Problems in Education

65 Post author: ThinkOfTheChildren 08 April 2013 09:29PM

Post will be returning in Main, after a rewrite by the company's writing staff. Citations Galore.

Comments (318)

Comment author: CronoDAS 08 April 2013 10:08:49PM 4 points [-]

Scary, if true, but not too surprising.

(It seemed to me that my high school used an algorithm that amounted to "students who asked for honors classes got them", although apparently there was a lot going on behind the scenes that I didn't see...)

Comment author: JohnWittle 08 April 2013 11:12:37PM *  2 points [-]

It depends entirely on when you were in school. At present day, most of a student's path is determined by whether they are selected for 8th grade Algebra (in fact, if you were to rank all of the factors possible in determining a person's lifetime earnings, the factor at the top would be whether you took Algebra in 8th grade). The 7th grade math teacher's recommendation is the primary factor in this particular decision, and middle school teachers are incompetent at predicting whether a child could succeed at advanced math 4-6 years later.

Comment author: CarlShulman 08 April 2013 11:41:53PM 19 points [-]

in fact, if you were to rank all of the factors possible in determining a person's lifetime earnings, the factor at the top would be whether you took Algebra in 8th grade

Citation needed, especially for a claim of causality.

Comment author: [deleted] 08 April 2013 10:36:53PM 10 points [-]

I can provide citations for any statements I've made, but since nearly everything I said is NDA'd I'd like to be careful to anonymize my citations, making sure to find national studies instead of state or county specific studies.

It's probably too late, based on what you've said already. Anonymity is hard.

Comment author: orthonormal 09 April 2013 12:43:56AM 8 points [-]

For something like this, security through obscurity is probably good enough, as long as the information isn't presented in a way that shows up in Google searches for the actual context.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 09 April 2013 10:30:20AM *  6 points [-]

Even if anynomity is hard, deniability is useful. Also, the people most likely to complain that this article was written, would prefer if their names remain unknown.

Comment author: Randy_M 09 April 2013 03:10:34PM 1 point [-]

The people most likely to complain are evidently have very poor reading comprehension to begin with. (Not meaning the students, either).

Comment author: jooyous 08 April 2013 11:02:19PM *  2 points [-]

Is there a way that we can just give you money and you can expand to more counties? I think this is a super-important issue but it's not in my area of focus (and I suspect my particular county is actually doing pretty well.)

Comment author: shminux 08 April 2013 11:05:20PM *  12 points [-]

If you are a decision maker in education in your area, please, please, please look into the various Bayesian predictive models used for math placement

Seems like you have worse problems than not using Bayesian predictive models. Like racism and corruption in the school system, and inability to tell means from goals.

For comparison, the first two don't seem to be a significant issue up here in BC, Canada, what with more than half of the students being Asian (and often ESL) and a reasonably strong tradition of integrity in the teacher's union. From what I know, there are few issues with assigning children into classes by ability, not by profiling.The main problem is the steadily declining financing, resulting in fewer and weaker programs. Another issue is that there is virtually no way to affect or even get rid of a bad teacher (union, remember?), and some teachers suck big time. I am not even aware of any targeted programs to "raise literacy" except for ESL classes, or to "raise basic math skills". Well, there are some which target the local native population, not sure how successful they are.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 April 2013 02:11:45AM 5 points [-]

We had a creepy social stupies teacher with big seniority who eventually got fired. Everyone knew if was coming for years, and then he finally pissed off the wrong parents. It is possible to get really bad teachers fired eventually.

(Kits high, btw)

Comment author: katydee 09 April 2013 12:16:40AM 1 point [-]

This should probably be promoted to Main immediately.

Comment author: gwern 09 April 2013 12:22:26AM 32 points [-]

Plausible yet pseudonymously provided & unverifiable info should not be promoted to Main, IMO. If he was willing to own his claims and at least his bio of working for a corporation that did something similar to what he indicates, that would be one thing, but he didn't.

(I'm not going to criticize him for not being willing to risk the NDAs, but that doesn't mean we should endorse the post and try to spread this post as far and wide as possible.)

Comment author: katydee 09 April 2013 12:44:40AM 6 points [-]

On reflection, I agree. Consider my earlier recommendation retracted, though I'll leave it up for contextual reasons.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 April 2013 02:17:29AM 4 points [-]

Retraction puts strikethrough, so it's still readble but noticably retracted. You should retract.

