The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

by Ben Reilly Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:23 am

I've made this point on other forums, but it occurs to me that since this site has a majority non-American audience, and only Veya has heard me expounding this point before ... Smile

... I should say it again.

The U.S. public education system dictates that you go to school within your tax district -- that is a relatively small (several square miles) area from which the taxes to fund your school are drawn from.

Imagine a poor area with few businesses, few rich people and thus very little taxes collected -- in the U.S., if that's where you were unlucky enough to be born, that's where you will be unlucky enough to receive (most likely) 12 years of education.

But if you're born rich, hey now -- you're born in an area with prosperous businesses, prosperous citizens who pay the taxes of the prosperous, and really fucking great public schools that can afford to offer teacher salaries that the poor areas will never ever ever be able to pay. Guess what? You're getting a rich person education!!!

And those crusading politicians who introduced plans that would fund all schools equally in a plan that was quite literally named after Robin Hood? Good news for you, we drummed those socialists out of office.

I can't see how a society that doesn't spend a proportionately equal amount on every child's education can possibly call itself equal.

Can you?

by Original Quill Tue Aug 11, 2015 5:18 pm

It's the case with everything as long as the market metaphor is the predominate medium of exchange: the rich treat themselves to privilege, the poor have to make do with what is in their market.

You complain about inequality based upon living patterns...the placement of residences is according to wealth. It's the same with health care, legal care, emergency services, police and fire departments...as long as the market paradigm is used for distribution, it's going to have inequities.

by Guest Tue Aug 11, 2015 10:52 pm

dont interfere with that which you know not Ben

we have a "one size fits all " education system and its shite,,,

if you are lucky and rich and have a good brain you can get on via the bizarely named public school system (which is actually "private schools)
If you are doomed to the state school and are brilliant...prepare to be held back...so as not to make the no chancers despondant...be prepared to be in a system where failure is not only an option, but an option celebrated as much as or more than success....
be prepared , in your "mixed ability class" to have the teachers spend 80% of their time dealing with disruptive low achievers, 15% of their time on joe average and only 5% on you and your brighter colleagues. Dont expect any work that will challenge you and dont expect any praise when you do well...it will simply be "expected" of you...praise is soley for the foul mouthed brat of a drunk who for once didnt slap the teacher

such is what the lefty equality principle has wrought in our education system.....

by Guest Tue Aug 11, 2015 10:54 pm

I realise that what you have is not the best it could be.....the alternative is worse....

by Ben Reilly Tue Aug 11, 2015 11:55 pm

victorismyhero wrote:I realise that what you have is not the best it could be.....the alternative is worse....

There's no getting around the fact that if students don't receive the same level of quality education, we don't have equality of opportunity in this country. Two students of average intelligence, one going to a rich school and another to a poor school, are going to have very different outcomes and the rich student is statistically favored to do better in the job market.

According to 2007-2008 state data compiled by Education Week, nearly 30,000 schools missed “adequate yearly progress” benchmarks. For 2007, while a large portion of all students fell short of state proficiency levels in reading and math, failure was especially prevalent among low-income, black, Latino and Native American students.

http://inthesetimes.com/article/4244/unequal_education

The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit U.S._Real_Median_Household_Income_by_Race_and_Ethnicity

The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit U.S._Real_Median_Household_Income_by_Race_and_Ethnicity

The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit Slide5

Obviously lower-income children are not achieving at the same rate as upper-income children. There are many things states could do about this, including providing for more security of all people living in lower-income areas, but obviously this system is unfair, punishing people for where they were born.

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:07 am

dont doubt it...but as i said...beware of the "british experiment"

by veya_victaous Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:22 am

victorismyhero wrote:dont interfere with that which you know not Ben

we have a "one size fits all " education system and its shite,,,

if you are lucky and rich and have a good brain you can get on via the bizarely named public school system (which is actually "private schools)
If you are doomed to the state school and are brilliant...prepare to be held back...so as not to make the no chancers despondant...be prepared to be in a system where failure is not only an option, but an option celebrated as much as or more than success....
be prepared , in your "mixed ability class" to have the teachers spend 80% of their time dealing with disruptive low achievers, 15% of their time on joe average and only 5% on you and your brighter colleagues. Dont expect any work that will challenge you and dont expect any praise when you do well...it will simply be "expected" of you...praise is soley for the foul mouthed brat of a drunk who for once didnt slap the teacher

such is what the lefty equality principle has wrought in our education system.....

