Comment by camgunz
1 day ago
>> 30 student classes obviates any benefit you'd get from anything else. There are no systems with those class sizes that are achieving the outcomes we want.
> I disagree? Universities have larger lectures, and students can move to lower classes if theirs moves too fast. I think your argument goes somewhat like:
You're doing the thing again where you apply your expertise to a domain you're naive to. Google for class size and outcomes.
>> You also can't literally fire all teachers. The NEA or teacher tenure won't let you.
> Not with that attitude!
Contracts are contracts. Attitude has nothing to do with it.
> I think the key is to steal employees ;). If you're offering double the salary, I think the local universities might lose a few professors.
How do you deal with losing... let's just say 2m people from other high-value professions? Unemployment is at historic lows. You also haven't wrestled with finding ~$700b to pay for all of this. There's ~100,000 public schools in the US in ~13,000 school districts. You think you'll get good outcomes letting them all hire individually? Will you put caps on salary so smaller districts don't lose out?
You've honestly not thought through this at all. You're again walking onto an issue you're entirely ignorant of, and if you were in charge of it you'd thoroughly destroy it.
>> You also get stuck in tracks, so if say your mom dies in 3rd grade, you do poorly on the test and get bumped down, you're probably bumped down forever. That's a bad outcome.
> Bad for whom? It's great for the kid who got bumped up.
You're naive to the problems with standardized testing and trying to supplement with anecdata.
> [Weird takes on common core and standardized testing]
There may be a problem with the educational system not serving highly gifted students, but that's way further down the list than kids who graduate without basic reading and math skills. I'm not saying we can't walk and chew gum at the same time, but dealing with gifted students is a whole other kettle of fish (which judging by your anecdata I'm confident you've read nothing about).
>> Today they're throwing stuff in class, tomorrow they're breaking the windows of your car or running drugs in your neighborhood. At that point in the School-to-Prison Pipeline, rehabilitating the person is extremely expensive.
> In my other reply, the TLDR; is essentially, "it's the other way around". It's much more expensive to rehabilitate them in the classroom than in the prison system.
I'm gonna quote something from my response to Paul Graham's wokeness essay: "It's like someone's running an experiment on how many times you can be bafflingly wrong before people notice." I'm noticing.
There may be a problem with the educational system not serving highly gifted students, but that's way further down the list than kids who graduate without basic reading and math skills. I'm not saying we can't walk and chew gum at the same time, but dealing with gifted students is a whole other kettle of fish (which judging by your anecdata I'm confident you've read nothing about).
the answer is simple - these two groups should NEVER be in the same classrooms - NEVER. these two groups will soon approach being different species. The entire issue is that they ARE in the same classroom but shittiest programmer is not sharing an office with Googlers working on search algo - yet somehow this is acceptable in schools. I have to pay tens and tens of thousands of dollars every year to make sure my kid does not have to deal with that nonsense
> There may be a problem with the educational system not serving highly gifted students, but that's way further down the list than kids who graduate without basic reading and math skills.
My entire premise is it's way further up the list. I called you out originally for "adding layers instead of removing them." You won't even acknowledge my cruxes exist, in fact you "refuse to even continue considering it." It's like they say: insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. Everyone you talk to from the other side is baffingly wrong, because you keep doing the same thing and expecting different results.