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

Privileged Poor vs. Doubly Disadvantaged at Elite Schools

theamericanconservative.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 96 posts

Re: Privileged Poor vs. Doubly Disadvantaged at Elite Schools

#31

Post by Bostonian »

_bxg1 wrote: post #29
Bostonian wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Private schools could be outlawed. Rich parents who want their children to go to better schools can donate to their city's public education budget." This awful idea makes sense only if you think the state owns people's children. As a parent it is my right, within certain bounds, to decide how my children are educated.

The state already imposes certain basic aspects of welfare on children, from vaccines to the fact that they have to go to school at all. In fact (I believe) private schools already have to be certified by the state. So it wouldn't be an enormous leap to simply stop certifying private organizations that want to play the role of state-certified educational institution.

Would you ban private after-schools too? For example, my children attend Russian School of Math, which has branches around the country, especially in the Northeast. Chinese parents have created supplemental schools where Chinese language, English, art, contest math and other things are taught.

If you ban physical after-schools, do you then ban online classes such as the math classes offered by the Art of Problem Solving?

Re: Privileged Poor vs. Doubly Disadvantaged at Elite Schools

#32

Post by droithomme »

It seems to me that this group appellated the "Privileged Poor" - disadvantaged poor children who have graduated from the most elite private preparatory institutions in the nation - are an incredibly small group, perhaps 0.001% of students, and well below the noise floor of any sort of meaningful statistical analysis.

The other groups the article contends with, being the elite and the not elite, are much larger groups and more worthy of attention. The Privileged Poor do not need to be specially accommodated any more than any other group that is a tiny fraction of one percent of the relevant population.

Re: Privileged Poor vs. Doubly Disadvantaged at Elite Schools

#33

Post by TBurette »

I've been friends with people who had to mind the way they flushed the toilet at home to save money as well as people whose parents' home front lawn I mistook for some farmland.

There are several unspoken differences in the way the two population perceive education and defining your future:

If you fail that's it you're done, you'll have to find some low wage job.

  vs
If this doesn't work out you could always try something else

University is there to get a diploma to get a job to set you in life

  vs
Entering higher education is one more step to further orient you towards your future.

You approach some subjects for the first time. It is real work.

  vs
Higher education is not too hard. You had a good school that prepared you well. You have the time to go out and have fun

You make friends

  vs
You make friend and network

School and your own curiosity will not prevent gaps. Other students seem to all possess 'cultural' references you don't. You sometime have to write down words you don't know to look them up later.

  vs
Your parents brought you to museums/theater/... shared their appreciation of art, history, science,... Things that can come up among educated people / in university

At school If you hand an assignment late you'll get zero. No one will give you up extra time later in life young man.

  vs
You can see someone that's there to help you, you can get an extension on this assignment.

Finding an internship / someone in some industry to help on a project will be a time consuming task with many people no deigning to reply

  vs
Dad is a business owner that asks for a spot for his kid to his accounting firm.

Re: Privileged Poor vs. Doubly Disadvantaged at Elite Schools

#35

Post by catalogia »

Glyptodon wrote: post #14

Some of these issues extend beyond such narrow groups. Office hours as a concept are easily one of the weirdest and most confusing things ever because they simultaneously encompass at least two entirely different disharmonious concepts. Are they (a) time set aside so those who need significant help can get it without disrupting class, or (b) time aside so students can chat and schmooze with their professors? The real…

Somehow I made it through four years of university without learning until today that "office hours" were ever anything other than (a)...

Re: Privileged Poor vs. Doubly Disadvantaged at Elite Schools

#36

Post by secabeen »

shantly wrote: post #25
Glyptodon wrote: post #14

Some of these issues extend beyond such narrow groups. Office hours as a concept are easily one of the weirdest and most confusing things ever because they simultaneously encompass at least two entirely different disharmonious concepts. Are they (a) time set aside so those who need significant help can get it without disrupting class, or (b) time aside so students can chat and schmooze with their professors? The real…

> And this can be very confusing, unless you come from a self-centered elite worldview where (a) and (b) aren't highly differentiated. I'm a white dude from a family that was totally fine financially (though more due to good money management than sky-high income) so I can't and wouldn't claim any disadvantage on those fronts, obviously, but socially there's just so much my upbringing didn't prepare me for in the worl…

>It would never, ever have occurred to me to attend office hours just to get to know my professors. Woulda seemed pretty dickish, actually. But it's normal and expected and confers all kinds of advantages. Go figure.

