They like, totally have, you know, other things, like, on their, you know, minds, or something. Duh. They will prolly graduate with honors.
All those orthodontics wasted on so many empty heads.
I’m not much concerned about this. We, the readers of this blog and writers of our own blogs, are a little group of people concerned about the welfare of the country and our society. Most people do not have the same concerns we have.
Some days I find this aggravating.
Some days I find this ignorance/unconcern wonderful.
If we could only stop the crap about “the responsibility” to vote. I would love to have programs like “Rock the Vote” off the air. Just leave the voting to people that care. If less people voted, I might vote.
Whenever I see something like this, I wonder how much it is edited or how many people that know the right answers are left out.
I know few young people that will parrot the (usually) liberal/green party “facts” but when confronted with real world facts will get angry. Asking them how “green” energy works usually gets you worse answers than this. It is even more fun to ask them why they think what they do.
Here’s the good news…the Information Age will fix all of this over time, and none too soon for my taste. If enough people would wake up to the larger issues involved, we could make it tomorrow and pay off the debt to boot.
It’s yet another reason to vote for Ron Paul, for those who still believe in mob rule, but I suppose it’s also another reason to believe that, in the near term anyway, we’re domed.
You didn’t notice, g? The cost of information and its distribution has been steadily decreasing over time, to the point where it’s effectively zero now. This means that the trillions we sink into the “educational system” will be ever more plainly a complete waste of resources. Sure, there’ll always be a value in critical thinking, but that’s the one thing public education doesn’t teach anyway.
Really…you didn’t know that? Go price a textbook and then do some Internet research on the same topic. Compare public school students to homeschoolers. You seem like such a bright person; I’m surprised you never realized this stuff.
Yeah, I know it’s bad news for that teacher in NY gettin’ 100K+ to sit at home while he’s on indefinite suspension, and the many other teachers like him. But hey…exactly how many pedophiles and child abusers do you think our tax dollars should support? Me, I think one is too many, but I know you disagree with that. That’s alright; we probably disagree about jackbooted, black-hooded thugs too.
The problem isn’t the educational system per se. What is revealed in the video isn’t the failure of public education, it is that the median IQ of Americans is 100.
The fact is, there are large numbers of stupid people out there. You run into them everywhere. Finding them in abundance among a sample of high school students shouldn’t take anyone by surprise.
The difference between an intelligent person’s ignorance and the ignorance of those who are merely badly served and badly informed has just been sharply demonstrated once again. Bruce Charlton calls this behavior posing. Just as birds display their feathers, high IQ individuals signal their status.
[...] Heard Or Read Lately) goes out this Super Bowl Sunday to commenter Jim Klein, who says over at Daphne’s place… The cost of information and its distribution has been steadily decreasing over time, to the [...]
[...] Piggy Doesn’t like FOX NewsIn a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World-Super Bowl Pin UpJaded Haven-We’re DoomedLazy Farmer-The Route of a Gila MonsterLeft Coast Rebel-Render Unto Caesar What is [...]
The asylum for half-wits that I currently infest has a Masters degree program in secondary education (I use the word “education” with no regard for its usual meaning). Students with a BA in anything get an MA in Ed and are certified to teach in middle school and high school.
They are taught nothing about how to teach anything—how to communicate so that students get it, remember it, use it fast, integrate it, and generalize it.
Their courses on Social Science Methods (leftist blather with full helpings of multiculturalism, diversity, social justice, and relativism) teach nothing about big ideas in history, the conflict between statism and individualism, the fragility of republican forms of government, or anything important (unless being an idiot is now important).
They know nothing about research and logic.
They don’t even take a sequence of courses to prepare them to teach any particular area. They will teach whatever they took as a minor as undergrads—many years ago.
The difference between this special college money-making track and the usual four year waste-of-time track is zero.
I agree with Jim Klein. Technology could provide alternatives to the usual teacher nontraining. All the conceptual stuff could be on line. Application could be done in schools—if you could find any that are worth spit. Likewise, most everything kids need to learn (and learn from) could be slapped on a Nook.
I believe I speak for many when I say, “Hey, Ms. Daphne. More posts (e.g., Pretty Woman) about your wardrobe—with detailed descriptions of the donning and parading of.” Around here, the most provocative of Lucretia’s apparel is a chenille bathrobe with holes in the wrong places, and combat boots. Not provocative, if you catch my drift.
