How does /sci/ feel towards the current primary, secondary and tertiary educational systems?
>>7668236
/sci/ is american so probably won't feel any way. I am not but I also have no feelings towards it. Now I'm out of it let the other kids burn I say.
>>7668236
>primary, secondary
Too fucking slow and doesn't cover nearly enough material.
>tertiary educational
People not interested in learning need to get the fuck out.
>>7668236
Sine about 1950 problems have compounded each other to the point where the public K12 system is almost unsalavgable.
First, integration needed to occur (inb4 /pol/ shows up). The shock of it has never been resolved. Then schools stopped getting enough money to operate. Then teachers unions went full strike mode because they don't want their pay cut or any sort of accountability introduced on their end. What we have now is a huge fucking mess. Affirmative Action court orders from the 60s go up against modern PTAs setup by the NCLB. Schools are responsible to individual cities, counties, school districts, states, and DC with no clear chain of command.
The the Common Core comes in and standardizes everything into one system. This fixed a lot of the problems with the system, namely a lack of any single standardized metric to judge teacher quality. Problem is, a) the CC is more than just tests, it's curricula too and b) because CC tests determine how much federal money schools qualify for, schools have no incentive to teach anything other than what's exactly on the test. Schools also don't get as much money if their students choose an apprenticeship or military enlistment compared to college enrollment.
This also leads to another problem, overfilled colleges. Which leads to colleges dumping quality cirricula and standards as they have no incentive to compete now as there's an oversupply of paying, stupid students. The result of this is that you get colleges doing stupid things, like banning free speech, that goes against their supposed reason for existing. Now the public university system has the same issues the public K12 system does.
>>7668267
The entire system is fucked at the core and there's no real hope to fix it. The Common Core, as much as I heavily dislike it, is the closest to a "fix" we'll ever hope to get. Personally I expect private tutors and schools of all shapes and sizes to rise in popularity within our lifetimes in response to the public system's failings. The only other option is to dump EVERYTHING, especially the NCLB and the bank Sallie Mae (who underwrites student loans), but that is very unlikely.
>>7668254
CURRICULUM OF AUTISMO THE GREAT.jpg
God that picture is terrible. Its like,
>education is too slow and doesnt cover enough
>VECTOR CALCULUS IN THE 8TH GRADE NIGGUH
>hey man you left my soda underfilled, not nearly enough in here
>AYYYO NO WORRIES NIGGA I FLOOD YOU WHOLE FUCKIN HOOD
>>7668236
I often think about this. It really depends on what you think education is for, and how ruthless you are willing to be with the students. I have a particular vision for education, obviously one that's unlikely to ever be implemented, but many of the individuals that I've outlined the idea to have argued vehemently against me.
My personal opinion is that education, at its core, is to prepare students for participation in the economy. Education is about ensuring as many as students as possible are employable, ideally have as many job skills as possible and, should they have the talent and vision, the necessary knowledge and skills to not merely work for someone else but to be business owners/leaders in their own right.
I have gotten into heated disagreements with other anons on here and IRL, with the other side putting it, paraphrasing, that education is "about more than just producing wage slaves".
As I cannot prove the other side wrong, it's really impossible to answer the question of how the education system is performing when it doesn't even really have a clear mission statement.
>>7668272
>>VECTOR CALCULUS IN THE 8TH GRADE NIGGUH
There are already private schools that do just that right now
>>7668273
If the automation of work continues in the way that it is currently going. Then a whole lot of people, by no choice of their own, will not be able to contribute to the economy. How does that affect your model of education?
Homework is absolute cancer.
As someone who grew up in a really shitty family that instilled no discipline in me and even if I did need help couldn't help me it was just horrible.
Removing homework at least until university is one of the big things we could do to make school more equal. Let the kids stay in school longer. I don't care. But nothing hinders your learning more than having to go to school with no homework and knowing you'll be chastized infront of the entire class. It just widens the social gap. It resulted in me missing entire months of school.
>>7668291
It absolutely doesn't effect it at all? Quite apart from me not accepting your premise (automation destroys jobs, sure, but it also creates jobs that weren't there before) I said in the post above that the ideal was to prepare as many students as possible for education, not all of them. Even if automation destroys many of their jobs, have as many left employable as possible. In an economy with no automation, you could expect some unemployment, say for disabled individuals. It would not change my viewpoint that no school could prepare those outliers for employment.
