Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped?

[jogs]

 

School choice for all? How would this work? I have modest direct experience, in two very different ways. becky and her sister: Becky, my wife, went to Lowell High in SF. She had to take an exam, or get recommendations, or both, to get in. She had a fairly long trip in via BART.

I'm a San Francisco native. Why would anyone(living in San Francisco) take BART to Lowell??? BART's closest stop to Lowell is over one mile away. Natives would take MUNI.

[kenberg]

I'm a San Francisco native. Why would anyone(living in San Francisco) take BART to Lowell??? BART's closest stop to Lowell is over one mile away. Natives would take MUNI.

 

I just checked. I was in error.

 

It was walk to bus, bus to streetcar, streetcar to bus, bus to Lowell. Time, as she recalls, somewhere between an hour an an hour and a half. She lived near Twin Peaks, over the hill from Haight Ashbury, she says. Since she was born in 1947, this all was mostly before Haight-Ashbury was Haight-Asbhury, so to speak.

 

So right idea, but wrong on the BART detail.

 

Anyway, my point was that providing access to a better school has its good points, but providing a decent school nearby is much better. The shorter travel time is good, and it is good to have friends living nearby going to the same school. This latter is particularly important at the elementary school level.

My high school was probably twenty, possibly twenty-five, walking minutes away, the elementary school about three minutes away. I am not really claiming that the time I saved was used poring over A Tale of Two Cities, studying history or reading whatever we were supposed to be, but weren't, reading, but still an hour plus in each direction is a lot of down time. Surely for the kids, and also for the parents if they must provide transportation.

 

Of course not all schools can be the best school, but we can do better than what we are doing by quite a bit I think.And without going across town to do it.

[ldrews]

I was thinking about the deteriorating education levels in the US. How to improve them in the midst of all the political crap. How about this:

 

• Establish a national high school competency test
  
• Hire the Scholastic Aptitude Test people to administer the test
  
• Require all colleges and universities to accept the competency test passage in lieu of a high school diploma
  

 

This would allow families to home teach, use alternative schools, etc. The competition would cause the educational establishment to improve.

 

No service provider (teachers, teachers' unions) likes competition so there would be howls and gnashing of teeth. But external competition is about the only thing that causes calcified institutions to change.

[Trinidad]

I was thinking about the deteriorating education levels in the US. How to improve them in the midst of all the political crap. How about this:

 

• Establish a national high school competency test
  
• Hire the Scholastic Aptitude Test people to administer the test
  
• Require all colleges and universities to accept the competency test passage in lieu of a high school diploma
  

 

This would allow families to home teach, use alternative schools, etc. The competition would cause the educational establishment to improve.

 

No service provider (teachers, teachers' unions) likes competition so there would be howls and gnashing of teeth. But external competition is about the only thing that causes calcified institutions to change.

This is what happens in many other countries in the world:

 

At the end of elementary school the kids undergo a nation wide test. This provides stats on how the school is doing.

At the end of high school, the kids have their nation wide standardized final exam. This provides stats on the school and it serves as the entrance key to colleges nation wide.

 

But, of course, this will require a national agency to prepare these tests and a centrally coordinated system to evaluate them. Unfortunately, "national agency" and "centrally coordinated" are four letter words in American.

 

Rik

[kenberg]

This is what happens in many other countries in the world:

 

At the end of elementary school the kids undergo a nation wide test. This provides stats on how the school is doing.

At the end of high school, the kids have their nation wide standardized final exam. This provides stats on the school and it serves as the entrance key to colleges nation wide.

 

But, of course, this will require a national agency to prepare these tests and a centrally coordinated system to evaluate them. Unfortunately, "national agency" and "centrally coordinated" are four letter words in American.

 

Rik

 

 

In 1952, when I was 13 and finishing elementary school (eighth grade, we did not have middle schools) , we were given a battery of national exams. And yes, in Minnesota all of the children are above average.

