19 ms·

America's High School Graduates Look Like Other Countries' High School Dropouts

• tokenadult 11y ago
  Here is a link (hosted by the United States National Center for Educational Statistics) to the study report referenced in the news story submitted to open this thread, that is "Skills of U.S. Unemployed, Young, and Older Adults in Sharper Focus: Results From the Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) 2012/2014: First Look". The report includes a summary of findings, including findings about numeracy and technology skills: "In numeracy and problem solving in technology-rich environments, the United States performed below the PIAAC international average. In numeracy, the U.S. average score was 12 points lower than the PIAAC international average score (257 versus 269, see figure 1-B), and in problem solving in technology-rich environments, the U.S. average score was 9 points lower than the international average (274 versus 283, see figure 1-C). Compared with the international average distributions for these skills, the United States had "• a smaller percentage at the top (10 versus 12 percent at Level 4/5 in numeracy, and 5 versus 8 percent at Level 3 in problem solving in technology-rich environments, see figures 2-B and 2-C), and "• a larger percentage at the bottom (28 versus 19 percent 6 in numeracy, and 64 versus 55 percent in problem solving in technology-rich environments at Level 1 and below)." http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016039.pdf http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016039.pdf
• victorhugo31337 11y ago
  This is what happens when no child is left behind. How can EVERYONE graduate from HS without lowering the bar?
  • bnolsen 11y ago
    Absolutely utterly agreed. Trying to pull along students who want to fail pulls down the ones who want to succeed. The American dream used to be about letting those who work hard succeed, and letting those who didn't fail. And anyone could choose to more from the fail to the succeed pool.
    • derefr 11y ago
      NCLB deals with very few kids who "want to fail." It mostly deals with kids with learning/communication disabilities. Those kids don't have the choice of just "moving from the fail to the succeed pool"; they have to be given the opportunity to succeed you're talking about by giving them increased assistance. Which takes budget and teacher-time away from other students, which decreases class performance. If you really want to fix education, don't repeal NCLB; amend it to state that special-needs kids get education vouchers with for going to a school specifically enabled to help them, with at least one state-funded school so enabled in each state; and then drop the requirement that any other school handle them in normal classes. This would be better for the student, for the teacher, and for all the other students. The only people it would negatively affect are the parents, who would be forced to either homeschool, or move the family to a place where schooling for their child is available.
      • rankam 11y ago
        This isn't true at at all. I worked at the NYCDOE for 3 years planning, implementing, and executing NCLB. NCLB deals with passing tax dollars to private companies - plain and simple. Superintendents/Schools/Teachers no longer create their own curriculum - it's all purchased and has to be to meet the regulatory requirements of NCLB (amongst other regulations which benefit corporations). To clarify - I think corporations should profit as much as possible. I do have an issue with companies profiting from making shit products that comply with regulations and acting like they are making a positive contribution to society.
    • hackuser 11y ago
      > The American dream used to be about letting those who work hard succeed, and letting those who didn't fail. I've never heard the latter. When was this true? According to one history I read, one of the appeals of the New Deal programs in the 1930s is that we would be better than the Old World (i.e., Europe) and not leave our own citizens in the gutter.
      • deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
  • robert_foss 11y ago
    Based on which facts have you arrived at that conclusion?
  • ceejayoz 11y ago
    That appears to be an unfounded assertion. The US graduation rate is well under the OECD average. http://www.data360.org/dsg.aspx?Data_Set_Group_Id=1653 http://www.data360.org/dsg.aspx?Data_Set_Group_Id=1653
    • cosmie 11y ago
      Appearances can be deceiving. Secondary education is compulsory in the US, whereas it's not in every OECD country. In some countries such as Japan, high school is not only optional but you have to take exams just to get accepted into a particular high school. This effectively stratifies students such that you end up with much more homogenous classrooms and allows for more consistent teaching. Many countries also offer vocational alternatives over academic classes at the secondary education level. While some districts in the US offer vocational "tracks", they still have to abide by the federal and state academic mandates, so they're not usually purely vocational. Not that the structure of the US system isn't a problem in itself, but the fact that we have compulsory, academic-based secondary education that requires public schools to accept all students zoned for it leaves the US in a tight spot. We'll already have a lower graduation rate simply from people dropping out that would otherwise never have started if it wasn't compulsory here. But it's even worse since we don't optimize it to the students (such as the purely vocational options and competitive high school entrance acceptance that allows for a more homogenous student body and more tailored teaching that I mentioned previously)
  • keithnz 11y ago
    Rather than this conclusion, perhaps, look at what other countries are doing? Are they leaving children behind? or do they have better techniques for making sure everyone does well?
