4 ms·

Except that real solutions never seem to be on the table. For example, how about atomizing school into pods of smaller numbers of students with teachers scatte

by bsder 5y ago

Except that real solutions never seem to be on the table. For example, how about atomizing school into pods of smaller numbers of students with teachers scattered around the district instead of 30+ students per teacher with 1000+ students crammed into a building or campus? This would be especially effective for the youngest students. And a "Covid Outbreak" would shut down less than a dozen students and a teacher for a week or two and be done with it. But, you see, that would take money. And everybody likes to bitch about education but nobody wants to spend actual cash. And, by the way, if you think its been bad on kids, the teachers have had it bad, too. Unlike the kids, the teachers had a much higher probability of dying. And they get the joy of being on the frontlines with the anti-vax idiots. Any teachers I know of who can exit have been running for the doors.

WalterBright 5y ago
The schools are funded with rivers of cash. It's simply squandered. More money won't help (that's been tried many times). To make schools safe is simple - hold classes outside. It won't work everywhere everytime, but it can work enough. It'll work fine in California, Arizona, Seattle most of the time, etc.
- bsder 5y ago
  > The schools are funded with rivers of cash. It's simply squandered. More money won't help (that's been tried many times). Sigh. This simply isn't true. I'm no fan of the Gates Foundation as I think they helicopter in, muck everything up, and then leave picking up the pieces to the locals after they leave again. However, their transparency was at least useful. If you want effective education in younger students, it takes 2 adults in the room (both certified), less than 15 kids in the room, and costs about $15K per student (it's been a while since the study so this number has likely gone up). We spend nowhere near this in education. All initiatives that did this have all been shut down in spite of their documented success. We know what works. We tried it. We have the data. It simply costs more than the political will to implement it.
  - aidenn0 5y ago
    As of 2018, 16 states in the US spend over $15K per student[1]. The US average is either nearly 13k[1] in 2018 or over 14k[2] in 2017. Only 3 countries in the OECD spend $15k or more[2]. 1: https://ncses.nsf.gov/indicators/states/indicator/public-school-per-pupil-expenditures https://ncses.nsf.gov/indicators/states/indicator/public-sch... 2: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd
    - bsder 5y ago
      And I've had this discussion before, as well. Comparing the numbers to countries we would like to emulate implies that there is a maximum $1,500 overspend. Maybe. This is far from some magic windfall. Part of the problem with comparing the US to the OECD is the fact that socialized support systems means that auxiliary things like breakfast, lunches, learning disability support, nurses, etc. come out of a different budgetary bucket. This means that Norway, Sweden, etc., for example, actually spend more per student than is recorded because of the auxiliary expenses that are part of their socialized support system. And Norway and Austria already outspend the US (I wonder if they have something that's in the "education" bucket that we don't). If, however, you would like to argue that this being a function of the school budget is a bad thing and that school lunches and medical support should be a fundamental part of universal healthcare for children, I'm all ears.
  - School-Cotton 5y ago
    > Sigh. This simply isn't true. Yes it is. Compare per-student education spending in the US to any other country.
  - WalterBright 5y ago
    The WA teachers' union demanded "fully funded schools" for at least a decade. They finally got it. There was no measurable improvement whatsoever in education.
  - bsder 5y ago
    Here is the original link to the Gates Foundation report from 2014: "Lessons from Research and the Classroom: Implementing High-Quality Pre-K that Makes a Difference for Young Children" https://docs.gatesfoundation.org/documents/Lessons%20from%20Research%20and%20the%20Classroom_September%202014.pdf https://docs.gatesfoundation.org/documents/Lessons%20from%20... Everything in the report is 2012 dollars. Scale appropriately for today. Boston Pre-K is about $15K now while New Jersey would be about $18K now. These are minimums. More money doesn't guarantee success, but less money almost guarantees failure. And here is a link talking about Martin Walsh (Mayor of Boston) trying to get the money to pay for what that report calls an "exemplar program": https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/02/22/metro/eight-years-after-walshs-promises-boston-prekindergarten-is-still-not-universal/ https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/02/22/metro/eight-years-aft... All of the other exemplar programs were cancelled for lack of funding. You can persist in believing that there is some magic pot of money flying around education, or you can simply observe cancelled successful programs and teachers asking for donations to buy school supplies. Your call.
joshstrange 5y ago
For the first half of your comment I just kept say "that takes money" in my head over and over and then you said it. Pure and simple, this comes down to money or rather the lack thereof. When I was younger I had heavily considered going into teaching until I learned how little they make and how shitty parents are to them (not all, but enough to make their jobs hell if they want). After the last two years I cannot imagine why anyone would go into teaching (or nursing for that matter). Both groups bent over backwards (by and large, obviously you are going to always have a few duds) to continue to provide the best service they could and were treated terribly (and paid terribly) in return. Plenty of people (including some in these comments) want to wax poetic about "think of the children" or "the children are our future" but I have a hard time those same people are willing to put their money where their mouth is. Why we aren't shoveling money into education (before the pandemic as well) is completely beyond me and that's coming from someone who is childless. I'm more than happy to see my taxes go up if the money is going towards education.
SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
I’m inquiry: do we have enough educators for that plan?
- bsder 5y ago
  Almost certainly not. I suspect we don't even have enough teachers for the old system at this point. But money can fix the problem given time. Lack of money can, of course, fix nothing over time.
aidenn0 5y ago
I just want to know where the money is going to schools these days. Per-capita, inflation-adjusted public funding for schools in the US varies from flat to way up depending on which US state you choose over my lifetime. Similarly the US spends the 4th most per capita, and about 1/3 more than the average of OECD countries. I don't think money alone will fix this problem, judging by the number of quality teachers I know that leave for lower paying positions at private schools...