Technology _does_ provide alternatives. Getting these kids to utilize it – instead of watching Dancing with the Stars and/or texting each other on their phones – is the difficulty. To believe there is no problem simply because an alternative is available is pretty ignorant in itself. I guess logic isn’t taught in our high schools and colleges anymore, either.
The only thing technology will bring to education is faster access to useless information, pop culture mindlessness, and misinformation. Public education will only improve if the ineducable are removed from the classroom, regardless of whether texts are delivered on paper or electronically, or whether instruction is delivered in person or via the browser.
As long as women remain in the workforce (obviating home schooling) some sort of mass education will endure. But even if the current model of compulsory primary and secondary instruction delivered by unionized, “certified” teachers were to disappear, as long as one third of the students in the classroom are either too stupid or too distracted to learn, no amount of technology will help.
“To believe there is no problem simply because an alternative is available is pretty ignorant in itself. I guess logic isn’t taught in our high schools and colleges anymore, either.”
Must not be, since the claim wasn’t that there’s no problem. Hey, g…
“access to useless information”
Uh oh…that looks like a hidden confession to me. I does explain a lot.
At least we agree that the answer is to get those poor kids out of the classroom; that’s something. Now me, I’ll keep trying to persuade that information is useful to a rational being; you can stick with your POV that someone (something?) needs to filter it.
BTW the person hasn’t yet been born, who’s too stupid to learn.
Every kid I have known who found school impossible or made it impossible for others has learned quickly and easily with two hours a day of tutoring. School is punishment before you have committed the crime, and when some become adept at negotiating it, adults call this acquiring social skills. The rest just want to get even.
G. is right, assuming that the social organization of schools remains the same. But computer tech makes it possible for students to be taught in different ways. There are websites where info is presented in a logical sequence (I don’t mean simple facts and math operations; foreign language, history, science). Students can work independently as long and as fast as they wish. This makes it possible for bright students to be apart from the trouble makers.
Of course an anecdote proves nothing, but my kid hated high school, which he considered a combination prison and mental hospital. He transferred to an alternative hs where everything was on line and the teachers acted as tutors. The first day after school he said, “Dad [he calls me "Dad.], I love this place!.” He did nothing but history for a month and aced the final. Before then, he skipped twice a week and had mostly Ds.
How to “close the achievement gap” and educate the chavs is another matter. Of course, the party line of the progressive ed establishment is that the gap is a function of inequitable instruction (true, bright kids are getting shafted), racism (Black males are suspended at about 5 times the rate of Whites and Asians. This is supposed to mean they are being discriminated against. No one mentions that they commit most of the violence, drug sales, etc.) You’d get fired if you asked how kids with a group mean IQ’s of 85 are supposed to learn much, or how come Asians do so well, even if they just got here from the jungles of Laos.
The only feasible solutions I see are: (1) intensive instruction in reading, math, and language starting in pre-k ; and http://www.sradirectinstruction.com/
But computer tech makes it possible for students to be taught in different ways.
Does it? Of course, students who are self-motivated to learn may do so online, but they aren’t the problem, are they?
There is no evidence that “intensive” instruction in preschool helps stupid people learn to read, write, or calculate. Their only hope is to abandon school and adopt a trade. Keeping them in the classroom only ruins it for the students capable of learning.
Even retarded children and adults are capable of learning. The methods of training and teaching need to be modified, but will still enable them to learn. It’s pretty cold to separate out those who might not be equipped to function as doctors or engineers or such. By the same token, I think perhaps there are many who continue on into college who would have benefitted more from learning a trade than becoming teachers or social workers or unemployable Lit or Philosophy majors.
BTW, if you take the view that ” The cost of information and its distribution has been steadily decreasing over time, to the point where it’s effectively zero now” than you certainly are stating there is no problem. Information isn’t free, the Internet and the equipment needed to access it isn’t free, the cost of home schooling on-line isn’t free. Unless you are one of the “99%”, I guess. Maybe its “free” if mommy and daddy and/or the State pays for it for you. So, if you swing that way, yes, I guess you don’t see there being any problem.
If what you _meant_ was that it would be an order of magnitude cheaper and more effective, I can agree with that. The pubic school system has been designed to reduce the ability of our kids to function as informed and reasoning individuals, to think for themselves, to access information the State doesn’t want them to access. Home schooling and _quality_ on-line information will improve the chances of some kids to actually get a decent education. However, as with Wikipedia, you still have to guard against the problem of GIGO.
