Prepared Society Forum banner

Post shtfeducation

10K views 53 replies 27 participants last post by  Padre 
#1 ·
This isn't really the best spot for this but couldn't find a better place where it fits. I read a thread on another forum and it got me thinking. The thread was about post SHTF mathematics, and if/how people would take care of "figuring" without modern technology. If there are no more calculators, computers and such. How would people figure what they would need to build a house? We take stuff like that for advantage. Even more important is what about future generations? Now I'm talking a post-apocalyptic, TEOTWAWKI no near future restoration of normality. How do people educate their children? Can you teach your kids? Do you know someone who can, past the basics of addition, subtraction, and such?

Most of the preppers I know don't have or have even thought about any plan for this. It like entertainment is something "for a way down the road". While we don't have any kids the wife and I do have family members who either have or plan to have kids. Several of them are members of our "group". So we're lucky as my wife has her masters degree and teaches all levels from very basic ( grade school level almost) math to graduate level college courses at a local college.
Has anyone else prepared for this?
 
#27 ·
QUOTE:

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."

-Robert A. Heinlein

The closer we come to that ideal ourselves, the better teachers we will be.
I like Heinlein and I like the way he thought, but in this quote I think his last conclusion goes to far. Yes, we should all strive to broaden our skill base but there's no way no how that we're going to get rid of specialists.

You're a machinist. I'm not. If I needed to have a part machined and I had access to the same tools as you, I can guarantee you that you're going to do the job far better and faster than me. You'll now what metal to use for the tool being made, you'll know how to use the machines, you'll use your skills learned over decades of doing this work and meanwhile I'll be slicing my thumb off, I'll be using copper to make a hammer and so on.

Specialization is how society creates wealth. What you can do with one hour's work would take me 20 hours. What I can do with one hour of labor in my specialization would take you 20 hours. Instead of us wasting 40 hours between us to get two outcomes, we can trade an hour of each of our days and be just as well off and now have a free 19 hours to do other things and create wealth and betterment for society.
 
#28 ·
I have to agree with both Machinist and Bobbb , Bobbb for the economics of saving time and resources. Machinist for the fact that the wide one's knowledge base the more educated one is, and even though a person may not be an expert in every field it make it al lot easier to understand why some people ask a seemingly high price for something that they make look easy. Specialization without the knowledge of what is involved in the rest of the economic cycle is where the foolish idea that a Smart car is more economical on fuel than a loaded Tractor Trailer hauling goods.
 
#29 ·
Right now the school teaches our kids but my wife and I are prepared to teach our kids post shtf . Right now the school teaches basics and my wife reinforces them at home but she could teach them the basics as well. I focus on teaching them critical thinking skills because I feel it is missing in schools and it will be a valuable skill in a post shtf world.
 
#30 ·
Bobbb makes a good point and I agree. I am a good machinist because of my Engineering background, farm experience that provides knowledge of the parts I make or repair, and a lot of general mechanical experience. Being a mechanic does not make you a machinist, but learning mechanics will make a machinist BETTER .

Tirediron puts it all in perspective.

sgtrunningfool has the key to what is wrong in public education, IMHO. Independent critical thinking is discouraged mightily in our school system, to the detriment of the students, while that quality is exactly what is needed worst for our future.

From what I have seen, a high percentage of home school advocates understand all the above and are putting it to work. There are some whose motive is primarily a religious one, but they too want something better than public schools.

The nationwide minimum achievement test has resulted in "teaching for the test", instead of providing an education. SAT scores have sunken deplorably over the past 50 years. Our nation has fallen far down the ranks of education quality. As a result, I believe that if your child attends public schools, as a parent, you must provide what the schools do not teach. That was true 40+ years ago when we taught our own kids after school, and is more so today. TSHTF in this area long ago.
 
#31 ·
Independent critical thinking is discouraged mightily in our school system, to the detriment of the students, while that quality is exactly what is needed worst for our future.
It's discouraged because it requires the teachers to actually be sharper than the students in order to outthink them, to anticipate where the student's thinking will lead them, to foresee the logical pitfalls which await, to steer them away from the pitfalls or to find ways to extricate the student from faulty paths of logic.

The teachers can do this for the mediocre student but not so much for the average student and certainly not for the above average student and forget about it when it comes to exceptional students.

Simply put, for critical thinking to be nurtured in schools requires that teachers first master critical thinking themselves and that's clearly not happening in public education today.

The nationwide minimum achievement test has resulted in "teaching for the test", instead of providing an education.
True as far as it goes. Keep in mind that the teaching to the test outcomes are actually preferable to what preceded this movement, which was teachers providing what they thought was an education and failing so dismally that NCLB had to be implemented as a remedy.

SAT scores have sunken deplorably over the past 50 years.
Two factors are responsible here - more and more students are taking the SAT, meaning that we're diving deeper into the HS talent pool and so we're diluting the exceptional students in with the average students. Also, the demographics of the nation are changing and this has a HUGE effect on student outcomes.

Our nation has fallen far down the ranks of education quality.
This is almost all attributable to changing demographics - take a look at how we fair if we compare the demographics of America as though it were 1960 to the rest of the world:



We're doing better than Europe, and except for ethnically homogeneous Finland, we're neck in neck with the top scorers when we look at just White Americans.
 
#32 ·
Good discussion here!!

But, to fet back to the OPs actual question......:rolleyes:

I think education in a POST SHTF world, and over the next couple GENERATIONS(!!), will be an entirely different animal. I thinks lots of stuff will be NOT taught, in favor of the knowledge more appropriate to he times.
This would of course depend greatly on how bad things actually were DURING the SHTF times, what cause the fall, and how many people survived.
 
#33 · (Edited)
Bobbb made some excellent points regarding demographics and a higher % of students taking the tests. That supports what has become obvious in other ways, that there are a lot of kids going off to college that have no business there. Many colleges don't mind at all and accept the tuition money for kids who have to take all remedial classes for at least a year!

