[praxulus]

I live in Seattle, not San Francisco, but we have some similar issues with our schools. I'd really prefer to send my son to our local public schools, but if they aren't challenging him appropriately then my wife and I obviously aren't going to just give up on his education. We'll either pay for extracurricular enrichment like the person in this article, move to a wealthy suburb, or send him to a private school instead.

That's a much worse outcome from an equity lens, but there's only so much you can expect people to voluntarily sacrifice for the greater good. Asking higher income parents to risk their children's future is a lot.

[40yearoldman]

> That's a much worse outcome from an equity lens

Bingo, that is the issue, everybody is worried about equity.

You can't have it, we need meritocracy, equity is just cruel and unusual punishment to future. It is a recipe for driving society to the lowest common denominator.

You should demand proper education or your money back.

(Side note, this is what we will get 10x with free college, and the guaranteed loans have already driven it this way a bit more)

[com2kid]

Growing up in Seattle in the 90s, the school district was obviously racist and classist. Advanced programs were in the richer (whiter) neighborhoods and poor kids got to go to schools with police wagons out front.

The district charter use to have a line in it saying they had to offer each kid the best education possible. My mother used that line to force the school district to send a taxi to every day to take me up to a richer part of the city with better schools. That line of the charter has since been removed as from what I can tell kids now are at the mercy of their circumstances.

There is some fair arguments to make that mixing kids of different backgrounds together improves outcomes, if you take 1 kid from a poor background and surround that kid with a culture of success, there is a very large chance the kid will pick up on that culture of success and start doing better.

So, kernel of truth behind some of these policies.

IMHO the problem is, this plan only works if the vast majority of students are high achievers. If you have 10% of the students who are high achievers and you mix everyone together, after a few years you end up with no high achievers.

America in general needs to seriously look at how we as a culture approach education, until we fix that, there isn't much the schools can do to actually improve outcomes for underprivileged students en masse.

[smaudet]

> equity is just cruel and unusual punishment to future

Equality of outcome can be an undesired outcome, equality of opportunity is completely different.

The only trouble is getting the opportunities to be equal - there must be no advantage that can be unfairly given to one more deserving student than another, being able or willing to send your children to summer bootcamps must be an option for all children (who qualify), not whether you pay for it with time or money, e.g.

Free college is fantastic, but once again you confuse opportunity with outcome, and not even for the same individuals - parents are unburdened by cost, but in fact the opportunities are far from equal - money does not a quality education make, yet the majority or colleges are run as for profit institutions, not places that accept students based on their merits or potentials, nor do they actually try to actively shed students who are undeserving. Party culture does not need or require an expensive room and board situation, yet it pervades nearly every 'higher' education institution, only somewhat subsiding when graduate/doctorate programs become involved, and academics are once again taken seriously.

I.e. your meritocracy does not exist precisely because universities are busy making profits not teaching students.

[staunton]

> this is what we will get 10x with free college

That seems quite different. First, lots of countries have free higher education and seem to do just fine. Second, lowering price of entry is orthogonal to lowering expected performance. Your argument does not apply.

[2muchcoffeeman]

Making tertiary education free doesn’t mean you lower your standards like they have done here.

[eternityforest]

Without some level of equity, what exactly is the point of meritocracy?

A pure meritocracy wouldn't prioritize curing rare diseases or ending poverty, and might not reduce suffering as much as a more equitable society, even if that equitable society has less raw talent and education, so obviously there's an optimal point.

That optimal point may be a function of the current state of tech, as more and more of the stuff people need education for is done by AI.

It's not like they're ever going to have zero high achievers, even without school at all there's always going to be a few genuises.

On the other hand, the better AI gets, the less anyone outside the top 1% actually needs math, because AI may be able to do most of what an average person could learn without unrealistic amount of effort way beyond their motivation.

[cptcobalt]

I think it's moreso effective co-optimization between equity and meritocracy.

I went to private schools, and even kids of parents with money can wind up very unintelligent—placing them in the same classes as overachievers is good for neither. Same concept as bright kids from underprivileged families, let's bend over backward to get them in the same classes as the overachievers too.

[Der_Einzige]

That term "meritocracy" was coined originally in a book that was highly critical of meritocratic societies.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy

[adamredwoods]

We have two friends whose kids are in two different Seattle middle schools, and the anecdotes we hear are not going well. One middle school was considering getting rid of advanced courses entirely.

