3 ms·

America is not hardcore enough to do meaningful research? huh?

drivebyhooting 2y ago
Did you go to American high school? Most kids barely pass algebra 2. Even the “smart kids” can’t really compete in college. With standard American route there’s a sub 1% chance you can make it as a researcher in a hard science.
- asdf6969 2y ago
  That’s better than a system where future janitors are still expected to grind math problems instead of having a childhood
- firstplacelast 2y ago
  What? I went to an American public high school, there were/are plenty of kids who are very smart. 8% of my graduating class were in the uber-advanced honors math track. This is in a flyover state outside a small city. I also used to work in science, the reason there's so few chances to make it as a top researcher is that there is little opportunity. Look at jobs for a lot of life science majors after a BS, you will find a ton that is washing glassware in a lab, a complete waste of anyone with half a brain. There's reasons why there is little opportunity that's not worth exploring here, but suffice to say there are a ton of very smart kids in America that choose other paths. Outside tech and specialized physicians, nerd careers are not lucrative on average. With little opportunity, smart people end up doing banal work. Why do banal work and have a mediocre salary predicated on jumping through higher than average academic hoops? Doesn't add up for most people.
  - drivebyhooting 2y ago
    What’s uber advanced here? I was in the calculus BC class and double majored in math and physics in college. My performance in the Putnam (I got a 2…) and in grad school are all the proof I need that I couldn’t compete. BTW I was the best student in my flyover state public school.
  - im3w1l 2y ago
    I'd say the reason there is so little opportunity in science is that science as an instiution is terrible at capturing the value it creates. Thus it instead relies on charity of which there isn't enough.
- janalsncm 2y ago
  The original question was about what value educated people can bring to the economy. You are asking about most people. And I reject your characterization of the capabilities of American students. There are plenty of incredibly bright ones.
- acdha 2y ago
  Yes, and what you’re describing is inaccurate. This is a meme promulgated by the for-profit education industry but it’s based on people not comparing like cohorts. The American education system is huge and includes everyone, so if you compare averages it appears to produce worse results than systems which track poor/lower-performing kids out into vocational education, exclude kids with special needs or limited English proficiency, etc. but if you compare matching cohorts based on socio-economic status, etc. the results aren’t bad. The trick is realizing that research over the last century has shown that the most accurate predictor for educational outcomes is the socio-economic stability of their parents at birth, and the United States has both a lot of poor people and done less to help them than many of our peer countries. Regarding science, there are plenty of American scientists who graduated from public high schools. The problem there is that even highly-qualified students probably aren’t going to have a research career because the funding isn’t there to support it - even if you look at people who completed graduate school that was like 1/10 even before the Republicans’ savage cuts.

Did you go to American high school? Most kids barely pass algebra 2. Even the “smart kids” can’t really compete in college. With standard American route there’s a sub 1% chance you can make it as a researcher in a hard science.

asdf6969 2y ago
That’s better than a system where future janitors are still expected to grind math problems instead of having a childhood
firstplacelast 2y ago
What? I went to an American public high school, there were/are plenty of kids who are very smart. 8% of my graduating class were in the uber-advanced honors math track. This is in a flyover state outside a small city. I also used to work in science, the reason there's so few chances to make it as a top researcher is that there is little opportunity. Look at jobs for a lot of life science majors after a BS, you will find a ton that is washing glassware in a lab, a complete waste of anyone with half a brain. There's reasons why there is little opportunity that's not worth exploring here, but suffice to say there are a ton of very smart kids in America that choose other paths. Outside tech and specialized physicians, nerd careers are not lucrative on average. With little opportunity, smart people end up doing banal work. Why do banal work and have a mediocre salary predicated on jumping through higher than average academic hoops? Doesn't add up for most people.
- drivebyhooting 2y ago
  What’s uber advanced here? I was in the calculus BC class and double majored in math and physics in college. My performance in the Putnam (I got a 2…) and in grad school are all the proof I need that I couldn’t compete. BTW I was the best student in my flyover state public school.
- im3w1l 2y ago
  I'd say the reason there is so little opportunity in science is that science as an instiution is terrible at capturing the value it creates. Thus it instead relies on charity of which there isn't enough.
janalsncm 2y ago
The original question was about what value educated people can bring to the economy. You are asking about most people. And I reject your characterization of the capabilities of American students. There are plenty of incredibly bright ones.
acdha 2y ago
Yes, and what you’re describing is inaccurate. This is a meme promulgated by the for-profit education industry but it’s based on people not comparing like cohorts. The American education system is huge and includes everyone, so if you compare averages it appears to produce worse results than systems which track poor/lower-performing kids out into vocational education, exclude kids with special needs or limited English proficiency, etc. but if you compare matching cohorts based on socio-economic status, etc. the results aren’t bad. The trick is realizing that research over the last century has shown that the most accurate predictor for educational outcomes is the socio-economic stability of their parents at birth, and the United States has both a lot of poor people and done less to help them than many of our peer countries. Regarding science, there are plenty of American scientists who graduated from public high schools. The problem there is that even highly-qualified students probably aren’t going to have a research career because the funding isn’t there to support it - even if you look at people who completed graduate school that was like 1/10 even before the Republicans’ savage cuts.