    • kuschku 11y ago
      Germany, in fact, does leave people behind. But it doesn't leave them without perspective. The tiered school model of Germany sorts you into one of three tiers based on your abilities with the age of 10, which gets even more specific over the years after that. Only people finishing from the highest tier can go to a theoretical university, people from the tier below can at maximum go to a university of applied sciences, and people from the lowest tier can only go to a trade school. Obviously, these tiers have different lengths of education (5 years, 6 years, 8 years), and you can always switch up a tier if you believe you can do it, but most people take what's recommended for them. And this is necessary. We, as a society, have to accept that some people won't be able to study maths. Or computer science. For some people, applied sciences, or even a more technical job might be more ideal. The solution isn't to get everyone into college, but to accept the fact that not everyone can do so, and to also value the job the manual workers are doing. There is this nice advertisement campaign from 2014 from the German association of craftsmen, "What would the world be without craftsmen?": https://youtu.be/YfgqIWwxk2g https://youtu.be/YfgqIWwxk2g
      • spacecowboy_lon 11y ago
        Ah just like the old System the UK had with Grammar schools for the middle class and Secondary modern for the working class kids whose role in life to leave school at 15/16 and work in industry.
        • tremon 11y ago
          It's got nothing to do with "working class kids" and their "role in life". I've had classmates from very affluent parents move into vocational training, and I've had poor friends complete a university degree. That the US and UK fail in this matter doesn't say anything about the rest of the world's ability to provide equal opportunity for all children.
  • Retra 11y ago
    Because education is not a zero-sum activity?
    • enraged_camel 11y ago
      The resources allocated to education are not infinite.
      • vacri 11y ago
        They don't need to be infinite; education just needs to be taken more seriously. And the public in general needs to understand that social programs they like need to be funded, and that sometimes means more taxes (education is basically a social program). The US has a very high wealth per capita - if other countries with similar resources can do it, so can the US.
    • kuschku 11y ago
      You can say that when your school can provide 2 or more teachers per class of 20 pupils in high school, but as far as I know, in contrast to the schools where I'm from, in the US that doesn't happen. With growing class sizes, and less teachers, US schools don't have the resources to focus on individual students' needs. The best they can do is trying to get some students through. They could adopt the more modern concepts, where small groups of pupils get a task they can't do yet "derive a function", each group gets given some hints in which way to try it (each group in a different one — one going via limits, the next doing it numerically, the next graphically), and then each group presenting their concept to the others, and comparing. Those, more modern teaching concepts, also allow for good teaching for every student with a low amount of teachers (and teach independent understanding, research, etc), but they're rare in most countries.
  • withdavidli 11y ago
    by extending the time one has in school? by not pushing kids through the ranks because too many would stay back otherwise? by better funding schools, and providing safer environments for kids to work/live in? did you want actual suggestions?
  • mapt 11y ago
    Slightly more complex than that: http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/12/12/370057298/big-drop-in-students-being-held-back-but-why http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/12/12/370057298/big-drop...
  • hackuser 11y ago
    Outcomes vary greatly by school, zip code, and socio-economic class. Are children in the wrong zip code just lazy? Why do the children in poor families perform so much worse than in rich families? It doesn't, by any measure, appear to be a consequence of the children's efforts.
    • moultano 11y ago
      >It doesn't, by any measure, appear to be a consequence of the children's efforts. What basis do you have for saying that?
      • ryandrake 11y ago
        The best ranked public schools are consistently in the richest neighborhoods, and the worst ranked ones are consistently in the poorest neighborhoods. I don't think this can be disputed. So, what's more likely? 1. Rich neighborhoods result in well-funded schools with the resources to provide a superior education, better than the not-well-funded schools that are in poor neighborhoods. Or 2. A superior education comes from "children's efforts" and kids that put in a lot of effort coincidentally all live in the same school districts, which also coincidentally are located in the richest neighborhoods?
        • ars 11y ago
          Or 3. The humans who are smarter become richer and have children who are also smarter (and thus do better in school).
        • moultano 11y ago
          Why would you think that similar people living near each other is the result of a coincidence? Abject poverty is likely to have way more impact on kids performance in school than any level of school funding. Whether you want to lump that in with "children's efforts" or not, it's certainly exogenous to the school.
        • sethammons 11y ago
          It has more to do with parent involvement and support, and after that, community support. If the family does not value education, then the likely kids wont. Poverty in and of itself plays a role. Poorer families have other stressors that distract from school, and poorer families tend to not know the benefit of education (they may have been told education is a ticket out of poverty, but few see it happen). And it spreads out of the home. In poverty stricken areas, the majority of peers will shun those who are academically excellent as some kind of sell out. There have been successful schools in poor areas like Harlem when the majority of parents and students care about their education. On the flip side, excellent schools pull in families that value school performance and those families support and push the students. Annecdata: I grew up very poor and made it well into the middle class, it can be done, but the cards are stacked against you.
• madengr 11y ago
  Not able to send a text messsage? That I don't believe.
  • tokenadult 11y ago
    The study is about comparative data, and I can well believe (having lived in another country) that there are countries where a larger percentage of adults than in the United States can use commonplace technology of today. The math literacy (numeracy) advantage for other countries I absolutely believe, as I have read the textbooks from other countries (I am an American who can read Chinese), and the textbooks are simpler better in other countries than they are in the United States.
    • Denzel 11y ago
      How are the textbooks better? Can you provide some examples?
