4 ms·

A secondary problem is that public schools have essentially transformed into state nannys. 1. You can't send the kids home because both parents are probably wo

A secondary problem is that public schools have essentially transformed into state nannys. 1. You can't send the kids home because both parents are probably working. It's more likely the kid becomes lost forever and it becomes a government problem again once that kid is now living an alternative lifestyle that consumes government resources in other ways (crime, homelessness, or health). 2. Because of the realities of (1) everyone else is now forced to asked why the kid is no longer in school and becomes a failure of the teacher that the kid is not in school. The teacher must now deal with disgruntled parents and administrators for not enduring the emotional abuse and disruption a neglected child causes while also dealing with 20 other students. I think a lot of problems with child education and just be traced back to economic realities of many parents today. Even if you are relatively well off having your kid kicked out of school isn't financially feasible for a lot of families. Even a disruptive child might be the result of absent parents who must be at work to even afford school lunch.

kweingar 4y ago
> I think a lot of problems with child education and just be traced back to economic realities of many parents today. This is it. Our framework for understanding childhood success is based entirely in “school quality”. If a child enters adulthood with a criminal record, without job skills, or without prospects for higher education, it is always blamed on either the parents or the school system. The only remedies anyone can imagine is throwing money at the school system or setting up charter schools, so when that doesn’t work, you’re left guessing. But none of this addresses poverty! I am convinced that if children can go to sleep with food in their belly, stable housing, and proper healthcare, they’re much more likely to have good outcomes.
- draebek 4y ago
  I agree, you have to address these things outside the school. This is the same story when it comes to policing: police can arrest people all you want, but unless you're willing to significantly increase our existing lead in incarcerations per capita, it seems like just arresting people isn't working. On the other hand, if you can give people homes, food, jobs, and healthcare, I believe the crime rate will drop. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I suspect there are plenty of measures by which other countries achieve better educational outcomes with lower educational spending, in which case I'd be willing to bet that they are simply spending more in "social programs" (broadly speaking) than the United States.

kweingar 4y ago

> I think a lot of problems with child education and just be traced back to economic realities of many parents today. This is it. Our framework for understanding childhood success is based entirely in “school quality”. If a child enters adulthood with a criminal record, without job skills, or without prospects for higher education, it is always blamed on either the parents or the school system. The only remedies anyone can imagine is throwing money at the school system or setting up charter schools, so when that doesn’t work, you’re left guessing. But none of this addresses poverty! I am convinced that if children can go to sleep with food in their belly, stable housing, and proper healthcare, they’re much more likely to have good outcomes.

draebek 4y ago
I agree, you have to address these things outside the school. This is the same story when it comes to policing: police can arrest people all you want, but unless you're willing to significantly increase our existing lead in incarcerations per capita, it seems like just arresting people isn't working. On the other hand, if you can give people homes, food, jobs, and healthcare, I believe the crime rate will drop. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I suspect there are plenty of measures by which other countries achieve better educational outcomes with lower educational spending, in which case I'd be willing to bet that they are simply spending more in "social programs" (broadly speaking) than the United States.