Comments, observations and thoughts from two bloggers on applied statistics, higher education and epidemiology. Joseph is an associate professor. Mark is a professional statistician and former math teacher.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
If you want to understand what's wrong with American education...
These decisions seem to further prime the pump for privatization as the government can't regulate how much tuition one spends on a private school.
But it is odd that the tax cutting mania has reached the point where governments are refusing to take money from taxpayers for the services that they provide.
Do you really want to know what is wrong with the American education system? It’s the parents, and the conditions which exist in the homes of the children. The parents have roughly 5-6 years to mold the values, curiosity, personalities, and attitudes of the children. More parents are disillusioned, have more economic difficulties to address personally, and thus do not have as much energy or time as parents in the past to deal with the issues affecting their children. People change when they are sufficiently motivated to change. With so many unmotivated parents out there, why should we expect the kids to be motivated? By the time they reach grade school, they are complicated human beings and the education professionals are faced with major challenges.
How is this what's wrong with American education? Do you really think that the problem lies in areas that want to spend "too much" on education? American public schools in wealthy areas compete well with any school system in the world.
I agree that it's perverse, in a way, to limit how much an area can spend on educating its children. But the real scandal of American education is the localization of funding (and policy), so that, generally speaking, richer areas are better-funded (and certain areas can choose what's "real science" and what's "legitimate controversy").
I think you may have misunderstood the antecedent to my pronoun. The 'what' here is not this specific decision; it's a funding system that produces these decisions.
My point was that a productive debate on educational reform would start with how we fund our schools, not LIFO and standardized testing.
These decisions seem to further prime the pump for privatization as the government can't regulate how much tuition one spends on a private school.
ReplyDeleteBut it is odd that the tax cutting mania has reached the point where governments are refusing to take money from taxpayers for the services that they provide.
Do you really want to know what is wrong with the American education system? It’s the parents, and the conditions which exist in the homes of the children. The parents have roughly 5-6 years to mold the values, curiosity, personalities, and attitudes of the children. More parents are disillusioned, have more economic difficulties to address personally, and thus do not have as much energy or time as parents in the past to deal with the issues affecting their children. People change when they are sufficiently motivated to change. With so many unmotivated parents out there, why should we expect the kids to be motivated? By the time they reach grade school, they are complicated human beings and the education professionals are faced with major challenges.
ReplyDeleteHow is this what's wrong with American education? Do you really think that the problem lies in areas that want to spend "too much" on education? American public schools in wealthy areas compete well with any school system in the world.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it's perverse, in a way, to limit how much an area can spend on educating its children. But the real scandal of American education is the localization of funding (and policy), so that, generally speaking, richer areas are better-funded (and certain areas can choose what's "real science" and what's "legitimate controversy").
Ryan,
ReplyDeleteI think you may have misunderstood the antecedent to my pronoun. The 'what' here is not this specific decision; it's a funding system that produces these decisions.
My point was that a productive debate on educational reform would start with how we fund our schools, not LIFO and standardized testing.