I agree with virtually everything, Reg. My point to g wasn’t that people shouldn’t learn technical skills; it was a question about who is to decide who should learn what. The answer is inevitably, “Somebody else,” and I think that’s the critical mistake of our time. G will help us with that, if he answers.
Stating that information is effectively (effectively!) free is not to state that there’s no problem. Integrity and honesty are both free too, but how much of those do we see?
…who’s going to determine which kids are “capable of learning” and how are they going to do it?
It used to be that kids repeated grades if they couldn’t pass the exams and then at 16 flunked out of school. I imagine that doesn’t happen anymore…they’re just passed to the next grade regardless of how they perform. If you can’t pass tests associated with the work in your grade it is a good bet that you’re not capable of learning.
And also, which of yesterday’s vocations do you plan on teaching tomorrow’s Steve Jobs?
There are many vocations available to those who can’t pass high school. Food service workers, retail clerks, health care aids, and other such jobs for the those with the lowest IQs. Auto mechanics, the construction trades, and other such more skilled jobs for those capable of doing them, and countless other opportunities for those willing to work, including starting their own businesses like lawn care, snow removal, house cleaning, etc.etc.
Once again it is instructive to recall that intelligence is on a bell curve, and the median is 100.
Once again, the question has been evaded. The answer to “who decides who will learn what” is this: Bill Ayers and a cast of the very same educrats who have brought us the present system. How could it be otherwise? Lord Acton–”A government entirely dependent on public opinion looks for some security in what that opinion should be, strives for the control of the forces that shape it, and is fearful of suffering the people to be educated in sentiments hostile to its institution.” Mission accomplished.
Otherwise demands choice, such as an elimination of the government monopoly through vouchers, as Chile and Belgium have done. Choices are then made by students, parents, and schools independent of district and federal bureaucracy–the market. An evolution in education has the oxygen to evolve in a natural way, signaling us what should be rather than the other way around. But people are unnerved at the prospect of liberty, and comforted with certainty–of any kind.
All societies are a reflection of their intellectuals. Bill Ayers is ours now. He finally got Alinsky’s message, put down the bombs, and planted the mines of secondary education. No one is going to reform this creature. It is doing exactly what is natural to it. The definition of insanity…
An increasing relative level of IQ brings with it a tendency to over-use general intelligence in problem-solving, and to over-ride those instinctive and spontaneous forms of evolved behaviour which could be termed common sense. Since evolved common sense usually produces the right answers in the social domain, this implies that, when it comes to solving social problems, the most intelligent people are more likely than those of average intelligence to have novel but silly ideas, and therefore to believe and behave maladaptively. This random silliness of the most intelligent people may be amplified to generate systematic wrongness when intellectuals are also advertising their own high intelligence in the context of a modern IQ meritocracy. The stratified context of communicating almost exclusively with others of similar intelligence generates opinions and behaviours among the highest IQ people which are not just lacking in common sense but also perverse–
Bruce Charlton, professor of evolutionary psychology
The higher we climb up the ladder of intelligence, the more we talk with intellectuals, the more likely we are to encounter socialist convictions. Initial surprise at finding that intelligent people tend to be socialist diminishes when one realizes that, of course, intelligent people will tend to overvalue intelligence. Departments of psychology and sociology, of education, and the characteristic intellectuals whom they produce, are reproductions of Rousseau and Marx, Freud and Keynes, transmitted through intellects whose desires have outrun their understanding–
Friedrich von Hayek
I’ve just finished reading Coming Apart: The State of White America by Charles Murray (author of The Bell Curve), while I don’t feel that he’s offered anything new for those who’ve been paying attention, he has certainly shined a harsh spotlight on the significant social, educational and income differentials between those possessing higher IQ and those of average or lesser intelligence. I recommend the book.
Yes, everyone is capable of learning, but what the education wonks and politicians refuse to admit is how central IQ is to the learning curve. There is an educational ceiling the average IQ is going to eventually hit, no matter how great the curriculum, instructor or learning and home environments. Low IQ’s are going to hit it even sooner and stall out at the most basic ninth grade concepts.
My twelve year old is in an advanced Algebra II course that’s already edging into Geometry, he’s second chair in symphony and has been recommended for an advanced literature class next year.
