WTF is wrong with people

[soliloqueen]

The problem with "teaching to the test" exploded in public schools in the 90s as these Federally mandated and oversimplified evaluation mechanisms came into play. I remember well several conversations with my mother about this.


The benefit is more about localized decision-making, regardless of the type of school. When the Feds came in with heavy-handed one-size-fits-all approaches that took away local control, charter schools and similar workarounds were inevitable.


It's all tradeoff management. For most things, the further up the hierarchy decisions are moved, the worse the result for most people. Centralized planning mostly sucks rocks.

completely agree here

 

[user 37518]

The management... Public schools are saddled with teachers unions. Charter schools can fire bad teachers if they don't do a good job. That is only one difference but an important one.

That is, in my opinion, the cancer in education at all levels. You can include tenured professors in the same category. Some nasty things happen when people feel there is no chance of loosing their jobs even if they are lousy at it. There are some exceptions, of course.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I think we're going to disagree fundamentally here and further discussion may not be fruitful. I firmly believe that there are two types of people: people who are easily manipulated by others and accept that they are, and people who are easily manipulated by others and think they aren't. Nobody is beyond falling victim to cult power. Being socially and psychologically malleable is a fundamental human trait, and a responsible person is on guard about it all the time knowing that it could happen to them. Introversion and extroversion has nothing to do with it.

do you find that an effective strategy to win hearts and minds?

In the meaner areas of social media I am routinely called a cult member/follower. That does not make me very receptive to new ideas.

We all think we are smarter than we are (me included).

JR

 

[soliloqueen]

do you find that an effective strategy to win hearts and minds?

In the meaner areas of social media I am routinely called a cult member/follower. That does not make me very receptive to new ideas.

We all think we are smarter than we are (me included).

JR

I am simply not trying to win hearts and minds in the first place, tbh. My shit stinks the same way as everyone else's. I don't really think I am better or smarter. We are all easy to influence in the scheme of things. As long as someone is doing their personal best to evaluate their own beliefs critically, that's all I want. Even if we end up disagreeing or I think they're factually wrong. I am not immune to not having a grasp on facts. This belief has gotten me in a lot of trouble (Some might say I simply have self-doubt issues), but I do not go into arguments assuming that I am right, nor do I see discussions as a way to convince people of my opinion. I just kind of enjoy the talking with people and seeing how they think.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

I think we're going to disagree fundamentally here and further discussion may not be fruitful.

Not your call to make.

I firmly believe that there are two types of people: people who are easily manipulated by others and accept that they are, and people who are easily manipulated by others and think they aren't.

I believe there are people who are much more resistant to bad ideas due to their personality (which is some mix of nature and nurture). There are also people whose personality makes them much more susceptible to being conned and manipulated. The former type tend to reflect on their mistakes and learn from them which increases their resilience to manipulation over time. Introverts are more likely to be self-reflective.

Nobody is beyond falling victim to cult power.

Disagree. If you read more about mass hysteria and similar phenomenon there are typically 5-10% of people who simply will not succumb.

Being socially and psychologically malleable is a fundamental human trait,

During formative years, yes. As adults, not necessarily.

and a responsible person is on guard about it all the time knowing that it could happen to them.

Yet some otherwise responsible people do not resist.

Introversion and extroversion has nothing to do with it.

Perhaps there's something deeper related to questioning authority or skepticism in general (two things that, in my experience, are strongly associated with introversion).

 

[JohnRoberts]

I am simply not trying to win hearts and minds in the first place.

than what are you trying to do?
===
IMO Most people post hoping to hear some consensus for their personal world view, and maybe if lucky get others to think the same way after they see the errors in their flawed world view.

I mainly try to herd the kittens around here, and maintain a civil venue for discussing ideas.

JR

 

[soliloqueen]

than what are you trying to do?
===
IMO Most people post hoping to hear some consensus for their personal world view, and maybe if lucky get others to think the same way after they see the errors in their flowed world view.

I mainly try to herd the kittens around here.

JR

I love learning about people's opinions, how their minds work etc. I find humans beautiful and want to explore them. The variation between people is stunning. Everyone has a unique set of values, and a system by which they support those values with their beliefs, and I firmly believe that both the biggest boon and biggest flaw in humans is being friendly. Our tendency to be friendly (form in-groups) causes kindness, causes us to help others, etc, but it's also caused most of our wars and conflicts and atrocities (due to believing that another group is hurting our friends, whether because it's actually true or due to propaganda). I find the idea of us, a species that both advances and destroys itself due to its commitment to friendship extremely interesting and I want to collect as many perspectives as possible, so I talk to everyone I can.

