5 ms·

> The problem is not allowing people to take more advanced classes, if they so choose. The article itself says that students who want to go ahead will get priv

by cauch 3y ago

> The problem is not allowing people to take more advanced classes, if they so choose. The article itself says that students who want to go ahead will get private lessons. The idea is not stopping people to get more advanced classes, the idea is to cancel more advanced classes as long as "normal pace" classes are not present. The way it works is that if you put an advanced class and no normal pace class, people who need the normal pace class will fail school over and over again and finally drop out of it, and people will just say "the advanced class is just a normal pace class" without realising it's not the case.

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
replace "normal" with "slow" and "advanced" with "normal", and you will discover: 1. Why this initiative is a problem 2. That simply rewording "slow" to "normal" and "normal" to "advanced" seems to constitute the majority of your argument, without which there isn't a good one
- cauch 3y ago
  And replace "slow" by "terribly fast" and "normal" by "advanced" and, magic, now everyone gets advanced classes. Estimating if the pace is "fast" or "normal" is very very complicated. Only an idiot will pretend they know for sure that "this is too slow" (unless obvious extreme cases which don't correspond to what we have here) Also, apparently, the measure was to replace advanced algebra by advanced data science which was in fact more challenging than the initial recite-by-heart-the-formula algebra lessons.
  - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
    it's actually not that complicated, just look at what other schools in the country do, or what these did before the change then, with that data, you will know to replace "terribly fast" with the original "slow", and can try to make your proposal not depend purely on the semantics of inaccurately renaming "slow" to "terribly fast" remember, you are the one who started these word games by renaming the slow curriculum the normal one, when the normal one is the one they had before these changes, the one which reflected the norm (hence the name) in the US if you think that one is actually "advanced", that's upon you to convincingly make the case for, otherwise we default back to the above, but a purely semantic argument is pretty weak on its own anyways also, the last paragraph of your post presents a false dichotomy: creating a new class doesn't require cancelling advanced algebra (advanced advanced algebra?)
    - cauch 3y ago
      > it's actually not that complicated, just look at what other schools in the country do, or what these did before the change Except that you have not done that. Where are your data? Did you make sure that the group you compared are representative to each other? How do you correct for all the differences in state (unemployment level, diversity in education, political orientation, level of rurality, ...) that all have an effect? ... So, no, it is objectively pretty complicated. You should have taken advanced data science, you would understand better that just comparing 2 states is very very naive to draw conclusions. > remember, you are the one who started these word games by renaming the slow curriculum the normal one, when the normal one is the one they had before these changes, the one which reflected the norm (hence the name) in the US In fact, I was not the one who started: the measure that is in question in the article has been proposed because people have done a study (a real one, comparing the numbers, you know, the thing that you say one should do before saying if it is slow or not but that you did not do) and concluded that there was a problem. The document is 1000 pages long, of course it covers the elements that support their proposal (and you should agree with that as you say it's not complicated). These elements were themselves critized (maybe correctly), so it is funny to see that sometimes the argument is "their base study is badly done" and sometimes it is "I claim that I know what is 'slow' or not, without study, which is fine because if someone says it's not, they have just renamed without study" If a team came up and say "we had a look and concluded that we should replace algebra by data science" and you just say "naaah, I have ZERO study on the subject, but I want to believe that algebra is fine", when someone says "but the point is that algebra is not fine", you cannot say "you haven't done a study": YOU are the one who pretend that the measure is not supported by the data, while you are the one having not looked at the data. (and don't get me wrong, it does not mean that