5 ms·

Didn't seem to be a problem for The Economist in 2020 and 2021 - I checked a couple of older articles and and they said there wasn't right or wrong - it simply

by Proven 4y ago

Didn't seem to be a problem for The Economist in 2020 and 2021 - I checked a couple of older articles and and they said there wasn't right or wrong - it simply depended on what data were keyed in to the technocrats' policy models. Any advice on where the affected parents and children can get $5-10K for tutoring so that their kids can catch up? Is the WEF running any give-aways these days?

nemo44x 4y ago
That’s the best part of it all - watching the media, bureaucrats, and others wash their hands of this mess they all demanded without debate or inquiry.
- thrown_22 4y ago
  Much like the Iraq war, the only people who are punished are those who called it right.
datavirtue 4y ago
Catch up to what? Everyone always says "catch up" or "they are behind" and I have absolutely no idea what they are talking about (I don't think they do either). You are either getting an education or you are not.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- xwdv 4y ago
  Typically they are referring to their best life, but most will never make it, because things like this, or racism, discrimination, trauma, bills, all get in the way and make them fall behind. Pretty soon they add up and you can never catch up to your best life. You either settle for what you have; peacefully or bitterly.
- endisneigh 4y ago
  Catch up refers to being at or around a historical moving average. Is it that complicated to understand? More ideally it refers to where a child would’ve been without hinderances but that’s harder to articulate.
  - maxbond 4y ago
    This just moves the problem around. An average of what? It is worth actually thinking through the question rather than being dismissive.
    - toolz 4y ago
      It's not a binary "either you go into exact details with your entire answer or you're not thinking it through" - it seems intuitive that _many_ people have thought this through and spend their entire careers doing so. This is one reason we have standardized testing in the first place. It seems rather out of nowhere that someone would suggest we aren't measuring and/or don't know what we're measuring. Sure, the measurements probably aren't perfect, but if someone is suggesting we simply have no data on the subject isn't something that seems like a genuine argument.
      - maxbond 4y ago
        Being dismissive is a good indication someone did not think something through. Kinda by definition right? And standardized tests measure, again I ask you, _what_? Isn't it funny how deep we are in this thread and no one has put a name to it? So child A does better on a test than child B. What does that mean? And I do mean, what _precisely_ does that mean. I'll give you my opinion in the interests of fairness, there is no way to know what that means. Maybe one child is better at taking tests. Maybe one child resents the test taking process and isn't interested in participating. There are plenty of examples of meaningless tests that people believe in. Lie detectors do nothing, some people still take them seriously. IQ tests measure the biases of the person designing the test, some people still take them seriously. Haven't you ever filled out a job application and had to answer a 20 minute personality quiz? Do you think that works or makes sense? Is it really crazy to suggest that a top-down structure, where the federal government comes up with some arbitrary standards, then makes up a test to measure compliance with that standard, all in the face of intense political interference - did a bad job? And more importantly - are the standards meaningful at all? This gets to the heart of the original question. Is there a singular path one is supposed to take? Is it really meaningful to measure your progress along that path?
- mattmcknight 4y ago
  To the standard for the level of learning that students of their age have typically achieved, or the average of how much learning students of their age had achieved pre-pandemic.
  - giraffe_lady 4y ago
    Do you expect to "catch up" to where you would be without the pandemic? I'm not getting my parents back, my city isn't bringing public transit back, there is no world where the pandemic didn't happen. These are its effects, the kids are going to have them too.
    - mattmcknight 4y ago
      I don't expect them to catch up in a time sense- to learn faster than normal. I do expect that it may take them until they are a bit older to reach the standard. Unfortunately, in many places there is no standard, and students are simply socially promoted, irrespective of any progress.

by Proven 4y ago

nemo44x 4y ago

That’s the best part of it all - watching the media, bureaucrats, and others wash their hands of this mess they all demanded without debate or inquiry.

thrown_22 4y ago
Much like the Iraq war, the only people who are punished are those who called it right.

datavirtue 4y ago

Catch up to what? Everyone always says "catch up" or "they are behind" and I have absolutely no idea what they are talking about (I don't think they do either). You are either getting an education or you are not.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
xwdv 4y ago
Typically they are referring to their best life, but most will never make it, because things like this, or racism, discrimination, trauma, bills, all get in the way and make them fall behind. Pretty soon they add up and you can never catch up to your best life. You either settle for what you have; peacefully or bitterly.
endisneigh 4y ago
Catch up refers to being at or around a historical moving average. Is it that complicated to understand? More ideally it refers to where a child would’ve been without hinderances but that’s harder to articulate.
- maxbond 4y ago
  This just moves the problem around. An average of what? It is worth actually thinking through the question rather than being dismissive.
  - toolz 4y ago
    It's not a binary "either you go into exact details with your entire answer or you're not thinking it through" - it seems intuitive that _many_ people have thought this through and spend their entire careers doing so. This is one reason we have standardized testing in the first place. It seems rather out of nowhere that someone would suggest we aren't measuring and/or don't know what we're measuring. Sure, the measurements probably aren't perfect, but if someone is suggesting we simply have no data on the subject isn't something that seems like a genuine argument.
    - maxbond 4y ago
      Being dismissive is a good indication someone did not think something through. Kinda by definition right? And standardized tests measure, again I ask you, _what_? Isn't it funny how deep we are in this thread and no one has put a name to it? So child A does better on a test than child B. What does that mean? And I do mean, what _precisely_ does that mean. I'll give you my opinion in the interests of fairness, there is no way to know what that means. Maybe one child is better at taking tests. Maybe one child resents the test taking process and isn't interested in participating. There are plenty of examples of meaningless tests that people believe in. Lie detectors do nothing, some people still take them seriously. IQ tests measure the biases of the person designing the test, some people still take them seriously. Haven't you ever filled out a job application and had to answer a 20 minute personality quiz? Do you think that works or makes sense? Is it really crazy to suggest that a top-down structure, where the federal government comes up with some arbitrary standards, then makes up a test to measure compliance with that standard, all in the face of intense political interference - did a bad job? And more importantly - are the standards meaningful at all? This gets to the heart of the original question. Is there a singular path one is supposed to take? Is it really meaningful to measure your progress along that path?
mattmcknight 4y ago
To the standard for the level of learning that students of their age have typically achieved, or the average of how much learning students of their age had achieved pre-pandemic.
- giraffe_lady 4y ago
  Do you expect to "catch up" to where you would be without the pandemic? I'm not getting my parents back, my city isn't bringing public transit back, there is no world where the pandemic didn't happen. These are its effects, the kids are going to have them too.
  - mattmcknight 4y ago
    I don't expect them to catch up in a time sense- to learn faster than normal. I do expect that it may take them until they are a bit older to reach the standard. Unfortunately, in many places there is no standard, and students are simply socially promoted, irrespective of any progress.