This public school is exceptionally good, his teachers competent and our home life is a stable oasis that fosters learning. All fine and good, but none of these factors would make the slightest bit of difference if he wasn’t on the higher end of the intelligence scale.
He simply wouldn’t be capable of mastering these tasks without the appropriate brain power.
G, my son’s (the one mentioned above) third grade teacher suggested we have the boy tested for ADHD. We were absolutely shocked because he is a quiet, well-behaved, straight A student.
When I asked why she explained that he drifts off in class and doesn’t pay attention, especially during group discussions and projects.
I had to explain to her that he has some hearing loss which is aggravated by cacophony, prefers quiet when learning and was probably bored out his mind during group projects dumbed down to appeal the little morons in her class.
I did ask our brilliant pediatrician (who also happens to be my friend) about testing for ADD/ADHD – he said the only way to achieve an accurate diagnosis was through an MRI interpreted by a highly trained doctor. There is only one of those in the entire Austin area.
Of course, being an ethical man who scoffs at the fairy tale prevalence of ADD/ADHD, he told me that he has never treated a child for either condition, always referring parents to the specialist for a proper diagnosis.
It’s a bullshit malady for parents who’ve abdicated parenting and teachers stuck dealing with those poor results.
“…and was probably bored out his mind during group projects dumbed down to appeal the little morons in her class.”
Bingo; happens all the time. “Won’t go with the program” is another meaning of this diagnosis.
Now while your son obviously has the advantage of superlative genetics, and I agree brain power can mean a lot in specific instances, I think it’s misleading to say that some people just can’t learn beyond a certain point. Brains integrate; people learn. That’s what they do. That doesn’t mean anyone can learn advanced calculus, but it does mean that anyone can find their way and that they can keep learning forever…and will, if that’s their choice.
How many “dummies” have we seen excel at one thing or another, even intellectual things? And how far do we have to look to find bright minds that nonetheless can’t think straight? Sometimes we don’t see the craziness we’ve all bought into, out of plain habituation. Just look at us, even discussing how other people’s children ought, or ought not, be taught. And g’s even telling us what job they ought to have, or not. But the crazy thing is, we’re all seeing it his way and just arguing over the details. We’ve all bought into the madness and we’re all going to suffer for it, until reality sets us straight.
Intelligence has nothing to do with it, and “public policy” shouldn’t even exist at all on this matter. “Live; let live.” Do that and the kids will be fine.
I think it’s misleading to say that some people just can’t learn beyond a certain point…
Well, it isn’t misleading, it’s a fact. “Learning forever,” can mean anything. In a limited sense, of course, it’s true…even a profoundly retarded person can be taught one or another simple task throughout his life…to tie his shoes or put away the groceries. However, there is a large cohort of public school students who are simply incapable of learning any material beyond the 8th grade level, and should not be in school after that. Their presence in the classroom diminishes the ability of the students around them to learn to their potential. Teaching to the lowest common denominator helps not those too stupid to grasp the material, and hurts most those who are deprived of a teacher’s attention while she spends futile hours attempting to do the impossible.
And how far do we have to look to find bright minds that nonetheless can’t think straight?
This makes no sense whatsoever. What does a “bright mind” mean if it can’t think straight?
Intelligence has nothing to do with it, and “public policy” shouldn’t even exist at all on this matter. “Live; let live.” Do that and the kids will be fine.
Except that it isn’t fine, and the current system is destroying public education and countless lives along the way. It helps no one, either the dumb or the smart.
It’s false but it’s true; okay, got that. Those 8th graders never should’ve been there in the first place. Especially these days, that’s /why/ they can’t learn anything else!
As far as bright minds that can’t think straight, I was hoping maybe you’d help us with that.
Dear God.
They like, totally have, you know, other things, like, on their, you know, minds, or something. Duh. They will prolly graduate with honors.
All those orthodontics wasted on so many empty heads.
Barry Obama would have fit right in. He still does.
More proof that you cannot vote your way out of this. Because THEY are coming right behind.
An alternate title reads “We’re Domed”.
I’m not much concerned about this. We, the readers of this blog and writers of our own blogs, are a little group of people concerned about the welfare of the country and our society. Most people do not have the same concerns we have.
Some days I find this aggravating.
Some days I find this ignorance/unconcern wonderful.
