3 ms·

Money spent on education correlates very poorly with educational quality at k-12 level. (This may be different a the college level.) Parental involvement and ot

by Mz 9y ago

Money spent on education correlates very poorly with educational quality at k-12 level. (This may be different a the college level.) Parental involvement and other factors are much stronger indicators.

InitialLastName 9y ago
As a sibling of yours pointed out, the presence of affluent peers makes a big difference.
- Mz 9y ago
  Look, I know you don't know me as some kind of education expert, but I homeschooled my gifted-learning disabled sons for a lot of years and I was Director of Community Life at TAGFAM for a brief period and I know whereof I speak here. Those peers are almost certainly not just affluent, they are almost certainly also well read, well spoken and well educated. Money easily grows out of being well educated, assuming there aren't other barriers to accomplishment. You have the cause and effect relationship here backwards.
  - InitialLastName 9y ago
    Really not trying to disparage you, but I think there's room to allow the cause and effect to go in both directions. Since parental involvement is a really good proxy for wealth, and, as you point out, parental involvement correlates strongly with educational outcomes, wealthy children tend to have better educational outcomes. However (and take it from a gifted and learning disabled person) the presence of better-educated (and more academically invested) students in a classroom can be a rising tide that brings up the more marginal students. Overall, I don't think we actually disagree. Education is well-correlated with wealth. Parental involvement (given that parents who are able to be involved are more likely to be able to do that and stay financially functional) effectively "counts" as money spent on education, especially since it indirectly helps the entire cohort. It takes a village. Sidenote: > assuming there aren't other barriers to accomplishment In my neck of the world, poverty counts.
    - Mz 9y ago
      Actually, parental involvement tends to correlate to the middle class. Some studies show there is as much neglect and drug abuse in upper class neighborhoods as in the ghetto. Two career couples do not necessarily do a good a job of finding time for the kids. It is solidly middle class families that tend to do a good job of covering essentials while also having time for the family. It is more complicated than that. Some other factors are: Schools in "college towns" tend to be better and "neighborhood schools" where less than 5% of the kids are bussed in and the rest live in walking distance also do better than average. I am not saying poverty is not a problem. I am saying that spending per capita on students in public schools does not have a good track record for correlating well to student outcomes. Also, if you look at "The Tipping Point," it indicates that poor neighborhoods where middle class and better people are a certain percentage of the population fair much, much better than poor neighborhoods where those people drop below a certain percentage of the population. The lack of adequate "wisdom" being readily available seems to do more harm than lack of money per se. When it falls below a certain threshold, things rapidly come unraveled and you see crime and other problems shoot through the roof. We are not doing such a great job of creating community in the world today. I am not saying money doesn't matter. But I do believe that there are a lot of things that matter more and that cannot be solve by simply throwing money at the problem. Hopefully, that makes more sense.

by Mz 9y ago

InitialLastName 9y ago

As a sibling of yours pointed out, the presence of affluent peers makes a big difference.

Mz 9y ago
Look, I know you don't know me as some kind of education expert, but I homeschooled my gifted-learning disabled sons for a lot of years and I was Director of Community Life at TAGFAM for a brief period and I know whereof I speak here. Those peers are almost certainly not just affluent, they are almost certainly also well read, well spoken and well educated. Money easily grows out of being well educated, assuming there aren't other barriers to accomplishment. You have the cause and effect relationship here backwards.
- InitialLastName 9y ago
  Really not trying to disparage you, but I think there's room to allow the cause and effect to go in both directions. Since parental involvement is a really good proxy for wealth, and, as you point out, parental involvement correlates strongly with educational outcomes, wealthy children tend to have better educational outcomes. However (and take it from a gifted and learning disabled person) the presence of better-educated (and more academically invested) students in a classroom can be a rising tide that brings up the more marginal students. Overall, I don't think we actually disagree. Education is well-correlated with wealth. Parental involvement (given that parents who are able to be involved are more likely to be able to do that and stay financially functional) effectively "counts" as money spent on education, especially since it indirectly helps the entire cohort. It takes a village. Sidenote: > assuming there aren't other barriers to accomplishment In my neck of the world, poverty counts.
  - Mz 9y ago
    Actually, parental involvement tends to correlate to the middle class. Some studies show there is as much neglect and drug abuse in upper class neighborhoods as in the ghetto. Two career couples do not necessarily do a good a job of finding time for the kids. It is solidly middle class families that tend to do a good job of covering essentials while also having time for the family. It is more complicated than that. Some other factors are: Schools in "college towns" tend to be better and "neighborhood schools" where less than 5% of the kids are bussed in and the rest live in walking distance also do better than average. I am not saying poverty is not a problem. I am saying that spending per capita on students in public schools does not have a good track record for correlating well to student outcomes. Also, if you look at "The Tipping Point," it indicates that poor neighborhoods where middle class and better people are a certain percentage of the population fair much, much better than poor neighborhoods where those people drop below a certain percentage of the population. The lack of adequate "wisdom" being readily available seems to do more harm than lack of money per se. When it falls below a certain threshold, things rapidly come unraveled and you see crime and other problems shoot through the roof. We are not doing such a great job of creating community in the world today. I am not saying money doesn't matter. But I do believe that there are a lot of things that matter more and that cannot be solve by simply throwing money at the problem. Hopefully, that makes more sense.