Still massive better than the US system, the mere suggestion it is not show how far from reality you complaint is, you want specialized classes that cost more to organize, people keep voting to spend less(we have them here, I received the advantage of one) currently education is not trying 'the best way' but using 'the way you can do it within budget'

and the bottom of the us system is not even comparable to yours they average is about the same but only because the rich have quite good schools and the poor have nothing or worse than nothing (literally creationism and corporately funded education programs a.k.a propaganda )

and yours, the UK, is a bad example, we are similar but a few slight differences and we preform better than both on all fronts.

by veya_victaous Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:27 am

state funding is the best for equality, but to be the best for education as well it STILL needs to be funded properly
Any system of eduction is going to struggle if it is underfunded.

The US system if you are poor is the worse BY a LONG LONG WAY in the western world it is not even debatable. no other western nation accepts that systematic denial of education to poor people. the fact it could be 'related to race' is another US centric issue, purposely keep the ex-slaves poor doesn't sound so far fetched now we know what the cops act like pale

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:31 am

two words....mixed ability

a lefty inspired race to the bottom...promoting "fick is good"

hold back the talented and praise the wilfully thick just for turning up....

by Ben Reilly Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:35 am

victorismyhero wrote:dont doubt it...but as i said...beware of the "british experiment"

I doubt it could ever be implemented here -- the U.S. constitution doesn't actually guarantee a public education to citizens. Most states, like Texas, have something in their state constitution spelling out how all children have the right to a public education, but it's implemented differently from state to state. (Obviously no state at this point would stop providing public education for fear that everyone would leave.)

The issue in Texas is that the Robin Hood plan was found to violate our state constitution because the redistribution of tax income from district to district was deemed a de facto state property tax (it did go into a state fund) which is illegal in Texas. So I think the best solution will be something that can be adapted to different regulatory standards across the country.

Also, the disadvantages are in and outside the schools -- poor kids not only get the worst teachers, facilities and educational materials, they're also far more likely to be caregivers to younger siblings, to miss meals, to have an absent parent, housing insecurity, unreliable transportation, etc.

by Ben Reilly Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:37 am

victorismyhero wrote:two words....mixed ability

a lefty inspired race to the bottom...promoting "fick is good"

hold back the talented and praise the wilfully thick just for turning up....

"Fick is good" is promoted more by the corporate marketeers, mainly through advertising -- as a lefty, I'm pretty upset about the outsize influence of corporate consumerism and faddism on kids' lives.

It's not the left that wants kids to play the latest X-box game instead of being educated -- that's Microsoft's fault.

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:47 am

no but its the lefty ideal of "equality regardless"
that places more emphasis on merely "trying" than actually achieving

that spends the bulk of a teachers time on the wilfully stupid rather than on the talented
that holds the high achiever back to favour the "fick is good candidate"

that refuses to castigate the idle in case it "upsets them"
it is lefty idiocy that has destroyed discipline in schools
that allows snotty nosed sprogs to refer to teachers by their first name

and has in many cases reduced teaching to a less than respected profession....

the only people that show any respect for the teaching profession are those with kids of school age...out of fear for their kids....

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:48 am

It says it all when you think about the comment heard the other day from another old fossil .....

teachers....HUMPH says he....glorified baby sitters.....

by veya_victaous Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:57 am

victorismyhero wrote:two words....mixed ability

a lefty inspired race to the bottom...promoting "fick is good"

hold back the talented and praise the wilfully thick just for turning up....

yes, selective or targeted eduction is better than one size fit all but your one size fits all is 100 times better than poor kids in the Poor schools in the USA gets. Neutral

I know about he British experiments in education your system is close enough to our that we use it to show how much we have improved Wink

by veya_victaous Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:02 am

victorismyhero wrote:It says it all when you think about the comment heard the other day from another old fossil .....

teachers....HUMPH says he....glorified baby sitters.....

they really always have been, Rolling Eyes

we just didn't know any better before because the average person had so little education

Vote 1 Skynet
OR at least fund education technology at least then a technocrat can try an work some magic Rolling Eyes

Honestly I think we could replace teachers in a decade... if we tried... but i doubt we will Sad

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:03 am

veya_victaous wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:two words....mixed ability

a lefty inspired race to the bottom...promoting "fick is good"

hold back the talented and praise the wilfully thick just for turning up....

yes, selective or targeted eduction is better than one size fit all but your one size fits all is 100 times better than poor kids in the Poor schools in the USA gets.
and your point is??....hell my compost heap is better than most of what america offers....but where's the relevence?

