6 ms·

Meant to reply to this, but didn't work, so copying and pasting: In the debate about khan academy, there's an important fact that is continuously missed, it's

by jmcqk6 14y ago

Meant to reply to this, but didn't work, so copying and pasting: In the debate about khan academy, there's an important fact that is continuously missed, it's not about effective instruction vs. ineffective instruction; it's about less effective vs. more effective. The khan academy way may be better than trying to learn from the lower X% of math teachers out there. It's highly unlikely that it's going to be better than the top Y%. Things like Khan academy will not "fix" education. Anything that standardizes and automates education will only do one thing: insure mediocrity. It will protect against the bad while eliminating the possibility of excellence.

yummyfajitas 14y ago
The problem with education in the US is cost - quality is almost as good as it possibly could be (holding the inputs fixed). In 2010, the US government spent $900B on education. If Khan can reduce the number of teachers needed by even a few percent, that's a HUGE savings.
- jmcqk6 14y ago
  in 2010, the US Department of Education budget was $47 billion [1]. That's between 1-2% of the total budget. The problem with education in the US is not cost, and even if it was, the solution is not 'get rid of a few percent of teachers." Where did you get that $900 billion number? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budg...
  - mostlyListening 14y ago
    This doesn't include state and city levels, where most of the education spending happens.
- tokenadult 14y ago
  In 2010, the US government spent $900B on education. If Khan can reduce the number of teachers needed by even a few percent, that's a HUGE savings. Fully agreed with the conclusion. Staff compensation (including SUBSTANTIAL nonsalary compensation) is a big part of the budget of any school. Making the work of teachers more efficient (in the economics sense of "efficient") helps free up money for other worthy purposes. Another comment to your comment doubted the figure, I think because you wrote "US government spent" when you perhaps meant "all levels of government in the United States spent" so much money on education. Most spending on schools in the United States is from state taxes (as in my state) or from local taxes (as in some other states), as I'm sure you already know but which may be news to onlookers from other countries. "The U.S. has more than 14,000 public school districts and spends more than $500 billion on public elementary and secondary education each year (combined spending of federal, state, and local governments)." http://www.census.gov/did/www/schooldistricts/ http://www.census.gov/did/www/schooldistricts/ "United States (Billions of dollars. Detail may not add to total due to rounding) Total Federal State Local 593.7 74.0 258.2 261.4" http://www2.census.gov/govs/school/10f33pub.pdf http://www2.census.gov/govs/school/10f33pub.pdf

by jmcqk6 14y ago

yummyfajitas 14y ago

The problem with education in the US is cost - quality is almost as good as it possibly could be (holding the inputs fixed). In 2010, the US government spent $900B on education. If Khan can reduce the number of teachers needed by even a few percent, that's a HUGE savings.

jmcqk6 14y ago
in 2010, the US Department of Education budget was $47 billion [1]. That's between 1-2% of the total budget. The problem with education in the US is not cost, and even if it was, the solution is not 'get rid of a few percent of teachers." Where did you get that $900 billion number? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budg...
- mostlyListening 14y ago
  This doesn't include state and city levels, where most of the education spending happens.
tokenadult 14y ago
In 2010, the US government spent $900B on education. If Khan can reduce the number of teachers needed by even a few percent, that's a HUGE savings. Fully agreed with the conclusion. Staff compensation (including SUBSTANTIAL nonsalary compensation) is a big part of the budget of any school. Making the work of teachers more efficient (in the economics sense of "efficient") helps free up money for other worthy purposes. Another comment to your comment doubted the figure, I think because you wrote "US government spent" when you perhaps meant "all levels of government in the United States spent" so much money on education. Most spending on schools in the United States is from state taxes (as in my state) or from local taxes (as in some other states), as I'm sure you already know but which may be news to onlookers from other countries. "The U.S. has more than 14,000 public school districts and spends more than $500 billion on public elementary and secondary education each year (combined spending of federal, state, and local governments)." http://www.census.gov/did/www/schooldistricts/ http://www.census.gov/did/www/schooldistricts/ "United States (Billions of dollars. Detail may not add to total due to rounding) Total Federal State Local 593.7 74.0 258.2 261.4" http://www2.census.gov/govs/school/10f33pub.pdf http://www2.census.gov/govs/school/10f33pub.pdf