5 ms·

The start of the funnel is also the most racist and class discriminatory. Almost every school in the USA takes pupils from districts where the property owners p

The start of the funnel is also the most racist and class discriminatory. Almost every school in the USA takes pupils from districts where the property owners pay the taxes for the schools. Rich areas get much more resources and support. Poor students get put into less funded schools and suffer from not having mentorship or peers to look up to. I live on Long Island and we have a majority white population. Despite that we have 2 school districts that are almost 100% black. That is where the problem is. You are not giving these students a chance. When I am going through resumes I am not getting a diverse pool of qualified candidates because these poor people have been historically oppressed into a caste of poor schooling and neighborhoods.

polski-g 2y ago
Most of what you said is just wrong. "Poor students" have the most support in the country: https://www.mackinac.org/blog/2024/are-poor-urban-districts-really-underfunded https://www.mackinac.org/blog/2024/are-poor-urban-districts-... Baltimore public schools get $30k per student. Carmel, IN public schools spend $10k per student. You should look into heritability. There is no longitudinal impact on adult outcomes as a result of parenting/schooling practices.
- jyounker 2y ago
  I'm assuming you are not familiar with this study: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/lkatz/files/chk_aer_mto_0416.pdf https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/lkatz/files/chk_aer_mto_04... It shows that if a poor family moves from a poorer school district to a richer school district, and they have children under 13, then those children are significantly more successful than children whose families remain in the poorer school district. However, after 13 there seems to be a slight negative effect. There are other studies showing similar effedcts. Summary: It's not genetics.
  - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
    A lot of that has to do with who your kid goes to school with. If we take equally funded schools (in WA that’s easy since education is primarily funded by the state), the results are still different: districts with richer families do better probably because they get more support at home, but even lower income students do better since they feel like they need to keep up with their classmates.
    - tuan 2y ago
      Interesting. I've the same observation in Vietnam where I grew up. Maybe this is more universal than I thought.
  - whimsicalism 2y ago
    that is poor evidence for a school funding effect, but yes - environment is important. i will say that this is the first time i've ever seen MTO cited as a positive example of the impact, my understanding (not very informed) was that it is considered a negative result. i wish these analyses were pre-registered, but i recognize that is difficult to do for very long timespan studies like this
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - bcrosby95 2y ago
    > Summary: It's not genetics. No one said its genetics. They're saying its not only funding.
    - eapressoandcats 2y ago
      They said heritability. They meant genetics.
      - Biganon 2y ago
        Several people have told you that's not the case; don't assume other people's intents. Heritability is absolutely not congruent to genetics.
        eapressoandcats 2y ago
        The genetic meaning is the most common usage of the word, which is evidenced by a Google search. It’s also the most obvious meaning when referring to racial minorities. If they didn’t mean genetic, then they really screwed up in their use of language.
  - thfuran 2y ago
    Heritable doesn't mean genetic. Language and money are heritable.
    - eapressoandcats 2y ago
      Technically yes, but the poster also listed “parenting” practices not having an effect so I think we all know what he means.
bcrosby95 2y ago
In California funding is based upon attendance. The main place wealthy neighborhoods get extra money here is through PTAs rather than property taxes. This is in addition to what the other commenter said. I'm not very well informed about how other states fund their schools, but even if this blanket generalization is true in some places, there's enough evidence out there that funding isn't the only or maybe even the main problem.
- dmix 2y ago
  US ranks very high in the world in gov spending on education at 6% of GDP. Higher than Canada, France, Germany, UK, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_spending_on_education_as_percentage_of_GDP?wprov=sfti1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_spending_... The EU as a whole for example is around 4.7% https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Government_expenditure_on_education https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
seanmcdirmid 2y ago
Washington state pools property tax money and then redistributed it equitably across the state to pay for education on a per pupil basis. This mainly means poorer eastern Washington districts are subsidized by richer western Washington districts, and districts that lose students to private schools take a direct hit in their funding.
- blindriver 2y ago
  This is the same as California. EDIT: I was wrong, and explain it as a comment below.
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    No, it isn't. (1) California property tax stays local, and is not pooled, (2) However, due to Prop 13, property taxes are very small in California, and just over half of total funding for school districts comes from the state, (3) Distribution of funding (either just the state funds or total funding) is not equal per-student across districts, with per student expenditures ranging widely across districts.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - blindriver 2y ago
      My mistake, I know that most of school funding came from the state but I thought it was because it was from property taxes being collected. In fact it's from state income tax and sales tax.
      - inferiorhuman 2y ago
        Property tax in California is a huge mess. In terms of K-12 funding there's also Prop 98 to contend with. https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2012/tax/property-tax-primer-112912.aspx https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2012/tax/property-tax-primer-1129...
- 2y ago
wyager 2y ago
America spends more money per student, in almost any school district, than any European country. The problem is not "resources and support". We've tried "resources and support" for 50 years, so the (a priori entirely fantastical) notion that just throwing more money at the problem would make it go away has been thoroughly disproven.
- Loughla 2y ago
  Want to hear my hot take? It's not funding (though that is A problem). It's not attracting qualified, talented teachers (though that is A problem). The main problem is parents and society. Individualism means parents know better than the schools, and teach their kids that attitude as well. This cuts across class, ethnicity, and any other demographic marker you can think of. Am I right? I don't know, but I think I am.
  - wyager 2y ago
    If you condition on race, American students do better (e.g. on PISA) than almost any other country with a few exceptions like Hong Kong. American test cores are (slightly better than) what you expect given our demographics, which are by far the strongest predictor of population educational attainment.
    - croissants 2y ago
      Do you have a link to this analysis? I'm curious what "condition on race" actually means.
- eapressoandcats 2y ago
  I don’t think that’s true. It looks like the US has pretty similar spending to European countries at least as a percentage of GDP: https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2017/09/education-at-a-glance-2017_g1g7f6b6/eag-2017-en.pdf https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/report...
  - 2y ago
whimsicalism 2y ago
as someone who grew up attending a majority black school district, this is not really true.... underfunded majority minority districts typically more than have the gap made up by federal funds and the causal evidence on returns on education funding suggests extremely limited impact if any
- Loughla 2y ago
  That's just false. Nearly every state relies disproportionately on local property taxes to fund schools. Federal dollars tend to be supplemental and come in the form of food subsidies or Title grants. They absolutely do not "more than have the gap made up" unless you're in a state with an equity funding pool (like Washington).
  - bberenberg 2y ago
    I have heard that Baltimore school performance is the counterpoint here, but I have never dug into it myself. Do you happen to know if there is a material point there or obfuscation of some form?
  - ryan93 2y ago
    Places like Baltimore often have substantially more funding than many suburban districts
  - klooney 2y ago
    Title 1 schools can get a ton of money. Smartboards in every class, school supplies fully stocked, not the usual "grim downward spiral" feel of a public school.
ok123456 2y ago
Yes, class is the root divide. However, rejecting that fact is dogma for the people running these DEI programs. This is intentional because then DEI is intended to be a self-help religion for the corporate class designed to deflect the externalities that they produce, and not about actual material conditions. And that's at its best. At its worst, DEI is insulting and infantilizing to "marginalized communities."
DragonStrength 2y ago
Much of our economic disparity in this country remains regional. We have states full of poor White and Black people. Of course, I have never worked anywhere that "diverse" wasn't only about skin color and gender, which means kids in West Virginia and Alabama are treated like they grew up in Malibu. It's gotten worse where I live in recent years since those historically disadvantaged schools are also 50% English as a second language now with no new resources. Do any tech companies have programs to hire out of historically disadvantaged regions of the US?