I know about he British experiments in education your system is close enough to our that we use it to show how much we have improved

you being an example of that I suppose

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:04 am

veya_victaous wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:It says it all when you think about the comment heard the other day from another old fossil .....

teachers....HUMPH says he....glorified baby sitters.....

they really always have been,
we just didn't know any better before because the average person had so little education

Vote 1 Skynet
OR at least fund education technology at least then a technocrat can try an work some magic

Honestly I think we could replace teachers in a decade... if we tried... but i doubt we will

not unless you break ALL 3 of the laws of robotics..... Twisted Evil

by veya_victaous Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:38 am

well it is the systems that the team i am part of have put in place that we are measuring.

quarter of a million laptops and about that many again desktops just for students, 2500 odd servers, 10,000's of smart-boards. custom built software distribution infrastructure, proto-cloud computing services that allow teacher to send/receive lessons across the state in real time(which is about 3 and half times the size of the whole UK)

I am pretty proud of what my state has achieved we are reaching the point were we can almost say that MOST classrooms now have better technology than the classroom in Star Trek.... I think we have a right to be proud of that cheers

Honestly I probably would have left technology if i had stayed in Business enterprise systems, I am much happier working in education at least it feels like I am making a difference to more than just shareholders wallets

(my own education was before my current profession Wink

)

by veya_victaous Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:42 am

victorismyhero wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:It says it all when you think about the comment heard the other day from another old fossil .....

teachers....HUMPH says he....glorified baby sitters.....

they really always have been,
we just didn't know any better before because the average person had so little education

Vote 1 Skynet
OR at least fund education technology at least then a technocrat can try an work some magic

Honestly I think we could replace teachers in a decade... if we tried... but i doubt we will

not unless you break ALL 3 of the laws of robotics.....

if needs be Wink

and I never agreed to add that to my code The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit 3201073460

not hurt people? they haven't included it in any robot so far

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 9:36 am

So is it the teachers' fault then? After all, they're not forced to go to the rich areas are they?

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 9:41 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:I realise that what you have is not the best it could be.....the alternative is worse....

There's no getting around the fact that if students don't receive the same level of quality education, we don't have equality of opportunity in this country. Two students of average intelligence, one going to a rich school and another to a poor school, are going to have very different outcomes and the rich student is statistically favored to do better in the job market.

According to 2007-2008 state data compiled by Education Week, nearly 30,000 schools missed “adequate yearly progress” benchmarks. For 2007, while a large portion of all students fell short of state proficiency levels in reading and math, failure was especially prevalent among low-income, black, Latino and Native American students.
http://inthesetimes.com/article/4244/unequal_education

Obviously lower-income children are not achieving at the same rate as upper-income children. There are many things states could do about this, including providing for more security of all people living in lower-income areas, but obviously this system is unfair, punishing people for where they were born.

So do you think that the only thing which counts is a formal education when it comes to getting a job? You could have formal qualifications coming out your ears and still not get a job or last long in a job if you have the wrong attitude.

Do you not think that other things count - like the ability to pay attention for more than five minutes, enthusiasm, a good attitude to fellow workers, and a willingness to learn? How do you get those things by throwing money at people?

Do you not think it's possible that some rich people encourage their children to have the same ambition they had? I know that some people think that all rich people sat there waiting for money to fall from the trees and got lucky, but that's not the case. Do you not think that some people are "poor" because they make no effort, and they pass that apathetic attitude down to their children?

by nicko Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:01 am

I agree 100% with that Raggs.

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:17 am

nicko wrote:I agree 100% with that Raggs.

Thank you Nicko.

Of course it's important to have funding and resources, but they're not the only things which count. Schools with money can give the kids computers but that's not much use if they sit there shooting UFOs on them all day.

by veya_victaous Wed Aug 12, 2015 10:49 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
nicko wrote:I agree 100% with that Raggs.

Thank you Nicko.

Of course it's important to have funding and resources, but they're not the only things which count. Schools with money can give the kids computers but that's not much use if they sit there shooting UFOs on them all day.

you cant just give a kid a computer and expect them to learn any more than you can give a kid a bunch of power tools and expect them to build a house

which is why you require the whole system, ours was literally called 'the digital education revolution' because that is what it is, you cant just tack on some extras it is systematic changes towards a new way of educating that makes the most of the technology available

the problem is the varying quality of teachers, even teachers that excel at teaching one subject may not be that good at another. the REAL point of digital education system is that you can transfer and share the best resources that teachers create. Plus it can be constantly updated much cheaper than textbooks can be.

