5 ms·

I still don't follow. What exactly in what I suggested is the problem with equalizing outcomes? If everyone is learning the same things then what exactly is the

I still don't follow. What exactly in what I suggested is the problem with equalizing outcomes? If everyone is learning the same things then what exactly is the problem? There is no discrimination involved.

TimTheTinker 5y ago
"Equalizing outcomes" is exactly what they want to do. They seek to accomplish this by pulling down those who would otherwise excel, not by solving the real problems that are preventing people from excelling in the first place. Part of the problem is that outcomes can never be equalized. It's a fallacy to try to force everyone into the same educational mold. A statistical normal distribution will always occur. Better to remove impediments that are keeping people from excelling -- things like poverty, crime, etc. would be a great place to start.
- holonomically 5y ago
  What's the fallacy in teaching everyone the same things? That seems like a good way to equalize life outcomes and give everyone the required skills for succeeding in contemporary society.
  - thereisnospork 5y ago
    In order to teach everyone the same thing you can only teach as much as the stupidest and least motivated person can grasp.
    - holonomically 5y ago
      I don't see how that follows.
      - thereisnospork 5y ago
        everyone is a set which includes anyone. If all (e.g.) 7th graders must have the same knowledge of math, that knowledge of math cannot exceed the knowledge attainable by the dumbest (read: any) 7th grader. This is tautologically true.
        holonomically 5y ago
        Yes, thanks. That clears it up. You're right. We must teach no one anything otherwise there would be some people that wouldn't be able to understand. That was exactly what I was thinking and your example helped me understand. What you were saying was clearly tautological and I just didn't have the logical training to understand it.
        thereisnospork 5y ago
        I suppose this is what I get for trying to interact with someone in good faith on the internet.
        holonomically 5y ago
        Your interpretation of what I was saying was clearly adversarial and uncharitable so I just got tired of it. It's entirely possible to have high standards for everyone (including the "stupid") without reducing the quality of the curriculum. But you're not interested in having that discussion because you're grinding some other axe about what you perceive to be the ideological takeover of the educational system.
        s1artibartfast 5y ago
        Then make your case instead of pretending to not understand the statement. What is your solution to enable high quality curriculum and ensuring uniform success?
        holonomically 5y ago

TimTheTinker 5y ago

"Equalizing outcomes" is exactly what they want to do. They seek to accomplish this by pulling down those who would otherwise excel, not by solving the real problems that are preventing people from excelling in the first place. Part of the problem is that outcomes can never be equalized. It's a fallacy to try to force everyone into the same educational mold. A statistical normal distribution will always occur. Better to remove impediments that are keeping people from excelling -- things like poverty, crime, etc. would be a great place to start.

holonomically 5y ago
What's the fallacy in teaching everyone the same things? That seems like a good way to equalize life outcomes and give everyone the required skills for succeeding in contemporary society.
- thereisnospork 5y ago
  In order to teach everyone the same thing you can only teach as much as the stupidest and least motivated person can grasp.
  - holonomically 5y ago
    I don't see how that follows.
    - thereisnospork 5y ago
      everyone is a set which includes anyone. If all (e.g.) 7th graders must have the same knowledge of math, that knowledge of math cannot exceed the knowledge attainable by the dumbest (read: any) 7th grader. This is tautologically true.
      - holonomically 5y ago
        Yes, thanks. That clears it up. You're right. We must teach no one anything otherwise there would be some people that wouldn't be able to understand. That was exactly what I was thinking and your example helped me understand. What you were saying was clearly tautological and I just didn't have the logical training to understand it.
        thereisnospork 5y ago
        I suppose this is what I get for trying to interact with someone in good faith on the internet.
        holonomically 5y ago
        Your interpretation of what I was saying was clearly adversarial and uncharitable so I just got tired of it. It's entirely possible to have high standards for everyone (including the "stupid") without reducing the quality of the curriculum. But you're not interested in having that discussion because you're grinding some other axe about what you perceive to be the ideological takeover of the educational system.
        s1artibartfast 5y ago
        Then make your case instead of pretending to not understand the statement. What is your solution to enable high quality curriculum and ensuring uniform success?
        holonomically 5y ago