Science Education in America: Why I'm Homeschooling My Kid in Science

[Rduke55]

[ QUOTE ]
In any case a system that allows people willing and able to arrange notepads to do better then people understand the subject far better is aweful for science education and a disaster because it fills the world with people who value presentation over content.

[/ QUOTE ]

But as Andy has said, this is also the case in some private schools. This is an individual teacher and student here.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
And I think Phil is bringing up good points worthy of discussion and I don't know why you are doing what you are doing. You are just brushing his points aside without any debate - some sort of reverse-trolling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe because Phil made it pretty clear he was more interested in petty trolling than actual debate?

I really don't understand why he gets all bent out of shape even if this WAS meant to be an AC thread (which, I don't think it necessarily was, especially when you consider that Boro is a man of science and could easily have been motivated by only that). Is being an ACist not allowed? Since the state in some way will affect basically everything we could talk about, I guess Phil would rather Boro just not start threads, since they *could* all be construed as an "AC thread in disguise" whenever someone asked him a question that begged that answer.

If in one of Phil's threads someone asked him a question that he answered with something to the effect of "public school is good," would Boro or any free market fans bash him for making the thread? "ZOMG this is a state thread in disguise!!1!!!1!" No way. And it's not because we're necessarily any more polite than Phil. It's just that when you're confident in your message you don't really feel the need to resort to nonsense to attack other messengers.

If you had to deal with this guy doing this to all of your threads, you'd probably ignore him too, even if he found a nut every once in a while. I don't get why you, especially as a moderator, would defend Phil here. You accuse Boro of "reverse-trolling".... shouldn't you be more worried about the person doing the "-trolling"?

If you want to layout what exactly you'd like an answer to though, I'm sure someone will address it.

[Rduke55]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe because Phil made it pretty clear he was more interested in petty trolling than actual debate?

[/ QUOTE ]

In this thread?

[ QUOTE ]
I really don't understand why he gets all bent out of shape even if this WAS meant to be an AC thread (which, I don't think it necessarily was, especially when you consider that Boro is a man of science and could easily have been motivated by only that). Is being an ACist not allowed? Since the state in some way will affect basically everything we could talk about, I guess Phil would rather Boro just not start threads, since they *could* all be construed as an "AC thread in disguise" whenever someone asked him a question that begged that answer.

If in one of Phil's threads someone asked him a question that he answered with something to the effect of "public school is good," would Boro or any free market fans bash him for making the thread? "ZOMG this is a state thread in disguise!!1!!!1!" No way. And it's not because we're necessarily any more polite than Phil. It's just that when you're confident in your message you don't really feel the need to resort to nonsense to attack other messengers.

[/ QUOTE ]

My problem is that I'm seeing more of threads that go something like what we see here.

OP: -Link- "Blah blah blah"

Responder: What about -link- "Blah blah blah?"

OP: Stop trolling me.

Responder: I'm not trolling you. I'll say again what about this point?

OP: You're a troll.

etc. etc. etc.

And nothing gets discussed - which is the point of this forum.

[ QUOTE ]
If you had to deal with this guy doing this to all of your threads, you'd probably ignore him too, even if he found a nut every once in a while. I don't get why you, especially as a moderator, would defend Phil here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Phil and I have had some battles before. I briefly considered ignoring him but got past it, quit with the insults, and started debating his points and I think it worked itself out.

[ QUOTE ]
You accuse Boro of "reverse-trolling".... shouldn't you be more worried about the person doing the "-trolling"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I didn't see much in the way of trolling here by Phil. It seems like Borodog has been doing this lately: makes a declaration, people try to debate with him, he responds with the "Market is better than anything.", "You haven't read what I've read", or "you're a troll" instead of discussing the issue at hand.

There is a ton of stuff on public vs. private schooling. Instead of talking about the studies, flaws, etc. we get nothing done.

I asked whether or not these problems could be fixable because he did just give an anecdote about one individual teacher and student. He gave a stock answer, Phil brought up a study disagreeing with Borodog's point and then the T-word started getting tossed out.

Borodog also said that I "really didn't want to hear the answer" which seems kind of odd. Maybe I'm a troll too I guess.

[ QUOTE ]
If you want to layout what exactly you'd like an answer to though, I'm sure someone will address it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't necessarily care about an answer, I just want to see some actual discussion.

Also, straight AC threads go in politics. Debating public vs. private education stays here.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
If you had to deal with this guy doing this to all of your threads, you'd probably ignore him too, even if he found a nut every once in a while.

[/ QUOTE ]
I just have to point out that this is untrue. Look at his last 100 posts and several OPs (or any time before that) and see how many times I've responded to him...none apart from this thread. I respond to maybe 1 in 10 of his OPs (mostly when he posts thinly disguised AC rants in SMP that are contradicted by evidence) and virtually none of his posts. There is no pattern of trolling at all like you suggest.