Comment author: katydee 09 April 2013 02:29:42AM 2 points [-]

Thanks, done-- I wasn't sure whether that would bury the comment thread or not, but it looks like it's okay.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 09 April 2013 12:50:24AM 2 points [-]

I don't see this level of scrutiny being applied to most posts here.

Comment author: katydee 09 April 2013 01:00:40AM 1 point [-]

I don't either, but that isn't a compelling argument against applying that level of scrutiny.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 09 April 2013 01:10:56AM 0 points [-]

We don't generally (for instance) discredit posters for pseudonymity. Doing so for a particular post, but not others, invites the question — Why this one?

Comment author: CarlShulman 09 April 2013 02:08:37AM *  19 points [-]

Most posts make arguments that readers can assess using public sources: if the argument and citations are good, they can stand separately from the poster. This post is personal testimony.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 09 April 2013 02:24:58AM 4 points [-]

Good point — it's not that the poster is pseudonymous, but that they don't offer much to distinguish a factual post from a hoax.

Comment author: orthonormal 09 April 2013 01:18:37AM 12 points [-]

While I read this post, and before I got to the grandparent comment, my reaction was "Wow, this is enough of a surprise to my current model (and most of the evidence is the personal statement of an unverified person on the Internet) that my probability of it being a fabrication is significant". I don't usually get that from a LW post.

Furthermore, the effect of promoting a fabrication is way worse for accusations of major malfeasance and racism than for most minor personal anecdotes.

(This is not saying that I think the post is probably a fabrication! I give it about a 2/3 probability of being true.)

Comment author: orthonormal 09 April 2013 12:53:03AM *  12 points [-]

Second what gwern said, but more politely. This is an excellent post, and if it substantiated its claims (in general, not in NDA-violating specifics) it would definitely belong in Main, but as it stands it's unverified (and perhaps unverifiable for good reasons), and thus I think we should leave it on Discussion (but I'm upvoting the post).

Promotion implies some significant level of endorsement (of the quality of evidence if not necessarily of the conclusions), and LW should be careful not to abuse the trust reposed in it by many readers.

Comment author: katydee 09 April 2013 01:00:07AM 1 point [-]

I think you missed something.

Comment author: orthonormal 09 April 2013 01:04:49AM 2 points [-]

Ah, you replied to gwern while I was reading the comments and writing my reply to you.

Comment author: AlexMennen 09 April 2013 12:40:10AM *  12 points [-]

the evaluators job was to collude with the grant proposal submitter, so that we got more evaluation jobs from them in the future.

The grantee, not the grantor, hires the evaluator? What the hell?

Can you see where the politics might come in? There were rich whites who got upset when the data told the schools to put some blacks in their son's advanced math class. There were math teachers who absolutely refused to allow blacks/poors in their classroom, or worse, treated them in such a way as to cause them to fail, thus confirming their worldview.

More what the hell. Was this a long time ago, or am I just really naive about what certain parts of the US outside the bay area look like?

Comment author: RomeoStevens 09 April 2013 01:39:27AM *  23 points [-]

Most things in general are broken to a degree that the average reasonable person would find completely shocking. There are absolutely comic book levels of incompetence, grift, discrimination, and vice, within most bureaucratic organizations if you know where to look.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 09 April 2013 10:23:02AM *  16 points [-]

Other country, other situation, but I think this meta observation works for both:

If the educational system is broken too much, the society loses an ability to rationally discuss how to fix it, because the "unbelievable" facts you report are taken as an evidence against your sanity or honesty, not against the system. And of course there are some people who benefit from the system remaining as it is, and they are happy to confirm that you are wrong.

On some level, yeah, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. But people have their priors seriously wrong here -- sanity waterline is generally low, incompetence is not so rare in the absence of feedback, and there are lot of money to make by abusing the school system. Also the prior probabilities are counted repeatedly. (If one teacher complains, he is probabably just an incompetent lunatic. If another teacher complains, she is also an incompetent lunatic. If thousands of teachers complain... well, by the same logic, they are all incompetent lunatics. There is never a point where there is enough evidence to start suspecting that they might actually be right. It also does not promote honest communication if it is widely known that a teacher who complains about the system will be considered incompetent.)