The decline of the US in international ranking is less dramatic than the precipitous drop in raw SAT scores, especially from the 1960's through 1980. I could not find numbers previous to 1972, but from then to 1980, SAT scores in the US fell from an average of 530/509 (verbal/math) to 502/492 in just that 8 year period. That is a drop of 5% in the verbal section and near 1% in math. Inexcusable, IMHO. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT

Today, local manufacturers in Indiana cannot find qualified applicants despite a high unemployment rate. This is primarily due to a complete lack of technical training, formal or otherwise. Govt. emphasis on computer technology in schools has left us without any vocational training worthy of the title.

In a PAW world, I would expect all the above to change dramatically and fast. With a dire need for people who can function in a world deprived of today's advantages, I see education reverting to a very practical direction. I think that would best be served by apprenticeships and on the job training supplemented with after hours textbook teaching, as has been the practice in skilled trades for a long time. Long ago, doctors and lawyers learned the same way.

With a lower population, less communication, and less travel, the world will shrink again to the local area. This begets a need for fewer medical specialists and more general practitioners, and more skilled people with broader knowledge. Each person will have to wear more than one hat to make the community function. I hope it does not get as bad as the days when the blacksmith was also the dentist, because he was the only one with pliers to pull teeth. :eek:
 
#34 ·
I am actually really glad to see this issue being addressed; I brought up a similar point about a year ago, and it was largely dismissed. It makes me happy to see that other people are considering education as an important aspect of being prepared for the future.
 
#35 ·
This is almost all attributable to changing demographics - take a look at how we fair if we compare the demographics of America as though it were 1960 to the rest of the world:



We're doing better than Europe, and except for ethnically homogeneous Finland, we're neck in neck with the top scorers when we look at just White Americans.
What a ridiculous comparison, that is not like 1960's America at all.
I do believe there were races other than non-Hispanic whites in America in the 1960's:rolleyes:

But comparing Canada with it's ethnic diversity (Native's alone make up more than 4% of our population) to ONLY whites in the U.S?!? And Canada still comes out ahead, scary. I really think our school system is terrible so to think that it is worse south of the border:eek:

Anyways with regards to the topic, having a broad range of experiences and knowledge makes one much better at solving novel problems, which is what we really need today and would even more if tshtf. The number of times I have seen intelligent, highly educated "specialists" be utterly baffled by a problem that was "not in the book":( It is not really their fault in a way, if you haven't been exposed to different fields and ways of doing things and instead are taught the only "right" way to do things you are at a disadvantage.

I HATED school but I love learning. I will never be finished learning till I die.
Whether it's here on this forum where I am learning others opinions and ways of doing things, from a book, listening to those even older than me:D, or dealing with my livestock and plants, there is always something to learn.

People put too much emphasis on the idea that everything must be crammed into kids before they start living their life. I served my time in the system (with the help of some understanding individuals overlooking a ridiculous level of absenteeism at times:eek:) and I certainly learned whatever curriculum was available. The thing is, that info is such a tiny part of what there is to learn, sure you can take a million different courses at colleges and university but why waste the time and money when the information is out there for the taking. As others have mentioned condensed courses offer an example of just how inefficient typical education is.

Homeschooling is often done along similar lines, sure there are basics that must be learned at some point, but learning happens much better when the individual is actually seeking out that particular knowledge, when they have a use for it. And the idea that these things must be learned when you are young is nonsense, it may be easier when you are young, then again you may forget it and have to re-learn it anyways. There are also lots of physical things to do when you are young, and learning as you go is better for your brain:).

The only other thing I would add is that it is not easy to say what knowledge will be needed. Some stuff that we consider basics, like trigonometry might be of little use to an individual (in practical building it is often easier to just lay it out and use a measure) while manipulating equations could be very important (physics equations relating to electricity for example). So I think it is important to preserve as much knowledge as possible in as many forms as we can but not worry so much about cramming all of it into the heads of children.
 
#36 ·
What a ridiculous comparison, that is not like 1960's America at all.

I do believe there were races other than non-Hispanic whites in America in the 1960's:rolleyes:
Frankly I'm baffled by why you persist with your short methodology critiques for "What a ridiculous comparison" is a joke of a critique. You've done this a few times now and your critiques are pathetic. I suggest that if you want to engage in critique, then put your shoulder into it and do it right.

But comparing Canada with it's ethnic diversity (Native's alone make up more than 4% of our population) to ONLY whites in the U.S?!?
First off, it's not ethnic diversity which was the variable being isolated, it was racial diversity. Secondly, tell us how much racial diversity Canada has which is now in it's third generation in Canada? There certainly were smatterings of Chinese-Canadians and other Asian communities who can trace their ancestors to the Gold Rush days of the 19th Century and the Chinatowns of Victoria and Vancouver, but Canada's racial diversity back in the 40s to 60s was basically inconsequential. You had the Chinese Immigration Act passed in 1923 and there was effectively almost zero Asian immigration until 1967 and even then it didn't kick into high gear until much later. There was also the Komagata Maru Incident: (no this is not the more famous Kobiyashi Maru incident referenced in Star Trek lore)

The Komagata Maru incident involved a Japanese steamship, the Komagata Maru, that sailed from Punjab, India to Hong Kong, Shanghai, China; Yokohama, Japan; and then to Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, in 1914, carrying 376 passengers from Punjab, India. Of them 20 were admitted to Canada, but the 356 other passengers were not allowed to land in Canada, and the ship was forced to return to India.[1] The passengers consisted of 340 Sikhs, 24 Muslims, and 12 Hindus, all British subjects. This was one of several incidents in the history of early 20th century involving exclusion laws in both Canada and the United States designed to keep out immigrants of only Asian origin.

These regulations came at a time when Canada was accepting massive numbers of immigrants (over 400,000 in 1913 alone - a figure that remains unsurpassed to this day), almost all of whom came from Europe.

