Problematic Stuff

Post Reply
User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 11280
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I identify as sexually arousing to women.
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Forty Two » Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:47 pm

JimC wrote: The disadvantage is very simple and clear-cut, particularly for tertiary education. Students with reasonably wealthy parents can be supported financially over their tertiary studies, and not have to live in poverty as they study, and they either don't need a part time job, or it may only be a few hours a week.
I would agree that such advantages and disadvantages exist, however, I do not regard them as "systemic." They are not entrenched aspects of the education system or government in general that operates as an obstacle. That's a practical disadvantage, like - some people live farther away from the school of their choice and therefore their parents have a harder time transporting them. Or, some people live in rural counties with few options, and others live in Manhattan with 100 schools to choose from. Some kids have parents who read to them every night, and parents who teach them to read before they even start school. And, yes, rich parents can send their kids to the most expensive private schools. I have that problem, as I am middle class and I can't afford to send my daughter to the best Prep school because it costs like $20,000 per year. But, that's not a "systemic" disadvantage to me.
JimC wrote:
Students from poor families don't have this luxury; they live in shit places, and spend a large amount of time working to keep themselves.
Yes, and some parents move their kids to rural communes where they don't go to school and have to be home schooled.
JimC wrote: It is particularly evident for the rural poor in Oz, where living at home (often the case for Uni students in big cities) is not an option, so they need to rent as well as keep themselves fed when they go to a big city to study.
Again, not a "systemic" disadvantage, because nothing in the system tells them where to live.
JimC wrote: So, I'm not talking about anything other than a greater burden, statistically, on the children of poor parents, one that tends on average to maintain professions such as the law and medicine in the hands of the existing wealthy, rather than allowing significant upward mobility out of poverty via education.
Well, here in the US that concern is addressed through the availability of grants and financial aid which help people of less means to afford such schools. We also have thousands of colleges, including many hundreds of law schools, at all price ranges and entrance requirements - if someone wants to go to college here, they can. They may not get into to Cal Tech or MIT, but they can go to college. And, if they're poor, they can get significant financial aid, and even free schooling, and on top of that, guaranteed student loans without collateral.
JimC wrote:
This sort of nonsense goes too far, of course, and is not part of any argument of mine.
Then we're agreed on that point. The issue of the article concerning "rigor" though is that it comes from an ideological point of view which has seriously infected AMERICAN universities. Here's another one - mainstream US university -- http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... -professor (math is racist -- it's "whiteness.")
“curricula emphasizing terms like Pythagorean theorem and pi perpetuate a perception that mathematics was largely developed by Greeks and other Europeans.” As further evidence of her argument, Gutierrez added that more white than nonwhite people are math professors and that math professors often benefit from “unearned privilege” — getting more grants and more respect than other professors — just because they are math professors and not professors in another academic field. “Are we really that smart just because we do mathematics?” she asked.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... -professor

Are we really that smart just because we do mathematics? Errr... well, if you can do high level mathematics, you're educated in math, that's for sure. What kind of college professor asks "are we really that smart..."?

This is like saying I'm really smart, but I'm just a bad test-taker. LOL. Oh, you're a bad test taker? You're really really smart, except for the part where we find out what you know? Seems legit.
If you ever feel sad, remember that somewhere in the world there is a fat kid dropping his favorite ice cream cone.

I'm not Steve Bannon. I'm not trying to suck my own c**k. - Anthony Scaramucci.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 11280
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I identify as sexually arousing to women.
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Forty Two » Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:57 pm

Rum wrote:
Forty Two wrote:
Rum wrote:
laklak wrote:That mentality is also common in certain segments of society here, and I have no idea how to change it. It requires a seismic shift in attitudes, and that's a damn hard thing to accomplish. My grandpappy didn't need no book learnin', my daddy didn't need none, and I ain't neither. It might be worse here, in some ways, as there is an active rejection of education (by some) as a gummint plot to turn ar kids inta libruls and fags.
Now that is scary - and of course Trump led the charge on exploiting that particular brand of ignorance. It has become a political force. Here and in most of the rest of the world ignorance is just that.

