I'm skeptical about efforts to revolutionize schooling • Hacker News Board

Re: I'm skeptical about efforts to revolutionize schooling

#431

Post by sokoloff » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 3:51 PM UTC

bccdee wrote: post #411

Edman274 wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do understand at least intuitively that it's not even mathematically possible - let alone practically - to train 100 percent of teachers to be in the top 10 percent of teachers, right? The definition of "good" and "gifted" is only used relative to an average. No amount of training can make the average teacher better than the average teacher; it's a logical impossibility, and misunderstands the central effect of t…

> it's not even mathematically possible to train 100 percent of teachers to be in the top 10 percent of teachers …yes, but it's totally possible to (by, say, 2036) train 100% of teachers to perform at a 90th percentile as compared to teachers from 2026. That's how improvement works, which is what people are describing here. > No student nor teacher cares about be trained to some objective standard of competence What…

> it's totally possible to (by, say, 2036) train 100% of teachers to perform at a 90th percentile as compared to teachers from 2026. That's how improvement works, which is what people are describing here.

I doubt you can pull this off unless you’re willing (and able) to fire at least 25% of teachers who appear not willing (and under strong unions cannot be required) to outperform the current 90th percentile teacher.

There are great teachers; there are also entirely lazy/entitled teachers who will never willingly be at the performance of the current top 10%.

Re: I'm skeptical about efforts to revolutionize schooling

#432

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 3:54 PM UTC

tombert wrote: post #70

I'm not the first person to state this, but it bears repeating: nearly everyone thinks that they know the right way to teach, and most people don't. I'm not exempting myself from this. I was an adjunct lecturer for two semesters. I did have some fun with it, but it was way harder than I thought it would be, and I think that university is probably considerably easier than elementary or high school. I had students that…

Also, there is no 'right way to teach', but there are 'right ways of teaching'. This difference being that people can respond very differently to the same approach, so many approaches are needed to be effective.

Re: I'm skeptical about efforts to revolutionize schooling

#433

Post by shimman » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 3:54 PM UTC

simiones wrote: post #410

shimman wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a book that says it's intended as a science book focusing on biology for around elementary aged students, it's from the 1890s and the material is something I'd expect high schoolers to start learning not 4th graders!

I think these sorts of things are very commonly misleading. The Romanian school system I grew up in for example nominally had way more advanced subjects even in middle school, not to mention high school, than what is commonly taught in much of Europe and the USA. For example, we did a solid two-three months of basic group theory in the 10th grade (sophomore year?) - learning about monoids, groups, rings, fields, prov…

This is true, this book was also written when the idea of high school education was extremely new (let alone public high school education). With what you're saying it was likely a book for advance students and even though it uses terms I associated with younger people they likely meant teenagers.

Re: I'm skeptical about efforts to revolutionize schooling

#434

Post by tombert » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 3:54 PM UTC

red-iron-pine wrote: post #348

tombert wrote: post #70

I'm not the first person to state this, but it bears repeating: nearly everyone thinks that they know the right way to teach, and most people don't. I'm not exempting myself from this. I was an adjunct lecturer for two semesters. I did have some fun with it, but it was way harder than I thought it would be, and I think that university is probably considerably easier than elementary or high school. I had students that…

> I had students that I knew were smart that I was forced to fail. They would grasp the subjects quickly when I was speaking, they would ask good questions during class...and then they would simply never study or do the homework I assigned them, and then they would do terrible on tests and I'd be stuck having to give them a bad grade. They were smart students, but they didn't want to be there. "The A students lead th…

I thought I might be able to reach them, because I was never an A student. I was always kind of the underachiever who teachers knew was smart but would get mediocre grades because I wouldn't do the homework. I passed high school because I have a good enough memory to remember what was being taught in class and do fine on tests, but I'd still get middling-to-bad grades in high school because I wouldn't consistently do the homework.

To be clear, I do not blame the teachers at all for this; I do not think they took any joy giving me bad grades.

But because I was someone who knew what it was like to be a smart academic underachiever, I thought I might have luck reaching the students who I saw falling into the same negative patterns I had.

I do think I reached at least one, but I think most of them I did not. It's ok, teaching is hard. I hope a better teacher came along in these students' lives and helped them out.

Re: I'm skeptical about efforts to revolutionize schooling

#435

Post by deepsun » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 4:06 PM UTC

tombert wrote: post #70

I'm not the first person to state this, but it bears repeating: nearly everyone thinks that they know the right way to teach, and most people don't. I'm not exempting myself from this. I was an adjunct lecturer for two semesters. I did have some fun with it, but it was way harder than I thought it would be, and I think that university is probably considerably easier than elementary or high school. I had students that…

Yes, and I probably was that student in school.

The thing is -- grades looked to me like a silly attempt in gamification. I did not really care about grades, but I care about learning. So you might have taught them good, and they will carry it to their lives, they just don't care to show it off in the form of grades.

