On 6/2/2023 9:50 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 6/1/2023 9:22 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 6/1/2023 8:36 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> Public school 'teachers' are very well compensated for not
>>> so much actual work.
>>
>>
>> There may be some examples of that down at the usual low end
>> of the normal curve. But based on teachers I've known, "not
>> so much actual work" is bullshit. Do you know any actual
>> teachers?
>>
> OK, that's a good point.
>
> There are radical differences between districts, among principals and
> state to state so I should not have used a categorical tone.
>
> Teachers I know retired young and live very well.
>
> The largest districts are nothing short of abominable
I think bad education results correlate very strongly with low income
levels. And given the audience here, I'll quickly add that giving a ton
of money to a family wouldn't necessarily improve that.
I believe it's a cultural problem. There are sub-cultures where families
demand and expect their kids succeed. There are sub-cultures where
families barely exist, and/or don't care about their kids success. And
(again, given the audience here) those differences are not
all-or-nothing. They are normal curves with overlaps and exceptions.
For the anecdote addicts, one teacher friend of mine transferred to a
low income school and had great difficulty. She once described standing
aside one kid's desk to give him individual help with math. As she did
so, a kid in an adjacent desk began drawing on her skirt using his pen.
You can't blame that on the teacher.
In anther instance, I visited a certain high school science class to
make them aware of our programs. I was astonished to see seniors in an
elective science class absolutely defying the teacher, to the point of
blatantly using her computer and refusing to stop.
But on the other hand: _Freakonomics_ discussed a natural experiment
that took place in Chicago schools. They decided to implement "magnet"
schools with special, higher level curricula. Hundreds of families
applied they didn't have capacity for them all. So they held a lottery,
and winning kids got to go to the special schools.
Researchers later evaluated academic progress of the kids whose families
applied. It turned out the schools (and thus teachers, curricula, etc.)
didn't matter. If a kid's family _tried_ to get him into a magnet
school, he did very well in school whether or not he won a spot. Kids
whose families didn't care to apply did much worse.
Family and culture seem to be the most important factor.
--
- Frank Krygowski