I wouldn't necessarily say that people go to office hours just to get to know their professors, that would be presumptuous. What people do do is go when they are temporarily stuck on a concept, or want to work through a problem in the exercises, or when developing an idea for a paper. All temporary, normal steps in the process, that most students could get by on their own, or by working in a group with other students or the TA. Privileged students feel comfortable going all the way to the professor for help (even just a little help), in a way that less privileged students don't seem to.

Re: Privileged Poor vs. Doubly Disadvantaged at Elite Schools

#37

Post by whymauri »

droithomme wrote: post #32

It seems to me that this group appellated the "Privileged Poor" - disadvantaged poor children who have graduated from the most elite private preparatory institutions in the nation - are an incredibly small group, perhaps 0.001% of students, and well below the noise floor of any sort of meaningful statistical analysis. The other groups the article contends with, being the elite and the not elite, are much larger group…

They are a small group in the overall population but not at elite schools.

Re: Privileged Poor vs. Doubly Disadvantaged at Elite Schools

#38

Post by jarjoura »

My take away from this is privilege is just code for what they term in the corporate world as "soft skills". Some students have access to programs, or mentors that teach them how to maximize inter-personal relationships and build good problem solving skills outside of the core course work they'll need to study for.

I realize this is kind of off topic, but there's something else I notice when I tag along with recruiters to schools. Even though recruiters sometimes attempt to recruit at "non-elite" schools, or whatever you want to call them, they are always unable to successfully recruit candidates in the numbers they need to make it worthwhile. "Maybe it'll be be better next year, but doubtful" they say. I've seen it. The students are definitely hungry and passionate for landing a job in tech at these schools, even asking us what they need to do. Yet they just don't seem to know-how to prepare and be successful at the interviews. We try to coach them, but we also have other schools to visit and we only have so much time. I mostly lay the blame on these schools though and not the students.

Re: Privileged Poor vs. Doubly Disadvantaged at Elite Schools

#39

Post by _bxg1 »

Bostonian wrote: post #31
_bxg1 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The state already imposes certain basic aspects of welfare on children, from vaccines to the fact that they have to go to school at all. In fact (I believe) private schools already have to be certified by the state. So it wouldn't be an enormous leap to simply stop certifying private organizations that want to play the role of state-certified educational institution.

Would you ban private after-schools too? For example, my children attend Russian School of Math, which has branches around the country, especially in the Northeast. Chinese parents have created supplemental schools where Chinese language, English, art, contest math and other things are taught. If you ban physical after-schools, do you then ban online classes such as the math classes offered by the Art of Problem Solv…

No, just the ones that serve as alternatives to the public ones. Obviously after-school programs, while potentially leading to some of the same problems, would be a much more complicated question.

Re: Privileged Poor vs. Doubly Disadvantaged at Elite Schools

#40

Post by droithomme »

whymauri wrote: post #37
droithomme wrote: post #32

It seems to me that this group appellated the "Privileged Poor" - disadvantaged poor children who have graduated from the most elite private preparatory institutions in the nation - are an incredibly small group, perhaps 0.001% of students, and well below the noise floor of any sort of meaningful statistical analysis. The other groups the article contends with, being the elite and the not elite, are much larger group…

They are a small group in the overall population but not at elite schools.

Poor kids at elite prep schools is what do you think 2% of their enrollment? So 2% is not small, fair enough.

And private preparatory schools (much less elite prep schools) educate far less than 1% of the student population in the US. But let's go crazy over the top just to avoid nitpicking and claim it's as much as 1%.

1% * 2% = .02%

Explain again why they need special consideration and are statistically legitimate to analyze and make claims regarding?

Post reply on HN