 

 

This was not so much true at the high school level four years later. It would be more complicated. In elementary school we all were expected to learn the same stuff.Everyone then went on to high school but on different tracks. My friend Fred took "shop math" and planned to become a plumber. He would not have scored well on a trigonometry exam. Some of the kids in my high school spent the morning in "regular" classes and then went to another place in the afternoon for vocational training. And for that matter, even though I was on the college prep track I took metal shop. One of the well taught courses, by the way. I am not saying this could not somehow be coped with, but we would not want to fault a school for failing to turn a plumber into a mathematician. There are things that everyone, plumber or mathematician, should know but that's only part of what goes on in high school.

 

One thing I would like: While we are testing the knowledge of students, I would like us to also test the knowledge of teachers. My geometry teacher knew geometry, my physics teacher knew physics, my biology teacher did not know anything, as near as I could tell. It's not a matter of being an expert, kids can learn from non-experts. But they need to know more than some do.. For example, when I say that my geometry teacher knew geometry, i mean that she understood the axiomatic approach and she could tell a correct proof from an incorrect proof, based on an examination of the logic rather than by looking in the teacher's manual to see if there was a match. Brilliance is not required, being able to independently judge whether a proof is correct or not is, well should be, required. .

 

I learned a great deal, spelling, geography, mathematics, grammar, history, what have you, from my eighth grade teacher. Quite a remarkable woman, surely not an expert in everything she taught but broadly knowledgeable.

 

I acknowledge that my adolescent behavior sometimes interfered with my learning, but it is also true that when I thought a teacher knew what s/he was talking about I would usually shut up and listen. Many, not all, youngsters will respond the same way.

[mike777]

Regarding school choice experiment there is at least some evidence, not proof, but evidence that it provides significant value.

 

See Corey DeAngelis and Patrick Wolf study, see St. Marcus Lutheran school in Milwaukee.

 

 

At the very least it seems there is enough evidence to continue experiments and see the results. If the experiments are a failure, fair enough destroy the program and continue to try out other ideas. As always I tend to trust results of experiments that come out with results that were not expected. Winston and others caution about bias is good advice.

[jogs]

 

No service provider (teachers, teachers' unions) likes competition so there would be howls and gnashing of teeth. But external competition is about the only thing that causes calcified institutions to change.

There's no hope of improving K-12 education until the teachers' union is broken. There are far too many underperforming teachers who can't be fired.

[Winstonm]

There's no hope of improving K-12 education until the teachers' union is broken. There are far too many underperforming teachers who can't be fired.

 

Do you support a similar breakup of police and firefighter unions?

[jogs]

Today in San Francisco the mayor has weaken the power of the police union.

[Winstonm]

Today in San Francisco the mayor has weaken the power of the police union.

 

The question is not what has happened in a local area but do you think all public unions should be treated equally, i.e., the same as the teacher's union? Do you also think private unions have the same problems?

 

In other words, I am simply asking if there is a consistency to your ideas.

[PassedOut]

There's no hope of improving K-12 education until the teachers' union is broken. There are far too many underperforming teachers who can't be fired.

Firing bad teachers won't help unless there are good replacements. Although everyone claims to want good teachers, one can tell by the salary structures that many people don't consider the teaching profession to be valuable or important.

 

Years ago I moved to Atlanta to help the company I worked for set up an additional IT department. For programmers, we tested candidates for the aptitude and trained the hires internally. The most successful of these (by far) were teachers who left to retrain for another profession. We paid them considerably more as trainees than they were earning as experienced teachers. Although the company gained, the kids lost.

[jogs]

The question is not what has happened in a local area but do you think all public unions should be treated equally, i.e., the same as the teacher's union? Do you also think private unions have the same problems?

 

In other words, I am simply asking if there is a consistency to your ideas.

Why should every union be treated equally? Why should there be public unions?

[jogs]

Firing bad teachers won't help unless there are good replacements. Although everyone claims to want good teachers, one can tell by the salary structures that many people don't consider the teaching profession to be valuable or important.

 

Years ago I moved to Atlanta to help the company I worked for set up an additional IT department. For programmers, we tested candidates for the aptitude and trained the hires internally. The most successful of these (by far) were teachers who left to retrain for another profession. We paid them considerably more as trainees than they were earning as experienced teachers. Although the company gained, the kids lost.

There needs to be a more flexible solution. Many experts from various fields are probably willing to teach for one year. But the teachers' union would require them to have a teacher's certificate. Require the experts to use an approved lesson plan.