In my opinion the Smartboards are of more value than the giving students a personal PC. And even giving them a personal PC is a little be 'old tech' we are already looking towards something like a Google account, where they could login on almost any computer and access a bunch of services over the internet.

Then you would only need to worry about giving the poor kids without a computer a computer. And i think it would work because a lot of the kids had a better personal computer than the ones the schools gave them anyway, so didn;t use it anymore than they had to... and that proportion is only growing.

by eddie Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:41 pm

victorismyhero wrote:two words....mixed ability

a lefty inspired race to the bottom...promoting "fick is good"

hold back the talented and praise the wilfully thick just for turning up....

That is absolutely spot on!

Having worked in the education system and been behind it as a school governor for five years, that is bang on the money.

High-achievers - they don't know what to do with them
Middle-achievers - ignored
Low-achievers - every effort is put in to you just to turn up.

It's crap.

by Ben Reilly Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:57 am

My point to Raggs would just be something like this -- successful people tend to raise successful children because they in turn were raised by successful parents themselves and know what it takes.

Unsuccessful children are raised by parents who have no idea what it takes to be successful.

There are people who are told to dress up for a job interview and put something like this on:

The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit D30ebbab457993cb214e67bd3c46a4d2

The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit D30ebbab457993cb214e67bd3c46a4d2

... because in their world, that's what dressing up means. They are trying -- they just haven't been taught how to get ahead and don't know anyone who has gotten ahead.

As far as money goes, it's the rich kids who get more money (a lot more; two, three and four times as much) spent on their education -- not just in tax money, but by their own parents, who can afford private tutoring.

The best way to break the cycle of failure is an intervention (or a half-dozen interventions) by someone who can teach poor kids skills nobody else they know can teach them. And yes, the best teachers, the ones who can actually make a difference and get results, are going to take a $75,000 per year salary in a nice, low-crime area with modern facilities over $40,000 per year in a poor neighborhood, at least the majority of the time.

by eddie Thu Aug 13, 2015 9:33 am

Over here the rich go to the best universities and therefore will get the cream of the jobs, no matter how hard another kid might try.

My son wants to go into law. I know he will be up against very rich children his own age who want to go into law.
He goes to a mainstream school and is exceptionally bright.
He will not go to Eton or Cambridge Uni and therefore he will be fighting against the already fortunate-enough children with family members already in law, to get a job.

by Raggamuffin Thu Aug 13, 2015 9:37 am

eddie wrote:Over here the rich go to the best universities and therefore will get the cream of the jobs, no matter how hard another kid might try.

My son wants to go into law. I know he will be up against very rich children his own age who want to go into law.
He goes to a mainstream school and is exceptionally bright.
He will not go to Eton or Cambridge Uni and therefore he will be fighting against the already fortunate-enough children with family members already in law, to get a job.

It does depend on what degree they get eddie. Of course for some jobs you need a degree or you won't get into that field of employment. After they get the qualification, whether or not they get a job depends on many factors. For some degrees, they're not particularly useful for any particular employment field, and they don't guarantee anything.

In order to go to Oxford or Cambridge, does it not depend on issues other than how rich someone is?

Tony Blair was obsessed with young people going to university, and I think that was stupid. It made them think that if they did, they would be guaranteed a job, and of course that's not the case.

by eddie Thu Aug 13, 2015 11:24 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
eddie wrote:Over here the rich go to the best universities and therefore will get the cream of the jobs, no matter how hard another kid might try.

My son wants to go into law. I know he will be up against very rich children his own age who want to go into law.
He goes to a mainstream school and is exceptionally bright.
He will not go to Eton or Cambridge Uni and therefore he will be fighting against the already fortunate-enough children with family members already in law, to get a job.

It does depend on what degree they get eddie. Of course for some jobs you need a degree or you won't get into that field of employment. After they get the qualification, whether or not they get a job depends on many factors. For some degrees, they're not particularly useful for any particular employment field, and they don't guarantee anything.

In order to go to Oxford or Cambridge, does it not depend on issues other than how rich someone is?

Tony Blair was obsessed with young people going to university, and I think that was stupid. It made them think that if they did, they would be guaranteed a job, and of course that's not the case.

All that's true rags but employers will choose an Eton or Cambridge student over an unknown.

by Sponsored content

The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit

Re: The notion of equality of opportunity in the United States is truly, laughably bullshit