3 ms·

You're not doing the bare minimum of even attempting to understand the purpose of my argument and instead taking the dumbest possible literal interpretation and

You're not doing the bare minimum of even attempting to understand the purpose of my argument and instead taking the dumbest possible literal interpretation and then responding to that. That is the very definition of a bad-faith argument. Governments can hire experts to determine standards by doing research, and then can apply those standards over time to the schools they regulate. They can also collect massive amounts of data and compare performance between schools, across time, determine means and check for outliers, etc. etc. etc. My argument is that consumers don't have time to do any of that. They have time to do what they do with colleges: Read a limited number pamphlets, thumb through Newsweek's annual "best colleges" report, maybe spend a few minutes here and there checking data online. We can, as a society, devote more resources to making sure the government regulation side of things improves. What we can't do is collectively give OURSELVES more time to do that research individually.

ultrarunner 7y ago
Oh no, I understand your argument full well. I just think it's extremely shallow. Parents and students have plenty of time to research important aspects of their lives, starting with the experiential reality of the school they're subjected to for several years. One of your argument's shortcomings is the implication that only an a priori decision making process is possible for the over-a-decade process of going to school. I would argue that these experiential data are more valid than metrics like standardized test scores by ethnicity or "letter grades" that the government gives itself for its school. Ultimately I question the motives behind many of these testing methodologies, because when they're not meant to satisfy the motivation of the student and/or their parents, the student (and their parents) become the product. But even if parents could choose between multiple public school pedagogical methodologies, many can't simply because it requires selling the family's house and relocating to a different district. It's hard to have time to impact a situation when the situation is already fixed before the fact, but of course then it's not a time issue at all. Ultimately I was responding to a two-sentence comment from you. I don't think complaining that my response was "bare minimum" is an appropriate way to handle the challenge, and I find the resort to name-calling about the "age of 4chan" particularly off putting.
- swivelmaster 7y ago
  "Oh no, I understand your argument full well. I just think it's extremely shallow." Maybe you should poke around the rest of the comments for the article, because I've gone into a lot of detail about it. "Parents and students have plenty of time to research important aspects of their lives" I've addressed this elsewhere in the thread, but this assumption penalizes the children of parents who are poor, working multiple jobs, or dealing with health issues. It penalizes single parents as well. Basically, if you put the onus on parents to do the research, parents with more disposable time will make better decisions for their children, thus exacerbating the existing inequalities in the system. The whole point of the public education system is to level the playing field; what you're suggesting will increase the gap between the haves and the have-nots. "...starting with the experiential reality of the school they're subjected to for several years. One of your argument's shortcomings is the implication that only an a priori decision making process is possible for the over-a-decade process of going to school." What you're suggesting is that it's okay to have a system where parents and students make the decision about whether or not schools are good or bad by spending time at them. That is a ludicrously impractical suggestion. What happens if your kid hates their first day of school? Their first week? Their first month? How do you decide when they can make decent decision about it? What if they just hate going to school? Are you going to go sit in the classroom and watch the teacher for hours or days at a time? Experiential data is not particularly useful on an individual basis; There are so many kids who just have a bad time at school no matter what, often for reasons that don't implicate the school directly as good or bad. And there are plenty of kids who have a great time at school precisely because they're not getting a very good education. (IE they're ignored, the work is too easy, etc.) Their experience is going to be fantastic, and they will enter college completely unprepared. I'm not arguing that the EXISTING methods for measuring school performance are perfect; I am arguing that theoretically, the best possible version is mass-collection and analysis of data. Relying on individual decisions based purely on experience is a recipe for chaos; Kids would be begging their parents to change teachers and schools all the time, and how would parents have any idea if the kids were right? I didn't complain that your response was the bare minimum, I complained that it was LESS than the bare minimum. And my 4chan comment was about the downvoting, not about your comment. Please read more carefully.
souprock 7y ago
Although "Governments can hire experts to determine standards by doing research, and then can apply those standards over time to the schools they regulate.", those supposed experts can be pretty bad. Richard Feynman relates a fascinating account of this in his book "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!". Aside from him, every "expert" gave good scores to books that were entirely blank. Some quotes from that: https://fs.blog/2016/07/richard-feynman-teaching-math-kids/ https://fs.blog/2016/07/richard-feynman-teaching-math-kids/ http://whyhomeschool.blogspot.com/2006/08/richard-feynman-on-textbook-review.html http://whyhomeschool.blogspot.com/2006/08/richard-feynman-on...
- swivelmaster 7y ago
  The argument that “we could screw this up” is not the same as “we will screw this up and therefore should not do it.”

