4 ms·

Not only does gates throw lots of money at problems, they follow up the results with effectiveness studies.

andreyf 16y ago
And what makes his definition of "effectiveness" any good? When goals are as clear as "maximize profit", I have no doubt Bill Gates is one of the most competent in the field. However, when it's as vague as "improve education", I have serious doubts. I'd trust a passionate fifth grade teacher to make good judgements of what's best for their students' education over a billionaire entrepreneur any day.
- edanm 16y ago
  I'm guessing a portion of that money is going towards "passionate 5th grade teachers", giving them the chance to use their expertise and imagination to improve education. Bill Gates is, at the very least, very smart. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt that he's spending his considerable net worth in a way that helps.
- anigbrowl 16y ago
  Where do you think the mantra of 'smaller class sizes = better education' came from in the first place? Though I don't doubt the advice was was honestly intended, teachers do have an economic interest in reducing class sizes (as it increases demand for their educational skills and accordingly, wages). It's got to be easier to teach 10 kids than 20, and we generally feel we're more productive when we're not overly stressed, the economic implications of the 'small is beautiful' policy were incidental or even unconscious [1]. So, the Gates foundation spent a lot of money discovering that this has little real effect on educational outcomes. I don't regard that as a waste - it may have been an expensive lesson, but I presume the money was spent on subsidizing smaller class sizes in schools. The understanding we've gained will save many billions of taxpayer dollars from being spent on a widespread but mistaken belief about teacher:student ratios, which is a significant public good. [1] I say 'were', because now that we have evidence of the policy's ineffectiveness, many teachers' union members have designated the Gates Foundation and Obama's education secretary as evil corporatists out to wreck public education.
  - andreyf 16y ago
    I don't regard that as a waste - it may have been an expensive lesson, but I presume the money was spent on subsidizing smaller class sizes in schools. I can assure you that when a smart teacher who spends every day with kids says one thing about what's better for their education, and the Gates' Foundation's research says another, I have trouble seeing the validity of the latter. What I'm saying is that yes, smaller class sizes are a requisite for a better education. Have you ever been in a classroom?
    - jacquesm 16y ago
      > Have you ever been in a classroom? Are you suggesting Anigbrowl does not have any education ?
      - andreyf 16y ago
        No, I'm suggesting he's a little too quick in believing the "scientific method" over people with direct experience in a classroom.
    - shard 16y ago
      It sounds as if you're saying you believe in anecdotal evidence and doubt the scientific method.
      - andreyf 16y ago
        Precisely.
    - anigbrowl 16y ago
      (sorry to abandon this thread - I went away for the weekend) I have indeed been in a classroom, and even had some teaching experience, although I don't claim to be an education expert. I have 2 problems with your approach. First, I don't want to over-rely on the reports of smart teachers. Not because I don't trust them, but because when it comes to public education we have limited financial resources, and a distribution of ability across the population of teachers. Maybe a smart teacher can consistently get better results with a smaller class. I could believe it. Unfortunately, we have yet to find a system that ensures we only hire and retain smart teachers. In matters of public policy, we are often forced to forgo optimal results for some, in order to achieve acceptable results for the system as a whole. My second problem is more fundamental: how are we evaluating what's 'better'? If this determination is made purely by those who are most involved, then logic dictates that parents should be the ultimate arbiters of educational quality by virtue of having the greatest intimacy with their kids. Of course, we know that this is not the case in practice, because parents' commitment and ability varies very widely indeed, and so we cannot trust them as objective reporters. If we did, collage admissions officers and potential employers could simply call up an applicant's parents and ask them if the applicant would be a good candidate. In reality, we use testing of various kinds because it gives us some sort of objective yardstick with which to measure academic performance across a large population. We simply don't have the resources to fully evaluate every aspect of every individual candidate, and while statistical methods are rather dehumanizing they do offer enough predictive power to be useful. Consider that while High School teachers express a high degree of optimism about the future academic prospects of their graduates, college teachers have been complaining more and more about the number of incoming students who need remedial classes in English or Math. Just as an excess of 'teaching to the test' may measure only test-taking ability, an excess reliance on classroom performance as reported by teachers may measure only the ability to perform in a classroom context.
- crystalis 16y ago
  "I'd assume my conclusion any day over considering that maybe my hero isn't also the best hero of all."
- mistermann 16y ago
  > However, when it's as vague as "improve education", I have serious doubts. It's fun and provocative to say, but do you really feel (or, I should say, think) this way? I could maybe understand if you were talking about, for example, the CEO of CitiCorp, who really doesn't give a shit about anything (compare his background vs, that of Bill Gates). But are you actually calling out Bill Gates, and saying he's not legitimately trying to accomplish something good for the lesser blessed people in the world? Do you think he's in it for the publicity? > I'd trust a passionate fifth grade teacher to make good judgements of what's best for their students' education over a billionaire entrepreneur any day. Well, I don't know what to say about this. Do you actually have children, so that you've actually had to sit down and think about these types of things?