      • tokenadult 11y ago
        Thanks for the follow-up question. Here is a link to a LONG article about Russian textbook that I learned about from a fellow HN participant years ago. http://toomandre.com/travel/sweden05/WP-SWEDEN-NEW.pdf http://toomandre.com/travel/sweden05/WP-SWEDEN-NEW.pdf
    • bigger_cheese 11y ago
      I think part of the issue is the corporate lobbying culture that exists in America. I read an article a while ago about what goes into selecting textbooks in American schools apparently textbook companies lobby the education departments to use their brand of books so rather than getting the best textbook schools get the book from whichever company "bribed" the officials the most. Because it all goes through politicians they can push their own agendas into textbooks hence you get books trying to teach kids intelligent design or whatever. From someone like me outside of America it seems absurd.
      • 11y ago
• Cookingboy 11y ago
  And in this age of information and technology, many of these people are voting to decide the next leader of the only superpower left on Earth. This may sound grossly elitist, but democracy can be super scary sometimes.
  • laxatives 11y ago
    Maybe Trump is the only politician with the knowledge/freedom to act on that realization, leading to landslide victories by appealing to the lowest common denominator in US voters. I guess that's exactly what democracy is.
    • tw04 11y ago
      In theory that's why we have delegates. Unfortunately the delegates are now bought and paid for by the same corporate interests that have our country in its current state...
      • mc32 11y ago
        And ultimately the electoral college in the event it's believed voters made an egregious error in electing their president. Don't think we'll see that happen regardless of winner this cycle.
  • Moshe_Silnorin 11y ago
    Voting is considered holy, a sacred ritual immune from criticism. There exist alternatives like sortition - I favor a combination of sortiton and standardized testing.
  • xtian 11y ago
    As it stands, the American populace has been expertly prepared to engage in our political process to the fullest extent possible. That is, to spectate the circus act for a while, and then with great certainty and condescension, choose one of two preselected options.
  • Houshalter 11y ago
• hackuser 11y ago
  When it comes to technology skills, the story gets worse. The U.S. came in last place — right below Poland. The study looked at basic technology tasks: things like using email, buying and returning items online, using a drop-down menu, naming a file on a computer or sending a text message. Something to consider about your users.
  • subway 11y ago
    Why can't I help but feel the "our users must never be forced to learn" and "our children must never experience discomfort" mindsets are related, and contribute to the US coming in last place.
    • ajmurmann 11y ago
      Well, I certainly wouldn't want to start the company that makes the only product that has it as part of its philosophy to make their users learn in order to be able to use it efficiently. That being said you are probably right and the dumbed down UIs we see more and more with low information density are annoying and underline what you are saying. Everything is catering to the lowest common denominator.
      • losteric 11y ago
        It depends on the product... Photoshop's did pretty well and it's learning curve is almost vertical. It's all about reducing pain. If you're automating something simple (like a TODO list), it better be stupid-friendly. But expert-oriented UX is fine for complex expert-level problems.
        • marcus_holmes 11y ago
          Photoshop's UI is developed for a market of people who have particular skills in... Photoshop's UI. Their learning curve is vertical because they have a large user base of people who have invested significant time and effort learning that arcane UI. They're also dominant in the market - any new designer had better know their way around Photoshop's UI or they're unemployable (at least until recently). A new product in that market, aimed at the same audience, say.. Sketch... needs a friendly UI because it doesn't have the same invested user base. In other words, Photoshop's UI can be difficult because it's always been difficult and its always been the dominant player in the market, not because it's expert-oriented.
• chatmasta 11y ago
  I'd be much more interested in a study that compares the top 1 percentile of graduates between countries. Of course the bulk of US graduates are going to be unskilled... that's just how the bell curve works, and the US has the resources to support lots of unskilled laborers. It's the top of the bell curve that matters. How do the smartest engineers and scientists in the US compare to their counterparts in other countries? Eventually we'll have a basic income so if people don't want to learn, they won't have to.
  • hn9780470248775 11y ago
    > It's the top of the bell curve that matters. I think that this attitude has gotten us into a pretty big mess.
    • chatmasta 11y ago
      You can't force somebody to learn.
      • supercheetah 11y ago
        Sure, but environmental factors play a pretty big factor in how much people will want to learn.
      • EvanPlaice 11y ago
        But you can sure as hell discourage/demotivate them by standardizing all classes into a game of 'guess the question', all work into mechanical problem solving, and all tests into multiple-choice bubble filling. The first class where I experienced true critical thinking was 10th grade English. By a teacher who was ejected the next semester for giving the school jocks a hard time when they acted up in class. I had the luck and very good fortune to get out of public school and attend a boarding school on a fully funded scholarship. In my earlier years I went from Minnesota where they were experimenting with teaching algebra to 4th grade students who tested high on intelligence assessments, and where we were practicing basic physics in Science class in 6th grade. To Colorado, where my school didn't even teach Science and we spent most of the day screwing around and playing card games. Middle school was light on content and dominated by a culture of bullying/bullies. High school was all about 'getting into college' and bullying was replaced with popularity contests and jocks. Ironically, I took all useful classes where I learned skills that I've used a lot since. Metal Shop, Wood Shop, Graphic Arts, and Computer Programming. All of the shop, graphics, architecture classes were on the chopping block despite the school having 5 baseball teams 3 softball teams, the 3 usual football teams, a state-winning marching band, and many teams for various other sports including tennis, volleyball, soccer, basketball, etc...