by bsder 5y ago

WalterBright 5y ago

The schools are funded with rivers of cash. It's simply squandered. More money won't help (that's been tried many times). To make schools safe is simple - hold classes outside. It won't work everywhere everytime, but it can work enough. It'll work fine in California, Arizona, Seattle most of the time, etc.

bsder 5y ago
> The schools are funded with rivers of cash. It's simply squandered. More money won't help (that's been tried many times). Sigh. This simply isn't true. I'm no fan of the Gates Foundation as I think they helicopter in, muck everything up, and then leave picking up the pieces to the locals after they leave again. However, their transparency was at least useful. If you want effective education in younger students, it takes 2 adults in the room (both certified), less than 15 kids in the room, and costs about $15K per student (it's been a while since the study so this number has likely gone up). We spend nowhere near this in education. All initiatives that did this have all been shut down in spite of their documented success. We know what works. We tried it. We have the data. It simply costs more than the political will to implement it.
- aidenn0 5y ago
  As of 2018, 16 states in the US spend over $15K per student[1]. The US average is either nearly 13k[1] in 2018 or over 14k[2] in 2017. Only 3 countries in the OECD spend $15k or more[2]. 1: https://ncses.nsf.gov/indicators/states/indicator/public-school-per-pupil-expenditures https://ncses.nsf.gov/indicators/states/indicator/public-sch... 2: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd
  - bsder 5y ago
    And I've had this discussion before, as well. Comparing the numbers to countries we would like to emulate implies that there is a maximum $1,500 overspend. Maybe. This is far from some magic windfall. Part of the problem with comparing the US to the OECD is the fact that socialized support systems means that auxiliary things like breakfast, lunches, learning disability support, nurses, etc. come out of a different budgetary bucket. This means that Norway, Sweden, etc., for example, actually spend more per student than is recorded because of the auxiliary expenses that are part of their socialized support system. And Norway and Austria already outspend the US (I wonder if they have something that's in the "education" bucket that we don't). If, however, you would like to argue that this being a function of the school budget is a bad thing and that school lunches and medical support should be a fundamental part of universal healthcare for children, I'm all ears.
- School-Cotton 5y ago
  > Sigh. This simply isn't true. Yes it is. Compare per-student education spending in the US to any other country.
- WalterBright 5y ago
  The WA teachers' union demanded "fully funded schools" for at least a decade. They finally got it. There was no measurable improvement whatsoever in education.
- bsder 5y ago
  Here is the original link to the Gates Foundation report from 2014: "Lessons from Research and the Classroom: Implementing High-Quality Pre-K that Makes a Difference for Young Children" https://docs.gatesfoundation.org/documents/Lessons%20from%20Research%20and%20the%20Classroom_September%202014.pdf https://docs.gatesfoundation.org/documents/Lessons%20from%20... Everything in the report is 2012 dollars. Scale appropriately for today. Boston Pre-K is about $15K now while New Jersey would be about $18K now. These are minimums. More money doesn't guarantee success, but less money almost guarantees failure. And here is a link talking about Martin Walsh (Mayor of Boston) trying to get the money to pay for what that report calls an "exemplar program": https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/02/22/metro/eight-years-after-walshs-promises-boston-prekindergarten-is-still-not-universal/ https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/02/22/metro/eight-years-aft... All of the other exemplar programs were cancelled for lack of funding. You can persist in believing that there is some magic pot of money flying around education, or you can simply observe cancelled successful programs and teachers asking for donations to buy school supplies. Your call.

joshstrange 5y ago

For the first half of your comment I just kept say "that takes money" in my head over and over and then you said it. Pure and simple, this comes down to money or rather the lack thereof. When I was younger I had heavily considered going into teaching until I learned how little they make and how shitty parents are to them (not all, but enough to make their jobs hell if they want). After the last two years I cannot imagine why anyone would go into teaching (or nursing for that matter). Both groups bent over backwards (by and large, obviously you are going to always have a few duds) to continue to provide the best service they could and were treated terribly (and paid terribly) in return. Plenty of people (including some in these comments) want to wax poetic about "think of the children" or "the children are our future" but I have a hard time those same people are willing to put their money where their mouth is. Why we aren't shoveling money into education (before the pandemic as well) is completely beyond me and that's coming from someone who is childless. I'm more than happy to see my taxes go up if the money is going towards education.

SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago

I’m inquiry: do we have enough educators for that plan?

bsder 5y ago
Almost certainly not. I suspect we don't even have enough teachers for the old system at this point. But money can fix the problem given time. Lack of money can, of course, fix nothing over time.

aidenn0 5y ago

I just want to know where the money is going to schools these days. Per-capita, inflation-adjusted public funding for schools in the US varies from flat to way up depending on which US state you choose over my lifetime. Similarly the US spends the 4th most per capita, and about 1/3 more than the average of OECD countries. I don't think money alone will fix this problem, judging by the number of quality teachers I know that leave for lower paying positions at private schools...