If we could only stop the crap about “the responsibility” to vote. I would love to have programs like “Rock the Vote” off the air. Just leave the voting to people that care. If less people voted, I might vote.
Whenever I see something like this, I wonder how much it is edited or how many people that know the right answers are left out.
I know few young people that will parrot the (usually) liberal/green party “facts” but when confronted with real world facts will get angry. Asking them how “green” energy works usually gets you worse answers than this. It is even more fun to ask them why they think what they do.
And you wonder why some of homeschooled our kids?
Here’s the good news…the Information Age will fix all of this over time, and none too soon for my taste. If enough people would wake up to the larger issues involved, we could make it tomorrow and pay off the debt to boot.
It’s yet another reason to vote for Ron Paul, for those who still believe in mob rule, but I suppose it’s also another reason to believe that, in the near term anyway, we’re domed.
How will the “information age” fix this over time?
You didn’t notice, g? The cost of information and its distribution has been steadily decreasing over time, to the point where it’s effectively zero now. This means that the trillions we sink into the “educational system” will be ever more plainly a complete waste of resources. Sure, there’ll always be a value in critical thinking, but that’s the one thing public education doesn’t teach anyway.
Really…you didn’t know that? Go price a textbook and then do some Internet research on the same topic. Compare public school students to homeschoolers. You seem like such a bright person; I’m surprised you never realized this stuff.
Yeah, I know it’s bad news for that teacher in NY gettin’ 100K+ to sit at home while he’s on indefinite suspension, and the many other teachers like him. But hey…exactly how many pedophiles and child abusers do you think our tax dollars should support? Me, I think one is too many, but I know you disagree with that. That’s alright; we probably disagree about jackbooted, black-hooded thugs too.
The problem isn’t the educational system per se. What is revealed in the video isn’t the failure of public education, it is that the median IQ of Americans is 100.
The fact is, there are large numbers of stupid people out there. You run into them everywhere. Finding them in abundance among a sample of high school students shouldn’t take anyone by surprise.
The difference between an intelligent person’s ignorance and the ignorance of those who are merely badly served and badly informed has just been sharply demonstrated once again. Bruce Charlton calls this behavior posing. Just as birds display their feathers, high IQ individuals signal their status.
Another one of your classic passive voice verbal mazes, Wilson. I can make neither heads nor tails of it.
[...] Heard Or Read Lately) goes out this Super Bowl Sunday to commenter Jim Klein, who says over at Daphne’s place… The cost of information and its distribution has been steadily decreasing over time, to the [...]
That’s a BSIHORL right there, Jim.
jdgjtr, a local TV station had an article on this that you might find comforting
Thanks, but I first heard this from Greg Swann, a mere 17 years ago. He’s 17 years ahead of other stuff, even now.
splendorquest.com
[...] Piggy Doesn’t like FOX NewsIn a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World-Super Bowl Pin UpJaded Haven-We’re DoomedLazy Farmer-The Route of a Gila MonsterLeft Coast Rebel-Render Unto Caesar What is [...]
This may explain something—what, I don’t know.
The asylum for half-wits that I currently infest has a Masters degree program in secondary education (I use the word “education” with no regard for its usual meaning). Students with a BA in anything get an MA in Ed and are certified to teach in middle school and high school.
They are taught nothing about how to teach anything—how to communicate so that students get it, remember it, use it fast, integrate it, and generalize it.
Their courses on Social Science Methods (leftist blather with full helpings of multiculturalism, diversity, social justice, and relativism) teach nothing about big ideas in history, the conflict between statism and individualism, the fragility of republican forms of government, or anything important (unless being an idiot is now important).
They know nothing about research and logic.
They don’t even take a sequence of courses to prepare them to teach any particular area. They will teach whatever they took as a minor as undergrads—many years ago.
The difference between this special college money-making track and the usual four year waste-of-time track is zero.
I agree with Jim Klein. Technology could provide alternatives to the usual teacher nontraining. All the conceptual stuff could be on line. Application could be done in schools—if you could find any that are worth spit. Likewise, most everything kids need to learn (and learn from) could be slapped on a Nook.
I believe I speak for many when I say, “Hey, Ms. Daphne. More posts (e.g., Pretty Woman) about your wardrobe—with detailed descriptions of the donning and parading of.” Around here, the most provocative of Lucretia’s apparel is a chenille bathrobe with holes in the wrong places, and combat boots. Not provocative, if you catch my drift.