• gregatragenet3 11y ago
  Of course the US does poorly in this survey. The survey measures life skills. We've spent the last decades changing our schools from teaching life skills to pure college prep. A terrible disservice to young people. Here's some sample questions http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/Education%20and%20Skills_online%20sample%20items.ppt http://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/Education%20and%20Skills_onli... .
  • roymurdock 11y ago
    One has to wonder...does it really matter what you learn in school? Relative to who you meet, and what brand you get to slap on your resume at the end of the day? Do you remember anything you learned in AP Calc or APUSH all those years ago? I think it's important to learn how to think. But you can always do that in your 4 years at college, once you get into an ivy league, right? Who needs life skills when you can get a cushy job straight out of school and just pay others to cook, clean, drive, etc. for you? Isn't it every parent's dream that their child's life be better than their own?
    • conceit 11y ago
      before you care about that question, you should ask yourself, "should it?." BTW: Am I doing this little american grammatical quirk with the punctuation within quotes right?
      • mindcrime 11y ago
        Am I doing this little american grammatical quirk with the punctuation within quotes right? Well, since the question part is quoted, I believe the '?' should go inside the quotation marks in this case. But I think most Americans would put the period outside of the quotes, or leave it off altogether in that case. It's one of those things where I doubt anybody (other than an English teacher) actually knows the formal rule for sure. If there even is a rule. :-)
        • dj-wonk 11y ago
• eldavido 11y ago
  American academia is the envy of the world. I haven't met a single ambitious person in the US who dreams of teaching in a high school. It's kind of sad that secondary ed isn't high-prestige in today's American culture, but it's not.
  • ktRolster 11y ago
    I haven't met a single ambitious person in the US who dreams of teaching in a high school. Maybe there's a problem here with how you define "ambitious"
    • nostrebored 11y ago
      Maybe his comment doesn't have the best wording, but it's true. I'd love to teach high school, but the way that teaching is structured and the compensation make me completely unwilling. My dream is to start a school simply where I can teach without the hamstringing of the modern education grinder, hopefully before my kid reaches high school.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  • acjohnson55 11y ago
    I once had the ambition to teach high school. I'm forever glad I did it, but that experience comprised the 2 most intense years of my life. My experiences in an Ivy League grad school and as professional engineer don't even come close. I wrote quite a bit in the process: https://alanjayteaching.wordpress.com/?order=asc https://alanjayteaching.wordpress.com/?order=asc
• esaym 11y ago
  I don't expect the public school system to teach my children anything. Hence why they won't be attending. Most of the schools I attended growing up were completely useless. Filthy, full of drugs and gangs. Sadly I even listened to some of my teachers more than I did my own parents (indoctrination) which I now see lead me down the wrong path. I don't expect the public school to teach my kids any kind of career skills or path. Think they'll teach them Python or Swift? Even if they did, it'd be boring as heck and wouldn't happen until they're 16 years old. Conversely, I fully expect to start "outsourcing" my web dev work to my children when they are 13. My wife thinks it won't work. I think having them make $60 an hour while their friends make nothing will be a large deciding factor.... And by the time they're 16, I am expecting them to be taking classes at the local community college which is just a few miles from here.
  • Xeoncross 11y ago
    It's not that you have to leave education. But anything would be better than 12 years just to learn the basics so they can re-learn them again in college. Public schools waste way, way too much time. Get kids into college sooner so they can actually learn things. I was that kid. I went to the "best" high school in all the surrounding cities. It was a mess, sub-pair on every academic, legal, and social level. Teachers taking bribes, drugs, fights, teachers that didn't know their subjects well enough (I helped teach one class). I dropped out and went to college.
    • esaym 11y ago
      Indeed, the pace of public education is horribly slow. Kids are bored, they need something to do.
      • ryandrake 11y ago
        This is partially because public schools have to also accommodate kids with disabilities, English learners, and those who simply will never keep up. For these kids, public education is horribly accelerated and they're being left behind.
• 2bitencryption 11y ago
  This also demonstrates the drastic disparity of quality. You can either be getting a world-class education in the best high schools, or apparently a terrible one. I'm glad I went to a good high school. I never knew how good my education was until my first year of college, in my first writing class. Yeesh.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
• jorgecurio 11y ago
  yeah just talking to elementary school kids from America vs. Korea was an eye opening experience. I couldn't help but feel that the future is kinda bleak for American society because so much of it is centered around jock/warrior culture that places far more emphasis on physical education whereas in South Korean kids who study and is intelligent is revered as the alpha male model. Kinda explains why South Korea ranks #1 for the most innovative economy. There's no hazing of nerds although bullying and suicide due to over studying is a definite problem....it just follows the trend that American kids are seriously being left behind by other countries.
  • awa 11y ago
    Can you give a reference for "South Korea ranks #1 for the most innovative economy"?
  • TulliusCicero 11y ago
    On the other hand, Korea's work culture is amazingly bad, so we're probably safe for now.