polski-g 2y ago

Most of what you said is just wrong. "Poor students" have the most support in the country: https://www.mackinac.org/blog/2024/are-poor-urban-districts-really-underfunded https://www.mackinac.org/blog/2024/are-poor-urban-districts-... Baltimore public schools get $30k per student. Carmel, IN public schools spend $10k per student. You should look into heritability. There is no longitudinal impact on adult outcomes as a result of parenting/schooling practices.

jyounker 2y ago
I'm assuming you are not familiar with this study: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/lkatz/files/chk_aer_mto_0416.pdf https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/lkatz/files/chk_aer_mto_04... It shows that if a poor family moves from a poorer school district to a richer school district, and they have children under 13, then those children are significantly more successful than children whose families remain in the poorer school district. However, after 13 there seems to be a slight negative effect. There are other studies showing similar effedcts. Summary: It's not genetics.
- seanmcdirmid 2y ago
  A lot of that has to do with who your kid goes to school with. If we take equally funded schools (in WA that’s easy since education is primarily funded by the state), the results are still different: districts with richer families do better probably because they get more support at home, but even lower income students do better since they feel like they need to keep up with their classmates.
  - tuan 2y ago
    Interesting. I've the same observation in Vietnam where I grew up. Maybe this is more universal than I thought.
- whimsicalism 2y ago
  that is poor evidence for a school funding effect, but yes - environment is important. i will say that this is the first time i've ever seen MTO cited as a positive example of the impact, my understanding (not very informed) was that it is considered a negative result. i wish these analyses were pre-registered, but i recognize that is difficult to do for very long timespan studies like this
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- bcrosby95 2y ago
  > Summary: It's not genetics. No one said its genetics. They're saying its not only funding.
  - eapressoandcats 2y ago
    They said heritability. They meant genetics.
    - Biganon 2y ago
      Several people have told you that's not the case; don't assume other people's intents. Heritability is absolutely not congruent to genetics.
      - eapressoandcats 2y ago
        The genetic meaning is the most common usage of the word, which is evidenced by a Google search. It’s also the most obvious meaning when referring to racial minorities. If they didn’t mean genetic, then they really screwed up in their use of language.
- thfuran 2y ago
  Heritable doesn't mean genetic. Language and money are heritable.
  - eapressoandcats 2y ago
    Technically yes, but the poster also listed “parenting” practices not having an effect so I think we all know what he means.