>>7668298
I can tell you now that this discussion will lead absolutely nowhere and you're about to waste potential hours in this thread. I'd honestly drop it.
Not even the guy you replied to. Just a well meaning anon.
>>7668301
I'm actually not even arguing. Why do you expect this turn of the discussion to be a waste? To cap, the OP asked how I feel about education. I replied it depends on what one feels education is for. Then I threw my hat in the ring with a strictly utilitarian view of education, it is preparation for employment or business ownership. Another anon questioned the effect of automation on that model, I replied how I simply didn't see how it would have any effect at all.
I frankly had considered the matter to be dealt with, not only did I not need you to tell me not to embark on this tangent, I wouldn't have listened or cared for your advice if I had.
>>7668236
Public education is possibly the worst idea we've ever had.
>>7668311
As the anon that asked the question, I personally don't see this discussion as a waste, a discussion of education is what the OP asked for.
Having said that, I agree that at the moment, education should primarily be used to ready students for the workplace, but at the moment ~80% of all jobs in the US are in the service industry, and even if you exclude all the jobs that require higher education, over 50% of all jobs in the US are very replacable by forthcoming automation.
>>7668328
>As the anon that asked the question, I personally don't see this discussion as a waste
Neither. Maybe it's the way things come off over the internet, where one doesnt have body language or inflection, but that anon struck me as a bit of a dickhead. If he doesnt like the tangent, I'm sure he can hide our posts.
>Having said that, I agree that at the moment, education should primarily be used to ready students for the workplace, but at the moment ~80% of all jobs in the US are in the service industry, and even if you exclude all the jobs that require higher education, over 50% of all jobs in the US are very replacable by forthcoming automation.
Historically, entire industries have been displaced by advancing technology. There is no longer an industry for shoeing horses, or ploughing a field with oxen, but we don't have an unemployment problem today because the steam engine has rendered people who would otherwise be smithing horse shoes out of wrought iron unable to find other work. Automation produces as many jobs as it destroys. Even if it didn't, the mandate at school wouldn't change, it would just mean that it would fail in 50% of cases.
>>7668328
As an extra question, and please don't be offended, it's just an honest question, where are you on the political spectrum? Left or Right? I'm wondering if individuals who would lean left are sort of against school privatisation of any description.
Children can master gymnastics or piano after ten years of solid training. Students are pushed through 13 years of curriculum that cater toward casuals, only to come out not being able to tie their shoes. This is the outcome when government monopolizes the provision of a good or service.
>post-secondary
A lazy excuse for something touted as an education. You pay too much to take an exam. Wonderful. Don't get me started on how fucking stupid labs are.
School isn't about education. It's ye old Prussian model made to label people.
>>7668236
Education was a mistake.
Knowledge is too powerful for the general public, we should hide it from all but the most intelligent individuals of each generation to initiate into an ivory tower academic establishment that is separated from the plebs of the working class.
>>7668376
Had a couple of profs that talked like this. They were just as boring and predictable as anyone else who fancied themselves elite. It's a red flag m8. Quick! Take some peyote.
>>7668348
Perhaps I am a bit too fanciful when I think about the future, but I forsee a reality where a company can easily decide that 10,000 truckers can be replaced by 100 programmers within the next 20 years. If a similar scenario happens for all service jobs then there is going to a lot of unemployed people.
I know that this isn't an argument in my favour, but I think that the premise that is often portrayed in science fiction as post-scarcity, is something that requires some thought.
>>7668354
Well, I don't like to define myself in those terms. I feel that I am kind of fiscally conservative, but socially liberal. As an Australian, I tend to vote for independents that represent my ideal, and then minor parties that do likewise, as all our votes trickle down to the big parties. I guess in US terms you could call me left of centre, but I'm not against private schooling.
>>7668291
You're wrong. Very wrong.
"Automation" has never been a problem and is unlikely to ever be. New jobs are created, old ones done away with. Regardless, some sort of "automation wave" is not going to happen due to the economics of it. The fact is, there's too many people on earth and all the borders are open. In this environment human labor is cheap and exploitable. Look at Uber, it exists (though not profitably) because it exploits this fact. Automation doesn't thrive in this environment. Even if the borders were to be shut, wages would skyrocket and quality of life would improve for everyone so automation of many services wouldn't be an issue.
I strongly suggest you stop reading wired or other pop-sci magazines, because they all suck down whatever tech companies feed them.