  • netheril96 11y ago
    I've heard a conspiracy theory that it is a way to ensure reproduction of social class. Students of lower class have fun in the environment where jocks are most revered, and grow to have little economic power (barring the few who become sports stars). Students of upper class are educated in highly competitive private schools or top public schools, where the culture is similar to Asian ones, reproducing their upper class status when entering society.
• InclinedPlane 11y ago
  This is why the college situation is so dire these days. It used to be that a high school diploma meant something, and guaranteed a certain level of literacy and basic familiarity with mathematics and other useful basic skills. Now there are virtually no jobs where the core requirement is literacy or basic math skills etc. which one can get as only a high school graduate. The credential of a college education, or even just having spent some time in college, is the new high school diploma. Except whereas the public funds high school, it does not completely fund college. And even though total government outlays to colleges have actually increased, admissions have increased even more, and spending on administrators has as well, so per student costs not covered by tax payers has gone through the roof. > She offers a sample math problem from the test: You go to the store and there's a sale. Buy one, get the second half off. So if you buy two, how much do you pay? > "High school-credentialed adults, they can't do this task — on average," says Carr. High school graduates can't do what is basically a middle school level math problem. It's no wonder employers don't want to hire them. As a society we spend hundreds of thousands of tax dollars on K-12 students as they pass through the school pipeline but when they graduate they aren't educated and they have very little to show for all that time, effort, and expenditure. This is unquestionably a national tragedy that will haunt our country for decades to come. We've got a "lost generation" already with millenials who were vastly underemployed for several years after the big financial crash (which would be expected to have a lifetime impact on career and wealth development). And we're seeing that there's a new lost generation of young adults who have been ill served by the educational establishment. Edit: even worse, HS education does a poor job of preparing students for college, leading to the double whammy of debt + dropping out of college without earning a degree.
• spike021 11y ago
  I won't go into much detail because I would wind up ranting and only be somewhat understandable.. However, as an American citizen who went to public schools as a child/teenager and am now finishing up at a public state university, I'm inclined to say that the education system here is a complete wash. It works for some people who fit the one-size mold that the system here seems to target, but there are a large number of children/teenagers/college-aged students for whom it does not. That isn't to say one set of students are anymore gifted than the other. Just that the approach to education is deeply flawed. It works for the type of student it is set up for, and has little to no appreciation for other types, least of which if they even exist. The approach needs a serious revolution in order for our country to have a successful academic system. source: I am from California and the state university I currently attend and am almost graduated from is in CA as well.
  • bananamansion 11y ago
    How would you suggest it change/whats the biggest problem.
  • m0llusk 11y ago
    This may be true, but oddly enough it might not really matter. If math such as investigated here is required then those skills can be outsourced to those who are so gifted. The most important thing is the gift of enterprise and entrepreneurship which schools around the world are desperately trying to pick up from the US. Math is great, but ultimately it must be used as a means to some ends and that is where US students continue to excel.
    • tonyedgecombe 11y ago
      Or perhaps it does matter, middle and lower incomes in the US have been stagnating for a long time.
  • Haul4ss 11y ago
    There are a few different ways in which the public education system doesn't work for people. Some students want to learn but don't do well in the "system" of public education. This is a pedagogy issue; we're not teaching those kids in the way that they will learn the best. Those kids might benefit from "unschooling", homeschooling, or other forms of self-directed learning. Some students, mostly in areas of concentrated poverty, are going to struggle in school because of the emotional turmoil of living in poverty. Unsafe neighborhoods, neglectful homes, etc. The school system can't "fix" that by itself. Lastly, there are students that are simply not smart enough to thrive in academic learning. If you accept that some kids are smarter than others, the natural corollary is that some kids are not as smart. That doesn't mean their worth as human beings is less. It just means we should not be shoehorning them into this terrible "everyone must go to college" meme.
• aaron695 11y ago
  Yet America, has lead and continues to lead the world. Maybe we are barking up the wrong tree, maybe school isn't as important for a country as what we take as just fact.
• tn13 11y ago
  Public schooling is trash in USA. As an Asian parent I can tell you it is more than worthless. That is what happens when you put government into too much of control. Americans as a society have clearly traded job safety of teacher for good quality education. Stossel's Stupid in America : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4pN-aiofw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4pN-aiofw
  • lagadu 11y ago
    > That is what happens when you put government into too much of control. This doesn't make any sense, most of the leading countries have far more governmental control over education than the US does. If "governmental control" is your metric of choice, the US would need to increase it badly.
    • jessaustin 11y ago
      If the government bureaucrats responsible for education in other nations had performed as poorly as their American counterparts, they would have been fired decades ago. (In China and similar polities, the firing might have been done by a squad.) When people decry government control in the USA context, the focus of the complaint is the complete lack of accountability by government personnel for the results of their actions and decisions.
• smartbit 11y ago
  Nothing on creativity. I wonder why? "creativity is essential to successful civilizations" http://www.amazon.com/dp/1907794883 http://www.amazon.com/dp/1907794883 http://larstvede.com/lars-on-creativity http://larstvede.com/lars-on-creativity
  • netheril96 11y ago
    Hard to quantify?