EDIT: I was a teacher for a few years, then I realized the system is so broken that my individual contribution as a teacher is unlikely to improve things. I talked to some people around me about what I have experienced. Later one of them told me that at the beginning they just considered me crazy, because obviously things can't be that wrong. But they were curious whether the things I said could be at least partially true, so they cross-checked some of my stories with other teachers. And the other teachers confirmed my version. Even now the person tells me it is impossible to believe everything I said (only a few things could be cross-checked), but the confirmation from the other sources at least moved my credibility from "crazy" to "essentially correct, but probably exaggerating a lot" area. I asked whether they consider the other teachers (who have confirmed my stories) to be similarly untrustworthy as me, and the answer was negative. Apparently the greatest difference is that I spread the information actively, but the other ones were silent and only answered when they were asked. They have better social skills than me, and probably soon realized that speaking about their experience is only going to ruin their credibility. (If you are asked about an improbable thing and you confirm it, it does not have the same impact as when you contribute dozen improbable stories to an unprepared audience.)

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 09 April 2013 11:42:26AM 4 points [-]

I'm reading The Shadow Scholar, a book by a man who makes his living by writing papers for college students. There's a root and branch attack on Rutgers, a university which is sort of an educational scam which loots the students for the benefit of the parking system and the athletics program.

Poking around online, the only people I've found who've said he's unfair to Rutgers have been very marginal about it (they say it's possible to get a good education at Rutgers), and a number who agree that it's really that bad.

Comment author: mwengler 09 April 2013 02:27:52PM 8 points [-]

I attended Rutgers part time when I was a full time employee of bell labs. The graduate physics classes were excellent, rigorous, well taught, well designed, and hard. I have no particular recollection of any parking fees or atheletic activity. Since that time, I proceeded to get a PhD from Caltech and teach for 8 years at University of Rochester. In my opinion, informed by my experience, Rutgers is categorically NOT an educational scam.

The company I work for has hired many engineers who have been educated at Rutgers. There is no evidence that Rutgers is a scam, either in the interview process for these engineers, or their subsequent performance on the job.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 09 April 2013 03:47:03PM 1 point [-]

Thanks. When did you attend Rutgers?

One data point of modest value-- a friend of mine graduated from Rutgers as a history major, probably in the 80s. She didn't know that life could be very hard for civilians in war zones. She isn't my smartest friend, but she isn't stupid and she's pretty conscientious.

Comment author: mwengler 09 April 2013 05:32:34PM 3 points [-]

I attended in 1979. I did not matriculate, but I did take regular graduate Physics courses that I had to leave work during the day to attend.

My other exposure to Rutgers is through a very good friend who was a Bell Labs department head for years, who was then Professor at Rutgers for seems about 10 years until probably 2000. He started the Wireless Information Lab which has a superb national reputation for research, graduate, and postgraduate work. I visited him and Lab events many times over the years, and find it implausible that if the undergrad education was a scam he wouldn't have mentioned it.

In fact I'll email him about this, and if he answers post something here.

Comment author: orthonormal 09 April 2013 04:15:00PM 8 points [-]

The quality of undergraduate and graduate experiences at the same university can be dramatically different, since their funding sources (and thus their incentive structures) are separate. It's possible that Rutgers is broken as an undergrad institution, but not as a graduate one.

(Rutgers also has a good reputation as a graduate math department.)

Comment author: Alrenous 10 April 2013 01:18:53PM 5 points [-]

It's also possible that there's a division between STEM and everything else. Especially, there aren't many term papers or essays being written for math-heavy courses, and so I can safely assume the Shadow Scholar wouldn't have run across their students.

Comment author: Desrtopa 09 April 2013 06:01:16PM *  5 points [-]

Having read The Shadow Scholar also, I don't think the author himself would stand behind a claim that Rutgers is an educational scam, although he certainly testified to it having an uncaring and incompetent administration which doesn't show much care for the education of its students. The sort of lost purpose educational aimlessness that allows students to graduate without really learning anything exists in universities all over the country, as do the students who retained his services and those like his.

If you haven't gotten that far in the book yet, it's for-profit colleges which he really attacks as educational scams.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 09 April 2013 06:30:26PM 1 point [-]

"Educational scam" was my language, and may have been too strong. The author does describe Rutgers as a place where it's difficult to learn much (indifferent teaching, and a lot of institutional barriers to spending much time on learning).