the study done by the people who proposed these measures is perfect or even correct. On the opposite: such study is difficult. If you now claim their study is invalid, it just show that 1) it is true it's complicated, 2) you don't care about the reality as you didn't even consider that they may have been backed by a study, you just assumed there was none because it was more convenient for you) > also, the last paragraph of your post presents a false dichotomy: creating a new class doesn't require cancelling advanced algebra (advanced advanced algebra?) What are you talking about: I'm not saying they had to remove advanced algebra in order to introduce advance data science, I'm saying they decided to replace something that they think is not challenging, engaging and useful enough by something more challenging, more engaging and more useful. And if you think "aaaah, it's awful because before there was algebra and now there is no algebra, so it tortures the poor students who like algebra", why were you not crying about the poor students who like data science that was "canceled" before this proposal.
stale2002 3y ago
> the idea is to cancel more advanced classes Canceling advanced classes quite literally prevents people from taking those classes. If someone doesn't want to do the advanced classes, they don't have to. But don't prevent others from taking those classes if they want to take them. > people who need the normal pace class This is about allowing people to take the advanced classes if they choose, and allowing others to take normal classes. And other people, who want to cancel the advanced classes, are definitely the ones who want to dumb things down. Just allow people to take those advanced classes if they choose, and allow others to take take the normal classes. Problem solved.
- cauch 3y ago
  > Canceling advanced classes quite literally prevents people from taking those classes. 1) You've cut my sentence, which says "cancel more advanced classes IF ...", which means that not all advanced classes are cancelled. 2) You are therefore asking to cancel "beginner's classes". I'm saying "cancel advanced classes as long as there are not enough beginner classes", so you are in practice canceling beginner classes. As any "advanced class" student was first a "beginner class" student, you are canceling the path towards advanced class. > This is about allowing people to take the advanced classes if they choose, and allowing others to take normal classes. Quickly looking closer to this, it was NEVER QUESTION TO CANCEL ADVANCED CLASSES. Simply, instead of algebra, do advanced data science (basically statistics), which is probably 1) more challenging, 2) more engaging, 3) more practical. > Just allow people to take those advanced classes if they choose, and allow others to take take the normal classes. Problem solved. Which problem exactly? It looks like the "no advanced classes" is just people on the internet getting all exited for something that was never considered.
  - stale2002 3y ago
    > You are therefore asking to cancel "beginner's classes" No, people are not asking to do this, lol. The complaint is about the education report that opposed students being allowed to study algebra in advanced classes. Thats what this is about. > Simply, instead of algebra, do advanced data science Ok, so algebra classes are being cancelled. Yeah, thats the problem! > Which problem exactly? The problem of not being able to take algebra classes.
tyg13 3y ago
> The article itself says that students who want to go ahead will get private lessons. This is a ridiculously privileged view that hurts the people it claims to help. As a child, I was heavily invested in math, but I was raised by a mother who had no resources or inclination to pay for private lessons. Luckily my public school district had a few advanced classes available for all, and along with my own initiative, I was able to scrounge up a passable math education. > The way it works is that if you put an advanced class and no normal pace class, Caveat: I didn't grow up in California. I don't know how public schools are run there. That being said, this sounds like nonsense to me. There were always normal pace classes for students who excelled less. These were, in my experience, the most populated classes.
- cauch 3y ago
  > This is a ridiculously privileged view that hurts the people it claims to help. I'm not saying it is what it will happen, I'm saying that some says "this measure is stupid, smart students will get private lessons anyway" and other are saying "this measure is stupid, smart students are forced to not learn". All I was saying was: if you think that the "private lessons" argument is elitist or unrealistic, then you should disagree with the author of the article.

