"Equity".....The dumbing down of 'Murica

Burning Man

Super Anarchist
10,610
2,110
Back to the desert
What a bogus source. 

No wonder you put up such bizarre posts 

  • Overall, we rate The Federalist Questionable and far-Right Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that always favor the right and promotion of propaganda, conspiracy theories, and numerous failed fact checks.
Do you disagree with the content of the story?  If so, feel free to refute its veracity with some facts.

 

Burning Man

Super Anarchist
10,610
2,110
Back to the desert
“We need real solutions, such as investment in Pre-K , tackling discrepancies at the source and early, making sure there are more opportunities available — that is how you make education equitable,” he said. “If you are not solving the problem at the root, it’s window dressing.”  
The Federalist. What whiny garbage. You're not going to introduce Abelian group theory in pre-K. In fact, what is your great pre-K study plan? I would suggest mud. What sez you?

The state needs to provide a good education for everyone and equity is a concern. Parents need to provide a good education for their children. These are not the same thing and are often at odds. So outcomes will be different. Rich parents can afford great schools and even private tutors for academics and sports. We have great equalizers such as junior colleges. I had a wrong side of the tracks JC transfer buddy at Cal. Arrest record wrong side of the tracks. JC-Cal->Columbia grad school. He's a hedge fund manager in NY now.  Ritchie Rich gets a head start but we have multiple avenues for equalization. And for re-invention; bankruptcy is no different from lighting out for the territory.

Max chillage on the right wing SoCon whining.
Not whining, I think that bolded part is spot fucking on.  What that means is that we need investment in children AND PARENTS at the earliest ages.  I am firmly convinced that success or failure in school starts at birth or even before.  If parents have no idea how to nurture their child both physically and mentally, then they will be behind from the get go.  It's not all about $$.  If we can teach poor people the value of reading to their infant or toddler AND give them the resources to do so, and so on - then we won't have to struggle with "equity" quite so much by 11th grade.  

That is what I have a problem with with these "level the playing field equity" BS pushes.  All you're doing is lowering the bar rather than trying to get everyone to meet meet the standard or to excel.  Equity should be addressed at much earlier stages and we need the backbone to look at parents of color and tell them they are doing a shit job of raising their children and here's some better ways to do it and here's some better resource$ to help you achieve that - such as day care for working parents, and so forth.  As well as both carrots and sticks to keep them from continuing to pop out kids that they can't afford or are equipped to raise. 

But that last bit is FAR too un-PC and SJWNJ would have a meltdown at even the suggestion of such things.  Just saying.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

3to1

Super Anarchist
guess the facts are opinions are like assholes and there's many shades of grey, there's no absolutes here.

other than that, fascinating shit in a point in world history where triage will increasingly dictate policy.

 

Burning Man

Super Anarchist
10,610
2,110
Back to the desert
guess the facts are opinions are like assholes and there's many shades of grey, there's no absolutes here.

other than that, fascinating shit in a point in world history where triage will increasingly dictate policy.
Can you translate that into Engrish please???  Seems like you were one of those "equity" cases in grammar and language.  Just saying.....  

 

Olsonist

Disgusting Liberal Elitist
29,498
4,266
New Oak City
...  Equity should be addressed at much earlier stages and we need the backbone to look at parents of color and tell them they are doing a shit job of raising their children and here's some better ways to do it and here's some better resource$ to help you achieve that - such as day care for working parents, and so forth.  As well as both carrots and sticks to keep them from continuing to pop out kids that they can't afford or are equipped to raise. 

But that last bit is FAR too un-PC and SJWNJ would have a meltdown at even the suggestion of such things.  Just saying.
Jeff, if you only present an actionable idea without resorting to SoCon nonsense it would be a mitzvah. BTW, my boy Biden just unveiled the American Families Plan which calls for devoting hundreds of billions of dollars to national child care, prekindergarten, paid family leave and tuition-free community college, among other domestic priorities. SoCon incoming in 3, 2, 1 ....

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Cal20sailor

Super Anarchist
12,868
3,353
Detroit
El Mariachi said:
1). Home made, authentic Italian lasagne is the best lasagne on the planet.
Homemade, one word Einstein.  Also, please look up ellipsis (ellipses), because you are fucking those up too.    

 

Sol Rosenberg

Girthy Member
94,396
11,885
Earth
It isn’t just unfair. It is SO Unfair. 
 