bcrosby95 2y ago

In California funding is based upon attendance. The main place wealthy neighborhoods get extra money here is through PTAs rather than property taxes. This is in addition to what the other commenter said. I'm not very well informed about how other states fund their schools, but even if this blanket generalization is true in some places, there's enough evidence out there that funding isn't the only or maybe even the main problem.

dmix 2y ago
US ranks very high in the world in gov spending on education at 6% of GDP. Higher than Canada, France, Germany, UK, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_spending_on_education_as_percentage_of_GDP?wprov=sfti1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_spending_... The EU as a whole for example is around 4.7% https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Government_expenditure_on_education https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...

seanmcdirmid 2y ago

Washington state pools property tax money and then redistributed it equitably across the state to pay for education on a per pupil basis. This mainly means poorer eastern Washington districts are subsidized by richer western Washington districts, and districts that lose students to private schools take a direct hit in their funding.

blindriver 2y ago
This is the same as California. EDIT: I was wrong, and explain it as a comment below.
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  No, it isn't. (1) California property tax stays local, and is not pooled, (2) However, due to Prop 13, property taxes are very small in California, and just over half of total funding for school districts comes from the state, (3) Distribution of funding (either just the state funds or total funding) is not equal per-student across districts, with per student expenditures ranging widely across districts.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - blindriver 2y ago
    My mistake, I know that most of school funding came from the state but I thought it was because it was from property taxes being collected. In fact it's from state income tax and sales tax.
    - inferiorhuman 2y ago
      Property tax in California is a huge mess. In terms of K-12 funding there's also Prop 98 to contend with. https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2012/tax/property-tax-primer-112912.aspx https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2012/tax/property-tax-primer-1129...
2y ago

wyager 2y ago

America spends more money per student, in almost any school district, than any European country. The problem is not "resources and support". We've tried "resources and support" for 50 years, so the (a priori entirely fantastical) notion that just throwing more money at the problem would make it go away has been thoroughly disproven.

Loughla 2y ago
Want to hear my hot take? It's not funding (though that is A problem). It's not attracting qualified, talented teachers (though that is A problem). The main problem is parents and society. Individualism means parents know better than the schools, and teach their kids that attitude as well. This cuts across class, ethnicity, and any other demographic marker you can think of. Am I right? I don't know, but I think I am.
- wyager 2y ago
  If you condition on race, American students do better (e.g. on PISA) than almost any other country with a few exceptions like Hong Kong. American test cores are (slightly better than) what you expect given our demographics, which are by far the strongest predictor of population educational attainment.
  - croissants 2y ago
    Do you have a link to this analysis? I'm curious what "condition on race" actually means.
eapressoandcats 2y ago
I don’t think that’s true. It looks like the US has pretty similar spending to European countries at least as a percentage of GDP: https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2017/09/education-at-a-glance-2017_g1g7f6b6/eag-2017-en.pdf https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/report...
- 2y ago

whimsicalism 2y ago

as someone who grew up attending a majority black school district, this is not really true.... underfunded majority minority districts typically more than have the gap made up by federal funds and the causal evidence on returns on education funding suggests extremely limited impact if any

Loughla 2y ago
That's just false. Nearly every state relies disproportionately on local property taxes to fund schools. Federal dollars tend to be supplemental and come in the form of food subsidies or Title grants. They absolutely do not "more than have the gap made up" unless you're in a state with an equity funding pool (like Washington).
- bberenberg 2y ago
  I have heard that Baltimore school performance is the counterpoint here, but I have never dug into it myself. Do you happen to know if there is a material point there or obfuscation of some form?
- ryan93 2y ago
  Places like Baltimore often have substantially more funding than many suburban districts
- klooney 2y ago
  Title 1 schools can get a ton of money. Smartboards in every class, school supplies fully stocked, not the usual "grim downward spiral" feel of a public school.

ok123456 2y ago

Yes, class is the root divide. However, rejecting that fact is dogma for the people running these DEI programs. This is intentional because then DEI is intended to be a self-help religion for the corporate class designed to deflect the externalities that they produce, and not about actual material conditions. And that's at its best. At its worst, DEI is insulting and infantilizing to "marginalized communities."

DragonStrength 2y ago

Much of our economic disparity in this country remains regional. We have states full of poor White and Black people. Of course, I have never worked anywhere that "diverse" wasn't only about skin color and gender, which means kids in West Virginia and Alabama are treated like they grew up in Malibu. It's gotten worse where I live in recent years since those historically disadvantaged schools are also 50% English as a second language now with no new resources. Do any tech companies have programs to hire out of historically disadvantaged regions of the US?