Sadly it is one of the reasons I think America has peaked. If you guys don't do something about this sort of thing the money will slowly bleed out as innovation declines and before you know it China will hold all the cards.
Indeed, and education in the US over the last 40 years has taken a nosedive, with Americans graduating high school now at what formerly was the 7th grade level. They're barely literate. And, what's worse is that if you leave it up to the Progressives in the US, they want to make the problem even worse because they want to lower the playing field in order to make it conform with their definition of fairness.
That isn't happening here - nor are the attempts to redefine what learning is (as per your post above). Instead our inspectorate of schools (Ofsted) has a standard it expects all schools to attain. There is an inspection regime and all schools are very thoroughly scrutinised on a regular basis. Every school is graded Outstanding, Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate.

In terms of this discussion the playing field is flat. Allowances are not made for geographical, social or economic/deprivation reasons. They take the rather tough line that a school in a rough area can (and does) often become Outstanding because of excellent head teachers and other staff.

My old job was primary focused on assisting schools to reach the required standards with regards to struggling kids of one sort or another.

The point here is that creative (and sometimes financial) ways are found to help schools reach struggling kids and no excuses are in theory allowed. I saw a number of head teachers lose their jobs because try as they might they couldn't make it from 'requires improvement' to Good or better.

It is true to say though that in the real world tough areas tend to have poorer performing schools, but it is not as clear cut as one might think.
All good points.

I would add that education is often, in my view, a function of culture, rather than system. You have Asian culture, Jewish culture, etc. excelling in education because their social groups value it. I think that's why my daughter began reading very early. She's only 4 and she reads to me now, advancing by leaps and bounds by the day. Of her peer group, she is almost the only one that reads. That was me and my family, not a school that did that. We played games that taught reading and numbers from the time she was only a few months old - from before her brain could consciously register. Everyone in my family values education, not just formal schooling, but knowledge in general - learning as a life habit. Some of it is genetic, I believe, in that IQ is to some extent genetic and some kids will just have greater aptitudes earlier than others.

She has an advantage because of that. Is that unfair? I guess it's how you look at it. But, to me we can't have a world which prevents kids from excelling. What we need is to add means to assist kids who are not steeped in such familial and cultural teacups to get that too. But I hesitate to call that "systemic disadvantage" because then the solution posed is just as well a tamping down of those who are excelling, rather than boosting those lagging.
If you ever feel sad, remember that somewhere in the world there is a fat kid dropping his favorite ice cream cone.

I'm not Steve Bannon. I'm not trying to suck my own c**k. - Anthony Scaramucci.

User avatar
Rum
Absent Minded Processor
Posts: 33562
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm
Location: South of the border..though not down Mexico way..
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Rum » Thu Jan 11, 2018 9:49 pm

Of course it isn't unfair. As it happens the single biggest indicator of educational achievement is being read to at a very early age. Whole academic careers have been built on research to this end (e.g http://www.education.vic.gov.au/documen ... gchild.pdf )

And of course those who aspire for their families and kids will be more inclined to do so.

It isn't possible to wave a magic wand and make everyone as ambitious for their kids as we might like them to be, but we can try to ensure the system doesn't leave those whose backgrounds leave them with a handicap from the get go.

User avatar
pErvinalia
Off his meds
Posts: 43828
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Now with 50% less ranting!
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by pErvinalia » Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:22 am

Forty Two wrote:
Rum wrote:
Forty Two wrote:
Rum wrote:
laklak wrote:That mentality is also common in certain segments of society here, and I have no idea how to change it. It requires a seismic shift in attitudes, and that's a damn hard thing to accomplish. My grandpappy didn't need no book learnin', my daddy didn't need none, and I ain't neither. It might be worse here, in some ways, as there is an active rejection of education (by some) as a gummint plot to turn ar kids inta libruls and fags.
Now that is scary - and of course Trump led the charge on exploiting that particular brand of ignorance. It has become a political force. Here and in most of the rest of the world ignorance is just that.