Technology _does_ provide alternatives. Getting these kids to utilize it – instead of watching Dancing with the Stars and/or texting each other on their phones – is the difficulty. To believe there is no problem simply because an alternative is available is pretty ignorant in itself. I guess logic isn’t taught in our high schools and colleges anymore, either.
The only thing technology will bring to education is faster access to useless information, pop culture mindlessness, and misinformation. Public education will only improve if the ineducable are removed from the classroom, regardless of whether texts are delivered on paper or electronically, or whether instruction is delivered in person or via the browser.
As long as women remain in the workforce (obviating home schooling) some sort of mass education will endure. But even if the current model of compulsory primary and secondary instruction delivered by unionized, “certified” teachers were to disappear, as long as one third of the students in the classroom are either too stupid or too distracted to learn, no amount of technology will help.
“To believe there is no problem simply because an alternative is available is pretty ignorant in itself. I guess logic isn’t taught in our high schools and colleges anymore, either.”
Must not be, since the claim wasn’t that there’s no problem. Hey, g…
“access to useless information”
Uh oh…that looks like a hidden confession to me. I does explain a lot.
At least we agree that the answer is to get those poor kids out of the classroom; that’s something. Now me, I’ll keep trying to persuade that information is useful to a rational being; you can stick with your POV that someone (something?) needs to filter it.
BTW the person hasn’t yet been born, who’s too stupid to learn.
Every kid I have known who found school impossible or made it impossible for others has learned quickly and easily with two hours a day of tutoring. School is punishment before you have committed the crime, and when some become adept at negotiating it, adults call this acquiring social skills. The rest just want to get even.
G. is right, assuming that the social organization of schools remains the same. But computer tech makes it possible for students to be taught in different ways. There are websites where info is presented in a logical sequence (I don’t mean simple facts and math operations; foreign language, history, science). Students can work independently as long and as fast as they wish. This makes it possible for bright students to be apart from the trouble makers.
Of course an anecdote proves nothing, but my kid hated high school, which he considered a combination prison and mental hospital. He transferred to an alternative hs where everything was on line and the teachers acted as tutors. The first day after school he said, “Dad [he calls me "Dad.], I love this place!.” He did nothing but history for a month and aced the final. Before then, he skipped twice a week and had mostly Ds.
How to “close the achievement gap” and educate the chavs is another matter. Of course, the party line of the progressive ed establishment is that the gap is a function of inequitable instruction (true, bright kids are getting shafted), racism (Black males are suspended at about 5 times the rate of Whites and Asians. This is supposed to mean they are being discriminated against. No one mentions that they commit most of the violence, drug sales, etc.) You’d get fired if you asked how kids with a group mean IQ’s of 85 are supposed to learn much, or how come Asians do so well, even if they just got here from the jungles of Laos.
The only feasible solutions I see are: (1) intensive instruction in reading, math, and language starting in pre-k ; and
http://www.sradirectinstruction.com/
(2) vocational schools.
But computer tech makes it possible for students to be taught in different ways.
Does it? Of course, students who are self-motivated to learn may do so online, but they aren’t the problem, are they?
There is no evidence that “intensive” instruction in preschool helps stupid people learn to read, write, or calculate. Their only hope is to abandon school and adopt a trade. Keeping them in the classroom only ruins it for the students capable of learning.
Your number 2 solution is the only solution.
You gotta be kidding, g. But alright, I’ll bite…who’s going to determine which kids are “capable of learning” and how are they going to do it?
And also, which of yesterday’s vocations do you plan on teaching tomorrow’s Steve Jobs?
Even retarded children and adults are capable of learning. The methods of training and teaching need to be modified, but will still enable them to learn. It’s pretty cold to separate out those who might not be equipped to function as doctors or engineers or such. By the same token, I think perhaps there are many who continue on into college who would have benefitted more from learning a trade than becoming teachers or social workers or unemployable Lit or Philosophy majors.
BTW, if you take the view that ” The cost of information and its distribution has been steadily decreasing over time, to the point where it’s effectively zero now” than you certainly are stating there is no problem. Information isn’t free, the Internet and the equipment needed to access it isn’t free, the cost of home schooling on-line isn’t free. Unless you are one of the “99%”, I guess. Maybe its “free” if mommy and daddy and/or the State pays for it for you. So, if you swing that way, yes, I guess you don’t see there being any problem.