And what makes his definition of "effectiveness" any good? When goals are as clear as "maximize profit", I have no doubt Bill Gates is one of the most competent in the field. However, when it's as vague as "improve education", I have serious doubts. I'd trust a passionate fifth grade teacher to make good judgements of what's best for their students' education over a billionaire entrepreneur any day.

edanm 16y ago
I'm guessing a portion of that money is going towards "passionate 5th grade teachers", giving them the chance to use their expertise and imagination to improve education. Bill Gates is, at the very least, very smart. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt that he's spending his considerable net worth in a way that helps.
anigbrowl 16y ago
Where do you think the mantra of 'smaller class sizes = better education' came from in the first place? Though I don't doubt the advice was was honestly intended, teachers do have an economic interest in reducing class sizes (as it increases demand for their educational skills and accordingly, wages). It's got to be easier to teach 10 kids than 20, and we generally feel we're more productive when we're not overly stressed, the economic implications of the 'small is beautiful' policy were incidental or even unconscious [1]. So, the Gates foundation spent a lot of money discovering that this has little real effect on educational outcomes. I don't regard that as a waste - it may have been an expensive lesson, but I presume the money was spent on subsidizing smaller class sizes in schools. The understanding we've gained will save many billions of taxpayer dollars from being spent on a widespread but mistaken belief about teacher:student ratios, which is a significant public good. [1] I say 'were', because now that we have evidence of the policy's ineffectiveness, many teachers' union members have designated the Gates Foundation and Obama's education secretary as evil corporatists out to wreck public education.
- andreyf 16y ago
  I don't regard that as a waste - it may have been an expensive lesson, but I presume the money was spent on subsidizing smaller class sizes in schools. I can assure you that when a smart teacher who spends every day with kids says one thing about what's better for their education, and the Gates' Foundation's research says another, I have trouble seeing the validity of the latter. What I'm saying is that yes, smaller class sizes are a requisite for a better education. Have you ever been in a classroom?
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    > Have you ever been in a classroom? Are you suggesting Anigbrowl does not have any education ?
    - andreyf 16y ago
      No, I'm suggesting he's a little too quick in believing the "scientific method" over people with direct experience in a classroom.
  - shard 16y ago
    It sounds as if you're saying you believe in anecdotal evidence and doubt the scientific method.
    - andreyf 16y ago
      Precisely.
  - anigbrowl 16y ago
    (sorry to abandon this thread - I went away for the weekend) I have indeed been in a classroom, and even had some teaching experience, although I don't claim to be an education expert. I have 2 problems with your approach. First, I don't want to over-rely on the reports of smart teachers. Not because I don't trust them, but because when it comes to public education we have limited financial resources, and a distribution of ability across the population of teachers. Maybe a smart teacher can consistently get better results with a smaller class. I could believe it. Unfortunately, we have yet to find a system that ensures we only hire and retain smart teachers. In matters of public policy, we are often forced to forgo optimal results for some, in order to achieve acceptable results for the system as a whole. My second problem is more fundamental: how are we evaluating what's 'better'? If this determination is made purely by those who are most involved, then logic dictates that parents should be the ultimate arbiters of educational quality by virtue of having the greatest intimacy with their kids. Of course, we know that this is not the case in practice, because parents' commitment and ability varies very widely indeed, and so we cannot trust them as objective reporters. If we did, collage admissions officers and potential employers could simply call up an applicant's parents and ask them if the applicant would be a good candidate. In reality, we use testing of various kinds because it gives us some sort of objective yardstick with which to measure academic performance across a large population. We simply don't have the resources to fully evaluate every aspect of every individual candidate, and while statistical methods are rather dehumanizing they do offer enough predictive power to be useful. Consider that while High School teachers express a high degree of optimism about the future academic prospects of their graduates, college teachers have been complaining more and more about the number of incoming students who need remedial classes in English or Math. Just as an excess of 'teaching to the test' may measure only test-taking ability, an excess reliance on classroom performance as reported by teachers may measure only the ability to perform in a classroom context.
crystalis 16y ago
"I'd assume my conclusion any day over considering that maybe my hero isn't also the best hero of all."
mistermann 16y ago
> However, when it's as vague as "improve education", I have serious doubts. It's fun and provocative to say, but do you really feel (or, I should say, think) this way? I could maybe understand if you were talking about, for example, the CEO of CitiCorp, who really doesn't give a shit about anything (compare his background vs, that of Bill Gates). But are you actually calling out Bill Gates, and saying he's not legitimately trying to accomplish something good for the lesser blessed people in the world? Do you think he's in it for the publicity? > I'd trust a passionate fifth grade teacher to make good judgements of what's best for their students' education over a billionaire entrepreneur any day. Well, I don't know what to say about this. Do you actually have children, so that you've actually had to sit down and think about these types of things?