 

What about unmotivated C and D students? Do all blue collar workers really need 12 years of schooling? There needs to be more trade schools. Try to remodel your house. There needs to be more electricians, plumbers, carpenters, painters, and etc.

[blackshoe]

We expect people to have basic knowledge of driving regulations before we issue him a license, we regulate the purchase of poisons, and so on. So I think this is reasonable

This logic leads to the conclusion that it is reasonable for the government to regulate any aspect of our lives, including all of them. I disagree. Rand said that government has three legitimate functions: To provide for the objective use of retaliatory force against citizens who initiate force against other citizens (the police), to provide for the objective use of retaliatory force against citizens of other nations, or other nations themselves, who initiate force against our citizens (the military), and to provide for the objective arbitration of disputes (the civil court system). Not sure I entirely agree with that either, but If I had to err one way or the other, I'd rather go with Rand.

 

Note "retaliatory force". This is important. If someone initiates force against someone else, that someone else is well within his rights to respond immediately with whatever force is necessary (and generally no more) to stop the initiator. What he can't do is, for example, run away, and then come back later and initiate force himself against the person who attacked him.

[hrothgar]

Why should every union be treated equally? Why should there be public unions?

 

The US government is often in a position of a monopsony.

 

If anything, employees have a greater requirement for the protections offer by a union.

[hrothgar]

 

Note "retaliatory force". This is important. If someone initiates force against someone else, that someone else is well within his rights to respond immediately with whatever force is necessary (and generally no more) to stop the initiator.

 

Unless, of course, the use of force involves a Rand protagonist raping whom ever he feels like...

 

Then, of course, that "someone else" is expected to fall madly in love with the rapist.

[hrothgar]

There needs to be a more flexible solution. Many experts from various fields are probably willing to teach for one year. But the teachers' union would require them to have a teacher's certificate. Require the experts to use an approved lesson plan.

 

I'm an expert in my field.

 

I could take a year off and teach at a variety of charter schools in the greater Boston area without any need for a teacher's certificate.

However, doing so would cut my salary by 75%... (Its a lot worse if you factor in bonuses, Restricted Stock Units and the like)

 

Also, there is the whole issue that being an expert in a field doesn't mean that I'm well qualified to teach in that field.

In particular, the skills necessary to teach high school students and younger are VERY different that the skills necessary to practice.

 

Once you hit college, there starts to be some relationship between what you're teaching and what you actually do, however, even here there are very very big difference.

 

FWIW, I am considering quitting the rat race in roughly five years and going back to teaching college.

 

I'd like to set up a Master's Degree program that will focus on the relationship between applied math and TCP/IP networking. For example:

 

1. Here's how queuing theory gets used when you build a router
   
2. Here's how SDE's influence TCP flow control
   
3. Here's how predictive models are used for capacity planning
   
4. Here's how graph theory gets used for routing
   

 

However, I need to sock aside a wee bit more money before I am ready to retire (plus get enough $$$ to hire four or so tenured profs)

[helene_t]

tests are overrated. they serve mainly to demotivate low performing students and to make teaching them even less attractive.

 

Finland has the world's best education system and theyare among the least ytest obsessed countries.

[awm]

There's strong evidence from education research that experienced teachers are more effective than novice teachers. The value of teaching experience is more significant than measures of IQ or subject area knowledge.

 

Nonetheless the vast majority of "education advocates" ignore this research and continue to believe that (for example) anyone who has worked as an engineer can teach high school math, and probably better than a teacher with a decade in the classroom (but no "real world engineering experience").

 

Since this is simply untrue (and many "experiments" in the charter school industry provide supporting evidence) it's interesting that the belief persists. Most likely this is due to gender bias (most teachers are female, so of course it must be an easy job that any reasonably intelligent male could do better).

 

We have people who've taught actual kids in actual classrooms for decades. We have people who've spent careers examining educational practices in different cities and producing peer reviewed research about what works. So why is "education" inevitably being reformed by successful business people and/or political appointees who have none of this experience and expertise? How about an experienced TEACHER for Secretary of Education?