It is only in recent years that it's possible for 3rd generation minority Canadians to be counted in such a study, presuming the immigrant grandparents arrived in the late 60s and early 70s. Canada wasn't drowning in racial diversity 2 generations ago. And thirdly, Canada is not the center of the universe. The methodology is most useful when applied to Europe for Europe didn't have a small indigenous community, so the rounding error of Natives and Asian-Canadians doesn't influence the findings. The point here is that Canada was overwhelmingly white 2 generations back, on par with the racial characteristics of Europe.

It's amusing when you get on your high horse and then demonstrate that you don't even understand the issue. Your invocation of Canada's ethnic diversity completely misses the target and demonstrates that you don't understand what is being measured in that graph. No one was looking at isolating Canada's Ukrainian and Polish and German immigrants.

And Canada still comes out ahead, scary. I really think our school system is terrible so to think that it is worse south of the border:eek:
As noted above, Canada's Asian population who are neither 1st nor 2nd generation Canadians are included in the Canadian score while Asian-Americans who meet the same criteria are excluded from the American score. Asian students, as a class, generally score a bit higher than white students, so Canada's score is boosted with the inclusion of these students while America's score doesn't get the same benefit.

As to the remainder of your comment I think you raise insightful points and I take no issue with them.
 
#37 ·
A comparison as ridiculous as that does not need an in depth critique imo so I'm not going to spend all day writing one. With regards to the racial diversity of Canada I already mentioned more than 4% of the population is Native (these are certainly not immigrants by the chart's criteria)
These are included in the Canadian numbers (and the Australian for that matter), even Sami in Scandinavia, but not American ones, that makes it a bad comparison on it's own. There are many other groups that would be included, natives are just the most obvious.
Making the assertion that third generation Canadians of Asian origin might somehow "cancel out" the other ethnic groups is not a valid argument without any evidence.

If a person for some reason wants to compare the score of whites in one country to whites in another for some reason, then do it, but to compare countries using such skewed criteria is misleading.

I certainly do find it interesting that many of your much vaunted examples of homogenous populations like Iceland fall below Canada and other countries that, even with 2 generations of immigrants removed show considerably more diversity.
 
#38 ·
Anyways with regards to the topic, having a broad range of experiences and knowledge makes one much better at solving novel problems, which is what we really need today and would even more if tshtf. The number of times I have seen intelligent, highly educated "specialists" be utterly baffled by a problem that was "not in the book":( It is not really their fault in a way, if you haven't been exposed to different fields and ways of doing things and instead are taught the only "right" way to do things you are at a disadvantage.

People put too much emphasis on the idea that everything must be crammed into kids before they start living their life. I served my time in the system (with the help of some understanding individuals overlooking a ridiculous level of absenteeism at times:eek:) and I certainly learned whatever curriculum was available. The thing is, that info is such a tiny part of what there is to learn, sure you can take a million different courses at colleges and university but why waste the time and money when the information is out there for the taking. As others have mentioned condensed courses offer an example of just how inefficient typical education is.

Homeschooling is often done along similar lines, sure there are basics that must be learned at some point, but learning happens much better when the individual is actually seeking out that particular knowledge, when they have a use for it. And the idea that these things must be learned when you are young is nonsense, it may be easier when you are young, then again you may forget it and have to re-learn it anyways. There are also lots of physical things to do when you are young, and learning as you go is better for your brain:).

The only other thing I would add is that it is not easy to say what knowledge will be needed. Some stuff that we consider basics, like trigonometry might be of little use to an individual (in practical building it is often easier to just lay it out and use a measure) while manipulating equations could be very important (physics equations relating to electricity for example).
As has been pointed out, specializing is how we expand the knowledge base in specific areas. I am a pediatric home health nurse, I have extensive training & experience in managing kids on ventilators, etc. in the home. I assure you if your kid on a ventilator had a fabulous nurse without my skill set, she would not progress & would likely stay on the vent years longer than necessary, if she lived through it.

When you talk about teaching things when the child has a use for them, this is called unschooling & its founder is John Holt. While it definitely has it's up side, it also has it's downside. There are reasons we teach things to children in the order we teach them. The brain of a child is not a mini version of an adults. It is still developing & is quiete different than ours. We can take advantage of that development though. Classically, this was done using the trivium approach. This approach to teaching children helped to produce people with a depth of knowledge in a variety of areas that you are so fond of. In the early years, the focus is on memorization & learning facts, when the child's brain does so most easily. In middle school the focus switches to analyzing information, support an argument, & learn the "why" behind things. Next it changes to forming arguements, just in time for those adolescent years when arguing is second nature :). Without the facts the student memorized in the early years & the logic learned in the middle years, the student is just an argumentative dumba$$ teen that makes no sense & can be led around using his emotions.

Unschooling & classical education are on different ends of the spectrum in education. One is a "let the child lead the way" theory, the other a "lead the student in a very methodical way" theory. So you see you have contradicted yourself somewhat in your statements. ( Disclaimer, I know these things because I am a "homeschooling specialist" with 15 years of experience homeschooling my kids & doing consulting work for other homeschoolers, so that may mean you dismiss everything I've said. :teehee:) If you want more information, read about John Holt & unschooling & the Well Trained Mind & classical education.
 
#39 ·
If a person for some reason wants to compare the score of whites in one country to whites in another for some reason, then do it, but to compare countries using such skewed criteria is misleading.
The problem here is the design of the data set or the limitation on the release of the entire data set. For instance, the Educational Testing Service, the people who run the SAT, used to gather student information on race and family income and release that information in their Technical Bulletins, but when researchers discovered that white students from the poorest category of family income were scoring higher on the SAT than black students from the richest category of family income this "hate-fact" caused quite a stir. Since that information became public the ETS no longer releases tables which break down race and family income, though it's highly likely that the data still exists and is now for internal ETS use only.

Well, the same principle applies to the PISA data-sets - one can only analyze the data that is released.

