This shows a lack of understanding of the doing of stuff. I want to say that making widgets is in no way analogous to teaching children, but here, there is a parallel. If you ask a production manager about the overall cost difference between making 10,000 widgets vs. 9990, he might explain to you how making fewer widgets is actually costlier. Similarly, the marginal cost of one less student in the system can be very hard to realistically measure, and in some cases, one would have to try to also figure out the positive impact one student might have on their classmates. Taking one student out of the system probably saves the system far less than what a parent would expect as voucher compensation, if in fact it “saves” anything at all.
Well, to be entirely pedantic, while your children benefit from their education, I benefit from their education as well. That is, unless they become corporate lawyers or insurance executives.
Oh god it’s spreading. But at least it’s a relief you don’t have this from the only guy I know it from. Shapiro isn’t nearly as much of a fucking looney tune as Molyneux.
Would you risk it to prosecute jaywalking?
I might have to arrest you if you’re delinquent to your court case for jaywalking. You might resist, and I might shoot a bullet into your body with a gun.
I mean, props to Ben Shapiro for internal consistency if that’s how he feels about jaywalking, but I maintain that it’s a silly way to think about government action, because any government action eventually comes down to “someone’s getting shot” if the participants are ornery and uncooperative enough. That’s kind of the definition of what a state monopoly on legitimate violence means - if people resist the state, the state will become increasingly pressing in its demands for compliance with the rule of law.
But the reality is, in the vast, vast, vast majority of cases, people aren’t getting shot for jaywalking. They get a ticket, they pay it*, and the world moves on. If they get shot, they’re getting shot for entirely different reasons. Specifically: violently resisting arrest. And they’re getting arrested for entirely different reasons too!
*Jaywalking might be a bad example, because I don’t think jaywalking is a reasonable thing to punish, so if you don’t like it, just pick a regulation which is similarly small and seemingly unimportant.
It’s just a cogent example of critiques of modern math pedagogy that completely miss the point. Kids today aren’t getting taught math the way I was taught math, and I’m in my early 20s. I don’t understand all of it, but it makes good sense once it’s explained to me.
First, it’s funny, because Tom Lehrer is hilarious.
But pay attention to the math protocol he’s complaining about, and to the way that he says people traditionally do math. If you’re my age, the traditional way is totally unfamiliar; the “new” way he’s complaining about is how I learned to do it and looks like the default to me.
This was in 1965. Complaints about newfangled math instruction are not something new.
As for whether multiplication should be taught to comprehension, not just recall, that’s an obvious yes. Sure, complain about how memorization is neglected and I’m right there with you; but the first part is to get kids to understand what multiplication means, and the second part is to get kids to know how to find the answer to a one-digit multiplication problem; these steps should come before memorization.
We’re in a world rightn ow where a shitload of adults grin and say, “I’m no good at math,” and that’s socially acceptable, because math instruction traditionally didn’t work for so many people. We’re trying to change that.
Sure, that happens at all levels. Somebody who smokes in bed may benefit from having a fire station next door. A person particular at danger may benefit from having a police car out side their door 24/7 .
But benefits to society, taxed from society have to benefit society not one single individual.
There’s little doubt that 1 on 1 teacher/student would make for better students- but we have decided not to fund that.
Hundreds of millions of Americans are prevented from making “better choices” dues to lack of funds.
Their choice is to make sacrifices for their kids education- or not.
Wow, that is a heck of a statement. How far do you take that philosophy “for the good of the children”. That is a slippery slope that I think as a society we would really want to stay away from.
In a well-designed study by the Center on Education Policy, it suggests vouchers for private schools are unnecessary because — once you control for socioeconomic status — students at private aren’t performing any better than those at public schools. The study says that it is “the kinds of economic and resource advantages their parents can give [students]” — as well as the level of parental involvement in their kids’ education —that determines success or failure in high school. The problem isn’t necessarily in the schools; it’s with social inequality…Using sophisticated analytical tools, the authors concluded that the private-school effect is a myth. After accounting for socioeconomic status, race, and other demographic differences among students, the researchers found that public school math achievement equaled or outstripped math achievement at every type of private school in grades 4 and 8 on NAEP. The advantage was as large as 12 score points on a scale of 0 to 500 (or more than one full grade level) when the authors compared public school students with demographically similar 4th graders in conservative Christian schools.
I feel like we are straying from the original question but I agree, jaywalking is a horrible example and taken to the extreme so is the notion that all taxes are extracted at the point of a gun. But what’s not silly is the notion that there are some things the government does better than the private sector and some things it does worse and in close cases, we are probably better off with the private sector. As technology and society changes, the relative advantages may change as well.
Cite? Not that anyone thinks you actually read that somewhere.
It is true for at least one DC school that received voucher students, which is too many. But otherwise it’s mostly Catholic schools, so no issues with eevolution there.
I read six pages of this, and what my average joe mind picked up from reading both sides of this argument:
Real problem stems from lack of a strong middle class. Vouchers don’t really solve this problem but make some parents feel like they are doing what’s best for their individual kid(s).
Most parents are narcissists who are more interested in creating clones of themselves than in equipping children to pursue their own fulfillment in the real world.
A large minority of parents are gigantic fucking idiots who simply lack the critical judgment skills necessary to make the best decisions for the child’s welfare (e.g. anti-vaxxers).
A good number of parents exhibit both qualities.
The well-being of the children is more important than the ego of the parents.
I disagree. I think most parents want good things for their kids, they may not have thought about it enough to know what that means but I think most of them try:
“Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” -Jesus
Well, yes, this might be a problem and these parents don’t know enough to help their kids develop the critical skills to help the next generation and we have generation upon generation of parents without good judgment. Fortunately, we have this thing called society that creates norms that help keep most of us following best practices.
Why not just take all kids away and birth and raise them in a creche? It would probably remove some sources of inequality.
Actually, they do. The problem stems from the fact that public schools are a monopoly. They are going to get your money come hell or high water and they have no incentive to provide a quality product. The competition that is introduced by the voucher system will force public schools to up their game. They will have no choice: provide a quality education or shut the doors.
