Because the rich don’t want there kids to have more competition when trying to get into the best colleges and jobs.
Having said all that … iq has an inheritance factor of about 60% BUT that means 40% is a heck of a lot to play with.
I think the best thing would be to make each school private and give parents vouchers, there could be private boarding schools as well so if you live in a bad area and are worried about kids falling into the wrong crowd you can just send em away !
Am I the only one who sees tremendous class prejudice in that statement?
nope, its rubbish… 2 people, same iq, 1 in good school, 1 in bad… easier in good school, end of case…
The rich want to keep the poor down so they give them bad schools.
They only want you to learn to read and write so you cost less to train for jobs and will buy more consumer products i.e. magazines etc.
The rich want a big military = get one.
The rich want a space program = get one.
The rich want less competition for there kids entrance into ivy league colleges and top jobs = muck up the public school system.
Huh?
Do you have anything to back that assertion up? I don’t think there is any good evidence that IQ (or any other mental trait) is 60% heritable.
I don’t have the numbers in front of me, but I recall that the results of studies of personality traits of identical twins raised seperately showed that such traits appeared to be 40% due to genetics, 40% due to environment, and 20% due to unknown (random chance or something). I would expect IQ to be somewhat similar. Also IQ is not all that good a predictor of scholastic achievement.
As for educational inequalities being the result of a conspiracy, you may as well say that bacteria develop resistance to a specific antibiotic as the result of a conspiracy. There is nothing in either system which requires an intelligent agent to cause the system to produce the result. This does not mean the result is desirable in either case.
As was stated earlier, talking about “American” public schools doesn’t really make any sense. The awful public schools in the South Bronx are a mere few miles from the excellent ones in Westchester County, which I attended.
Economics is an important factor, but how much funding the school receives is not the sole determinant of its effectiveness. It also has to do with the students it receives.
I think children in wealthy families (I was one) are more likely to do well in school because they are not predisposed with concerns like getting food on the table and avoiding the crack dealer down the street. And education tends to be highly values in families with successful parents.
That said, my public school experience was rather mediocre. I was too lazy and bored to make a real effort at it. Public schools are often forced to deal to the lowest-common-denominator, and as a smart kid (if I dare say so myself) I found most of it mind-numbing. I’m not surprised that all the skills I require for my job (which I love) I acquired through self-teaching.
LonesomePolecat - What is it that you find prejudicial about my statement? That I don’t value every career path equally or that I don’t feel that every student has the same potential to succeed?
And success has nothing to do with IQ. You can have a student with an IQ of 160, but if he never goes to class or does his homework, his grades are going to reflect it.
Dude, your conspiracy theory statements are ignorant on so many levels.
First of all, wealthy people would want less competition for THEIR kids, not THERE kids.
Second of all, most really wealthy people don’t send their kids to public school. They usually send them to private school or prep schools. Since this is such a small % of the population and we are talking about public education for the masses, I won’t address this.
Third of all, wealthy and upper middle class people don’t “conspire” against the poor. We don’t sit around in dark conference rooms smoking cigarettes, plotting to keep the people ignorant so we can get ahead. If anything the opposite is true: Education = more money = more purchasing power = companies make more $$.
Fourth, why do you assume that people with money are somehow lazier than poor people? The implication seems to be that kids from good suburbs don’t have to work as hard to get ahead. I assure you, that isn’t the case.
My school had a pretty good cross section of people. There were rich kids, poor kids, a few minorities, some stoners, brains, jocks, preps, etc. When I went back for my reunion, it was pretty much as I expected. The kids who studied a lot and had good grades had graduated from good schools and went on to good jobs. The kids who goofed off in class and were drunk all the time had gone to community college and many had crappy jobs.
I think there are three basic assumptions that form the philosophical foundation for American public education, so I’ll start there.
That having an “educated” populace is so vital that it should be a tax-supported endeavor for the entire community. Nationally, this philosophy goes back at least to the Northwest Ordinances, and in individual states it goes back even further.
There is a basic core of knowledge that people in a community should know. This explains both the “core curriculum” and the historic battle to have local school boards decide what is to be taught, and how.
The system is open to everyone. Unlike many of the systems in Europe and Asia, students are not tested every few years, with low achievers shuffled off to less desirable schools and prepared for vocatinal training.
It’s my belief that the system has remained true to its founding philosophies. I agree that American education is in deep trouble and needs to be fixed. I agree that keeping a classroom open to everyone means one or two lousy students can ruin it for 25 others.
However, I can also attest that when my daughter hit rock bottom in 6th grade she put our local school system to the test – bad grades, special needs and personality problems. A lot of private schools would have asked her to leave, and a lot of schools in other countries would have shunted her off to some B-grade curriculum to train her for a lifetime of employment in the food service and hospitality industries. Her school stuck with her, and she answered with 25 consecutive quarters on the honor roll and a college scholarship.
In High School, I rarely did homework (unless it was a big project or counted for a large part of the grade). I spent most of the time in classrooms doodling in the margins of my notebook or barely paying attention in various other ways. I still graduated with a GPA over 93. This was at a better than average public school on Long Island, and my IQ has never been measured as anything close to 160.
I’d say neither effort nor IQ nor any other single measure is a good predictor of scholastic success. Which is all the more reason to give all students an equal opportunity at an education.
Perhaps I missed this, but did you, in fact, attend school in America?
The reason I ask is because in America, plenty of successful people who went to good colleges were goof-offs as students. Look at President Bush, for example. It’s no secret that plenty of college students, even at Ivy League schools and other elite institutions, are interested in little more than partying. If lazy kids don’t get into good schools, then how did all the jocks get into a very exclusive university so they could take gut courses and drink themselves into a stupor five nights a week?