To conduct the study you suggest would require mounting an independent effort and such a study would never pass the Institutional Review Board gauntlet of leftist protectors of the faith. They'd ask "why do you want to isolate scores by race across nations, don't you realize that race is merely a social construction? What are you, a racist?"

Look at what happened to the Duke researchers who discovered that black students disproportionately switch out of difficult majors into fluffy majors. No one disputed the evidence, no one disputed the study design, they just crucified the researchers and many asked why they bothered to even ask the question of whether black students switch to less difficult majors? Others asked how such a study could be approved and published.

I certainly do find it interesting that many of your much vaunted examples of homogenous populations like Iceland fall below Canada and other countries that, even with 2 generations of immigrants removed show considerably more diversity.
Why should you find that surprising? Student outcome is not determined by a one factor explanation. The point is to account for a number of factors so that we can isolate the influence of the factor in question here, which is the curriculum and the school culture of each nation. That is, after all, the point of these international comparisons. The presumption is that Finland is doing something right and so all sorts of ed-folk make the trip over to Finland to study what they're doing and bring it back to their countries to implement.
 
#40 ·
Something I would recommend is to get those cheater cards that you can buy at places like Bomgarrs and store these in your SHTF files. Basic geometry is a must for doing some projects but this is not a math thing its a craftsman thing that normally has to be learned by doing. Decimal equivalent cards are nice to have around too.
Just what do you mean by "cheater cards"? Flash cards of some kind? Also, I've never heard of Bomgarrs; what kind of store is it?

I would also recommend that every one have a Machinery's Handbook in the file. This is the bible of projects. They have everything you would need to design almost anything. The last one I purchase was maybe 15 years ago but when I run into trouble on a project that book always has a solution. These can be purchased from Amazon for $75 for a hard cover and $15 for the paper back version.
Hmmm...methinks I overpaid for mine. I got mine new at a local Barnes & Noble store for about $103 with member's discount. But then I've got the 29th edition, too.:hmmm:
 
#41 ·
Just what do you mean by "cheater cards"? Flash cards of some kind? Also, I've never heard of Bomgarrs; what kind of store is it?

Boomgarrs is local to Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma. I didn't know where else they are sold. These cheater cards are plastic cards that have the most common formulas on them by discipline. There are maybe 15 different cards that cover Trig, Geometry, Basic math, etc.
 
#42 ·
As has been pointed out, specializing is how we expand the knowledge base in specific areas.

Specialists may expand our knowledge base to some degree but most innovation and leaps ahead come from integrating knowledge from a variety of fields. The first example that comes to mind in the medical field is Frederick Banting (Canadian btw:)), he was absolutely in no way whatsoever a specialist in diabetes and yet he discovered the way to make insulin, the biggest breakthrough by far the field had ever seen. His training as a surgeon and other experiences allowed him to put ideas together that others did not. Even after proving insulin's effectiveness he never specialized, continuing to pursue his many other interests until his untimely death

I am a pediatric home health nurse, I have extensive training & experience in managing kids on ventilators, etc. in the home. I assure you if your kid on a ventilator had a fabulous nurse without my skill set, she would not progress & would likely stay on the vent years longer than necessary, if she lived through it.

I would certainly not question your skill set but at the same time I would not blindly trust someone with that background either. I bet a lot of people on here have seen mistakes made by doctors and nurses (as with any profession) there have been many studies showing how fallible specialists are. If I had a child on a ventilator you can bet I would be up to date on any and all research anybody could get their hands on just as I have had to when helping others with medical conditions. I don't have time to research every medical condition but I can certainly make the time for those that affect my loved ones

When you talk about teaching things when the child has a use for them, this is called unschooling & its founder is John Holt.

I mean this in the most lighthearted manner possible but this is a textbook example of mistakes specialists make:D
Similar to the Einstellung effect.
Unschooling is a specific method of teaching that involves not only the order in which things are learned but also the manner in which materials presented, often with the emphasis on unconventional methods. I think it has much to offer but as a "method" it certainly has issues.
While it sounds similar, what I was referring to was not a methodology founded by an individual, I was speaking more along the lines of life-long learning.


While it definitely has it's up side, it also has it's downside. There are reasons we teach things to children in the order we teach them. The brain of a child is not a mini version of an adults. It is still developing & is quiete different than ours. We can take advantage of that development though. Classically, this was done using the trivium approach. This approach to teaching children helped to produce people with a depth of knowledge in a variety of areas that you are so fond of.

The trivium certainly is useful but the degree to which it "helps" with the depth of knowledge is debatable. There are many ways to encourage depth or more specifically breadth of knowledge and I don't think one that neglects the sciences is the best.

In the early years, the focus is on memorization & learning facts, when the child's brain does so most easily. In middle school the focus switches to analyzing information, support an argument, & learn the "why" behind things. Next it changes to forming arguements, just in time for those adolescent years when arguing is second nature :). Without the facts the student memorized in the early years & the logic learned in the middle years, the student is just an argumentative dumba$$ teen that makes no sense & can be led around using his emotions.

Unschooling & classical education are on different ends of the spectrum in education. One is a "let the child lead the way" theory, the other a "lead the student in a very methodical way" theory. So you see you have contradicted yourself somewhat in your statements.

Sorry but I really don't see the contradictions in what I said, I certainly think you have made some good points though. For anyone who is not familiar with it the Unschooling method it is certainly worth a look, if only to learn about alternatives.

( Disclaimer, I know these things because I am a "homeschooling specialist" with 15 years of experience homeschooling my kids & doing consulting work for other homeschoolers, so that may mean you dismiss everything I've said. :teehee:) If you want more information, read about John Holt & unschooling & the Well Trained Mind & classical education.
Well, the same principle applies to the PISA data-sets - one can only analyze the data that is released.
I agree, at some point the data does not exist to make a reasonable comparison and I would argue that is the case here. Your suppositions that 3rd generation Asian immigrants might be responsible for the differences is one example of why the comparison is flawed. Without knowing how many of them exist, whether or not they perform any better on the test, whether or not that would have equal weight with other groups the comparison becomes less than useful. One could select even further and compare only white Americans of a certain income bracket with the entire populations of other countries but this would also be a very poor indicator of the effectiveness of a school system.