Sadly it is one of the reasons I think America has peaked. If you guys don't do something about this sort of thing the money will slowly bleed out as innovation declines and before you know it China will hold all the cards.
Indeed, and education in the US over the last 40 years has taken a nosedive, with Americans graduating high school now at what formerly was the 7th grade level. They're barely literate. And, what's worse is that if you leave it up to the Progressives in the US, they want to make the problem even worse because they want to lower the playing field in order to make it conform with their definition of fairness.
That isn't happening here - nor are the attempts to redefine what learning is (as per your post above). Instead our inspectorate of schools (Ofsted) has a standard it expects all schools to attain. There is an inspection regime and all schools are very thoroughly scrutinised on a regular basis. Every school is graded Outstanding, Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate.

In terms of this discussion the playing field is flat. Allowances are not made for geographical, social or economic/deprivation reasons. They take the rather tough line that a school in a rough area can (and does) often become Outstanding because of excellent head teachers and other staff.

My old job was primary focused on assisting schools to reach the required standards with regards to struggling kids of one sort or another.

The point here is that creative (and sometimes financial) ways are found to help schools reach struggling kids and no excuses are in theory allowed. I saw a number of head teachers lose their jobs because try as they might they couldn't make it from 'requires improvement' to Good or better.

It is true to say though that in the real world tough areas tend to have poorer performing schools, but it is not as clear cut as one might think.
All good points.

I would add that education is often, in my view, a function of culture, rather than system. You have Asian culture, Jewish culture, etc. excelling in education because their social groups value it. I think that's why my daughter began reading very early. She's only 4 and she reads to me now, advancing by leaps and bounds by the day. Of her peer group, she is almost the only one that reads. That was me and my family, not a school that did that. We played games that taught reading and numbers from the time she was only a few months old - from before her brain could consciously register. Everyone in my family values education, not just formal schooling, but knowledge in general - learning as a life habit. Some of it is genetic, I believe, in that IQ is to some extent genetic and some kids will just have greater aptitudes earlier than others.

She has an advantage because of that. Is that unfair? I guess it's how you look at it. But, to me we can't have a world which prevents kids from excelling.
Please show where anyone has suggested that we need to prevent kids from excelling. This is a strawman. The point that people are trying to make to you is that it's harder for some people to fulfil potential due to circumstance. And that's why a simple "merit" argument is problematic. Some people perform better for no other reason than they were born luckier than someone else.
But I hesitate to call that "systemic disadvantage"
It's systemic in the sense that it's a function of society - poverty breeds poverty and poverty also reduces IQ.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"You know you blokes didn't criticize Obama. You're lying. - Forty Two. Umm - http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=42144

User avatar
rainbow
Posts: 7798
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:10 am
About me: Pre-Modernist
Location: Africa
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by rainbow » Fri Jan 12, 2018 12:08 pm

Forty Two wrote:
rainbow wrote:
Forty Two wrote:Meritocracy -- a tool of whiteness -- very problematic - https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10342
This victim mentality of the pasty-faced ones is getting quite tiresome.

Don't see it as a problem, it is a 'challenge'.
LOL, can't get much more racist than that.
What is racist is you expecting special treatment because your ancestors were mutants that couldn't produce enough melanin.
:smug:
Äitisi nai poroja!

User avatar
pErvinalia
Off his meds
Posts: 43828
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Now with 50% less ranting!
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by pErvinalia » Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:00 pm

:hehe:
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"You know you blokes didn't criticize Obama. You're lying. - Forty Two. Umm - http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=42144

User avatar
Rum
Absent Minded Processor
Posts: 33562
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm
Location: South of the border..though not down Mexico way..
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Rum » Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:28 pm

Now this is commitment to education!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... end-school


Indian man carves road through hills so children can attend school

Jalandhar Nayak used a chisel, hoe and pickaxe to dig five-mile route, with officials planning to compensate him for his efforts

A man in a remote eastern Indian village has single-handedly carved a five-mile (8km) road through hilly terrain to help his children attend school.

It had been taking Jalandhar Nayak’s three sons about three hours each way to navigate the narrow, rocky route to class. So two years ago the vegetable seller from Odisha state picked up a chisel, a garden hoe and pickaxe and began building a shorter route.

His efforts came to the attention of government officials this week when he was featured in a local media bulletin.

“My children found it hard to walk on the narrow and stony path while going to their school. I often saw them stumbling against the rocks and decided to carve a road through the mountain so that they can walk more easily,” he told News World Odisha.