ultrarunner 7y ago

Oh no, I understand your argument full well. I just think it's extremely shallow. Parents and students have plenty of time to research important aspects of their lives, starting with the experiential reality of the school they're subjected to for several years. One of your argument's shortcomings is the implication that only an a priori decision making process is possible for the over-a-decade process of going to school. I would argue that these experiential data are more valid than metrics like standardized test scores by ethnicity or "letter grades" that the government gives itself for its school. Ultimately I question the motives behind many of these testing methodologies, because when they're not meant to satisfy the motivation of the student and/or their parents, the student (and their parents) become the product. But even if parents could choose between multiple public school pedagogical methodologies, many can't simply because it requires selling the family's house and relocating to a different district. It's hard to have time to impact a situation when the situation is already fixed before the fact, but of course then it's not a time issue at all. Ultimately I was responding to a two-sentence comment from you. I don't think complaining that my response was "bare minimum" is an appropriate way to handle the challenge, and I find the resort to name-calling about the "age of 4chan" particularly off putting.

swivelmaster 7y ago
"Oh no, I understand your argument full well. I just think it's extremely shallow." Maybe you should poke around the rest of the comments for the article, because I've gone into a lot of detail about it. "Parents and students have plenty of time to research important aspects of their lives" I've addressed this elsewhere in the thread, but this assumption penalizes the children of parents who are poor, working multiple jobs, or dealing with health issues. It penalizes single parents as well. Basically, if you put the onus on parents to do the research, parents with more disposable time will make better decisions for their children, thus exacerbating the existing inequalities in the system. The whole point of the public education system is to level the playing field; what you're suggesting will increase the gap between the haves and the have-nots. "...starting with the experiential reality of the school they're subjected to for several years. One of your argument's shortcomings is the implication that only an a priori decision making process is possible for the over-a-decade process of going to school." What you're suggesting is that it's okay to have a system where parents and students make the decision about whether or not schools are good or bad by spending time at them. That is a ludicrously impractical suggestion. What happens if your kid hates their first day of school? Their first week? Their first month? How do you decide when they can make decent decision about it? What if they just hate going to school? Are you going to go sit in the classroom and watch the teacher for hours or days at a time? Experiential data is not particularly useful on an individual basis; There are so many kids who just have a bad time at school no matter what, often for reasons that don't implicate the school directly as good or bad. And there are plenty of kids who have a great time at school precisely because they're not getting a very good education. (IE they're ignored, the work is too easy, etc.) Their experience is going to be fantastic, and they will enter college completely unprepared. I'm not arguing that the EXISTING methods for measuring school performance are perfect; I am arguing that theoretically, the best possible version is mass-collection and analysis of data. Relying on individual decisions based purely on experience is a recipe for chaos; Kids would be begging their parents to change teachers and schools all the time, and how would parents have any idea if the kids were right? I didn't complain that your response was the bare minimum, I complained that it was LESS than the bare minimum. And my 4chan comment was about the downvoting, not about your comment. Please read more carefully.

souprock 7y ago

Although "Governments can hire experts to determine standards by doing research, and then can apply those standards over time to the schools they regulate.", those supposed experts can be pretty bad. Richard Feynman relates a fascinating account of this in his book "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!". Aside from him, every "expert" gave good scores to books that were entirely blank. Some quotes from that: https://fs.blog/2016/07/richard-feynman-teaching-math-kids/ https://fs.blog/2016/07/richard-feynman-teaching-math-kids/ http://whyhomeschool.blogspot.com/2006/08/richard-feynman-on-textbook-review.html http://whyhomeschool.blogspot.com/2006/08/richard-feynman-on...

swivelmaster 7y ago
The argument that “we could screw this up” is not the same as “we will screw this up and therefore should not do it.”