Johnny One-Tooth is gonna be irate that little Johnny Jr. won’t get the chance to follow the family tradition in AP Calculus. Goll Durn  it, hay knows his rats!

 

Rain Man

Super Anarchist
7,226
2,074
Wet coast.
Removing the smart kids turns the class into Sweathogs?
Not really, but having kids with enthusiasm for math in the class improves the atmosphere and lifts the whole class up.

Some think removing accelerated classes is dumbing down the system, but I disagree.  Dumbing down the system is happening in other ways, such as allowing students to progress without demonstrating sufficient learning to support their progression, and making graduation easier.   I used to joke that, if I had seen the changes coming, I could have registered my dog in distance learning/home schooling and gotten her a BC high school graduation without too much effort.  It is closer to the truth than it should be.

 

Burning Man

Super Anarchist
10,610
2,110
Back to the desert
Jeff, if you only present an actionable idea without resorting to SoCon nonsense it would be a mitzvah. BTW, my boy Biden just unveiled the American Families Plan which calls for devoting hundreds of billions of dollars to national child care, prekindergarten, paid family leave and tuition-free community college, among other domestic priorities. SoCon incoming in 3, 2, 1 ....
Good. It’s about time he listened to me. I’ve only been saying that since Before Obama was elected as a means to level the playing field. 
 

Joes going: “it’s about time I had the power to implement my Boy Jeff’s ideas.”

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Fah Kiew Tu

Curmudgeon, First Rank
10,130
3,276
Tasmania, Australia
Not really, but having kids with enthusiasm for math in the class improves the atmosphere and lifts the whole class up.

Some think removing accelerated classes is dumbing down the system, but I disagree.  Dumbing down the system is happening in other ways, such as allowing students to progress without demonstrating sufficient learning to support their progression, and making graduation easier.   I used to joke that, if I had seen the changes coming, I could have registered my dog in distance learning/home schooling and gotten her a BC high school graduation without too much effort.  It is closer to the truth than it should be.
What you claim might have some validity *if* the class' fellow students actually recognised and supported the bright kids. And the teacher actually gave extra, challenging work to those kids.

In my personal experience, neither actually happens. The bright kid gets bullied and stops trying. The bright kid can coast and as life is easier all round, does so. And then gets very, very bored.

I got through high school on memory and assiduous use of the local (not school) library where I found other kids from different schools with the same interests and issues. With 2 exceptions, the teachers and actual class attendance were a waste of my time. English was a classic example; I'd read Bleak House in less than a week and it was the assigned book for the entire term. The teacher suggested I read my way through the rest of Dickens and then start on Victor Hugo.

So I support streaming and so did my wife, who was Dux of her school. Our kids *didn't* go to State run schools because we had no faith that the teaching philosophy would do them any good. 2 of them now are employed by universities and the eldest used to be until he went into private IT.

If you think teaching to the median or lower is a good thing and retaining bright kids in the class rather than allowing them freedom to push their curiosity with their intellectual peers is a good thing, I disagree with you.

FKT

 

Rain Man

Super Anarchist
7,226
2,074
Wet coast.
If you think teaching to the median or lower is a good thing and retaining bright kids in the class rather than allowing them freedom to push their curiosity with their intellectual peers is a good thing, I disagree with you.

FKT
Those two things are not mutually exclusive.  Research has shown that having bright kids in a class where there is a lot of review and re-teaching of material to help the weaker kids benefits the bright kids as well.  

Bright kids finish their work early.  Once a teacher is comfortable teaching a subject, it doesn't take a lot of brilliance on the teacher's part to find interesting things for them to do.   For me, the dividing line was kids who though the extra exploration was "extra work" in which case I stopped giving them deeper material and instead let them work at their own pace through the regular material.  Kids who didn't see it as extra work were often asking very interesting questions and exploring the answers in their spare time.  You would be surprised what I found kids doing in class who were interested in a topic.  

I don't think teaching to the median or lower is a good thing either.  I did my best not to lower the bar no matter what the subject was, and in spite of the constant pressure from the kids and the admin to drop standards.  Kids sometimes complained that I was pushing them too hard and had unrealistic expectations.  To me that meant I was probably getting close to the right pace.  Real life teaching isn't always pretty but it is what it is.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

roundthebuoys

Super Anarchist
9,909
919
Limelight
I sort of thought that the accelerated classes were more about parents egos than the kids' learning.  Parents would sign up kids for these classes who had no business being there.  