To conduct the study you suggest would require mounting an independent effort and such a study would never pass the Institutional Review Board gauntlet of leftist protectors of the faith. They'd ask "why do you want to isolate scores by race across nations, don't you realize that race is merely a social construction? What are you, a racist?"

Look at what happened to the Duke researchers who discovered that black students disproportionately switch out of difficult majors into fluffy majors. No one disputed the evidence, no one disputed the study design, they just crucified the researchers and many asked why they bothered to even ask the question of whether black students switch to less difficult majors? Others asked how such a study could be approved and published.

Why should you find that surprising? Student outcome is not determined by a one factor explanation. The point is to account for a number of factors so that we can isolate the influence of the factor in question here, which is the curriculum and the school culture of each nation. That is, after all, the point of these international comparisons. The presumption is that Finland is doing something right and so all sorts of ed-folk make the trip over to Finland to study what they're doing and bring it back to their countries to implement.
I never said I found it surprising;)
Even if this particular comparison was reasonable it is still a long way from isolating just those two variables, as I'm sure you know. Cultural capital alone like Machinist mentioned is capable of causing huge differences in priorities. Either way in a long term SHTF situation education will most likely neglect areas that are less valued and focus on those that are considered important.
 
#43 ·
I agree, at some point the data does not exist to make a reasonable comparison and I would argue that is the case here.
You're making perfect the enemy of the good. You really are. PISA releases the international comparisons to the public and almost every report from every organization dealing with education issues, not to mention the mass media, simply looks at country to country comparisons and declare that the system of education in the US is the principal variable which is responsible for student outcomes and that we should adopt our system of education to be more like country X in order to attain their student outcomes.

That methodology is utterly and irredeemably garbage. This analysis of the demographic data makes the country to country comparisons quite a bit better, in fact, a whole lot better. The methodology is sound and it's better than the methodology of simply comparing students' PISA scores across countries. It's not a perfect methodology because that's impossible to achieve considering that a researcher can only analyze data which is collected and if the collected data doesn't include the variables you deem important, well, there's nothing that the researcher can do about that (well there is, but now we're talking independent funding and a parallel research design to gather that supplementary data).

Your suppositions that 3rd generation Asian immigrants might be responsible for the differences is one example of why the comparison is flawed.
No, that's not a good example. Simply because a supposition is invoked doesn't mean that the supposition is meritless or that it's not applicable. I don't need to conduct a thorough survey to declare that automobiles have 4 wheels. This is something that most people know. Sure, there are rare instances of 3 wheeled cars or James Bond driving his Mustang on two tires through downtown Las Vegas, but these exceptions don't invalidate the general rule. We know from international data, including Canada, that Asian students as a group, perform at levels slightly higher than the white mean. I don't need a thorough survey of Canadian student achievement broken down by race to invoke this issue.

In fact, you're doing the same thing - you're invoking Native Canadian underperformance without referencing a source. You can't have it both ways. If the study is flawed, or at least my response is flawed on the issue of Asian over performance, then the same criticism applies to your critique. You haven't cited any sources for that claim. I didn't bother to dispute your claim because I know this literature very well - the problem is that you apparently don't, hence your skepticism about Asian performance.

One last point on Native underperformance and their proportion of the Canadian population. We're dealing with two distinct populations here. The criteria to self-identify as Native or Metis is fairly broad, same as in the US. Canadian Status Indians are far fewer than Indians who maintain identity as Indians. There are huge problems in Reserve Schools but that doesn't necessarily translate outwards to all young students who identify as Indian and who are the products of out-marriage to both non-Status Indians and to non-Indians. So that 4% population proportion doesn't map directly over to the trouble that Status Indians are having in their reserve schools or even some non-Status Indians are having in the public school system. In fact, with many people who have some Indian heritage, this could be a flip of the coin situation - are they white or Indian? Do their scores elevate or depress one group or the other?

One could select even further and compare only white Americans of a certain income bracket with the entire populations of other countries but this would also be a very poor indicator of the effectiveness of a school system.
Not necessarily. Many of the countries which populate these international comparison lists have populations similar to counties in the US. Iceland has a population of 320,000. The US has a population 1,000x greater. How would Iceland fare in comparison to the public high school students of Cambridge, MA?

Look, the basic principle of statistical analysis is to compare Like to Like. Race is a huge factor here. Ideally we should be comparing Swedish-American students in Minneapolis to Swedish student in Stockholm in order to control for ancestry. Then we should compare the students by class. Then compare by family composition. And so on. Eventually all that's left is the school systems and curricula which differ between Minneapolis and Stockholm. This leaves us analyzing what people really want to know - how well does the school system function at the level of student outcomes.
 
#44 ·
Bobbb, I'm not going to quote everything you wrote because this thread was supposed to be about POST shtf education and frankly I doubt most people on here care about this argument.

The fact that other people and the media might make the erroneous argument that the only factor in test outcomes is the system of education is misleading, if that in fact occurs.
My criticism of that particular graph has nothing to do with that argument though.
If one looks at the total averaged test scores for a nation it will give a relatively accurate assessment of how well students in that country perform.
When you start isolating variables then it may be possible to gain some insight into the degree to which the system, for instance plays a role. However if the data is not available and you only include one variable then it may not give a more accurate measure of how the system performs, therefore the comparison has little use.

By excluding all races other than whites in the U.S for instance, many factors will also be affected, income level being the most obvious but others can also be very important. If, for instance minorities are overly represented among lower level jobs and that leads to lower test scores the results will be skewed because this lower income level will be excluded from U.S data but not other countries.