by cauch 3y ago

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago

replace "normal" with "slow" and "advanced" with "normal", and you will discover: 1. Why this initiative is a problem 2. That simply rewording "slow" to "normal" and "normal" to "advanced" seems to constitute the majority of your argument, without which there isn't a good one

cauch 3y ago
And replace "slow" by "terribly fast" and "normal" by "advanced" and, magic, now everyone gets advanced classes. Estimating if the pace is "fast" or "normal" is very very complicated. Only an idiot will pretend they know for sure that "this is too slow" (unless obvious extreme cases which don't correspond to what we have here) Also, apparently, the measure was to replace advanced algebra by advanced data science which was in fact more challenging than the initial recite-by-heart-the-formula algebra lessons.
- ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
  it's actually not that complicated, just look at what other schools in the country do, or what these did before the change then, with that data, you will know to replace "terribly fast" with the original "slow", and can try to make your proposal not depend purely on the semantics of inaccurately renaming "slow" to "terribly fast" remember, you are the one who started these word games by renaming the slow curriculum the normal one, when the normal one is the one they had before these changes, the one which reflected the norm (hence the name) in the US if you think that one is actually "advanced", that's upon you to convincingly make the case for, otherwise we default back to the above, but a purely semantic argument is pretty weak on its own anyways also, the last paragraph of your post presents a false dichotomy: creating a new class doesn't require cancelling advanced algebra (advanced advanced algebra?)
  - cauch 3y ago
    > it's actually not that complicated, just look at what other schools in the country do, or what these did before the change Except that you have not done that. Where are your data? Did you make sure that the group you compared are representative to each other? How do you correct for all the differences in state (unemployment level, diversity in education, political orientation, level of rurality, ...) that all have an effect? ... So, no, it is objectively pretty complicated. You should have taken advanced data science, you would understand better that just comparing 2 states is very very naive to draw conclusions. > remember, you are the one who started these word games by renaming the slow curriculum the normal one, when the normal one is the one they had before these changes, the one which reflected the norm (hence the name) in the US In fact, I was not the one who started: the measure that is in question in the article has been proposed because people have done a study (a real one, comparing the numbers, you know, the thing that you say one should do before saying if it is slow or not but that you did not do) and concluded that there was a problem. The document is 1000 pages long, of course it covers the elements that support their proposal (and you should agree with that as you say it's not complicated). These elements were themselves critized (maybe correctly), so it is funny to see that sometimes the argument is "their base study is badly done" and sometimes it is "I claim that I know what is 'slow' or not, without study, which is fine because if someone says it's not, they have just renamed without study" If a team came up and say "we had a look and concluded that we should replace algebra by data science" and you just say "naaah, I have ZERO study on the subject, but I want to believe that algebra is fine", when someone says "but the point is that algebra is not fine", you cannot say "you haven't done a study": YOU are the one who pretend that the measure is not supported by the data, while you are the one having not looked at the data. (and don't get me wrong, it does not mean that the study done by the people who proposed these measures is perfect or even correct. On the opposite: such study is difficult. If you now claim their study is invalid, it just show that 1) it is true it's complicated, 2) you don't care about the reality as you didn't even consider that they may have been backed by a study, you just assumed there was none because it was more convenient for you) > also, the last paragraph of your post presents a false dichotomy: creating a new class doesn't require cancelling advanced algebra (advanced advanced algebra?) What are you talking about: I'm not saying they had to remove advanced algebra in order to introduce advance data science, I'm saying they decided to replace something that they think is not challenging, engaging and useful enough by something more challenging, more engaging and more useful. And if you think "aaaah, it's awful because before there was algebra and now there is no algebra, so it tortures the poor students who like algebra", why were you not crying about the poor students who like data science that was "canceled" before this proposal.

stale2002 3y ago

> the idea is to cancel more advanced classes Canceling advanced classes quite literally prevents people from taking those classes. If someone doesn't want to do the advanced classes, they don't have to. But don't prevent others from taking those classes if they want to take them. > people who need the normal pace class This is about allowing people to take the advanced classes if they choose, and allowing others to take normal classes. And other people, who want to cancel the advanced classes, are definitely the ones who want to dumb things down. Just allow people to take those advanced classes if they choose, and allow others to take take the normal classes. Problem solved.

cauch 3y ago
> Canceling advanced classes quite literally prevents people from taking those classes. 1) You've cut my sentence, which says "cancel more advanced classes IF ...", which means that not all advanced classes are cancelled. 2) You are therefore asking to cancel "beginner's classes". I'm saying "cancel advanced classes as long as there are not enough beginner classes", so you are in practice canceling beginner classes. As any "advanced class" student was first a "beginner class" student, you are canceling the path towards advanced class. > This is about allowing people to take the advanced classes if they choose, and allowing others to take normal classes. Quickly looking closer to this, it was NEVER QUESTION TO CANCEL ADVANCED CLASSES. Simply, instead of algebra, do advanced data science (basically statistics), which is probably 1) more challenging, 2) more engaging, 3) more practical. > Just allow people to take those advanced classes if they choose, and allow others to take take the normal classes. Problem solved. Which problem exactly? It looks like the "no advanced classes" is just people on the internet getting all exited for something that was never considered.
- stale2002 3y ago
  > You are therefore asking to cancel "beginner's classes" No, people are not asking to do this, lol. The complaint is about the education report that opposed students being allowed to study algebra in advanced classes. Thats what this is about. > Simply, instead of algebra, do advanced data science Ok, so algebra classes are being cancelled. Yeah, thats the problem! > Which problem exactly? The problem of not being able to take algebra classes.

tyg13 3y ago

> The article itself says that students who want to go ahead will get private lessons. This is a ridiculously privileged view that hurts the people it claims to help. As a child, I was heavily invested in math, but I was raised by a mother who had no resources or inclination to pay for private lessons. Luckily my public school district had a few advanced classes available for all, and along with my own initiative, I was able to scrounge up a passable math education. > The way it works is that if you put an advanced class and no normal pace class, Caveat: I didn't grow up in California. I don't know how public schools are run there. That being said, this sounds like nonsense to me. There were always normal pace classes for students who excelled less. These were, in my experience, the most populated classes.

cauch 3y ago
> This is a ridiculously privileged view that hurts the people it claims to help. I'm not saying it is what it will happen, I'm saying that some says "this measure is stupid, smart students will get private lessons anyway" and other are saying "this measure is stupid, smart students are forced to not learn". All I was saying was: if you think that the "private lessons" argument is elitist or unrealistic, then you should disagree with the author of the article.