3 ms·

The US has decided that the way to increase the educational opportunity of disadvantaged kids is to put them into school earlier and earlier- there are programs

The US has decided that the way to increase the educational opportunity of disadvantaged kids is to put them into school earlier and earlier- there are programs which put kids into public education as early as 3 years old. The fear of 'falling behind' other countries has turned Kindergarten from an optional half-day of play and socialization to a full day program with a real curriculum- not just basic reading/math but in many cases science and social studies standards.

tharne 6y ago
The unspoken implication here, which I've always found to be an ethical nightmare, is that the intellectual and activist classes in America have quietly decided that poor families are incapable of raising their children properly, so the state should step in and do it "correctly". It is perfectly acceptable in educated circles in the U.S. to state that kids from "disadvantaged families", should be taken out of their families' homes from 7 AM to 7 PM to get "additional enrichment opportunities", in other words, raised by the state. It may well be that you could increase grades and test scores this way, but I have some serious issues with the degree to which we're comfortable separating children from their families, because we've decided that we know what's best for everyone. Reminds me of how the American government made a big push in the second half of the 19th century to remove Native American children from their homes and send them to boarding schools to "civilize" them.
- nitrogen 6y ago
  People can't complain about achievement gaps and then also complain about the only ways to lower them. When one parent is in prison and the other is working nonstop, how is a kid supposed to learn from their parents all the things kids are expected to know by kindergarten?
  - tharne 6y ago
    I wasn't complaining about the achievement gap. I think we're placing far too much emphasis on academic performance at the expense of the individual families and certain social classes and cultures, all the while pretending that the very significant moral questions around this approach don't exist. If we're going to have the state effectively raise the children of certain social classes in the name of academic and economic achievement, we need to be clear as day and openly state exactly what we are doing, and why we think it's the right thing to do. My guess is that we haven't had this conversation thus far because to do so would reveal the arrogance of the educated classes in the U.S. and show folks just how little the elites think of them and their families.
    - Thlom 6y ago
      In northern Europe 90+% of children between 1 and 6 attends daycare. Both the very rich and the very poor. It's a very good way for the kids to learn critical social skills and having fulfilling days. But I do appreciate the huge differences between the US and Europe, both in the labor market, family and welfare.
  - rovolo 6y ago
    > complain about the only ways to lower them. When you say "the only way", you are ignoring other solutions > When one parent is in prison and the other is working nonstop Should we be putting that parent in prison? Should we be forcing the other parent to work nonstop to provide for their family?
    - nitrogen 6y ago
      IMO in a complex, vicious feedback loop like this (namely, cultural and systemic discrepancies in outcomes and opportunities), you have to use every solution, weighted for effectiveness and weighted against backlash and unintended consequences. In some cases you really want state-provided educational daycare. In some you really want the parents to have more time with the kids, in some you really don't (I know personally of some cases in rural "red neck" towns where kids' parents were the worst influence in their lives). If non-violent parents are put in prison, that's a problem. If violent parents are not put in prison, that is also a problem. You have to address peer influences. You have to support families who have the potential to do well. You have to improve access to means of family planning (education, birth control, etc.). You have to try to persuade people to do things differently than the way that keeps them in poverty. You have to do all of these things.
- war1025 6y ago
  > Reminds me of how the American government made a big push in the second half of the 19th century to remove Native American children from their homes and send them to boarding schools to "civilize" them. One great resource to get your toes wet on this topic is to read the "Neither Dog nor Wolf" series by Kent Nerburn [1]. I was going to link to the Goodreads for the books, but when I went there just now it had full page ads that completely changed the styling of the page. So f that. [1] https://kentnerburn.com/books/ https://kentnerburn.com/books/
pessimizer 6y ago
And the school days have gotten longer and longer, and the homework both far heavier and far easier at the same time. They're optimizing for control, not education. The US upper-middle classes value themselves so highly that they think that total control by middle management will inevitably breed success.

tharne 6y ago

The unspoken implication here, which I've always found to be an ethical nightmare, is that the intellectual and activist classes in America have quietly decided that poor families are incapable of raising their children properly, so the state should step in and do it "correctly". It is perfectly acceptable in educated circles in the U.S. to state that kids from "disadvantaged families", should be taken out of their families' homes from 7 AM to 7 PM to get "additional enrichment opportunities", in other words, raised by the state. It may well be that you could increase grades and test scores this way, but I have some serious issues with the degree to which we're comfortable separating children from their families, because we've decided that we know what's best for everyone. Reminds me of how the American government made a big push in the second half of the 19th century to remove Native American children from their homes and send them to boarding schools to "civilize" them.

nitrogen 6y ago
People can't complain about achievement gaps and then also complain about the only ways to lower them. When one parent is in prison and the other is working nonstop, how is a kid supposed to learn from their parents all the things kids are expected to know by kindergarten?
- tharne 6y ago
  I wasn't complaining about the achievement gap. I think we're placing far too much emphasis on academic performance at the expense of the individual families and certain social classes and cultures, all the while pretending that the very significant moral questions around this approach don't exist. If we're going to have the state effectively raise the children of certain social classes in the name of academic and economic achievement, we need to be clear as day and openly state exactly what we are doing, and why we think it's the right thing to do. My guess is that we haven't had this conversation thus far because to do so would reveal the arrogance of the educated classes in the U.S. and show folks just how little the elites think of them and their families.
  - Thlom 6y ago
    In northern Europe 90+% of children between 1 and 6 attends daycare. Both the very rich and the very poor. It's a very good way for the kids to learn critical social skills and having fulfilling days. But I do appreciate the huge differences between the US and Europe, both in the labor market, family and welfare.
- rovolo 6y ago
  > complain about the only ways to lower them. When you say "the only way", you are ignoring other solutions > When one parent is in prison and the other is working nonstop Should we be putting that parent in prison? Should we be forcing the other parent to work nonstop to provide for their family?
  - nitrogen 6y ago
    IMO in a complex, vicious feedback loop like this (namely, cultural and systemic discrepancies in outcomes and opportunities), you have to use every solution, weighted for effectiveness and weighted against backlash and unintended consequences. In some cases you really want state-provided educational daycare. In some you really want the parents to have more time with the kids, in some you really don't (I know personally of some cases in rural "red neck" towns where kids' parents were the worst influence in their lives). If non-violent parents are put in prison, that's a problem. If violent parents are not put in prison, that is also a problem. You have to address peer influences. You have to support families who have the potential to do well. You have to improve access to means of family planning (education, birth control, etc.). You have to try to persuade people to do things differently than the way that keeps them in poverty. You have to do all of these things.
war1025 6y ago
> Reminds me of how the American government made a big push in the second half of the 19th century to remove Native American children from their homes and send them to boarding schools to "civilize" them. One great resource to get your toes wet on this topic is to read the "Neither Dog nor Wolf" series by Kent Nerburn [1]. I was going to link to the Goodreads for the books, but when I went there just now it had full page ads that completely changed the styling of the page. So f that. [1] https://kentnerburn.com/books/ https://kentnerburn.com/books/

pessimizer 6y ago

And the school days have gotten longer and longer, and the homework both far heavier and far easier at the same time. They're optimizing for control, not education. The US upper-middle classes value themselves so highly that they think that total control by middle management will inevitably breed success.