3 ms·

>>> 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

>>> 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
    >What everyone else. Me and the other person who replied to you. "The US is also exceptional in how bad its bad schools are, this drags our averages down. While it's a tragedy for the kids who are not being served, it's a distortion to say all US schools are bad when most are not." >The US is not particularly diverse in the world. I'm sorry I can no longer take you seriously. >And again, how do you compare "diverse" data sets like kids literally being able to read? An average is nearly useless if you don't know the distribution. Rankings based on averages are meaningless. >Right, because we actually have countries where half the population is 125 and half is 75, what can I say How could you think an example that works out with nice easy numbers is supposed to actually represent a real country? >Why are you commenting? Because of this >Oh come on, every study puts the US in a mediocre position in education within the OECD. That's not a debate. Because it is debatable. Using PISA rankings to say that the US is in a mediocre position in education is very controversial. In addition to using the mean of a set of test scores, they don't take into account the percentage of 15 year olds still in school, or the percentage of 15 year olds who take the test. The US goes WAY up in the ranks when those things are taken into account.
    - vilmosi 9y ago
      >>> What everyone else. > Me and the other person who replied to you. "The US is also exceptional in how bad its bad schools are, this drags our averages down. While it's a tragedy for the kids who are not being served, it's a distortion to say all US schools are bad when most are not." You really think this is not true elsewhere? Inequality doesn't exist in other countries? Do you really think medians are unheard of for scientists and they didn't take that into account? Please. >>> The US is not particularly diverse in the world. > I'm sorry I can no longer take you seriously. You know there's studies ranking countries based on diversity right? You want me to Google them for you? Oh wait, you probably think they're missing something clearly obvious like not knowing what a median is again. >>> And again, how do you compare "diverse" data sets like kids literally being able to read? > An average is nearly useless if you don't know the distribution. Rankings based on averages are meaningless. Great if you think that. Show me a better way to compare countries when it comes to reading skills. >>> Why are you commenting? > Because of this You just said you don't believe the study is relevant. So why do you care what it says. >>>Oh come on, every study puts the US in a mediocre position in education within the OECD. That's not a debate. > Because it is debatable. It's really not and it's the best we have. > Using PISA rankings to say that the US is in a mediocre position in education is very controversial. Again, it's really not. Haven't seen any counter studies, happy to see them. Not saying there's no criticisms obviously. > The US goes WAY up in the ranks when those things are taken into account. Go on then, show the studies, I'm willing to change my mind.

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
  >What everyone else. Me and the other person who replied to you. "The US is also exceptional in how bad its bad schools are, this drags our averages down. While it's a tragedy for the kids who are not being served, it's a distortion to say all US schools are bad when most are not." >The US is not particularly diverse in the world. I'm sorry I can no longer take you seriously. >And again, how do you compare "diverse" data sets like kids literally being able to read? An average is nearly useless if you don't know the distribution. Rankings based on averages are meaningless. >Right, because we actually have countries where half the population is 125 and half is 75, what can I say How could you think an example that works out with nice easy numbers is supposed to actually represent a real country? >Why are you commenting? Because of this >Oh come on, every study puts the US in a mediocre position in education within the OECD. That's not a debate. Because it is debatable. Using PISA rankings to say that the US is in a mediocre position in education is very controversial. In addition to using the mean of a set of test scores, they don't take into account the percentage of 15 year olds still in school, or the percentage of 15 year olds who take the test. The US goes WAY up in the ranks when those things are taken into account.
  - vilmosi 9y ago
    >>> What everyone else. > Me and the other person who replied to you. "The US is also exceptional in how bad its bad schools are, this drags our averages down. While it's a tragedy for the kids who are not being served, it's a distortion to say all US schools are bad when most are not." You really think this is not true elsewhere? Inequality doesn't exist in other countries? Do you really think medians are unheard of for scientists and they didn't take that into account? Please. >>> The US is not particularly diverse in the world. > I'm sorry I can no longer take you seriously. You know there's studies ranking countries based on diversity right? You want me to Google them for you? Oh wait, you probably think they're missing something clearly obvious like not knowing what a median is again. >>> And again, how do you compare "diverse" data sets like kids literally being able to read? > An average is nearly useless if you don't know the distribution. Rankings based on averages are meaningless. Great if you think that. Show me a better way to compare countries when it comes to reading skills. >>> Why are you commenting? > Because of this You just said you don't believe the study is relevant. So why do you care what it says. >>>Oh come on, every study puts the US in a mediocre position in education within the OECD. That's not a debate. > Because it is debatable. It's really not and it's the best we have. > Using PISA rankings to say that the US is in a mediocre position in education is very controversial. Again, it's really not. Haven't seen any counter studies, happy to see them. Not saying there's no criticisms obviously. > The US goes WAY up in the ranks when those things are taken into account. Go on then, show the studies, I'm willing to change my mind.