3 ms·

You really can't be more efficient than that model of using the existing resources. It’s only “efficient” because it doesn’t have to scale. Add non-wealthy kid

You really can't be more efficient than that model of using the existing resources. It’s only “efficient” because it doesn’t have to scale. Add non-wealthy kids into the mix. Add children with learning disabilities. All of a sudden, homeschooling fails a massive chunk of the population. Public education has served the US well for most of the post-WWII era. Let’s fix it, not abandon it.

giantg2 3y ago
"Let’s fix it, not abandon it." I'm not saying to abandon it. I'm saying if the question is efficiency, that particular homeschooling model is very efficient, even if other arrangements need to be made for certain segments of the population (I would revise your "non-wealthy" statement to be "poor" as much of the middle class could make that system work). Of course there have been multiple attempts to fix the system already. So far we haven't seemed to find the solution. Back to your "non-wealthy" comment, even the current system tends to fail the poor, since parent involvement is one of the largest factors for academic success (this is largely tied to two parent households, but income plays a role as well).
- alistairSH 3y ago
  I'm not saying to abandon it But many people, both in this forum and in meat-space are doing just that. Perhaps not directly, but the end result of "school choice" (of which there are several flavors) will be the end of generally good-enough public education for most of the population. Toss in the latest conservative boogeymen (CRT, book bans, etc) and the outlook looks pretty gloomy. parent involvement is one of the largest factors for academic success I often wonder if our schools are fine, but everything else is broken. Stagnant wages, longer working hours, fewer 2 parent households, other things.
  - giantg2 3y ago
    Is school choice driving the end result, or is it a symptom of that end result? My big question is if the money per student is the same, but the outcomes are better, then what can we emulate from the charter or private schools? Or is it selection bias since the parents are involved enough to get them in?
    - alistairSH 3y ago
      A bit of both, probably. But the school choice movement is largely being driven by wealthy people who could afford private schools or homeschooling without any need to destroy public education. Selection bias a real problem with charters and privates. We've already selected for "parents who give a shit". And frequently for "no IEP or other learning disability". So, kids who are, at worst, average intellect with parents who care enough to fill out some paperwork and drive them to school - those kids are going to succeed almost anywhere. And I totally understand the desire to get your own children a high quality education. That's a large part of why I moved back to Fairfax County. But, I also feel strongly that strong public schools are a requirement for a healthy society.
      - gnicholas 3y ago
        > Selection bias a real problem with charters and privates. Charter schools are frequently oversubscribed, and admit students via lottery. This makes it pretty easy to run randomized tests that aren't affected by selection bias.
        alistairSH 3y ago
        There’s still bias. Parent has to care. Transport is often an issue. And the school usually gets to reject children with any sort of disability or other negative trait.
        giantg2 3y ago
        Most of the lotteries aren't automatic entry, etc. You still need a parent to fill out the forms and stuff. Some even rely on GPA, diversity metrics, or entrance essays. There's definitely selection bias, you just encounter it prior to the lottery drawing (or other selection process).
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        > Charter schools are frequently oversubscribed, and admit students via lottery. This makes it pretty easy to run randomized tests that aren't affected by selection bias. No, it does not, because the following sources of selection bias exist. (1) Charters select for actively involved parents, because they are not the default-assigned by-residence public schools, and an active choice is necessary to get into the pool, (2) Charters, because they are not scaled to only take the actively-choosing parents from the catchment area of a typical district school, select for parents with greater means who are able to make a longer travel to the school for drop off, pickup, and other necessary interactions. (3) There are often biases in the lottery system; even something as simple as giving favorable consideration for having a sibling already in the school reinforces the impact of other biases.

giantg2 3y ago

"Let’s fix it, not abandon it." I'm not saying to abandon it. I'm saying if the question is efficiency, that particular homeschooling model is very efficient, even if other arrangements need to be made for certain segments of the population (I would revise your "non-wealthy" statement to be "poor" as much of the middle class could make that system work). Of course there have been multiple attempts to fix the system already. So far we haven't seemed to find the solution. Back to your "non-wealthy" comment, even the current system tends to fail the poor, since parent involvement is one of the largest factors for academic success (this is largely tied to two parent households, but income plays a role as well).

alistairSH 3y ago
I'm not saying to abandon it But many people, both in this forum and in meat-space are doing just that. Perhaps not directly, but the end result of "school choice" (of which there are several flavors) will be the end of generally good-enough public education for most of the population. Toss in the latest conservative boogeymen (CRT, book bans, etc) and the outlook looks pretty gloomy. parent involvement is one of the largest factors for academic success I often wonder if our schools are fine, but everything else is broken. Stagnant wages, longer working hours, fewer 2 parent households, other things.
- giantg2 3y ago
  Is school choice driving the end result, or is it a symptom of that end result? My big question is if the money per student is the same, but the outcomes are better, then what can we emulate from the charter or private schools? Or is it selection bias since the parents are involved enough to get them in?
  - alistairSH 3y ago
    A bit of both, probably. But the school choice movement is largely being driven by wealthy people who could afford private schools or homeschooling without any need to destroy public education. Selection bias a real problem with charters and privates. We've already selected for "parents who give a shit". And frequently for "no IEP or other learning disability". So, kids who are, at worst, average intellect with parents who care enough to fill out some paperwork and drive them to school - those kids are going to succeed almost anywhere. And I totally understand the desire to get your own children a high quality education. That's a large part of why I moved back to Fairfax County. But, I also feel strongly that strong public schools are a requirement for a healthy society.
    - gnicholas 3y ago
      > Selection bias a real problem with charters and privates. Charter schools are frequently oversubscribed, and admit students via lottery. This makes it pretty easy to run randomized tests that aren't affected by selection bias.
      - alistairSH 3y ago
        There’s still bias. Parent has to care. Transport is often an issue. And the school usually gets to reject children with any sort of disability or other negative trait.
      - giantg2 3y ago
        Most of the lotteries aren't automatic entry, etc. You still need a parent to fill out the forms and stuff. Some even rely on GPA, diversity metrics, or entrance essays. There's definitely selection bias, you just encounter it prior to the lottery drawing (or other selection process).
      - dragonwriter 3y ago
        > Charter schools are frequently oversubscribed, and admit students via lottery. This makes it pretty easy to run randomized tests that aren't affected by selection bias. No, it does not, because the following sources of selection bias exist. (1) Charters select for actively involved parents, because they are not the default-assigned by-residence public schools, and an active choice is necessary to get into the pool, (2) Charters, because they are not scaled to only take the actively-choosing parents from the catchment area of a typical district school, select for parents with greater means who are able to make a longer travel to the school for drop off, pickup, and other necessary interactions. (3) There are often biases in the lottery system; even something as simple as giving favorable consideration for having a sibling already in the school reinforces the impact of other biases.