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

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]

And you're also missing the point that both public and private schools are scoring poorly on this test, worse than public education systems in other countries. The bottom line is that private schools are doing a piss poor job as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

You keep claiming this. Lets run through some bullets of points you have either conceded or not argued against but have been posted in this or the other thread.

<ul type="square">[*]private schools pay their teacher less than public schools[*]Private schools offer services that parents value that public schools don't[*]Public schools have significant incentives in the metrics used to compare public V private that private schools don't have[*]Public schools admit to decreasing time in classrooms for those courses not measured[*]Teachers unions have essentially been granted a sellers monopoly for a large portion of the education system, this drives up costs for private schools[/list]
[ QUOTE ]

Another independent metric is SAT scores. It's hard to get exact information, but the common number reported is that private schools typically score 100 points above public schools on a 2400 point scale (around 4% better, or 6% if you take the average of 1700). This is more or less in line with the 3% (based on total possible points) we see in the previously quoted data

[/ QUOTE ]

See, you say you don't need simplistic examples to understand my point, and then you post exactly the same point. SAT measures the exact same things that public schools have their funding tied to, reading and math (and now an essay section). No claim was made that math and reading scores were altered, but that they didn't reflect overall education levels in public schools well. Try finding test scores in science for public schools, you can't find large scale random samples of public schools for these test, they don't exist. Meanwhile public school officials admit that they spend ever declining % of their class time devoted to subjects that are not math and reading. Can you find statistics showing that private school attention to these subjects are also declining at similar rates?

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
Try finding test scores in science for public schools, you can't find large scale random samples of public schools for these test, they don't exist.

[/ QUOTE ]
Read this:

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard...es/2006459.pdf

This is a comprehensive assessment of public and private school performance in science in 2000. It shows exactly the same kind of differences we see in other metrics such as reading and mathematics. So your point is dead.

Also note other interesting information in that chart: private schools have higher levels of white children (who score significantly higher in school), as well as higher rates of parents who have completed college, far fewer children with disabilities and far fewer English learners. All are strongly correlated with performance.

So I repeat again something which you seem to want to continue debating: Private schools as they exist now do just as terribly, on average, at educating students, in the three largest metrics. This is despite all their inherent advantages (smaller class sizes, more personalized attention) and the existence of significant competition and many other free market drivers already (even if they aren't as comprehensive as you'd like). Science scores from the PDF above:






Now, you can throw all this data out and say "but a totally free market will be different." Borodog goes as far to claim that the problem will be "easily" solved. Where is your evidence??? You don't like the evidence I provide, but I'm trying to discuss the evidence that is available. You do understand that evidence is the key part of a rational debate, don't you?

Also, claiming that SAT stats are a poor metric seems rather strange to me. SAT tests are good enough for private colleges of America to use as half of their admissions criteria. The fact is that reading and math proficiency are a good guide for the quality of the school you went to, as they're the basis for most other subjects. And since the science results show the same trend...claiming that reading and math are being focussed on (and that this is responsible for the clos result between public and private schools), is simply wrong.

As far as your points go, I do not agree with these two:

Public schools have significant incentives in the metrics used to compare public V private that private schools don't have
Public schools admit to decreasing time in classrooms for those courses not measured

You are generalizing. I'm pretty damn sure that private schools have incentives for their students to do well on the SAT - way more than public schools, in fact. Yet they don't do very much better - and no better at all when you adjust for the different demographics. And the fact that science scores show the same differential invalidates your point IMO.

I also don't agree with the seller's monopoly point. Private schools offer significant benefits (smaller class sizes, longer holidays, more job satisfaction - as determined from teacher surveys) that would offset many of these pure $ considerations.

[ QUOTE ]
Can you find statistics showing that private school attention to these subjects are also declining at similar rates?

[/ QUOTE ]
You haven't shown statistics for the rate at which public school education is declining on these subjects...

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
Since you seem to have so much useless information at your disposal, do other systems spend more per student? I would guess that they certainly do (but who knows). That could be one reason the other systems get better results.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, one of the big gripes about US education (both public and private) is that far more is spent per student than other countries, which get superior results. I don't have the data available but it's well known.

[ QUOTE ]
And so, the more devastating the results of centralization will be when you're trying to service widely varying interests.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. But bear in mind that the US is largely decentralized - states and even local counties have more autonomy than other countries. And unless there is racial segregation, I don't see how your point is relevant to the superiority of private schools - they'll have to cater to diverse backgrounds as well. So it's either smaller class sizes or more personalized attention - which generally means higher costs.

[ QUOTE ]
So it seems silly to dwell myopically on various data points, and entirely ignore the broader trend that should tell you government intervention can only screw things up.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is the crux of all the ACer arguments in this thread - a belief that government is the root of all evil and only makes things worse. It doesn't matter what data I present - this core belief means you will find any of it invalid unless there are massive amounts of evidence showing private system failure (and even then, it's always due to government intervention, according to Borodog...).

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
If you think it's strange that it's something other than differing degrees of success in secular academic subjects that drives most of the private school market... then you just don't understand the market.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm asking, with my point about 10,000 year old beliefs, how you think the market will better with more parents making the choices.

[ QUOTE ]
And second, you've done nothing to actually respond to the objection that the data here is incomplete and could easily present a skewed picture. I'll ask again: is there more to education than math and reading skills?

[/ QUOTE ]
If a school can't even do the core, basic skills properly, then something is rotten. The point here is that private schools stink as badly as public schools at educating kids on core skills. I'm sure they provide other benefits not seen in public schools, and vice versa.

