4 ms·

We are currently living in a time when many people feel the need to dispute that rigorous education can have any meaningful impact on a child's abilities. Ever

We are currently living in a time when many people feel the need to dispute that rigorous education can have any meaningful impact on a child's abilities. Every chance to record and shares true facts, we should.

quadrifoliate 4y ago
> Every chance to record and shares true facts, we should. Sure, but it seems to me that we should do so in a controlled and rigorous fashion. A few questions: - Are we sure that the tests are exactly the same difficulty each year? If not, what is the falloff? - Who decides the difficulty? - How do we think about tradeoffs between grasping concepts correctly versus doing test prep? - Do the increased test scores from 2003 to 2020 actually translate into meaningfully better further education or quality of life on average? If you are making confident statements about "test scores dropped and this is bad for children", you should know the answers to all these questions. I feel like most parents handwave this sort of stuff away when it comes to children's test scores and always assume that it's perfect – but would start asking this kind of stuff very quickly, for example, if they were asked to, say, do a similar test as adults to determine what their bonus for last year should be.
- PubliusMI 4y ago
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
hotpotamus 4y ago
> We are currently living in a time when many people feel the need to dispute that rigorous education can have any meaningful impact on a child's abilities. That doesn't sound right to me. My perception is that the value of a rigorous education is actually nearly universally valued, but how/whether children should have access to that education equitably is quite disputed.
- PubliusMI 4y ago
  Thoughts on the current backlash against the SAT/ACT/other standardized college entrance exams? The liberal refrain is "High-scorers just had rich parents to hire them a tutor!", as if the tutor's instruction didn't actually uplift the children and make them stronger.
  - hotpotamus 4y ago
    Should those with low standardized test scores be denied a rigorous education?
    - adamsmith143 4y ago
      Despite the handwringing and poopooing from "liberals" there isa correlation between test performance and performance in college. Why would you send a student with sub 1000 SATs to Harvard when they likely won't be able to pass a single course?
      - hotpotamus 4y ago
        Why would you? Because you want them to get the most rigorous education possible I presume. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it doesn't seem like anyone in the scenario doubts the value of education.
        adamsmith143 4y ago
        The point being if you don't have some base level of preparedness the value of the education will be lost on you because you cannot complete it.
        hotpotamus 4y ago
        That makes sense to me. Presumably it's up to the university to make that determination, isn't it?

quadrifoliate 4y ago

> Every chance to record and shares true facts, we should. Sure, but it seems to me that we should do so in a controlled and rigorous fashion. A few questions: - Are we sure that the tests are exactly the same difficulty each year? If not, what is the falloff? - Who decides the difficulty? - How do we think about tradeoffs between grasping concepts correctly versus doing test prep? - Do the increased test scores from 2003 to 2020 actually translate into meaningfully better further education or quality of life on average? If you are making confident statements about "test scores dropped and this is bad for children", you should know the answers to all these questions. I feel like most parents handwave this sort of stuff away when it comes to children's test scores and always assume that it's perfect – but would start asking this kind of stuff very quickly, for example, if they were asked to, say, do a similar test as adults to determine what their bonus for last year should be.

PubliusMI 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

hotpotamus 4y ago

> We are currently living in a time when many people feel the need to dispute that rigorous education can have any meaningful impact on a child's abilities. That doesn't sound right to me. My perception is that the value of a rigorous education is actually nearly universally valued, but how/whether children should have access to that education equitably is quite disputed.

PubliusMI 4y ago
Thoughts on the current backlash against the SAT/ACT/other standardized college entrance exams? The liberal refrain is "High-scorers just had rich parents to hire them a tutor!", as if the tutor's instruction didn't actually uplift the children and make them stronger.
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  Should those with low standardized test scores be denied a rigorous education?
  - adamsmith143 4y ago
    Despite the handwringing and poopooing from "liberals" there isa correlation between test performance and performance in college. Why would you send a student with sub 1000 SATs to Harvard when they likely won't be able to pass a single course?
    - hotpotamus 4y ago
      Why would you? Because you want them to get the most rigorous education possible I presume. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it doesn't seem like anyone in the scenario doubts the value of education.
      - adamsmith143 4y ago
        The point being if you don't have some base level of preparedness the value of the education will be lost on you because you cannot complete it.
        hotpotamus 4y ago
        That makes sense to me. Presumably it's up to the university to make that determination, isn't it?