You said;
"In fact, you're doing the same thing - you're invoking Native Canadian underperformance without referencing a source. You can't have it both ways. If the study is flawed, or at least my response is flawed on the issue of Asian over performance, then the same criticism applies to your critique. You haven't cited any sources for that claim. I didn't bother to dispute your claim because I know this literature very well - the problem is that you apparently don't, hence your skepticism about Asian performance."
I never once made the claim that Natives in Canada performed worse on this test, I merely pointed out that by excluding them and other groups from the U.S data and including them in other countries makes the comparison strained to say the least.
I am not "skeptical" of Asian students performance on the test I was merely pointing out that you do not have the data required to make that argument. As I mentioned earlier, to make the argument you posited you would first have to prove that 3rd generation Asians performed better on this test, determine what their population is and the degree they would effect the average, then one would have to determine all other minorities that would be excluded in the U.S but not other countries, their population and the degree to which they over/under performed.
I doubt getting past even the first step with hard facts is possible at this point. So people can use this bad comparison (without even admitting how flawed it is) or they can simply admit that the data is not there to make an appropriate comparison along these lines.

Your last paragraph I can agree with for the most part, if one really wants to compare school systems then that is the variable to be isolated. Instead of just comparing one race however it would give more insight to see how different school systems perform with all races and cultures. There is no reason to only make the comparison with whites, it can also be done with immigrants and other races.

I agree Finland and Iceland have major differences other than the homogeneity of the population that you brought up. For all of our differences Canada would certainly have many more similarities with the U.S than those countries.
 
#45 ·
The only subject in K-12 education that really matters is Logic.

:eek:oops::brickwall:What you mean they don't teach that in most schools....:brickwall::eek:oops:


NB: I include communication (reading and writing) and math, which is essentially communication of abstract numerical ideas, under this heading as understanding definitions (vocab/mathematical principles) and how they are properly (logically) interpreted (read/solved) and communicated (written/expressed) is really the core of logic.

Thus, all the other STUFF, that modern kids learn is essentially irrelevant, by which I mean take it or leave it, they are not fundamental to a well formed mind. All you need to consider to understand my point is how much information is taught, tested on and forgotten, and likely never used again. That doesn't mean that knowledge isn't power, but that to gain true knowledge you need interest in understanding.

Personally I have an extensive library including titles on Theology, Philosophy, the Sciences, History, the Arts, etc.. If it hits the fan and children in our group need to be educated I would focus on teaching them how to read and (w)rite, and do (a)rithmetic, the proverbial three Rs, and then have them hone these skills, particularly the first two, by inviting them to read volumes that I have read and summerize/discuss their content, providing a little guidance to ensure a broad tasting of subjects, but also a lot of freedom for the kids to explore areas that they are interested in. When they are of age to do so I would also encourage them to focus on titles that teach needed skills. This strikes me the way that many of our autodidact luminaries learned, and so it would be good enoughf for our kids. Granted, some may not have the intellect to be "book smart," but that too would be ok, those who want to focus on Theology or Philosophy would be encourage to, and those whose skills were more practical, though exposed to loftier ideas, would be allowed to learn more practical skills, so long as they kept working on their ability to communicate and comprehend ideas well, aka Logic.
 
#46 ·
The fact that other people and the media might make the erroneous argument that the only factor in test outcomes is the system of education is misleading, if that in fact occurs.
Huh? Please reread what you wrote with fresh eyes. Is this what you really intend to argue?

I've never once seen any commentary or analysis which focused on these international comparisons address issues other than school policy. Not once did I see a commentator note that the demographics of one nation's study body has a positive or negative influence on these test scores. They don't do this because they don't want to be called Hitler.

The accounts of education policy specialists proposing fact-finding missions to Finland and Singapore, proposals to adopt the systems of successful nations are legion. Here are three such accounts.

The New Republic
reports:

In comparison to the United States and many other industrialized nations, the Finns have implemented a radically different model of educational reform-based on a balanced curriculum and professionalization, not testing. Not only do Finnish educational authorities provide students with far more recess than their U.S. counterparts-75 minutes a day in Finnish elementary schools versus an average of 27 minutes in the U.S.-but they also mandate lots of arts and crafts, more learning by doing, rigorous standards for teacher certification, higher teacher pay, and attractive working conditions. This is a far cry from the U.S. concentration on testing in reading and math since the enactment of No Child Left Behind in 2002, which has led school districts across the country, according to a survey by the Center on Education Policy, to significantly narrow their curricula. And the Finns' efforts are paying off: In December, the results from the 2009 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), an exam in reading, math, and science given every three years since 2000 to approximately 5,000 15-year-olds per nation around the world, revealed that, for the fourth consecutive time, Finnish students posted stellar scores. The United States, meanwhile, lagged in the middle of the pack.​

You see, it was the SYSTEM which is responsible for the outcomes.

Here is an Australian report from The Conversation:

It was fun while it lasted Finland, but we're going cold on you. We thought your schools had the secret but our new infatuation is with Asian school systems.

The Prime Minister seems to agree. The government has set a new goal that would see Australia get into the top five schools systems in the world, currently dominated by East Asian "sites". The recent OECD report Education at a Glance 2012 provides yet another international comparative leaderboard over which to agonise.

Aiming high and copying "what works" intuitively seems like a good idea . . .​

Again a focus on the SYSTEM - just copy what works "over there" and apply it "here" and presto-chango our students will soar.

And here from the education "specialists" the National Education Association:

One wonders what we might accomplish as a nation if we could finally set aside what appears to be our de facto commitment to inequality, so profoundly at odds with our rhetoric of equity, and put the millions of dollars spent continually arguing and litigating into building a high-quality education system for all children. To imagine how that might be done, one can look at nations that started with very little and purposefully built highly productive and equitable systems, sometimes almost from scratch, in the space of only two to three decades.​

You see, it's the system of education which is entirely the factor which is responsible for the outcomes.