[kenberg]

There's strong evidence from education research that experienced teachers are more effective than novice teachers. The value of teaching experience is more significant than measures of IQ or subject area knowledge.

 

Nonetheless the vast majority of "education advocates" ignore this research and continue to believe that (for example) anyone who has worked as an engineer can teach high school math, and probably better than a teacher with a decade in the classroom (but no "real world engineering experience").

 

Since this is simply untrue (and many "experiments" in the charter school industry provide supporting evidence) it's interesting that the belief persists. Most likely this is due to gender bias (most teachers are female, so of course it must be an easy job that any reasonably intelligent male could do better).

 

We have people who've taught actual kids in actual classrooms for decades. We have people who've spent careers examining educational practices in different cities and producing peer reviewed research about what works. So why is "education" inevitably being reformed by successful business people and/or political appointees who have none of this experience and expertise? How about an experienced TEACHER for Secretary of Education?

 

I suspect it depends on just how the question is framed. I had teachers in high school who did not know their subject matter. By "not know" I mean knew almost nothing. It was frustrating and I learned little if anything. Maybe you never had such teachers, but I did. How do you learn from someone who doesn't know anything? Of course s/he can recite what the book says. But I can read what the book says. If the teacher lacks an understanding of the subject, the student will get no more than this. That's what my biology teacher did, except for when he told us stories about his heroic years in the Navy. It's not enough.

 

Objecting to having teachers that don't know their subject matter is not the same as disrespecting teachers. I have good words to say about my Spanish teacher, my senior year civics teacher, my geometry teacher and many others. Not my biology teacher, not my engineering drawing teacher, not my wood shop teacher (as mentioned, metal shop was well taught).. I have seen more than a few cases of teachers who should take up a different profession. The fact that some teachers are quite good does not change the fact that some are quite bad.

[onoway]

My Union right or wrong... It's a disservice to the competent people and the clients, be they kids or a mugging victim, to have incompetents continue to enjoy the same security as the the competent ones have earned. Possibly unions need to have sort of peer reviewed jury, to determine who needs to be encouraged, or possibly forced, to find another line of work. Teachers who are verbally abusive or punitive towards kids, and they are out there, or police whose anxiety level is so over the top that they shoot to kill a clearly unarmed person, or arrest the person who called for help rather than the offender because of assumptions, should not enjoy the same rights and protections that appropriately competent Union members have. Otoh, there needs to be some sort of protection for whistleblower type situations so it's difficult to know how things should be arranged.

[Winstonm]

My Union right or wrong... It's a disservice to the competent people and the clients, be they kids or a mugging victim, to have incompetents continue to enjoy the same security as the the competent ones have earned. Possibly unions need to have sort of peer reviewed jury, to determine who needs to be encouraged, or possibly forced, to find another line of work. Teachers who are verbally abusive or punitive towards kids, and they are out there, or police whose anxiety level is so over the top that they shoot to kill a clearly unarmed person, or arrest the person who called for help rather than the offender because of assumptions, should not enjoy the same rights and protections that appropriately competent Union members have. Otoh, there needs to be some sort of protection for whistleblower type situations so it's difficult to know how things should be arranged.

 

As with almost everything else, unions have positive values and negative values - the solution is not to dump unions but to maximize value while minimizing negatives.

[jogs]

Anthony Bourdain slams ‘privileged’ liberals for ‘utter contempt’ of working class.

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/anthony-bourdain-slams-privileged-liberals-for-utter-contempt-of-working-class-151215285.html

 

Bourdain understands why rural America voted for Trump.

[mike777]

Regarding the purpose of schools, while I would agree if asked people would respond a good education is their priority, for many the highest priority is babysitting. Teachers have it tough when they deal with real hidden priorities of parents added on top of conflicting priorities from their bosses.

 

The Chicago teacher's union realized this power of babysitting long ago in going on strike.

[hrothgar]

Anthony Bourdain slams ‘privileged’ liberals for ‘utter contempt’ of working class.

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/anthony-bourdain-slams-privileged-liberals-for-utter-contempt-of-working-class-151215285.html

 

Bourdain understands why rural America voted for Trump.

 

Your summary suggests that Bourdain engaging in precisely the same behavior that he is criticizing...