As for the person who said the article is light on data - it references this report, which is one of the most comprehensive reports ever done on public vs private schooling:

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard...es/2006461.asp

Some highlights:

[ QUOTE ]
In the first set of analyses, all private schools were compared to all public schools. The average private school mean reading score was 14.7 points higher than the average public school mean reading score, corresponding to an effect size of .41 (the ratio of the absolute value of the estimated difference to the standard deviation of the NAEP fourth-grade reading score distribution). After adjusting for selected student characteristics, the difference in means was near zero and not significant.

[/ QUOTE ]

14.7 points difference on a 500 point scale...and this includes the subset of the wealthy, who do better in in school

[ QUOTE ]
In the first set of analyses, all private schools were again compared to all public schools. The average private school mean mathematics score was 7.8 points higher than the average public school mean mathematics score, corresponding to an effect size of .29. After adjusting for selected student characteristics, the difference in means was -4.5 and significantly different from zero. (Note that a negative difference implies that the average school mean was higher for public schools.)

[/ QUOTE ]
7.8 points on a 300 to 500 point scale (depends on the grade - not sure of the details).

This is including the fact that the elite private schools attract the best teachers available, and many are academically selective - which means they're already skewed toward picking up the most capable students already. Even if there was no effect from private school education, private schools should significantly outperform public schools...yet they don't.

Why are private schools failing as badly as public schools? Surely competition from the significant middle-upper class in the US is sufficient to provide market driven improvements in school quality and outcomes? BTW, private schools make up roughly 10% of the nation's schools. In other countries, this volume of kids would provide half or more the nation's education needs. Are you saying that this is insufficient to work? That the wealthy and those who care about their kids enough to pay for private school, are unable to choose the best one in their area and petition for improvements? It's a bizarre position that you guys have on this point.

One other point - the US trails significantly behind the Western world in terms of student proficiency - near the bottom, in fact. Yet they have one of the most decentralized educational systems in the Western world, and similar private school percentages to other countries who outperform them. So why are they failing?

RDuke asks above: Do you think this is fixable? Well, clearly it is, as other public school systems outperform both the public and private schooling system of the US.

So, you can keep posting "statist clown" pictures if you want, and blindly asserting your AC mantras, but the silence of you guys regarding the actual evidence is deafening....

[oe39]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But you have a PhD in Astrophysics. How many parents would you think are remotely able to teach their kid science?

[/ QUOTE ]

I know absolutely nothing about cobbling, yet I manage to procure top quality shoes. I know absolutely nothing about cattle ranching, yet I manage to procure top quality steak. I know absolutely nothing about building a car, yet I manage to procure one I like very much. I know nothing about making clothing, cell phones, televisions, yet I can get all. I don't have to mow my own lawn, change my own oil, or fix my own roof. I trust you see the pattern.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think that that article represents something that cannot be fixed?

[/ QUOTE ]

It can be easily fixed. End the government school monopoly.

[/ QUOTE ]

if only it were possible to start a private school

[bravos1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But you have a PhD in Astrophysics. How many parents would you think are remotely able to teach their kid science?

[/ QUOTE ]

I know absolutely nothing about cobbling, yet I manage to procure top quality shoes. I know absolutely nothing about cattle ranching, yet I manage to procure top quality steak. I know absolutely nothing about building a car, yet I manage to procure one I like very much. I know nothing about making clothing, cell phones, televisions, yet I can get all. I don't have to mow my own lawn, change my own oil, or fix my own roof. I trust you see the pattern.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you are forced to find another teacher for your child because you would be "unqualified" (not the best word choice I would guess, but you get my drift) to teach your child these topics if need be. So what do you do? You find another teacher I would guess (private school or private teacher)... and what happens when this new teacher has a similar requirement.

Parents that do not get involved with the happenings at their child(ren)s school really have a limit to which their complaints hold water.

I will agree that this story is redic and having 80% of one's grade depending on the neatness of a notebook is absurd.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
So you are forced to find another teacher for your child because you would be "unqualified" (not the best word choice I would guess, but you get my drift) to teach your child these topics if need be. So what do you do? You find another teacher I would guess (private school or private teacher)... and what happens when this new teacher has a similar requirement.

[/ QUOTE ]

You might not be able to find someone who makes the sandwich that you personally prefer in a free market, therefore any criticism of a system of government-supplied sandwhiches on the basis of you getting a sandwich you don't like is flawed.

Agree or disagree?

[Phil153]

Having been in both the public and private systems twice, I had a worse education in the private system than I ever did in the public system (this is Australia BTW). Apart from that the main difference was much nicer schoolgrounds and hotter, sluttier girls, which is important imo but irrelevant to the question of science.

BTW, where is the objective evidence that the private system is so much better? I don't see a huge differential in published studies of the US education system, and that's despite the fact that the children of those with means tend to go these schools.

[Phil153]

Read this for example:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/19/op...mp;oref=slogin

[wiper]

i'm torn. i've taught in public schools, private catholic schools, and now alternative schools. all had positives and negatives...

the science notebook thing sounds crazy, but it's coming from a scientist, who probably looks at science differently than a school system might.

in the end, it's usually parents that makes the difference. i can put the same amount of effort into 2 different kids, and the support system outside of school usually makes the difference...