However if the data is not available and you only include one variable then it may not give a more accurate measure of how the system performs, therefore the comparison has little use.
If you control for race and observe educational outcomes and you notice a disparity you're already better off than you were before when the disparity was hidden in the average.

Now you can't argue that the US education SYSTEM is producing bad outcomes because you have to explain why US white students do so well against many European white students. Secondly you have to explain why in an integrated school system white students outperform minority students when there is equal access to the curricula.

What you're doing is tossing out a word salad but you're not putting, to mix my metaphors here, any meat on them bones. You've just asserted that there is no use to a comparison which doesn't give you an accurate assessment of the state of the system when you control for only one variable, in this case race. This statement implies that you believe that you actually get a more accurate assessment of the system when no variable are controlled - just a straight across comparison of international results with no controls applied. That's a nonsensical position - less clarity leads to clearer results. Huh?

By excluding all races other than whites in the U.S for instance, many factors will also be affected, income level being the most obvious but others can also be very important. If, for instance minorities are overly represented among lower level jobs and that leads to lower test scores the results will be skewed because this lower income level will be excluded from U.S data but not other countries.
Bad example. Family income and educational outcomes are not independent of each other. Lower family income doesn't lead to lower test scores:



This phenomenon was at the core of the recent Supreme Court case Univ. of Texas vs. Fisher - the Univ. of Texas found that there weren't enough upper class Hispanic and black students being admitted because they scored lower than their white peers and thus couldn't be admitted via the Top 10% plan and so had to compete for open admission and were getting skunked by poor white students who outperformed them.

In the graph above, the white students from the poorest families were outperforming black students from wealthy families.

I am not "skeptical" of Asian students performance on the test I was merely pointing out that you do not have the data required to make that argument.
You mean like you don't have the authority to write that gasoline is detonated within an engine and thus creates the power that drives a car unless you append voluminous reports and videos of how gasoline is burned and how an engine works?

Look in the mirror and you'll see pedantism staring back at you.

Look, if you're ignorant about Asian academic performance, that's fine, but your ignorance about the topic doesn't put a burden onto me wherein I have to surmount the hurdles you put in place anymore than someone else's ignorance about how the internal combustion engine works puts a burden on you to validate the basic physics of the process and which is well understood by everyone who talks intelligently about how IC engines work.

I doubt getting past even the first step with hard facts is possible at this point. So people can use this bad comparison (without even admitting how flawed it is) or they can simply admit that the data is not there to make an appropriate comparison along these lines.
You're not the first creationist I've engaged with so your argumentative tactics are old-hat - this is merely that gambit of the ever escalating standards. There is always some piece of information which you will desire and until that information is provided you will reject the hypothesis or conclusion. Then when that information is provided you will find another nit to pick and reject the hypothesis or conclusion.

Instead of just comparing one race however it would give more insight to see how different school systems perform with all races and cultures.
This is impossible because not all nations in the PISA organization have the same population mix. Finland simply doesn't have a large Hispanic or large black population. Neither does Finland, neither does Germany, and so on. Why even Canada has a fairly miniscule black and Hispanic population, so the sample size for the comparison becomes an issue. On the other hand, most of the nations in the sample had overwhelmingly large white populations being that they are predominantly European nations.

There is no reason to only make the comparison with whites, it can also be done with immigrants and other races.
Sure it can be done with any race. I recall tales told to me by some of my elders about how Canadian students would arrive at US universities crowing about how they were less racist than Americans and that their culture was superior and so they opened the doors to multicultural immigration and they were going to eradicate the racial achievement gap. I can't speak to how frequently my mentors ran across this phenomenon but I never saw it amongst my students or colleagues, but then again those most recent generation Canadians may have been chastised by reality, to wit:

Back-to-school had a new twist for more than 100 students in Toronto on Tuesday as an Africentric alternative school opened its doors for the first time.

The black-focused school has sparked controversy, with opponents saying it smacks of segregation.

Supporters of the Africentric Alternative School maintain that it's important for children to understand their history and culture. They also point to a 40 per cent school dropout rate among black students.

The Canadian system and Canadian culture which were supposed to eradicate the Gap seem to have utterly failed at the mission and the outcomes for Black-Canadians mirrors what we see in America and now the Canadians are trying a radical experiment, one which our Supreme Court rejected in Brown vs. Board of Education - schools just for black students.
 
#47 ·
The only subject in K-12 education that really matters is Logic.

:eek:oops::brickwall:What you mean they don't teach that in most schools....:brickwall::eek:oops:

NB: I include communication (reading and writing) and math, which is essentially communication of abstract numerical ideas, under this heading as understanding definitions (vocab/mathematical principles) and how they are properly (logically) interpreted (read/solved) and communicated (written/expressed) is really the core of logic.
For the most part I agree with you. This is what the critics of NCLB seem to overlook. There is a lot of emphasis right now being placed on reading, writing and arithmetic. These skills are the building blocks used in other topics, like geography, social studies, health class, woodworking, and so on. If you can't read a geography textbook, then you can't master the details about different countries and cultures. If you can't do math then you can't do all the figuring that goes into woodworking or metal working or auto repair.

However, with mastery of the Thee 'Rs the world is opened to you. You can boostrap yourself to great heights.

Logic is harder to teach because, I believe, it is practiced so infrequently and the principles of logic are not internalized by many folks. Further, to teach logic often involves lessons which are like individualized tutorials - it has to be practiced and then the instances where it is applied to have be corrected by the teacher/tutor and the errors made have to be pointed out and the correct path explained at a level which is sufficient for the student to grasp the underlying principles which separate the logical misstep from the logically sound step.
 
#48 ·
Didn't read all the post , but in response to the initial question...

