to with it being from Cato. But purely with the content of the article. Let me explain. It opens with an unattributed quote. One that is somewhat surprising given what I've seen from the teachers and educators I know who have seen Khan Academy. While some complain about things like the rigor of the exercises, I've never heard the complaint about need…
The "appeals to authority" fallacy applies when I'm citing non-experts (like if I'm citing Chomsky for an economics issue). CATO is overwhelmingly filled with PhDs in Economics, and with my economics background, I think it's safe to assume the above article is not controversial at all among economists across the aisle and none of them would term it "purely political propaganda".
You state that CATO is "purely political propaganda" without substantiating that claim with any specifics whatsoever. Where is your data?
American public schools, with few exceptions, don't compete with each other for resources and students. Therefore, it's a form of monopoly. For instance, an American student within a designated area can only attend a certain public school. Geographically-disadvantaged residents can still choose supermarkets outside their areas if they find more utility doing so (or a competitor can start up their own supermarket and take market share from the lazy incumbent), so supermarkets do exist in a competitive market. Public school students rarely have the option to choose new suppliers.