 

[hodad]

I am routinely called a cult member/follower.

I love this righteous indignation!

I firmly believe that there are two types of people: people who are easily manipulated by others and accept that they are, and people who are easily manipulated by others and think they aren't.

As on old philosophy professor used to say, "Doubt is the cornerstone of faith." And if a person doesn't doubt, well, I have to question the value of their faith.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I love this righteous indignation!

and I so love your personal attention

As on old philosophy professor used to say, "Doubt is the cornerstone of faith." And if a person doesn't doubt, well, I have to question the value of their faith.

I have a surfeit of doubt and not much faith especially in people.

JR

 

[user 37518]

I mainly try to herd the kittens around here, and maintain a civil venue for discussing ideas.

JR

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

 

[soliloqueen]

Not your call to make.

Oh, I wasn't saying it was, I was just putting my opinion forth.

I believe there are people who are much more resistant to bad ideas due to their personality (which is some mix of nature and nurture). There are also people whose personality makes them much more susceptible to being conned and manipulated. The former type tend to reflect on their mistakes and learn from them which increases their resilience to manipulation over time. Introverts are more likely to be self-reflective.

Don't disagree here at all!

Disagree. If you read more about mass hysteria and similar phenomenon there are typically 5-10% of people who simply will not succumb.

That's a good point, thanks!

During formative years, yes. As adults, not necessarily.

Not necessarily, but I think a majority.

Yet some otherwise responsible people do not resist.

I think given the reasonableness of your above points, with the understanding of them being true, being able to see manipulation is a very specific skill and as you said here

Perhaps there's something deeper related to questioning authority or skepticism in general (two things that, in my experience, are strongly associated with introversion).

May indeed be separate from other traits

 

[Recording Engineer]

Are you suggesting that parents who pay to send their children to private schools do not also pay taxes? Every year on my real estate tax bill I see how much money I am personally paying towards local schools. I don't have any children but I do not mind supporting education because a well educated populace is good for all of us.

I have no idea how you got that from our exchanges. Absolutely zero of anyone’s taxes in the US are put toward private education; though apparently that’s to change.

The management... Public schools are saddled with teachers unions. Charter schools can fire bad teachers if they don't do a good job. That is only one difference but an important one.

You’re the first to ever to tell me that’s the only difference. If that’s true, that’s has to be one of the stupidest ideas I’ve ever heard!

Education is not strictly business, but performance can be measured (with testing) to gauge success or failure of the educators.

Um, no. Absolutely not. Testing only gauges the success and failure of the students. Period. Politicians really knew what they were doing with that one!

I recall a huge stink back when President Bush promoted his "no child left behind" program to use standardized tests to manage schools. The teacher's unions of course resisted because they were being measured too. The first lady Laura Bush was a teacher and librarian.

Oh I absolutely remember that too; family full of teachers and all and none of whom are political at all.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I have no idea how you got that from our exchanges. Absolutely zero of anyone’s taxes in the US are put toward private education; though apparently that’s to change.

apparently? what are you talking about?

You’re the first to ever to tell me that’s the only difference. If that’s true, that’s has to be one of the stupidest ideas I’ve ever heard!

pretty stupid.... but I did not say that was the "only" difference. It is one important difference.

Um, no. Absolutely not. Testing only gauges the success and failure of the students.

Spoken like a teacher blaming students for the teacher's failure to teach them the course work.

Period. Politicians really knew what they were doing with that one!

sadly politicians and teachers unions are tight as thieves.

Oh I absolutely remember that too; family full of teachers and all and none of whom are political at all.

of course....

JR

 

[soliloqueen]

I have a surfeit of doubt and not much faith especially in people.

this is very the opposite of me. i'm not often outspoken about my beliefs as a pretty hardline left libertarian because the core value of my belief system is that if people are left to their own devices, they will simply be nice to each other. that gets me a lot of ridicule, skepticism, even infantilization etc from the other 3 squares of the political spectrum who tend to think i am just naive. i have almost complete faith in people. i will say i have never encountered a person who disagrees ethically with my values, but the reaction of most people is "well, it would be great if you were right, but you're not."

that being said. i do not think it is my job to be realistic because i do not decide the intricacies of policy, in the same way that it's not really my job to convince others of my opinion because i am not responsible for their behavior. my sphere of influence is where my responsibilities as a person lie. myself, my family, my community, and my business. i could sit here and talk about how gun control is one of the oldest forms of systemic racism in the US, and how stronger enforcement of second amendment rights is essential to implementing critical race theory in policymaking, but to what end? does anyone here make policy? it's more important to me to understand other people.