We're in East Renton, which usually follows Seattle, but they have kept honor courses. In fact, honor courses are encouraged to take, open to everyone, and from what I understand, no one is rejected (possibly only for the first year). I like this approach better than 'algebra for no one'.

Yes, the better school districts are east of Seattle, and this is why all those homes are retaining their skyrocketing value.

>> Asking higher income parents to risk their children's future is a lot.

We're not wealthy at all, so if the Renton school system follows Seattle, we're not going to waste our child's future on crap education.

[echelon]

You're not going to improve the lives of impoverished children by lowering the bar. It's absurd.

The best solution I can think of is to pay children to succeed in academics or extracurriculars (STEM, clubs, sports, arts, etc.) A student wouldn't have to be gifted in math, just apply themselves to some interest that drives them.

Give them a score-based percentage of $200/mo for hitting certain criteria each month. Playing for the school sports team, being in the band, getting involved in photography. Something positive in academics, arts, leadership, cooperation.

Paying kids would teach valuable lessons about finance and build up a reward system that would serve them later in life as they begin to associate action and achievement with positive outcomes. It should still work even if they don't have a suitable environment at home to discover this on their own.

Right now school is basically daycare. It can teach those that are properly prepared at home to pay attention, but it fails so many others.

[nordsieck]

> I live in Seattle

Luckily, everyone in the area gets access to Running Start[1]. Doesn't address the earlier years of schooling, though.

If your children are in HS, I'd really recommend sitting downing with a HS councilor to make sure that your kids take the classes that are required by the district for HS, but aren't required for a college degree (I'm thinking of speech here, but there may be others) in the first 2 years of HS. That way they get the most benefit out of their Junior and Senior years, if they decide to go that route.

I'm honestly not sure how the GPA thing works - I know AP classes can sometimes let kids increase their GPA above 4.0 for admissions purposes. But as someone who did both Running Start and AP classes, IMO, the actual college credit was way more valuable. But I also went to school in state, so those credits transferred nicely. May be a totally different story if you're shooting for Ivys.

---

1. https://www.k12.wa.us/student-success/support-programs/dual-...

[pfannkuchen]

I found the actual impact of AP credits disappointing. I ended up with no gen ed classes and started off in sophomore classes for math and physics. AP doesn’t count towards college GPA, and it turns out that others ended up with GPA padding that I missed out on. Still turned out fine overall, the GPA padding thing just didn’t occur to me in high school and no one pointed it out.

[buildbot]

Running start is an incredible program - beyond offering far more advanced and faster paced classes, it also really helped me personally mature and see vastly different people and perspectives than where in my age group at high school.

[icelancer]

I did this in HS decades ago and had to fight guidance counselors to get it done. Fortunately, it's much easier now. I cannot recommend this program highly enough.

[seanmcdirmid]

Running start applies to the entire state of Washington, and since 2013, all Washington state schools are pretty well funded (even if that means taking money away from richer Seattle area property tax districts).

[bradlys]

They don’t generally transfer for Ivys. Running start is something you do if you have no intention of going to prestigious private universities as it’s completely pointless (credits don’t usually transfer) and they don’t have a great process for evaluating such students into their programs. You’d only do it if you plan to go to a school in your state since transferring credits out of state isn’t always easy going.

[testfoobar]

Wealthy suburbs are cutting advanced classes too. Palo Alto Unified School District is dropping dual-enrolled Multivariable Calculus and Linear Algebra (classes taken after AP Calculus BC).

https://www.paloaltoonline.com/square/2023/03/29/cancellatio...

[georgeecollins]

My kid is on this track exactly and I think it is a joke that some kids take multivariable calculus or linear algebra in high school. Enrichment and AP has become an arms race for the upper middle class to get their kids into good schools. Realistically, if you are STEM major you probably are going to have to retake these classes anyway. And if you aren't you probably won't need them.

I know some kids are really exceptional and maybe ought to take this much math that young. But I think a lot do it now to get into a college.