• breanwangji 11y ago
  It should not be judged so easily. However I have to say when I was in MBA course in US, I don't know why the teacher needs to teach the students how to calculate a linear equations of two unknowns. In China that is a question in elementary school and less than grade 5. I wonder how they graduated from high school and learning business.
  • netheril96 11y ago
    Linear equations of two unknowns are taught at grade 7 or 8, not less than 5 in China. Although still significant younger than MBAs.
  • learc83 11y ago
    Virtually everyone in your class learned to solve systems of equations in middle school or high school, and again in college math. The reason the teacher explained it is that for many students in an MBA program it has been many years since they had to use that particular skill.
• ommunist 11y ago
  But! Maintaining brain drain from the third world and the UK, negates this effect on the US economy.
• avaku 11y ago
  On average
• Geojim 11y ago
  How else are you going to educate kids for a Donald Trump world....
• Tehnix 11y ago
  As a non-native speaker this sentence actually got me a bit unsure (perhaps because I looked too much at it): "Buy one, get the second half off." Is that meant as the second unit you buy, you get half off? Don't know if this is a common way to phrase a discount like that in the US..
  • tronje 11y ago
    Not a native speaker either, but I spent a fair amount of time in the US and Canada; and I don't think I've ever heard that phrase. Usually it's "buy one, get one free" or some variation of that. The phrase you mentioned would mean that you receive 2 units and pay for 1.5.
    • jessaustin 11y ago
      ISTM basic English comprehension was part of this test? That isn't a common idiom as compared to BOGOF, but one will see it sometimes.
  • Haul4ss 11y ago
    Yes and yes. You interpreted it correctly, and that is a common way to phrase such discounts in the U.S.
• droithomme 11y ago
  The test checked literacy, numeracy, and IT skills. US did fine on literacy, so-so on numeracy, and last on IT skills. Which is interesting given where most tech comes from. Here's an example of the sort of task you had to complete (http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016039.pdf http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016039.pdf): > Level 3: Meeting rooms (Item ID: U02) Difficulty score: 346 This task involves managing requests to reserve a meeting room on a particular date using a reservation system. Upon discovering that one of the reservation requests cannot be accommodated, the test-taker has to send an e-mail message declining the request. Successfully completing the task involves taking into account multiple constraints (e.g., the number of rooms available and existing reservations). Impasses exist, as the initial constraints generate a conflict (one of the demands for a room reservation cannot be satisfied). The impasse has to be resolved by initiating a new sub-goal, i.e., issuing a standard message to decline one of the requests. Two applications are present in the environment: an e-mail interface with a number of e-mails stored in an inbox containing the room reservation requests, and a web-based reservation tool that allows the user to assign rooms to meetings at certain times. The item requires the test-taker to “[u]se information from a novel web application and several e-mail messages, establish and apply criteria to solve a scheduling problem where an impasse must be resolved, and communicate the outcome.” The task involves multiple applications, a large number of steps, a built-in impasse, and the discovery and use of ad hoc commands in a novel environment. The test-taker has to establish a plan and monitor its implementation in order to minimize the number of conflicts. In addition, the test-taker has to transfer information from one application (e-mail) to another (the room-reservation tool). Basically, users are given an intentionally badly designed user interface in which they receive no training, and a task that is impossible to accomplish within the obvious constraints of the interface, and asked to accomplish a goal. It simulates the experience of being a low paid customer service rep in the third world using crappy software and seeing if you can handle it or not. If one has common sense, intelligence, and a sense of valuing their own time, they will recognize this tasks as useless BS and refuse to cooperate further in the test.
  • Hermel 11y ago
    > Basically, users are given an intentionally badly designed user interface in which they receive no training, and a task that is impossible to accomplish within the obvious constraints of the interface, and asked to accomplish a goal. This is a gross misrepresentation of the test. The task is to manage incoming reservation requests. Having to decline such a request does not mean the "task is impossible to accomplish". It just means that the correct answer is to deny the incoming request within the framework of the test. Also, the test simulates an entirely realistic simulation. In everyday live, I often have to decline meeting requests and propose alternate dates. Also, having to use badly designed user interfaces without training seems very realistic to me. Being good at handling that is a relevant skill in modern life.
• vox_mollis 11y ago
  Not just any "other countries". PIAAC measures against other European and East Asian countries. To put it politely, the US has much greater demographic diversity, with its associated implications for IQ and consequently, all associated g factors.
  • kriro 11y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_ranked_by_ethnic_and_cultural_diversity_level https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_ranked_by_et...
• kriro 11y ago
  """things like using email, buying and returning items online, using a drop-down menu, naming a file on a computer or sending a text message.""" Way to measure stuff! How about using instant messaging, swiping and dragging stuff, taking pictures with a phone and sending them and doing tasks with Siri/HG instead? We're taking about HS-level students, right? They seem to be measuring stuff for older folks :P
• ryanackley 11y ago
  As a parent of a school-age child, I hate studies like this. It's exactly the sort of thing that leads to mandated programs like common core. Here's the thing, my son spends more time doing homework and studying for tests in elementary school than I ever did throughout my entire public education. I have worked internationally. From my own anecdotal experience, I didn't see a difference in intelligence or ability to do the job between cultures.