>>7668363
I agree about it being the old Prussian model made to label people.
I'm surprised by how education works in South Korea though... Where kids are taught up to 12 hours a day. And then suddenly they go to university and the IQ's all distribute normally afterwards.
>>7668396
Ok, so you're an aussie as well, who is ok with privatisation, fiscally conservative, who also believes that education is solely preparation for employment or business ownership, correct?
In order to understand how I feel about education, I have to back up for a bit. Education is a hot topic button for both sides of the political spectrum. It seems to drive the left absolutely crazy that students seem to differ in aptitude, whilst the right absolutely hates the carefully controlled studies that show that when corrected for the students innate aptitudes and ability, private schooling does absolutely nothing- it literally performs no better, and sometimes worse, than an equivalent public school.
However, that in itself is interesting, and requires explanation. In 99% of other fields, a functioning market breathtakingly outcompetes a government monopoly for the provision of a good or service. Why not education?
The answer is, from an economic point of view, the provision of education is a market place absolutely destined to fail. It's literally the only market with 100% positive externality- 100% of the service goes to a person who didn't pay for it. The parent who pays isn't in the classroom, doesnt see what goes on, is incapable of making a truly informed decision like in other markets, because it goes to your child and not you. The result is perfectly predictable, the private schools have an incentive to market the school to rich parents whilst ignoring the childs education as they know where their bread and butter are coming from. Hence they churn out a product with clipped upper class accents and smart blazers, who perform no better than a more uncouth public student with equivalent IQ and aptitude, at many times the price. Private schooling doesnt work.
>>7668407
Wiki:
The Prussian system had by the 1830s attained the following characteristics:[11]
Free primary schooling, at least for poor citizens
Professional teachers trained in specialized colleges
A basic salary for teachers and recognition of teaching as a profession
An extended school year to better involve children of farmers
Funding to build schools
Supervision at national and classroom level to ensure quality instruction
Curriculum inculcating a strong national identity, involvement of science and technology
Secular instruction (but with religion as a topic included in the curriculum)
I honestly don't see what the problem is. In fact, I think it should be stuck to more closely, secondary school not being compulsory.
>>7668414
By contrast, public education has a completely different business model. It should be noted that there is no such thing as "free" education, or "free" healthcare. The doctors and teachers that work in those "free" systems get paid from somewhere. Hence, it is appropriate to talk about public educations "business model".
Essentially, the government is educating it's future workforce, creating the next generation of tax payers. Ironically, the governments interests line up much better with students in this business model, there is no positive externality, the teachers wages are going to be paid by the students who they educate, so they have an incentive to give the kids as best a chance in the employment market as possible.
So we have a better business model thats fatally flawed in that its run by a government monopoly, hopelessly mired in meaningless politics but which should in theory have the kids best interest at heart, and a flawed market place for education that does have meaningful competition but can be expected to target parents wallets rather than students welfare.
>>7668424
Hence, my pet education model, which I've been gathering data for slowly for the last year or so, is built around a contract. On the first day of school, a school is given a certificate by the government guaranteeing them an iron clad right to the proportion of that students future tax that would ordinarily go to education. The school would have an incentive to prepare the child for the workplace, to ensure that she earns as much money as possible when she graduates, but it wouldnt be provided by a government monopoly. Take the governments business model, of providing free education to produce the next generation of tax payers, and have that education provided by a marketplace of competing private institutions, all attempting to add value and equity to the students future career options. Finally, have the government completely relinquish control of the education system, such as matters of curriculum, uniform, etc, and let the free market do it's work.
>>7668405
>New jobs are created
This is not a given.
Also the question remains about the quality of those jobs, should they in fact be created.
Say we get rid of doctors; what would all those people that would have been doctors do that is equivalent in pay and lifestyle?
>>7668440
Interesting model.
How would it handle student admissions though?
Because like you know that the schools would only admit the brightest students if they could make selections. Alternatively you know that parents would move to the areas with best schools if schools aren't allowed to turn people away (who live nearby).
Both seem to suck.
While this isn't very applicable now, the picture I have of the small village school where a handful of the most willing/capable women teach the kids who live in the area seems ideal. The incentive to do a good job is plentiful, and the likelihood of useless people being teachers reduced (by the fact that the parents probably know each teacher fairly well, and personally).