[prpl]

I have a hard time believing above average students (with parents with parents without engineering/science degrees) could take linear algebra and multi variable calculus at university rigor along any other courses they are required to take. Sure, maybe at Paly and Gunn there’s enough to fill a 20 person class, but those are still pretty steep courses which require math majors and not math education majors.

If the students are prepared enough for those classes, what’s the point in keeping them in High School anyway?

I had a strange experience where I had a bunch of AP courses lined up my senior year and then moved to a place which did not have nearly any of them. In hindsight, I should have really pressed for direct enrollment to college instead of faffing around my senior year in “communication skills”, AP english, and “Economics” - all three required by the school district but mostly useless.

[gramie]

The real problem is the insane policy of the U.S. to fund schools locally. That way, you will always have better schools in the richer areas and worse schools in the poorer areas.

In Ontario (Canada), schools are funded by the province. Schools doing worse can access addition funding and other resources. In 2020 teachers earned an average of $103,000/year including benefits. In Toronto, which has a high cost of living, the average was $108,000.

That's not to say that school quality doesn't vary, often by household income. Poorer people often have language issues (immigrants) and can't afford to pay for extra help for their kids, or don't have free time to work with them. The system is still stacked against them, but not nearly as badly.

The American "I got mine" method of school funding seems like the worst possible choice.

[laverya]

This isn't a funding problem - SF's schools spend ~$17,500/student/year, while the California average is ~$14,000/student/year.

LA Unified is currently ~16,000/student/year.

It looks to me like SF actually gets significantly more money per student than people in the suburbs.

[hintymad]

> In Ontario (Canada), schools are funded by the province.

California too, yet California has one of the most corrupted education systems. Case in point, the Bay Area schools couldn’t even afford school buses

[golergka]

I grew up in Russia, and education system at the time was mostly the same as it was in Soviet times.

Still, there was a whole system of special schools, both for high and low achievers. I have went to a “math/physics” grade school from the start, and subsequently changed schools two times, each time through hard entrance exams, to finally end up in the most challenging/prestigious school in the country.

It's completely mind boggling to me that a communist country has such a system, but a capitalist country is trying to bring everyone to common denominator.

[say_it_as_it_is]

The greater good isn't dumbing down but wising up. The former is the current strategy. Don't play their game.

[seanmcdirmid]

Same boat. He is in SPS now, but as a kindergartener. We will kick the can down the road and do something if he gets bogged down in a watered down curriculum. I get the equalization goal, but when kids in China are starting calculus, not algebra, in 9th grade, we can't just ignore that.

[option]

in what universe sacrificing child’s education (even if the child is from wealthy family) leads to some greater good. It is a lose-lose proposition for everyone.

[bigbacaloa]

This is the essence of NIMBY reasoning.

[b59831]

And the kids who's families can't afford to move/go to private school pay for the rich family's idealism.

[icelancer]

The rich families are not the problem here. The public schools with the tyranny of low expectations are the issue.

[celeritascelery]

No, it’s the school board of San Francisco who is making the poor kids pay. They can’t afford to get private schooling, and their school is actively preventing them from succeeding.

[keeganpoppen]

i'm curious in what sense you mean that they "pay"... public schools could easily just offer these classes, ex idealism, but they choose not to in the name of Equity. and it's not because the rich kids go and attend private school instead-- their rich parents still pay property taxes like everyone else, so i don't really know how that flight would shift an extra burden on to the kids that don't move schools. i guess school funding is tied in some formulaic sense to the number of kids that attend that specific school? but even that roundabout justification has the causality backward: the un-offering of the course is what leads to the rich kid flight in the first place-- seems to me that the only "idealism" that is being "paid" for here is that which is being promulgated by the Church of "Equity". but it is true that the non-rich kids are the ones stuck paying for it. (but where do the kids of these high priests of Equity go to school? i have a hunch...)

and beyond that, isn't the whole point of GP's comment that the idealistic rich people are trying to / would like to leave their children in public schools? what's idealistic about sending your kids to private school instead? seems like the exact opposite to me.

so other than "pay" not making any sense, "idealism" not making sense, and randomly swapping whose (not "who's") idealism is being paid for, your reply makes perfect sense.

like, when people make comments like this, do they think that they are saying anything in particular, or is it just about the words sounding good in a certain order, like music lyrics? it's like some sort of pathos DDoS. but, hey: at least "your heart's in the right place", right?