Home school your kids, live in the country raise animals, grow food,build your own buildings, fix your own cars, do your own gunsmithing, cast your own bullets and reload, learn to fire clay, can your food, build your own solar panels, setup a hydro generator, build your own computers, learn to repair old wagons, learn to blacksmith, learn ham radio skills, buy clothing and toys with money they have earned and spend at yardsales and Goodwill ( they dress better than most all kids around them ), read books by the arm full from the library ( they are free there ,if you didn't know that)

be surprised what you can teach your kids when you turn off the TV, don't give them cell phones, don't sign up for facebook accounts, eat out, hang out with kids in town, don't let them date ( committed to courtship), select what movies and tv shows they do watch on dvd, ( my kids love scfi ).


Most all these skills can be passed on after the SHTF and we are still living and doing the same things we have been doing for years as far as food, and living around the house is concerned...just the "hobbies" become daily activity

OH and while homeschooling teach the to use an abacus and slide rule...be amazed what you can calculate on one of them :)
 
#49 ·
...Logic is harder to teach because, I believe, it is practiced so infrequently and the principles of logic are not internalized by many folks. Further, to teach logic often involves lessons which are like individualized tutorials - it has to be practiced and then the instances where it is applied to have be corrected by the teacher/tutor and the errors made have to be pointed out and the correct path explained at a level which is sufficient for the student to grasp the underlying principles which separate the logical misstep from the logically sound step.
I disagree. We had logic classes in college (required for my degree) and they were relatively easy for most to understand. However you need good basic reading and reading comprehension skills to do so. In our experience reading skills and reading comprehension are very low in most public school students.

The other problem with logic is that the public school systems are so politically correct that the teachers would look like idiots if the students understood logic. So the students lose (as do the rest of us) just so that no one will be able to point out that the Emperor has no clothes.
 
#50 ·
The fact that other people and the media might make the erroneous argument that the only factor in test outcomes is the system of education is misleading, if that in fact occurs.
Let me rephrase that to make it clearer.
If in fact other people and the media make the erroneous argument that the only factor in test outcomes is the system of education then that is misleading.

I never made that argument and never would.

Huh? Please reread what you wrote with fresh eyes. Is this what you really intend to argue?

If you control for race and observe educational outcomes and you notice a disparity you're already better off than you were before when the disparity was hidden in the average.
The biggest problem here that I have stated from the beginning is that you are not actually controlling for race. Other problems are involved when certain races also fill different roles in their respective countries.

You've just asserted that there is no use to a comparison which doesn't give you an accurate assessment of the state of the system when you control for only one variable, in this case race. This statement implies that you believe that you actually get a more accurate assessment of the system when no variable are controlled - just a straight across comparison of international results with no controls applied. That's a nonsensical position - less clarity leads to clearer results. Huh?
Like I said from the beginning if it was a comparison of whites vs. whites then it would be a different story. I am sure you realize though as I just mentioned sometimes controlling for one variable can lead to skewed results.

Bad example. Family income and educational outcomes are not independent of each other. Lower family income doesn't lead to lower test scores:

In the graph above, the white students from the poorest families were outperforming black students from wealthy families.

You are missing the factor that can skew the results, even the chart that you provided demonstrates that income is a factor in educational outcomes. The point is, if in America minorities fill a larger number of low paying jobs (which they do) then by removing minorities you are effectively removing a segment of the population that will perform worse. Whether they are black or white, as your chart shows, people with lower incomes tend to perform worse. So if you don't take into account that there are a larger number of "minimum wage" people left in the data from other countries the results are skewed.


You mean like you don't have the authority to write that gasoline is detonated within an engine and thus creates the power that drives a car unless you append voluminous reports and videos of how gasoline is burned and how an engine works?

Look in the mirror and you'll see pedantism staring back at you.

Look, if you're ignorant about Asian academic performance, that's fine, but your ignorance about the topic doesn't put a burden onto me wherein I have to surmount the hurdles you put in place anymore than someone else's ignorance about how the internal combustion engine works puts a burden on you to validate the basic physics of the process and which is well understood by everyone who talks intelligently about how IC engines work.

I see so you believe that just because you think it, it must be true. More than likely you indeed looked for the facts and came up short so now you are making outlandish comparisons to gasoline engines. Just because there has been evidence of Asian students performing better, for a variety of reasons, it is not scientific to assume that 3rd generation or more Asian Canadians would not only perform better but, as you asserted, to a degree which would compensate for other minorities.

You're not the first creationist I've engaged with so your argumentative tactics are old-hat - this is merely that gambit of the ever escalating standards. There is always some piece of information which you will desire and until that information is provided you will reject the hypothesis or conclusion. Then when that information is provided you will find another nit to pick and reject the hypothesis or conclusion.

Come on bobbb, I was merely describing the process by which the argument would be proven. What part of the process of adjusting the statistics I described would not be necessary for a legitimate conclusion?


On the other hand, most of the nations in the sample had overwhelmingly large white populations being that they are predominantly European nations.
With a few notable exceptions to say the least
 
#51 ·
I disagree. We had logic classes in college (required for my degree) and they were relatively easy for most to understand.
Hold up there Hoss. I think we're talking past each other. I was sloppy in my remark and should have specified that I was talking about pre-college level of instruction that applied to all children, not just those who could master college level material.

Now to your point. I have no doubt that most of the students in your college classes could master elementary critical thinking and instruction in logical fallacies (I'm assuming that this is what you're referring to rather than something like Symbolic Logic) but I have to question how much of that has to do with selection effect. Today's college students are drawn from deeper levels of the intellectual talent pool and I do have doubts about many of them mastering elementary critical thinking classes. Clearly many would have no problems whatsoever but you'd be surprised at the low level of intellectual sophistication you can find on college campuses if you look for it.

The other problem with logic is that the public school systems are so politically correct that the teachers would look like idiots if the students understood logic. So the students lose (as do the rest of us) just so that no one will be able to point out that the Emperor has no clothes.
OK, now we're back on the same page - public school level education, and yeah, this is an excellent point that you raise. There is a lot of mumbo-jumbo in public schools that passes for knowledge and the ability to think critically exposes a lot of voodoo.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top