 

[Recording Engineer]

apparently? what are you talking about?

I mentioned it before. Nobody had a word to say about it:
https://groupdiy.com/threads/holy-sh-t.84120/post-1092817

Spoken like a teacher blaming students for the teacher's failure to teach them the course work.

Nope. Spoken like someone who understands the simple concept that a great testing student with a terrible teacher, absolutely doesn’t reflect on the teacher positively. Actually, unfortunately with Bush’s system, it does! Let’s not focus on actually educating, let’s instead focus on pulling in that government money!

Also, let’s put it all on the teachers shoulders… Can’t be the parenting!

of course....

When it comes to what we’re talking about in this conversation, it’s true; with the connection of government and teacher’s unions to politics. None of them have ever been involved. They’re kind of focused on the kids instead; far after school hours too. Let me tell you, I hear plenty of teacher-talk.

 

[boji]

i do not think it is my job to be realistic

Interesting. Fan of Dostoevsky?

 

[soliloqueen]

Now that's a level of honesty not often shared. Fan of Dostoevsky?

very much so. while I am not religious like Dostoevsky, we share a lot of common ground. i believe that functional relationships with others and with your society can only be found by accepting (and living with, and even valuing) the inherently irrational parts of your nature. without acceptance of the role of emotion, and the importance of emotion, in building one's own values, one cannot truly think critically about what one wants for themselves or others and why. it's why i try to be reverent of the values of others and interested in them. i would say that his narrative of seeking to exist naturally as a human without overdefinition is central to my philosophy

 

[Recording Engineer]

The problem with "teaching to the test" exploded in public schools in the 90s as these Federally mandated and oversimplified evaluation mechanisms came into play. I remember well several conversations with my mother about this.


The benefit is more about localized decision-making, regardless of the type of school. When the Feds came in with heavy-handed one-size-fits-all approaches that took away local control, charter schools and similar workarounds were inevitable.


It's all tradeoff management. For most things, the further up the hierarchy decisions are moved, the worse the result for most people. Centralized planning mostly sucks rocks.

AnalogPackrat:
You are the first person who has shown me the light after all these years. Really. I am finally beginning to understand the entire point of charter schools and how they truly came about… A workaround for a horrible federal system. I still don’t condone it (I loathe the game-playing), as I’d much rather reform it, but I truly am beginning to the understand. Thank you. Seriously.

 

[soliloqueen]

AnalogPackrat:
You are the first person who has shown me the light after all these years. Really. I am finally beginning to understand the entire point of charter schools and how they truly came about… A workaround for a horrible federal system. I still don’t condone it (I loathe the game-playing), as I’d much rather reform it, but I truly am beginning to the understand. Thank you. Seriously.

yeah, he made my point much more succinctly than me

 

[AnalogPackrat]

AnalogPackrat:
You are the first person who has shown me the light after all these years. Really. I am finally beginning to understand the entire point of charter schools and how they truly came about… A workaround for a horrible federal system. I still don’t condone it (I loathe the game-playing), as I’d much rather reform it, but I truly am beginning to the understand. Thank you. Seriously.

Not sure if you're serious, but parents who care about their kids' education aren't going to wait 4, 6, 10 years for reforms to maybe happen. Who would willingly sacrifice years of their children's education when an alternative is available? And besides that, having that viable competition (yes) can spur improvements in public schools. And if it doesn't spur improvement, maybe they simply can't be fixed.

 

[Recording Engineer]

Not sure if you're serious, but parents who care about their kids' education aren't going to wait 4, 6, 10 years for reforms to maybe happen. Who would willingly sacrifice years of their children's education when an alternative is available? And besides that, having that viable competition (yes) can spur improvements in public schools. And if it doesn't spur improvement, maybe they simply can't be fixed.

As I said, I don’t condone the game-playing (the root of the problem has been there for much more than 4-10 years now), but I understand.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

As I said, I don’t condone the game-playing (the root of the problem has been there for much more than 4-10 years now), but I understand.

Then it isn't game-playing. It's parents trying to do the best thing for their children. I don't even have children and I understand it. Bureaucracies in the public sector, even badly broken ones, are hard to dismantle thanks to too many laws with good intentions but bad unintended consequences.