For that matter, look at the colleges that the children of Presidents go to. What is the probability that Ron Reagan Jr., George W. Bush, Chelsea Clinton, and Jenna Bush were among the hardest-working students in America, and, by your standards, were therefore worthy of going to top schools? For that matter, didn’t Amy Carter go to Brown?
-Ben
Having attended public schools in the U.S. from kindergarten through grad school, I can testify that they worked for me. True, too many students fall through the cracks, but as other posters have pointed out, unlike private schools, public schools have to educate poor kids, immigrant kids, pregnant kids, kids with learning disabilities, etc. Given that many moms and dads expect schools to pick up their slack as parents, that teachers get paid crap, and that few schools receive enough financial/volunteer/moral support from their local communities, I’d say that most public schools in the U.S. work surprisingly well.
I, for one, have nuthing but gud memrees of my daze at skool… Yes, it was difikult at times, but werth evry penny.
ok, ok, just trying to wind you up with tales of conspiracy, its an on going joke in europe that all americans are hold up in log cabins with guns and conspiracy theories…
iq - different books tend to say that the inheritance factor of iq is about .6, there are lots of different studies with diferent results, i think the fact is that we don’t all start out with a level playing field BUT that is no reason for bad public schools.
ok, perhaps the rich don’t sit about in smoke filled rooms saying 'lets make the publics schools bad ’ BUT the point is that they have no stake in a system they do not have to use.
Countries with less private schools tend to have better public school systems, this isn’t because there is no demand but because it is a higher priority.
If the public school system was a ‘real’ priority then more money and resources would be pumped in, as it is, what stake do those in charge ( whose kids go to private school ) have in ensuring a good public school system ?
People are not totally selfish but if you link the leaders interests to those of the general public then things may work better ?
or to put it another way - you can have low taxes and private school bills or higher taxes.
That’s just silly. I mean, if you’re a management consultant, there are so many better reasons not to respect your work.
Over here in the UK they publish a league table of schools based on final exam results and also tests of pupils at different ages.
The schools at the bottom of the league are sent educational ‘swat’ teams who re-organise things and inspect the teachers.
These schools then move UP the league !
Perhaps I should have been more specific. The goof-offs who got crappy grades went to crappy schools. Some of us can actually have fun AND get good grades.
Why do you think jocks are lazy? My high school’s valadictorian was also on the baseball and basketball team. Not all athletes are fat dumbasses.
They also didn’t go to public school.
So has anyone actually come up with a GOOD criteria for judging if a public school is effective? You can’t say the public school system is bad just because every student doesn’t go to the Ivy League.
Oh and Dumbguy, you don’t have to respect my work. But at least I’ll be pulling down six figures and going on nice vacations with the wife and kids while you’re slaving away in your cubical or factory floor hoping my company doesn’t downsize you out of a job.
Well I have a good idea of what schools should do…
At the most basic level, schools should prepare people to be productive citizens in our society. That includes reading and writing, simple math, a basic understanding of science, enough economics to balance a checkbook and avoid credit card debt, enough of an understanding of the government to make informed voting decisions, and enough history and current events to be able to understand a newspaper.
In this properous society, we can go far beyond the most basic level. Our schools should set up people with the tools for life long learning. Schools should prepare all children to at least have the option of college, while acknowledgeing that that path might not be for everybody. The most important skill for college is learning how to write a good essay. Also important is a familierity with literature, socio-political theories, art appriciation, and scientific concepts.
The role of trade cannot be left out. Schools (and not just lower class ones) should still provide everyone (and not just the “bad students”) with basic training in a trade. Although blue collar work isn’t as important as it used to be, it can still provide a very good living. Woodshop, autoshop, drafting, computer classes, pottery classes and metalshop classes serve a very important role. They give our kids skills to fall back on, appreciation of the work that goes into the things we buy, and perhaps a lifelong hobby (not to mention jobs). Even for people heading into college, learning the beginnings of a trade can be very valueable. I personally have used my high-school aquired carpentry skills to earn money while in college. I think too many “upper-class” high schools think that they are beyond that and cut out trade classes altogether.
The liberal arts education serves a very important role in our society. It helps us all to live the “examined life” of Socrates. It may even protect us from great evil. What if Eichman thought about things for a minute instead of “just following orders”? Perhaps the whole world would be different, and a whole lot better. Even the grunts of this world can benefit (and benefit the world) by thinking critically and having a greater understanding of this world.
And in this prosperous society, why should we expect anything less?
That’s “valedictorian”.
That would be “a good criterion” or “good criteria”.
And finally, “cubicle”, and “your company doesn’t downsize you” - unless you plan on working for the same company.
By the way, I went to public school.
My two cents? What one gets out of an education depends on what one puts into it. From second through eighth grade, I attended a “gifted” public school in Chicago. We took Latin, logic, literature and philosophy courses, and were required to learn how to play an instrument. My high school was the neighborhood high school - general studies, but offered honors and AP courses. About two-thirds of my teachers were good or excellent; the remainder were fair, with one or two exceptionally bad teachers. I think I’m pretty well-educated and informed, but I also think that a fair amount of this is a result of my upbringing. When was interested in something beyond what I was offered in school, I took it upon myself to pursue it. I learned about Nazi Germany in history classes, but I read Mein Kampf on my own. I’m not saying we need to sacrifice depth for breadth all the time, but we can’t expect public schools to be the end-all be-all of education for everyone - some things kids and their parents have to do for themselves, or at least seek out in college.