My underlying assumption here is that public schools fail to educate kids primarily because they never feel the consequences of failure. If a private school fails, its attendance dwindles, funding drops, heads roll, and it closes if the problem isn't fixed. Not so for public schools -- the money just keeps on rolling in.
so your explanation for why schools in wealthy suburbs always do well and schools in poor urban areas do poorly is simply because somehow, suburbanites are holding their schools accountable while the urbanites are somehow not?
Really, the explanation is that suburban schools generally have a greater proportion of students from the socioeconomic and demographic groups that do better no matter where they are; typical metrics of school quality don't measure the effect of the school, but what the school is working with.
Yes, exactly. Suburbanites generally have more ability to move their kids to private schools if they want to. So the public schools have a higher bar to clear to keep attendance high.
That's very likely not true in the slightest. Only a very small percentage of suburbanites are close to a private school. And of that small percentage, most aren't close to being able to afford private school.
> Only a very small percentage of suburbanites are close to a private school.
I just used Esri geoenrichment tools to create maps of private schools (based on SIC code lookup) in the LA area, central Michigan, and Pennsylvania. Your assertion doesn't hold. There are multiple private schools in every local suburban area I've looked into. Or did you have a particular area in mind? (or maybe you meant to say "rural"?)
Southern California alone (south of San Luis Obispo) has 962 religious private elementary schools, and that's not counting the nonreligious, Montessori, preparatory schools, etc. Even charter schools in California (not counted either) often present excellent competition to traditional public schools, primarily because through them parents have greater choice (and no tuition!).
The assumption that public schools fail to educate kids is already erroneous and baseless.
That a public good, meant to ensure an equitable start for all children, regardless of their or their parents’ circumstance, is being treated like a free market asset is a bizarre failure to understand the fundamental difference between, say, Apple and your local elementary that must be prepared to educate kids ranging from G&T to barely able to read, and must often take the place of parents who are either incapable or unable to be present and continue the kids’ education outside school.
Your comments are case in point why people who don’t know anything about education shouldn’t have any input into how it’s delivered. I can’t tell if it’s Dunning-Kruger, or just an assumption that educators are idiots, but I can assure you the latter isn’t true.
Public school teachers certainly aren't idiots. I've personally known several as friends and acquaintances, for whom I'd vouch for their character and integrity.
Public school administration, public policy, and the content of education degrees is where I'd place the blame (and some curriculum publishers) -- the sort of people who write and listen to the kind of drivel TA is talking about.
This drive towards "equity" is creating even more disparate outcomes; and the notion being taught in some education degrees that a teacher's primary job is to make activists out of kids is hurtful to the kids, and to society.
Again, what is your expertise in education? Why do you think “equity” is driving disparate outcomes, let alone more disparate outcomes?
Do you actually think that any teachers are being taught that their primary job is to create activists (and do you have a source), or are you just repeating X memes because being angry feels good? What, specifically, do you think an education degree consists of, and what is your personal experience with that curriculum?
I can’t imagine you’re continuing to make sweeping pronouncements about something I’ve already asked you if you have any experience with.
Expertise in a subject is not required to think rationally about it. Do you require those who agree with you to have expertise in order to form a rational opinion?
> Why do you think “equity” is driving disparate outcomes, let alone more disparate outcomes?
Because according to hard data, it is. For example, delaying Algebra 1 and the other "equity" programs in the San Francisco school system did not improve outcomes or even manage to bring down top performers. Everyone did worse except those with means to be tutored outside of the classroom -- that's a more disparate outcome.
> Do you actually think that any teachers are being taught that their primary job is to create activists?
Yes, I do.
> (and do you have a source?)
Many. Here are a few I just cribbed from Google. These demonstrate the ideas that are going around in modern liberal education:
> What, specifically, do you think an education degree consists of, and what is your personal experience with that curriculum?
Again, why is this relevant to the discussion? I have heard multiple sources I trust from multiple angles emphasize that today's educators must make activists out of the next generation.
I've also read that today's graduating seniors feel a massive emotional burden because of the beliefs that their education has (probably unwittingly) instilled in them -- namely, that it's up to them to fix society's problems through activism.
Internet comments and most public discussion doesn't have to be held to the same standards that academic papers do... I hope you don't require people you talk with in person to have expertise in order to have a rational opinion on a subject.
I've posited a reasonable mechanism that explains a phenomenon. We know stores fail if they don't provide competitive service - which means those that survive do a good enough job to survive... why shouldn't schools function similarly? No one (including school administrators) really tries hard to succeed if failure isn't a possibility.
If you have an alternate explanation, I'm all ears.