If what you _meant_ was that it would be an order of magnitude cheaper and more effective, I can agree with that. The pubic school system has been designed to reduce the ability of our kids to function as informed and reasoning individuals, to think for themselves, to access information the State doesn’t want them to access. Home schooling and _quality_ on-line information will improve the chances of some kids to actually get a decent education. However, as with Wikipedia, you still have to guard against the problem of GIGO.
I agree with virtually everything, Reg. My point to g wasn’t that people shouldn’t learn technical skills; it was a question about who is to decide who should learn what. The answer is inevitably, “Somebody else,” and I think that’s the critical mistake of our time. G will help us with that, if he answers.
Stating that information is effectively (effectively!) free is not to state that there’s no problem. Integrity and honesty are both free too, but how much of those do we see?
…who’s going to determine which kids are “capable of learning” and how are they going to do it?
It used to be that kids repeated grades if they couldn’t pass the exams and then at 16 flunked out of school. I imagine that doesn’t happen anymore…they’re just passed to the next grade regardless of how they perform. If you can’t pass tests associated with the work in your grade it is a good bet that you’re not capable of learning.
And also, which of yesterday’s vocations do you plan on teaching tomorrow’s Steve Jobs?
There are many vocations available to those who can’t pass high school. Food service workers, retail clerks, health care aids, and other such jobs for the those with the lowest IQs. Auto mechanics, the construction trades, and other such more skilled jobs for those capable of doing them, and countless other opportunities for those willing to work, including starting their own businesses like lawn care, snow removal, house cleaning, etc.etc.
Once again it is instructive to recall that intelligence is on a bell curve, and the median is 100.
Once again, the question has been evaded. The answer to “who decides who will learn what” is this: Bill Ayers and a cast of the very same educrats who have brought us the present system. How could it be otherwise? Lord Acton–”A government entirely dependent on public opinion looks for some security in what that opinion should be, strives for the control of the forces that shape it, and is fearful of suffering the people to be educated in sentiments hostile to its institution.” Mission accomplished.
Otherwise demands choice, such as an elimination of the government monopoly through vouchers, as Chile and Belgium have done. Choices are then made by students, parents, and schools independent of district and federal bureaucracy–the market. An evolution in education has the oxygen to evolve in a natural way, signaling us what should be rather than the other way around. But people are unnerved at the prospect of liberty, and comforted with certainty–of any kind.
All societies are a reflection of their intellectuals. Bill Ayers is ours now. He finally got Alinsky’s message, put down the bombs, and planted the mines of secondary education. No one is going to reform this creature. It is doing exactly what is natural to it. The definition of insanity…
Intelligence
An increasing relative level of IQ brings with it a tendency to over-use general intelligence in problem-solving, and to over-ride those instinctive and spontaneous forms of evolved behaviour which could be termed common sense. Since evolved common sense usually produces the right answers in the social domain, this implies that, when it comes to solving social problems, the most intelligent people are more likely than those of average intelligence to have novel but silly ideas, and therefore to believe and behave maladaptively. This random silliness of the most intelligent people may be amplified to generate systematic wrongness when intellectuals are also advertising their own high intelligence in the context of a modern IQ meritocracy. The stratified context of communicating almost exclusively with others of similar intelligence generates opinions and behaviours among the highest IQ people which are not just lacking in common sense but also perverse–
Bruce Charlton, professor of evolutionary psychology
The higher we climb up the ladder of intelligence, the more we talk with intellectuals, the more likely we are to encounter socialist convictions. Initial surprise at finding that intelligent people tend to be socialist diminishes when one realizes that, of course, intelligent people will tend to overvalue intelligence. Departments of psychology and sociology, of education, and the characteristic intellectuals whom they produce, are reproductions of Rousseau and Marx, Freud and Keynes, transmitted through intellects whose desires have outrun their understanding–
Friedrich von Hayek
Well, since Hayek himself was a pretty smart fellow indeed, it looks like his law doesn’t actually have universal application, n’est ce pas?
The great Jim Goad weighs in:
Losing Interest in Attention Deficit Disorder
I’ve just finished reading Coming Apart: The State of White America by Charles Murray (author of The Bell Curve), while I don’t feel that he’s offered anything new for those who’ve been paying attention, he has certainly shined a harsh spotlight on the significant social, educational and income differentials between those possessing higher IQ and those of average or lesser intelligence. I recommend the book.