Now, an admission tests grades are way different deal, of course.

Re: I'm skeptical about efforts to revolutionize schooling

#436

Post by spudlyo » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 4:09 PM UTC

rustcleaner wrote: post #334

burnt-resistor wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a 1940 Massachusetts public school, my blue collar grandfather was required to take Latin, immersive French, and was graded on handwriting. Latin plus a foreign language like Mandarin, Hindi, or Spanish should be the table stakes minimum standard. English composition, creative writing, and reading classics should also be nonnegotiable essential requirements too.

[flagged]

"Fog everywhere. Fog up the river, where it flows among green aits and meadows; fog down the river, where it rolls defiled among the tiers of shipping and the waterside pollutions of a great (and dirty) city. Fog on the Essex marshes, fog on the Kentish heights. Fog creeping into the cabooses of collier-brigs; fog lying out on the yards and hovering in the rigging of great ships; fog drooping on the gunwales of barges and small boats. Fog in the eyes and throats of ancient Greenwich pensioners, wheezing by the firesides of their wards; fog in the stem and bowl of the afternoon pipe of the wrathful skipper, down in his close cabin; fog cruelly pinching the toes and fingers of his shivering little ’prentice boy on deck. Chance people on the bridges peeping over the parapets into a nether sky of fog, with fog all round them, as if they were up in a balloon and hanging in the misty clouds."

Re: I'm skeptical about efforts to revolutionize schooling

#437

Post by rsolva » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 4:10 PM UTC

tuumi wrote: post #325

rsolva wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What they need to figure out is what topics peaks their interest. Kids need exposure to a broad spectrum early, get interested, and then have mentors that know how to run with it and harness that motivation. Later on these kids can tolerate learning more mundane, boring stuff if that brings them closer to a goal they have set for themself. But motivation has to come first!

Piques their interest. Sorry to be that guy.

Thanks, English is not my first language, and I appreciate the knit pick :)

Re: I'm skeptical about efforts to revolutionize schooling

#438

Post by wnc3141 » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 4:10 PM UTC

annzabelle wrote: post #176

necovek wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never taught myself, so take this with a grain of salt (though I do think it is extremely hard to do well). I did, however, have a teacher who taught an advanced subject and I found his instruction so good that I did not have to bother with homework and assignments if I was happy with B grades — as I wasn't particularly motivated, only occassionaly did I put in the effort for an A. I could, however, see the level o…

I was lucky to attend a liberal arts college with a large and extremely pedagogy focused mathematics department, and all of my math classes there were like this. Engaging lectures, if I listened and wrote down everything on the board I would be able to get a B on the exams, even if I skimped on practice. Made it all the way to measure theory this way. They included in class group practice integrated with the lectures…

Loved my time at Olaf.

Re: I'm skeptical about efforts to revolutionize schooling

#439

Post by win311fwg » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 4:13 PM UTC

atoav wrote: post #230

teiferer wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> teach someone who really isn't interested in learning. This is key. If you are interested in a subject, the learning will come more or less automatically. Different ways of teaching still have substantial impact on how efficiently you learn, but you automatically gravitate towards the more efficient methods since you want to learn this out of interest in the subject. Without interest, this is an uphill battle. And…

Yes, but as an university level educator I have to stress that the vast majority of students suck at understanding what they will need to know to be good at the juicy bits that interested them in the first place. Our task isn't just to teach them what they are interested in. Our task (among others) is to prepare them for a life after university in their profession(s) while giving them the practical skill of learning…

> I personally think I would fail my students on a personal level if I let them go through my education and have them ill-prepared for the world that faces them outside.

While it is great that you are willing to help those in need catch up, something has gone horribly wrong with primary sources of education and lived experience if someone reaches the university level before being prepared for the world. In fact, given the immense cost of going to university, allowing them into university before they've gained that preparedness is quite unethical. It used to be that university had stringent admission standards as to not prey on those showing up mindlessness. Why do you think that fell apart?

Re: I'm skeptical about efforts to revolutionize schooling

#440

Post by nickwood_dot_io » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 4:13 PM UTC

tombert wrote: post #70

I'm not the first person to state this, but it bears repeating: nearly everyone thinks that they know the right way to teach, and most people don't. I'm not exempting myself from this. I was an adjunct lecturer for two semesters. I did have some fun with it, but it was way harder than I thought it would be, and I think that university is probably considerably easier than elementary or high school. I had students that…

Absolutely.

I regularly think about to how difficult it would have been to teach the younger me (while trying to stick myself in my kids' perspective).

Any well intended notion of "I wonder what sort of teacher would have ignited a passion for learning" is quickly replaced by the understanding that such a person likely didn't exist.

I was lazy up until I wasn't, which was largely a reaction to being lazy in the first place.

Fast forward a few decades and I am a serial workaholic who is continually making up for lost time.

Nowadays I wonder what it will take to motivate my offspring.

It's the circle of liiiiiife......