Jalandhar Nayak of #Kandhamal turns the #MountainMan of #Odisha by his expedition of carving a path to his house through 5 mountains; He has managed to carve a 8ft wide road trough 3 mountains so far.#NewsWorldOdisha Discovers The #Manjhi of #Odisha

“Nayak’s effort and determination to cut mountains to build a road left me spellbound,” the local administrator, Brundha D, told reporters.

He said Nayak, 45, would be paid for the time he had spent building the path between Gumsahi village and the school in Phulbani, according to the Press Trust of India.

The family are the only remaining residents of Gumsahi, with the rest of the village having left for areas with better roads and amenities.

Nayak had planned to work for another three years to build the remaining four miles (7km) required to complete the road – a job that has now been taken over by the local government.

“The district collector has assured me [he will] complete the construction of the road to my village,” Nayak said.

Footage of Nayak labouring has been aired on national TV, showing him carving out the route and struggling to line it with small boulders.

His story is being compared with that of Dashrath Manjhi, a labourer from Bihar who spent 22 years building a road through a mountain, reportedly reducing the route between two districts by 42km.

Manjhi’s efforts, which have inspired several films, were prompted by injuries his wife suffered while trying to cross the mountain to bring him lunch. He died in 2007 and received a state funeral.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 11280
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I identify as sexually arousing to women.
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Forty Two » Mon Jan 15, 2018 2:16 pm

rainbow wrote:
Forty Two wrote:
rainbow wrote:
Forty Two wrote:Meritocracy -- a tool of whiteness -- very problematic - https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10342
This victim mentality of the pasty-faced ones is getting quite tiresome.

Don't see it as a problem, it is a 'challenge'.
LOL, can't get much more racist than that.
What is racist is you expecting special treatment because your ancestors were mutants that couldn't produce enough melanin.
:smug:
I'm not one of those asking for special treatment, nor have I ever received it. Melanin has nothing to do with it. And, all people are mutants, technically speaking.
If you ever feel sad, remember that somewhere in the world there is a fat kid dropping his favorite ice cream cone.

I'm not Steve Bannon. I'm not trying to suck my own c**k. - Anthony Scaramucci.

User avatar
pErvinalia
Off his meds
Posts: 43828
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Now with 50% less ranting!
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by pErvinalia » Tue Jan 16, 2018 7:08 am

Australia Day is problematic. There's a growing movement to change the date. Thankfully 42 isn't Aussie, so we don't have to listen to how persecuted he would feel having his date taken away from him.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"You know you blokes didn't criticize Obama. You're lying. - Forty Two. Umm - http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=42144

User avatar
Rum
Absent Minded Processor
Posts: 33562
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm
Location: South of the border..though not down Mexico way..
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Rum » Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:45 pm

'Cos Oz was there long before the Brits stepped off that first boat?

User avatar
Tyrannical
Posts: 6113
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:59 am
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Tyrannical » Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:01 pm

Rum wrote:'Cos Oz was there long before the Brits stepped off that first boat?
Yup, 60,000 years of.......

Rape, forced marriage and child molestation. That's Australian "aborigines", it's just their culture.


Oh, and I shouldn't use the word marriage because that's just White people enforcing their culture on them.
A rational skeptic should be able to discuss and debate anything, no matter how much they may personally disagree with that point of view. Discussing a subject is not agreeing with it, but understanding it.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 11280
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I identify as sexually arousing to women.
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Forty Two » Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:41 pm

Rum wrote:Of course it isn't unfair. As it happens the single biggest indicator of educational achievement is being read to at a very early age. Whole academic careers have been built on research to this end (e.g http://www.education.vic.gov.au/documen ... gchild.pdf )

And of course those who aspire for their families and kids will be more inclined to do so.