Within schools there are mass:
Fainting epidemics
Vomiting epidemics
Diahorrea epidemics
Massacre/shooting epidemics
One has to question a system whereby the gathering together and melding of young minds produces such negative outcomes.
>>7668236
1900 BC (Egyptian, Moscow Papyrus): If someone brings in 100 logs measuring 2 by 2, then how many logs measuring 5 by 1 does this correspond to?
1900: A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of this price. What is his profit?
1920 (Progressive reform): Alice has 2 cups of milk, how many pints does she have?
1960 (New math): A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $144 (base 8). His cost of production is 0.4 (base 5) of this price. What is his profit in base 10?
1970 ("Traditional" math): A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80. What is his profit?
1980 (New-New math): A logger exchanges a set L of lumber for a set M of money. The cardinality of set M is 100 and each element is worth $1.
(a) make 100 dots representing the elements of the set M
(b) The set C representing costs of production contains 20 fewer points than set M. Represent the set C as a subset of the set M
(c) What is the cardinality of the set P of profits?
1990 (Calculator enhanced math): Type the number "100". Hit the minus, "-", key. Now type "80" and hit the equals key which looks like "=" or "↲". Does everyone see the number "20"?
1995 (Dumbed-down math): A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Underline the number 20.
2012 (Common Core Math™): By cutting down a forest full of beautiful trees, a logger makes $20.
(a) What do you think of this way of making money?
(b) How did the forest birds and squirrels feel?
(c) Draw a picture of the forest as you'd like it to look.
Home schooling (Real math): Logging Company sells some logs for $100. The company had to pay 19% of the sale for the taxes. 18% of the gross has to be used for stock dividend pay outs and an extra 11% of the total goes toward liability insurance. 7% of the sale needs to pay for employee wages and then 25% of the transaction gets sucked away by the mob. What's the bottom line?
It's a race to the bottom
>>7670010
>How would it handle student admissions though?
>Because like you know that the schools would only admit the brightest students if they could make selections
It may be my reactor grade autism, but over the past year or so of looking at this model of education I have spent some time researching the problem of school selection. My answer is 2 fold. In the early educational years, there simply is no method of student selection. In this age group, IQ and personality tests are only marginally better than chance at predicting students future career success (see the Wilson effect), as is looking at the IQ and personality of the parents (due to regression toward the mean).
As for later in life, student selection is probably not such a bad thing. In the US, educational costs blew out by 25% after no child left behind, with little later employment success to show for it. When a school can add no further equity to a students future career options it's probably for the best that that student is told to leave and get a job. That decision is also predicated on the assumption that no school can add equity to that students career options. In many cases there will be a better school for that student. Take the case of a troubled rebellious teen. His school may find that the costs of educating him exceed his future career projections. The school then makes his contract available on the market. A slew of competing schools, who specialise in rebellious students, say military schools, review his test scores and profile, decide they can add equity to his future career, and begin to bid on his contract. The original school then sells his contract to the highest bidder. Hence, increasing market specialisation may solve the problem of student selection.
If there is money to be made on a students future career, someone out there will probably find a way to extract it.
>>7670643
Damn that's actually good. Really good.
>>7668236
its complete shit,
they teached us shit in highcshool no I'm struggling in college
>>7670660
I tend to think so to, but of course, I may be hopelessly biased. I also may be more convincing than I should be, I have spent the past year researching the details of this model, and have the advantage of having my knowledge of the field ready, you have only heard of this idea tonight. We still have no idea how well my system would work in the real world.
At the end of the day, I'm still just a crank who has spent way too much time researching a pipe dream view of education. The past year or so studying this may be an example of my reactor grade autism; my decision to publish the idea on 4chan sci where it can't ever be attributed to me may be an example of my weapons grade stupidity.
>>7670643
in case of military school doesn't it boil down to the choice of war vs. poverty then?
what would be the at the lowest end, asylum?
hasn't changed since the ancient times imho
>>7670740
I would suggest you campaign to have it implemented where you live but good luck with that :/
>>7670744
The use of the term military school was intended only as an example. I didn't mean literal military school, but something like an educational boot camp with very severe discipline to build an espirit de corps among students, and give the incorrigible students the direction and meaning that they would otherwise lack in their life. Don't look at it to literally. At the lowest end you wouldn't have asylum, you would have schools making the decision that they could no longer add equity to a students future career and releasing him into the job market.
>>7670758
I'm well aware that although the economics of my system might make sense, it's politically completely infeasible.