  • novaleaf 11y ago
    my anecdote: I have seen a huge difference in ability (of developers). I think it's more due to geopolitical differences though, not just education.
  • pflats 11y ago
    >It's exactly the sort of thing that leads to mandated programs like common core. What exactly is wrong with the common core?
• Jugurtha 11y ago
  There's a presentation by Stephen Krashen where he talks about the latest research he wrote about in his book, "The Power of Reading".[0] He addresses the problem of education and the ways it is being done. One really important remark he has made was that one of the biggest differences between children of well off families and others less fortunate is the availability of books: kids of comfortable families have access to more books since they are very young, contrary to their peers. The more important remark is the follow up: libraries tend to offset the impact of economic differences. It's an interesting talk. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSW7gmvDLag https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSW7gmvDLag
• nibs 11y ago
  This study does not surprise me. All four of my grandparents were educators for their entire career. And as a result, my parents decided to unschool my brothers and I. In trying to be as objective and self-aware as possible, it is clear to us that the homeschoolers/unschoolers we built a community with are vastly better prepared for adulthood, regardless of level of general intelligence. There is a reason the acceptance rate at Stanford is ~27% for homeschoolers vs. 5% for those who went to school. [1] Regardless of the pursuit, it seems like our friends who went to school the whole time are stuck in this weird immature pergatory where they can't make decisions or stick to things. For the most part, the unschooler/homeschoolers are similar demographics, and from all different "walks of life", and yet invariably omit this issue of accepting adulthood. Our thesis was always that school spoon feeds you, and you have to learn the pain of learning independently to be successful and learn a real growth mindset. But who knows. It is a complicated issue. [1]: http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/doc/1011320109.html?FMT=AI&pubnum=1511345 http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/doc/1011320109.html?FMT=AI&pubn...
  • Xeoncross 11y ago
    I was a failure in public school because of A) poor social interaction B) focus on testing instead of learning and C) not fitting in the mold. I did private school, independent study, public school in two states (CA and TX), and Homeschool. Homeschool and public school can be the most easily abused. It's hard to abuse private schools since there is usually more focus on the students. However, it's clear to me that homeschooling is the winner for most people. You can completely customize the curricula and learning methods to help people learn the best. The social interactions in homeschool are also far better. Rather than learning how to deal with childish peers only (being locked in a classroom for 8 hours a day), you can actually go explore the world and learn how to interact with every age level. There are thousands of homeschool groups though if you really want to have that peer-pressure stuff.
  • thaumasiotes 11y ago
    > There is a reason the acceptance rate at Stanford is ~27% for homeschoolers vs. 5% for those who went to school. Is it selection bias?
• pokolovsky 11y ago
  That's really funny.
• camelNotation 11y ago
  The purpose of school is to equip students on how to teach themselves, not to spoon feed them facts. For that reason, philosophy, rhetoric, logic, music, literature, and mathematics should be the priorities. Students who are well-versed in those areas WILL figure out the rest of it a million times faster than some kid who drilled on history, science, or other facts. Teach the kids how to study history, don't feed them names and dates. Teach the kids how to research, don't make them regurgitate someone else's results. Teach kids how to comprehend and analyze a text, don't make them read Homer and then regurgitate the events. Modern education is bullshit.
  • izzydata 11y ago
    This was probably the biggest demotivating factor in school. Trying to force feed me a bunch of biology terms for every species isn't going to help me learn biology. There is little purpose in memorizing a bunch of random subjective names that people named things.
    • alanwatts 11y ago
      >We are students of words: we are shut up in schools, and colleges, and recitation -rooms, for ten or fifteen years, and come out at last with a bag of wind, a memory of words, and do not know a thing. -Ralph Waldo Emerson
  • kruhft 11y ago
    The purpose of elementary and high school is to create obedient workers that can follow a schedule and respect authority. I agree that the purpose of university is what you say though.
    • wamsachel 11y ago
      You're kidding yourself if you think that this purpose doesn't also extend to the Universities. High School graduates don't design missile guidance systems, nor do they work with FBI to break TOR, etc.
  • 11y ago
• Xeoncross 11y ago
  Has anyone ever studied the history of the "school system"? It was invented in Germany to help standardize away individualism and help promote "patriotism". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okPnDZ1Txlo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okPnDZ1Txlo
• rb808 11y ago
  I thoguht the article was very positive: > Americans who went to college and graduate school did well. They scored above their peers with similar degrees in other developed countries. The problem is that the bottom half does badly. I think this is largely due to poverty, culture and low expectations rather than poorly resourced schools. Maybe its also that its so easy to get a job in America that working classes really dont need to study hard.
• panglott 11y ago
  I always wish these reports would break out the average vs. the distribution. America, more than any other developed country, tolerates a high level of poverty. And poor kids just don't have the resources to do well in school, and bring the average down. The single largest predictor of how well kids will do in school is not any in-school factor, but rather the socioeconomic status of their parents.
