81–88 of 88 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Please don't take HN threads on generic ideological tangents. They're all the same, which makes them boring, and tend to get angrier as they go. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure what the message is here, though. Should the person running FB news have no political affiliations at all? Because if that's the standard, then it seems what you'll get is just people hiding their political affiliations, which doesn't seem particularly good for anyone.
No, the point is that Facebook has been trying to position itself as an arbiter of political neutrality while consistently taking actions that obviously indicates the bias it has. You can't claim you have no position while simultaneously taking actions that benefit one side or another. If they're going to go that route, they might as well just come out and say what their bias is rather than gaslighting people into th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I said, that's a separate issue. All I asked of OP is to not impune motives on people who mean well. Charter and voucher schools ARE public education, they just aren't part of the traditional monolithic bureaucracy. The ability to try different approaches and run different experiments to see if it results in different outcomes, and make fast adjustments, free from the existing hierarchy, is the quality improvement…
> Charter and voucher schools ARE public education, they just aren't part of the traditional monolithic bureaucracy. They also traditionally get to pick and choose who can attend, which often means excluding costly students like any that have disabilities. > The ability to try different approaches and run different experiments to see if it results in different outcomes, and make fast adjustments, free from the existi…
We both know that's not why you take issue with school choice because these kinds of issues can be easily adjusted through policy changes - but you're not proposing policy changes. You want to completely get rid of the entire thing.
And by the way, in the cases of kids with extreme behavioural issues, those kids are also routinely expelled from the public system schools. So again, what are you arguing?
>Let's apply "move fast and break things" to education. What could possibly go wrong?
Can you try and not distort arguments? Nobody except you argued this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tell that to the kids going to schools with massive gang problems. Even if they want to succeed it's a constant battle. My wife teaches at one of these schools and she has no problem understanding why kids would want out.
the correct response would be to one 1. fight the gang problems 2. stop tying school funding to localities which perpetuates poor districts being poor and underfunded. Clearly the solution can't be privatized 'school choice' because the people who need it the most will probably not be able to afford it, and it segregates society further, giving everyone even less stake in repairing their communities. It's a self-defe…
Don't be dense. Those are generational issues to solve. There is enough inertia in the system that solutions if there are any, will take decades to manifest. You know this. And nobody will sacrifice their children at the altar of 'social justice' as espoused online by 20something who doesn't know any better. No, they want their children to be safe, and get a quality education.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Charter and voucher schools ARE public education, they just aren't part of the traditional monolithic bureaucracy. They also traditionally get to pick and choose who can attend, which often means excluding costly students like any that have disabilities. > The ability to try different approaches and run different experiments to see if it results in different outcomes, and make fast adjustments, free from the existi…
>They also traditionally get to pick and choose who can attend, which often means excluding costly students like any that have disabilities. We both know that's not why you take issue with school choice because these kinds of issues can be easily adjusted through policy changes - but you're not proposing policy changes. You want to completely get rid of the entire thing. And by the way, in the cases of kids with extr…
Earlier:
>The ability to try different approaches and run different experiments to see if it results in different outcomes, and make fast adjustments
How is that not "move fast and break things"?
> And by the way, in the cases of kids with extreme behavioural issues
I specifically said children with disabilities. I think it says a lot about you that you're trying to re-frame that as kids with behavioral issues.
I don't think you're arguing in good faith.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>They also traditionally get to pick and choose who can attend, which often means excluding costly students like any that have disabilities. We both know that's not why you take issue with school choice because these kinds of issues can be easily adjusted through policy changes - but you're not proposing policy changes. You want to completely get rid of the entire thing. And by the way, in the cases of kids with extr…
> Can you try and not distort arguments? Nobody except you argued this. Earlier: >The ability to try different approaches and run different experiments to see if it results in different outcomes, and make fast adjustments How is that not "move fast and break things"? > And by the way, in the cases of kids with extreme behavioural issues I specifically said children with disabilities. I think it says a lot about you t…
Here's an example of charter school: A school that runs their curriculum partially in a foreign language (e.g. French for social sciences, but math in English) so that children pick up a second language while doing regular studies. Is that an example of "move fast and break things"? Implementing something like this would be very hard in a public system. The inertia is too great. That's just one example of a charter/voucher school being responsive to local needs in a way that would be hard for the largely public system (and I'm not saying charters/voucher replace the public system).
What you did was purposely apply a term from programming and startups to my argument for charters and voucher schools. It doesn't apply. Education is never going to be run like a startup with a 20-something founder. EVER. No parent will let a school 'break' their kids' education. But within those constraints, you can try things a little differently to tailor how and what you teach.
>I specifically said children with disabilities. I think it says a lot about you that you're trying to re-frame that as kids with behavioral issue
No. It was an example that shows the public system is also struggling with kids with disablities (in this case, kids with behavioural issues). But that wasn't the salient point. Ignore it. The primary point was just above it: "We both know that's not why you take issue with school choice because these kinds of issues can be easily adjusted through policy changes - but you're not proposing policy changes. You want to completely get rid of the entire thing."
I feel like this is grasping at straws. Facebook’s head of news co-founded a site in 2015 that promotes school choice, something supported by a majority of people and a super majority of people of color: https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/school-choice-strong-... . The articles posted on this site were critical of Warren because of Warren’s opposition to school choice, but has also criticized the other Democratic…
The National Review has a right wing bias, and has been called the “bible of American conservatism”. Since “school choice” is a conservative policy, it’s unsurprising that the NR ran an article that purports that it’s a popular policy. If we look at the source for the polls the article is based on, they cite polls from a lobbyist group specifically built to push policy on “school choice”. This doesn’t seem like a rep…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really, people are going to hang her on this issue? Most people have some family lore that isn't 100% verified -- oh, really, your great grandfather was hero in the civil war? maybe, maybe not. There isn't a pattern of deceit on her part, this "debacle" wasn't a sin of great consequence, all the while it is pushed over and over by someone whose entire life is built on manufacturing falsehoods. "Both sides do it" does…
She got into Harvard claiming "Native American" as her only race. If she were a conservative, she would have been crucified by now. Just because she's on the "good" side doesn't mean she gets a free pass, just like Joy Behar shouldn't get a pass for blackface. Oh no, I said something inconvenient for someone's ideology.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/elizabeth-warren-wealthy-n...