4 ms·

When I say it's not a debate, I don't say that to "win a debate". I mean it in a "debating the flat earth hypothesis is not a debate" sense. There's many studi

When I say it's not a debate, I don't say that to "win a debate". I mean it in a "debating the flat earth hypothesis is not a debate" sense. There's many studies about this, it's not a controversial topic. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_...

learc83 9y ago
Averages often say very little about a population. There are states and metro areas in the US with (and this is the important part) populations as large as many high ranked European countries that rank at the very top of the world in any educational metric.
- vilmosi 9y ago
  Every country has good and bad parts. That's the point of averages. How else would you compare countries? The study only compares averages and that's all that people are saying. It's totally possible that the best secondary school in the world is in the US but that's not the point. And I don't see how population size is important, as you say. Schools in the US are locally funded, no?
  - learc83 9y ago
    >Every country has good and bad parts. That's the point of averages. How else would you compare countries? Surely you understand that averages are often misleading and can be worse than useless. The US is the most diverse large country in the world. Averages do not work well when comparing highly varied populations. >And I don't see how population size is important, as you say. There are many smaller countries with better average educational outcomes than the US. But none of the countries with higher scores are anywhere near the size and diversity of the US. The only country even close to the US in population is China and you'll note that test scores are only available for the highest performing provinces. If you want to make a proper comparison, you'd need to compare the US with something like the entire continent of Europe. Finland is more analogous to say Massachusetts than it is to the entire US.
    - vilmosi 9y ago
      >>> Surely you understand that averages are often misleading and can be worse than useless. So why are you complaining in a conversation talking about averages? >>> The US is the most diverse large country in the world. Brazil and India would like a word. Also, irrelevant. >>> Averages do not work well when comparing highly varied populations. That's why you have averages. Again, how else would you compare countries? >>> There are many smaller countries with better average educational outcomes than the US. But none of the countries with higher scores are anywhere near the size and diversity of the US. And? How are those things relayed? Seriously, how is diversity related to federally provided education? >>>The only country even close to the US in population is China Well great, in a conversation comparing China and the US that might be relevant, but this is not it. >>> If you want to make a proper comparison, you'd need to compare the US with something like the entire continent of Europe. Why? You actually think population and diversity are even close? Or relevant? Just trying to understand your logic because it doesn't make sense.
      - learc83 9y ago
        >So why are you complaining in a conversation talking about averages? You're the one who is using averages. Everyone else here is telling you averages are a misleading metric here when trying to compare the US to other countries. Averages are not useful for comparing diverse data sets. The mean tells you a lot about a hypothetical population where everyone has an IQ of 100. It doesn't tell you a lot about a population where half the people have an IQ of 75 and half 125. Using mean scores to compare those populations is nearly useless. >That's why you have averages. Again, how else would you compare countries? That's just it, you can't use 1 number to compare countries. It's not meaningless, but it's close.
        vilmosi 9y ago
        >>> You're the one who is using averages. Everyone else here is telling you averages are a misleading metric here when trying to compare the US to other countries. What everyone else. The grandparent literally complained about three people in this thread mentioning a fact without sources about averages. I supplied said source. What are you responding to? >>> Averages are not useful for comparing diverse data sets. The US is not particularly diverse in the world. And again, how do you compare "diverse" data sets like kids literally being able to read? >>> The mean tells you a lot about a hypothetical population where everyone has an IQ of 100. It doesn't tell you a lot about a population where half the people have an IQ of 75 and half 125. Using mean scores to compare those populations is nearly useless. Right, because we actually have countries where half the population is 125 and half is 75, what can I say. /s >>> That's just it, you can't use 1 number to compare countries. It's not meaningless, but it's close Tell that to the OECD. Why do you care so must about this comparison of averages? Why are you commenting? I like how you literally don't answer half my replies, makes one think what's the point of this.

learc83 9y ago

Averages often say very little about a population. There are states and metro areas in the US with (and this is the important part) populations as large as many high ranked European countries that rank at the very top of the world in any educational metric.

vilmosi 9y ago
Every country has good and bad parts. That's the point of averages. How else would you compare countries? The study only compares averages and that's all that people are saying. It's totally possible that the best secondary school in the world is in the US but that's not the point. And I don't see how population size is important, as you say. Schools in the US are locally funded, no?
- learc83 9y ago
  >Every country has good and bad parts. That's the point of averages. How else would you compare countries? Surely you understand that averages are often misleading and can be worse than useless. The US is the most diverse large country in the world. Averages do not work well when comparing highly varied populations. >And I don't see how population size is important, as you say. There are many smaller countries with better average educational outcomes than the US. But none of the countries with higher scores are anywhere near the size and diversity of the US. The only country even close to the US in population is China and you'll note that test scores are only available for the highest performing provinces. If you want to make a proper comparison, you'd need to compare the US with something like the entire continent of Europe. Finland is more analogous to say Massachusetts than it is to the entire US.
  - vilmosi 9y ago
    >>> Surely you understand that averages are often misleading and can be worse than useless. So why are you complaining in a conversation talking about averages? >>> The US is the most diverse large country in the world. Brazil and India would like a word. Also, irrelevant. >>> Averages do not work well when comparing highly varied populations. That's why you have averages. Again, how else would you compare countries? >>> There are many smaller countries with better average educational outcomes than the US. But none of the countries with higher scores are anywhere near the size and diversity of the US. And? How are those things relayed? Seriously, how is diversity related to federally provided education? >>>The only country even close to the US in population is China Well great, in a conversation comparing China and the US that might be relevant, but this is not it. >>> If you want to make a proper comparison, you'd need to compare the US with something like the entire continent of Europe. Why? You actually think population and diversity are even close? Or relevant? Just trying to understand your logic because it doesn't make sense.
    - learc83 9y ago
      >So why are you complaining in a conversation talking about averages? You're the one who is using averages. Everyone else here is telling you averages are a misleading metric here when trying to compare the US to other countries. Averages are not useful for comparing diverse data sets. The mean tells you a lot about a hypothetical population where everyone has an IQ of 100. It doesn't tell you a lot about a population where half the people have an IQ of 75 and half 125. Using mean scores to compare those populations is nearly useless. >That's why you have averages. Again, how else would you compare countries? That's just it, you can't use 1 number to compare countries. It's not meaningless, but it's close.
      - vilmosi 9y ago
        >>> You're the one who is using averages. Everyone else here is telling you averages are a misleading metric here when trying to compare the US to other countries. What everyone else. The grandparent literally complained about three people in this thread mentioning a fact without sources about averages. I supplied said source. What are you responding to? >>> Averages are not useful for comparing diverse data sets. The US is not particularly diverse in the world. And again, how do you compare "diverse" data sets like kids literally being able to read? >>> The mean tells you a lot about a hypothetical population where everyone has an IQ of 100. It doesn't tell you a lot about a population where half the people have an IQ of 75 and half 125. Using mean scores to compare those populations is nearly useless. Right, because we actually have countries where half the population is 125 and half is 75, what can I say. /s >>> That's just it, you can't use 1 number to compare countries. It's not meaningless, but it's close Tell that to the OECD. Why do you care so must about this comparison of averages? Why are you commenting? I like how you literally don't answer half my replies, makes one think what's the point of this.