  • tokenadult 11y ago
    I always wish these reports would break out the average vs. the distribution. The report does that for you, if you trouble yourself to look it up, and I quoted that part of the report in a comment I posted yesterday. Here is a longer quotation for you. "In numeracy and problem solving in technology-rich environments, the United States performed below the PIAAC international average. In numeracy, the U.S. average score was 12 points lower than the PIAAC international average score (257 versus 269, see figure 1-B), and in problem solving in technology-rich environments, the U.S. average score was 9 points lower than the international average (274 versus 283, see figure 1-C). Compared with the international average distributions for these skills, the United States had "• a smaller percentage at the top (10 versus 12 percent at Level 4/5 in numeracy, and 5 versus 8 percent at Level 3 in problem solving in technology-rich environments, see figures 2-B and 2-C), and "• a larger percentage at the bottom (28 versus 19 percent in numeracy, and 64 versus 55 percent in problem solving in technology-rich environments at Level 1 and below)." There is more detail for you to read about if you are interested in the details, in the study report published by the international study group, with the report linked here hosted by the United States National Center for Educational Statistics. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016039.pdf http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016039.pdf
• pinaceae 11y ago
  Stats! See the details on race/social rank and performance of high schoolers that went on to college vs the ones that stopped after hs to fully understand the data. the US has layers, you have a first world country, a second world country and a third world country intermixed, skewing all these data sets. well-off whites perform as well in the US as everywhere else. Asians too. no need for homeschooling or other panic modes. if you're poor, you're fucked. just like anywhere else.
• rb808 11y ago
  I'm also a bit tired about hearing about how great Finland & Japan's schools are. How many illegal immigrants do these countries have in their school system? How many with minorities who dont speak the main language at home? How many kids in Japan/Finland dont eat properly because their families can't afford food? Of course the American's student's results are going to be worse on average.
  • UnoriginalGuy 11y ago
    I love how you act like these are inevitable or aren't America's issues. The fact that poor children aren't getting enough food in a affluent Western country is abhorrent, the fact the US refuses to provide comprehensive language classes to the children of immigrants is intentionally meant to disadvantage them, the fact that the US school system has a massive disparity of funding is on purpose so that those in rich neighborhoods get a better quality of education. Of course America's students results are worse when the American people seemingly don't care about them. Maybe you should bring in a better class of politician and instead of constantly whining about your "high" taxes you pay MORE tax and help the disadvantaged. Or heck you could cancel all of your corporate welfare and ultra-rich subsidies and use that money to help the poor... The US prides itself on being a Christian country, but they don't act like it. Christians are socialist in nature[0]. [0] http://www.faithstreet.com/onfaith/2011/08/12/from-jesus-socialism-to-capitalistic-christianity/10731 http://www.faithstreet.com/onfaith/2011/08/12/from-jesus-soc...
    • TheBeardKing 11y ago
      I think OP's point is: given our obvious economic equality differences, of course you can expect different educational outcomes. Economic inequality as an indicator of social issues seems an obvious point by now.
• bunkydoo 11y ago
  Well one thing to keep in mind is that some American States alone are the same size in terms of population of some of these entire countries being praised for having better education systems than the US. Sure we can learn from some of the small nuances of their systems, but infrastructurally we are in a much different situation than most of these examples (Finland/Japan)
• hourislate 11y ago
  The single largest factor in determining how well a student does in High School is poverty. Poor kids don't have the support nor the means to excel. They typically have to worry about other things. Like earning money or working the farm or just trying to keep the family together anyway they can. While other kids have computers, you didn't even have a desk to do your homework. Other kids get dinner, you go hungry. When your mom was sick it meant staying home to take care of her. The potential that is lost to poverty is no different than the potential lost to Wars. Millions of people who could have changed the world never get a chance.
• alanwatts 11y ago
  >when it comes to technology skills, we're dead last compared with other developed countries. Maybe because the education model in the US (and elsewhere) relies heavily upon Ludditism. Student's intelligence is measured on a single linear numeric scale based on paper-and-pencil administered examinations and are strictly limited to using computer technology (calculators) that was invented 40 years ago[1] even though they posses in their pockets computers that are millions (billions?) of times more powerful. "Never memorize something that you can look up." [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_Business_Analyst https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_Business_Ana...
• wmt 11y ago
  "Americans who went to college and graduate school did well. They scored above their peers with similar degrees in other developed countries. For young adults with a high school diploma or less, things did not look so good. These Americans performed significantly worse than those in other countries with the same education level." Doesn't that just mean that smart kids in America are more likely to get a higher education than in other many other countries?
• bawana 11y ago
  This is news? We have been devaluing education for decades as we pay teachers less than a poverty level wage (unless you are in that unnecessary branch-administration). Witness the populist appeal of Trump. Anyone with common sense (which our school system has been so effective in extinguishing) would recognize a demagogue even without the prior example of Hitler. Solution: Khan academy. let them issue diplomas.
• dclowd9901 11y ago
  I had to laugh when I got to this: > She offers a sample math problem from the test: You go to the store and there's a sale. Buy one, get the second half off. So if you buy two, how much do you pay? It doesn't even seem answerable. The closest I can think of a way to answer that question is "75%".
• FredWills 11y ago
  Contact geniushack08@gmail.com for email hack,phone hack,social media hack,instant messages hack,credit cards hack,web servers and database hack,school grades changes and others not listed above.