It isn't possible to wave a magic wand and make everyone as ambitious for their kids as we might like them to be, but we can try to ensure the system doesn't leave those whose backgrounds leave them with a handicap from the get go.
And, there are those professors in academia and activists who would say that by reading to your kids, you are "unfairly disadvantaging others." http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... rine-timpf

And, while that example would not "ban" reading to your children -- the thought crossed his mind -- only, he balances the interests and says he wouldn't suggest a ban on reading to kids, because of the familial and relationship benefits that the activity fosters. Apparently, it'd be great to ban reading to level the educational outcomes, but it's not great to ban reading to level the relationship outcomes. He doesn't explain why. Perhaps it's because he knows that anyone suggesting that mom and dad be banned from sitting Janey in their lap to read a board book would be looked at as having completely lost the plot, and there'd be no way to enforce such a rule without leaping directly to the most authoritarian, totalitarian state in the world.

But, never fear, this example does suggest we ban parents sending their kids to private schools (I think that means public school in the UK, not sure - he means banning non-government run schools, because the "elite" non-government schools are better, and we can't have that). That he'd ban. No freedom there. Can't get together and form a group to educate each other's children - that's the purview of the State (not just to set minimum standards and goals - no -- it's the purview of the State in his mind to make sure that the kids are educated the same, even if that means chopping the top down, rather than bringing the bottom up).

Like the publication Slate says - if you send your kids to private school, then you're a bad person. http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/ ... ivate.html This is a great example of morality getting stood on its head, due to the underlying ideological premise. Traditionally, parents sending their kids to a good private school would be seen as "good" because parents are working to fulfill their parental responsibility of giving their kids the best education possible and taking good care of their children. That's "good" because it benefits the children, and benefits society as a whole to have as many better educated kids as possible. Now, however, it's "bad" because under the ideology that says "equality" is the prime concern, parents sending their kids to private school is unfair to those whose parents do not send them to private school (whether through inability, lack of desire, or lack of knowledge). So, if you send your kids there, you are a bad person. Feel bad. To be a good person, you have to do less for your kids. How much less? To its logical conclusion, it would seem that one should not even feed them healthy food, because some children's parents don't (through inability or ignorance or laziness, or whatever) do not feed their kids healthy food. So, feeding them healthy food is unfair to the disadvantaged.

This is on the cutting edge of Progressive thought today. Feel bad sometimes about reading to your kids, and don't send them to private school or you're a bad person.

(I'm not suggesting most people who self-identify as Progressive agree with that cutting edge - most probably are unaware of that edge, because it is the extreme - the problem is that extremes slowly migrate to the middle as time goes on, and the absurd sometimes become accepted).
If you ever feel sad, remember that somewhere in the world there is a fat kid dropping his favorite ice cream cone.

I'm not Steve Bannon. I'm not trying to suck my own c**k. - Anthony Scaramucci.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 11280
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I identify as sexually arousing to women.
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Forty Two » Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:58 pm

pErvinalia wrote:Australia Day is problematic. There's a growing movement to change the date. Thankfully 42 isn't Aussie, so we don't have to listen to how persecuted he would feel having his date taken away from him.
You invent these ideas. I've never suggested I've been persecuted at all. Pointing out the idiocy of certain ideas is not a claim to persecution.

Moving Australia Day is of little importance to me, and I think an argument can be made that celebrating the day colonial rule started in Australia is different than celebrating the day a country becomes an independent nation. I'm sure that the fact that the US doesn't celebrate November 11 as "America Day" or something like that being that's the day the British Pilgrims landed in New England, doesn't bother you, and I would guess you can fathom difference between November 11, 1620, and July 4, 1776, in terms of concept.

I would suggest March 3 be Oz's new day, because that's the day you blokes finally gained complete independence from the British. Like the proverbial adult child who doesn't leave home until he's in his 40s, so went Australia.... :smoke:
If you ever feel sad, remember that somewhere in the world there is a fat kid dropping his favorite ice cream cone.

I'm not Steve Bannon. I'm not trying to suck my own c**k. - Anthony Scaramucci.

User avatar
laklak
Posts: 13836
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:07 pm
About me: My preferred pronoun is "Massah"
Location: on the beach, drinking a beer
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by laklak » Tue Jan 16, 2018 3:22 pm

That would be September 3rd for us then, because their calendar is upside down.

User avatar
Rum
Absent Minded Processor
Posts: 33562
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm
Location: South of the border..though not down Mexico way..
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Rum » Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:37 pm

Australia Day should be in the Dreamtime of course.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests