Issue '04: Education

[Nym90]

Not neccessarily, he may have attained the grades through the availability of better tutors or other resources, or the poor kid may have failed due to the lack of basic necessities of life which are prerequisities to academic success.

[Nym90]

Either way, he doesn't know the stuff, which is what's important.

Well, I don't agree with that. We have fundamentally different values on this...I see equality of opportunity as the most important thing, and you don't. That's fine, but it means we've basically reached the end of any usefulness to continue debating. We aren't going to change each other's values.

Rather than just telling the hungry kid "too bad, you don't have the ability to succeed, well tough", I think that we should give him the opportunity to get ahead.

[Nym90]

I also believe in giving him opportunity. Through a good education system. But his background means nothing to me.

Well, he doesn't have the opportunity due to his background. So he's not going to get it if you don't take that into consideration. If you don't care, that's fine, but you are ignoring reality if you think background doesn't matter.

[Nym90]

I agree with Badnarik and his belief that the state no longer has the ability to correctly teach my generation. Since the Department of Education has been established, we have gone to the most intelligent country in the world to around 30th. You can attribute that to the nation's shrinking attention span, but if you look at a lot of the material public schools teach, it seems that the attention span of our schools has recessed as well.

How do you measure most intelligent in this sense?

By standardized test scores? If so, you do realize that the United States is at a huge disadvantage compared to many other countries, because everyone must take the math, science, reading etc. tests, whereas in many other countries, you get onto a "track" at a young age and only focus on one area. We offer a broader education to allow people to choose what to go into upon graduation, we don't put them into one track from which they have a difficult time getting out of, based merely on what they are best at at the time.

[Nym90]

Nym is only part right.  WHen you see the US scores compared to scores from Europe you are seeing hte average of all US students compared to the average of the top 20% or so for the European nations.

This is because many European nations limit who can get what level of education at all points in the students life.  

How am I only part right then? Sounds like I'm all right, unless you mean I'm only part right because this only applies to Europe, and not the rest of the world. I was pretty certain that this was also true of Japan and most countries in Southeast Asia as well, though. If I'm wrong, please correct me there.

[Nym90]

Nym is only part right.  WHen you see the US scores compared to scores from Europe you are seeing hte average of all US students compared to the average of the top 20% or so for the European nations.

This is because many European nations limit who can get what level of education at all points in the students life.  

How am I only part right then? Sounds like I'm all right, unless you mean I'm only part right because this only applies to Europe, and not the rest of the world. I was pretty certain that this was also true of Japan and most countries in Southeast Asia as well, though. If I'm wrong, please correct me there.

No, you said the students focus on one area.  While this is partly true, the top 20% are the top average in all fields, not the top 20% in each field.

I'm tired and that reads confusing to me.  Let me give an example.  If we are comparing math and science the US uses the average of all US students.  Germany (for example) uses their top 20%, not jus tthe top 20% in science.  SOme of the students factored in will be mediocre in science but excellent in math or language skills.  But since there is a tendency for students gifted in one area to be able to perform at or above average in all fields these non-science specialists do not pull down the average all that much.

If this is still not clear I will try to explain it again in the morning.  

Ah, ok...I see what you mean. I think you explained it better than I, though I was getting at somewhat of the same point.

I remember hearing that Southeast Asia mostly used the idea of putting students into "tracks" where they only study what they are good at, starting in about 8th-9th grade though. Maybe my friend was just pulling my leg, I dunno. I admit I haven't researched it.