Yes, everyone is capable of learning, but what the education wonks and politicians refuse to admit is how central IQ is to the learning curve. There is an educational ceiling the average IQ is going to eventually hit, no matter how great the curriculum, instructor or learning and home environments. Low IQ’s are going to hit it even sooner and stall out at the most basic ninth grade concepts.
My twelve year old is in an advanced Algebra II course that’s already edging into Geometry, he’s second chair in symphony and has been recommended for an advanced literature class next year.
This public school is exceptionally good, his teachers competent and our home life is a stable oasis that fosters learning. All fine and good, but none of these factors would make the slightest bit of difference if he wasn’t on the higher end of the intelligence scale.
He simply wouldn’t be capable of mastering these tasks without the appropriate brain power.
G, my son’s (the one mentioned above) third grade teacher suggested we have the boy tested for ADHD. We were absolutely shocked because he is a quiet, well-behaved, straight A student.
When I asked why she explained that he drifts off in class and doesn’t pay attention, especially during group discussions and projects.
I had to explain to her that he has some hearing loss which is aggravated by cacophony, prefers quiet when learning and was probably bored out his mind during group projects dumbed down to appeal the little morons in her class.
I did ask our brilliant pediatrician (who also happens to be my friend) about testing for ADD/ADHD – he said the only way to achieve an accurate diagnosis was through an MRI interpreted by a highly trained doctor. There is only one of those in the entire Austin area.
Of course, being an ethical man who scoffs at the fairy tale prevalence of ADD/ADHD, he told me that he has never treated a child for either condition, always referring parents to the specialist for a proper diagnosis.
It’s a bullshit malady for parents who’ve abdicated parenting and teachers stuck dealing with those poor results.
“…and was probably bored out his mind during group projects dumbed down to appeal the little morons in her class.”
Bingo; happens all the time. “Won’t go with the program” is another meaning of this diagnosis.
Now while your son obviously has the advantage of superlative genetics, and I agree brain power can mean a lot in specific instances, I think it’s misleading to say that some people just can’t learn beyond a certain point. Brains integrate; people learn. That’s what they do. That doesn’t mean anyone can learn advanced calculus, but it does mean that anyone can find their way and that they can keep learning forever…and will, if that’s their choice.
How many “dummies” have we seen excel at one thing or another, even intellectual things? And how far do we have to look to find bright minds that nonetheless can’t think straight? Sometimes we don’t see the craziness we’ve all bought into, out of plain habituation. Just look at us, even discussing how other people’s children ought, or ought not, be taught. And g’s even telling us what job they ought to have, or not. But the crazy thing is, we’re all seeing it his way and just arguing over the details. We’ve all bought into the madness and we’re all going to suffer for it, until reality sets us straight.
Intelligence has nothing to do with it, and “public policy” shouldn’t even exist at all on this matter. “Live; let live.” Do that and the kids will be fine.
I think it’s misleading to say that some people just can’t learn beyond a certain point…
Well, it isn’t misleading, it’s a fact. “Learning forever,” can mean anything. In a limited sense, of course, it’s true…even a profoundly retarded person can be taught one or another simple task throughout his life…to tie his shoes or put away the groceries. However, there is a large cohort of public school students who are simply incapable of learning any material beyond the 8th grade level, and should not be in school after that. Their presence in the classroom diminishes the ability of the students around them to learn to their potential. Teaching to the lowest common denominator helps not those too stupid to grasp the material, and hurts most those who are deprived of a teacher’s attention while she spends futile hours attempting to do the impossible.
And how far do we have to look to find bright minds that nonetheless can’t think straight?
This makes no sense whatsoever. What does a “bright mind” mean if it can’t think straight?
Intelligence has nothing to do with it, and “public policy” shouldn’t even exist at all on this matter. “Live; let live.” Do that and the kids will be fine.
Except that it isn’t fine, and the current system is destroying public education and countless lives along the way. It helps no one, either the dumb or the smart.
It’s false but it’s true; okay, got that. Those 8th graders never should’ve been there in the first place. Especially these days, that’s /why/ they can’t learn anything else!
As far as bright minds that can’t think straight, I was hoping maybe you’d help us with that.