Oddly, I haven't seen any complaints about something which might plausibly discredit the author-- spending much of his time drunk and/or drugged.

Comment author: Desrtopa 09 April 2013 06:39:44PM 1 point [-]

Oddly, I haven't seen any complaints about something which might plausibly discredit the author-- spending much of his time drunk and/or drugged.

Although he's fairly open about that, I don't think he particularly stands out in terms of substance use among college students. I had plenty of peers in college who graduated with good-to-reasonable grades who I suspect used alcohol and marijuana to similar degrees.

In fact, I would have to say that they probably got considerably more out of college than I did, having gotten a lot of valuable networking done socializing while high.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 09 April 2013 07:04:25PM *  0 points [-]

My impression is that heavy alcohol use tends to increase people's level of anger, obsession, and resentment.

In other words, he might overestimate the pervasiveness of administrative abuse and neglect at Rutgers. It's also conceivable that his life was going worse than it would have if he was sober more of the time.

However, I searched on "rutgers r-u screw" and found this. It looks like, at a minium, the administrative style at Rutgers is significantly unfriendly to students.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 10 April 2013 05:32:05AM 0 points [-]

However, I searched on "rutgers r-u screw" and found this.

I thought every college had something like this.

Comment author: [deleted] 10 April 2013 06:40:08AM 1 point [-]

I thought every college had something like this.

Conversely, I didn't believe this was a thing until I saw it happen during grad school (to undergrads).

Comment author: CronoDAS 10 April 2013 09:31:31PM 2 points [-]

I was almost an RU Screw victim - some data entry clerk recorded my high school class rank as 20 instead of 2, which would have rendered me ineligible for a rather generous state scholarship if my parents hadn't inadvertently discovered this.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 09 April 2013 06:28:17PM 3 points [-]

Please, I beg of you, tell your story!

Now that I've asked, people will believe you, right? so you have no excuse to keep silent.

Incompetence is not what I find suspicious in this post.

Comment author: Barry_Cotter 09 April 2013 11:29:19AM 5 points [-]

For extra credit apply this insight to fast growing organisations that were initially founded or staffed by a group of unusual people, and don't foreget the role of luck or reversion to the mean.

Comment author: Qiaochu_Yuan 09 April 2013 05:24:04AM 8 points [-]

Was this a long time ago, or am I just really naive about what certain parts of the US outside the bay area look like?

Outside view suggests the latter. Also, it's probably more parts than you think. The Bay Area is pretty weird along several dimensions.

Comment author: Ivan_Tsarevitch 09 April 2013 01:06:46AM 11 points [-]

I'd like to see the citations on the importance of 8th grade Algebra as critical predictor of future success.

Also, since you're professionally aware of the ins and outs of US education systems, can you give us some general advice for contacting local school/school board officials or the like--how we should go about getting involved in ameliorating such issues in our communities?

Comment author: Stabilizer 09 April 2013 02:48:29AM *  9 points [-]

I found this. (Gated, though)

PDF available here.

Comment author: Ivan_Tsarevitch 09 April 2013 03:39:45AM 0 points [-]

Thank you!

It's not feasible for me to access that article at the moment, but I've bookmarked it for when it is.

I am still hoping to see ThinkOfTheChildren's source, though; I think it'd probably be the most germane evidence.

Comment author: Stabilizer 09 April 2013 03:46:42AM 3 points [-]

Edited, with accessible link to paper.

Comment author: Ivan_Tsarevitch 09 April 2013 04:52:43AM 0 points [-]

Aha! Excellent. Thank you very much.

Comment author: atucker 09 April 2013 01:29:25AM *  1 point [-]

Has anyone published data on the effectiveness of Bayesian prediction models as an educational intervention? It seems like that would be very helpful in terms of being able to convince school districts to give them a shot.

Comment author: TimS 09 April 2013 01:36:09AM 2 points [-]

My experience is that school districts have a strong not-invented-here bias. For example, special education laws require research based interventions, a requirement that is generally ignored.

Comment author: atucker 09 April 2013 01:38:09AM -1 points [-]

Maybe slightly vary the parameters to make the model "new"? Like, fit it to data from that district, and it will probably be slightly different from "other" models.