[ QUOTE ]
Third, you've never adequately responded to the objection that what things are like in the private school market when 90% of schools are public isn't an indication of how good education would be if it were all private. 10% of schools in America being private just isn't comparable to a privatized education system.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have responded...I'm not sure what else to say. If competition, consumer choice and experimentation among the upper middle class now isn't driving significant changes in education quality - with an industry in the millions of student - what mechanism will magically appear once the market gets bigger?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, to end this stupid argument...why do people in this thread think that public education system isn't fixable? It works quite well in other countries - at least a lot better than the US - even when much more centralized.

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean the stupid argument you started?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, I mean the stupid argument that Borodog started. "I'll never feed my kids to a public school"..."It can be easily solved by getting rid of the government control".

[ QUOTE ]
Like I said, personally I don't intend to have my children educated in private schools either. The real point I draw from the blog linked in the OP is that often institutional education fails to really teach well, especially with young, motivated students, and it's best in these cases if capable parents do what they can to ensure their children are educated well.

[/ QUOTE ]
The point I draw from the blog is that some overzealous, self important parent didn't like his son's grade and got flustered. We don't even know if the story is accurate - it certainly sounds bizarre. Regardless - it's one anecdote. I could easily post anecdotes or news stories of private school teachers preying on teenagers sexually, and having it covered up by the school. Then, I'd be justified in making a post saying: "I'm never feeding my kids to a private school!!!111!!lim[x-&gt;0](sin x)/x111!!

[ QUOTE ]
The real point I draw from the blog linked in the OP is that often institutional education fails to really teach well, especially with young, motivated students, and it's best in these cases if capable parents do what they can to ensure their children are educated well.

[/ QUOTE ]
This has never been my experience. Like most things, how well a kid does is largely tied to his motivation and parental involvement. Regular schooling and textbooks are adequate for the rest and come with a lot of benefits imo. I don't see why it's necessary to pull a child out of school - surely an hour a day on top of his regular schooling has to be adequate to teach and motivate him.

The power of instruction is seldom of much efficacy except in those happy dispositions where it is almost superfluous.” (Gibbons)

[tolbiny]

Phil,
Seriously. This study has data points in Math, Reading, Science and Writing. It has data points from 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005 for reading, 2000, 2003, 2005 for Mathematics, 2000 for science and 2002 for writing.

NCLB was introduced in 2001, this is the act that linked federal funding to Math and Reading scores. The decrease in time spent on Science in classrooms in favor of reading.

[ QUOTE ]
Sinking state standards are not the only unintended consequence of NCLB. Because the law holds schools accountable only in reading and math, there's growing evidence that schools are giving short shrift to other subjects. In a survey of 300 school districts conducted by the Center on Education Policy, 71% of local administrators admitted that this was the case in their elementary schools. Martin West of Brown University found that, on average, from 1999 to 2004, reading instruction gained 40 min. a week, while social studies and science lost about 17 min. and 23 min, respectively.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it just a coincidence that once federal was tied directly to math and reading that it it suddenly becomes very hard to get you hands on science scores? Your study makes a point of the importance of following trends in Math and Reading, why is science not included? As I said earlier these scores don't exist (or are doing a heck of a job hiding), and have not existed since NCLB was enacted. The next time these scores are scheduled to be released is in late 2008 after the science section is added to the criteria this school year.

[Phil153]

Seriously yourself. Why the [censored] are you being obtuse? A quick google brought up this: science results for 2005:

http://nces.ed.gov/Pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006466

[ QUOTE ]
Of the 37 states and jurisdictions that participated in the 2000 and 2005 eighth-grade assessments, 11 showed gains and 4 showed declines.

[/ QUOTE ]
So What - The - [censored] are you talking about??

Anyway, try comparing the results from years prior to the most recent...the differences are similar. Private schools do not greatly outperform public schools...pick any year you like, before or after NCLB.

I have no idea why science scores haven't reported as readily. Perhaps it wasn't a priority. But the data is there and publicly and easily available. It's completely irrelevant anyway because of the paragraph above - the differential just hasn't changed much from year to year.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree. But bear in mind that the US is largely decentralized - states and even local counties have more autonomy than other countries.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what. My point was that centralization will have harsher effects when there is less homogeneity, and you agree. Is it really impossible that this disadvantage could outweigh the relative lack of centralization?

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how your point is relevant to the superiority of private schools - they'll have to cater to diverse backgrounds as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

My point, very basically, is just that there exist countless differences between different societies, all with slightly different social structures, norms, lifestyles, and laws. And so, simply comparing broad results does not offer much insight into whether or not "centralization" works better than "decentralization."

I know nothing about how school systems are structured, not even in the US, let alone other countries. So I'm just taking your word for it that the US is less centralized than other systems. But, it seems fairly obvious to me that the US is a large country with varying interests. So just because "Florida" might have some sort of autonomy to make education decisions, I don't see how this means what you want it to mean. "Decentralized" seems like am awfully pointless term when you are comparing a large heterogeneous country to smaller, more homogeneous ones.

[ QUOTE ]
This is the crux of all the ACer arguments in this thread - a belief that government is the root of all evil and only makes things worse. It doesn't matter what data I present

[/ QUOTE ]

You seem to wish the belief was whimsical. You should consider that maybe the information you present doesn't actually prove what you'd like it to prove even if you yell about it really loud.