CronoDAS comments on Open Thread: January 2010 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (725)
I recently revisited my old (private) high school, which had finished building a new >$15 million building for its football team (and misc. student activities & classes).
I suddenly remembered that when I was much younger, the lust of universities and schools in general for new buildings had always puzzled me: I knew perfectly well that I learned more or less the same whether the classroom was shiny new or grizzled gray and that this was true of just about every subject-matter*, and even then it was obvious that buildings must cost a lot to build and then maintain, and space didn't seem plausible (because I passed empty classrooms all the time and they were often the same classroom pretty much all day). So this always puzzled me as a kid - big buildings seemed like perfect white elephants. I could understand the donors' reason, but not anyone else's.
When I remembered my childhood aporia, I suddenly realized - 'Oh, this is status-seeking behavior; big buildings are unfakeable social signals of wealth and influence. I was just being narrow-minded in assuming that if it didn't have your name on it, it couldn't boost your status.'
(I don't really have any point to this anecdote, but I thought it was interesting that OB/LW reading solved a longstanding puzzle of mine.)
* Obviously a few subject-matters do require specialized facilities; it's hard to do pottery without a specialized art-room, for example. But those are a minority.
My town has fairly recently (in the past ten years) added several new school buildings. The old buildings had problems (leaky roofs, no air conditioning, etc.) and the town's school-age population was growing.
Now, if they would only be willing to expand the library. :(
So make the classes bigger, perhaps. In a Hansonian vein:
(I don't think I ever met someone who failed to learn something because somewhere in the school there was a leak. Because of no air conditioning, maybe, but puddles or leaks?)
Well, classrooms are of limited size. I know that the classrooms at my old high school were only designed for thirty kids each. Now they hold nearly forty each. There is a significant cost from having correspondingly less space per person. The corresponding reductions in mobility and classroom flexibility have an impact on learning.
This is especially pronounced in science labs. Having even one more person per lab station can have a surprisingly detrimental impact on learning. If there are two or three people at a lab station, then pretty much everyone is forced to participate (and learn) in order to finish the lesson. However, if there are four or more kids at a lab station, then you can have a person slacking off, not doing much and the others can cover for the slacker. The slacker doesn't learn anything, and the other students are resentful because three are doing the work of four.
Leaks damage things. Such as ceilings, for example.