Going deeper into the curriculum is a better choice than going faster, IMHO.
Completely disagree as a parent of kids in accelerated classes.  I can't put them in anything, it's up to the teachers and schools, at least here.  And college credits for advanced classes is all about money and college applications in the very near future.

 

Rain Man

Super Anarchist
7,226
2,074
Wet coast.
Completely disagree as a parent of kids in accelerated classes.  I can't put them in anything, it's up to the teachers and schools, at least here.  And college credits for advanced classes is all about money and college applications in the very near future.
That's strange.  Here there is a registration process in the latter part of the school year where kids sign up for their courses for the following year.  They have to get their parent's signature on their registration forms.  It has gone to on-line registration only in the last year.  How does it work where you are?  Surely teachers are not selecting electives for the kids.

I had kids trying to register in Physics 12 at the same time they were registered in Physics 11, the pre-requisite.  They and their parents wanted them to give it a try.

I taught AP courses for a few years - mostly at lunchtime on my own time.  Generally I found that there was a very low subscription and a very high amount of effort on my part, and the kids would often drop out when they found out how much work it was.  The stakes for college and university aren't as high in Canada, as post-secondary is affordable for middle-class families.  I don't think that is true in the US.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

roundthebuoys

Super Anarchist
9,909
919
Limelight
That's strange.  Here there is a registration process in the latter part of the school year where kids sign up for their courses for the following year.  They have to get their parent's signature on their registration forms.  It has gone to on-line registration only in the last year.  How does it work where you are?  Surely teachers are not selecting electives for the kids.
Maybe not electives, but teachers are telling us, and always have, GATE for example, whether our kids should move up.  We basically talked to the counselor and said "what do they have to do to get into Stanford"  If they don't, no biggie, but it's a solid goal to get into other colleges.  And the kids are totally onboard.

 

Rain Man

Super Anarchist
7,226
2,074
Wet coast.
Maybe not electives, but teachers are telling us, and always have, GATE for example, whether our kids should move up.  We basically talked to the counselor and said "what do they have to do to get into Stanford"  If they don't, no biggie, but it's a solid goal to get into other colleges.  And the kids are totally onboard.
My guess is that you have exceptionally bright kids.  I would do the same for kids like that.  I don't think that is generally the approach though.

 

Fah Kiew Tu

Curmudgeon, First Rank
10,130
3,276
Tasmania, Australia
Those two things are not mutually exclusive.  Research has shown that having bright kids in a class where there is a lot of review and re-teaching of material to help the weaker kids benefits the bright kids as well.  

Bright kids finish their work early.  Once a teacher is comfortable teaching a subject, it doesn't take a lot of brilliance on the teacher's part to find interesting things for them to do.   For me, the dividing line was kids who though the extra exploration was "extra work" in which case I stopped giving them deeper material and instead let them work at their own pace through the regular material.  Kids who didn't see it as extra work were often asking very interesting questions and exploring the answers in their spare time.  You would be surprised what I found kids doing in class who were interested in a topic.  

I don't think teaching to the median or lower is a good thing either.  I did my best not to lower the bar no matter what the subject was, and in spite of the constant pressure from the kids and the admin to drop standards.  Kids sometimes complained that I was pushing them too hard and had unrealistic expectations.  To me that meant I was probably getting close to the right pace.  Real life teaching isn't always pretty but it is what it is.
I'll agree that in theory the things aren't mutually exclusive. And a good teacher makes a world of difference. My English teacher for example. I'd just sit in class and read whatever I wanted, having already read all the assigned books and had no problems remembering them.

However you haven't addressed the other issue - bullying by peers who don't want to be shown up by the bright kid and teachers who make this worse by holding up the bright kid as someone to be admired. My Latin teacher did that and to this day one of my fellow students is convinced I got favoured by getting asked questions that were 'easy'. The fact that I always came first and him second rankled.

One of my GF's grand-nephews got labeled as someone in need of remedial work and possibly ADHD. The real problem was, he was bored shitless and totally disengaged. That was a *teaching* problem. He was put in a different school where they streamed bright kids and problem went away.

What you're saying serves the needs of the median and maybe one SD either side. But low achieving kids in with bright kids far too often resent them and try to drag them down. Look at the whole dysfunctional 'nerd' thing compared to the 'sports hero' culture prevalent and the bullying that goes with it.

What do you do about that?

FKT

 




Top