Comment author: TimS 09 April 2013 01:40:42AM 0 points [-]

But that requires effort, and school districts don't generally want to put in effort to do things differently.

Comment author: atucker 09 April 2013 01:44:45AM -1 points [-]

I think the hard part of refitting the model would probably just be getting access to the data -- beyond that it seems like a statistician or programmer would be able to just tell a computer how to minimize some appropriate cost function.

Something like most of the marginal effort is devoted to gathering the data, which presumably doesn't require that much expertise relative to understanding the model in the first place.

Comment author: TimS 09 April 2013 01:59:37AM 1 point [-]

In practice, there are substantial privacy law issues, although those can be gotten around if the district is clever.

More importantly, collecting, collating, and ensuring coder reliability is expensive. What you called "marginal effort" is quite difficult for just about any large bureaucracy.

Comment author: atucker 09 April 2013 03:11:36AM -1 points [-]

Marginal effort within the bounds of a consulting agency offering a service "tailored" to each school district.

Comment author: gwern 10 April 2013 06:57:39PM 2 points [-]

Most of the discussions I've happened to see focus on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value-added_modeling , because being able to judge teachers is directly useful to school districts and lots of outsiders are interested in the topic. Since the usual approach uses multilevel model (you need to adjust for school-level effects, district-level effects, etc before you can extract a usable teacher-level effect), it's almost Bayesian by default, and if you google 'bayesian value-added modeling' you'll find a ton of material.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 09 April 2013 01:39:00AM 8 points [-]

Most of the money/resources schools receive comes in the form of grants.

Could you provide a source for that?


If you "know that there isn't actually any way to fix the problems," why do you care if the grants are scored in insane ways, or the interventions targeted demographically, or that 98% of the money is embezzled?

(Incidentally, a reason to give away incentives demographically rather than by test score is that they become an incentive to sandbag the early scores. Which could then produce the illusion that the program improved scores.)

What did the guy claim to have spent the $800,000 on?


Currently, my firm and its allies are trying to push the government into forcing the schools to use a Bayesian prediction model, in which you feed an individual student's test scores for the past 5 years

How much predictive value do you lose if you just use 1 year? Using a single test is transparent. Is that politically good or bad?
(I guess I'm assuming that "test" means a standardized test. If it means comparing students across different tests written by different teachers, it might not seem fair to use them naively, but sometimes transparency is more important.)

Comment author: Airedale 09 April 2013 05:00:53AM *  9 points [-]

Most of the money/resources schools receive comes in the form of grants.

Could you provide a source for that?

This claim definitely conflicts with my understanding, although perhaps it's true for that portion of resources that is actually up for grabs and not already committed through the normal funding (government) process.

This link is more in line with my understanding, that is, that most resources come from state and local government, and most of those resources are not awarded through "grants," but rather that local resources generally stay with local schools and state resources are divided in other ways but not usually through award of a grant. But I'd be interested in hearing if my (not heavily researched/sourced) understanding is incorrect either generally or at least for some portion of schools.

Some quotes from the link:

States rely primarily on income and sales taxes to fund elementary and secondary education. State legislatures generally determine the level and distribution of funding, following different rules and procedures depending on the state.

State funding for elementary and secondary education is generally distributed by formula. Many states use funding formulas that provide funding based on the number of pupils in a district. Some formulas are weighted based on different factors such as the number of students with disabilities, the number of students living in poverty, or the number of students for whom English is a second language. The allocation for students with different types of needs can vary significantly depending on the funding formula. Additionally, in some states the formula is designed so that higher poverty school districts with less access to local funding receive additional assistance.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 09 April 2013 05:35:27AM 2 points [-]

Thanks!

That link did imply that the 10% of funding that is federal is structured as grants, which surprised me. Though it's not clear that it means exactly the same thing as in this post.

that portion of resources that is actually up for grabs [are grants]

That sounds close to a tautology to me. Aren't grant applications the way that one grabs resources that are up for grabs? (OK, I can think of other examples, like specializing in disabled students, but...)

Comment author: Airedale 09 April 2013 04:34:34PM 3 points [-]

That sounds close to a tautology to me.

Yeah, I didn't phrase that very clearly. My thinking was drawing a distinction between (1) what may be the smaller portion of resources that is always up for grabs (and that is perhaps mainly grants) and (2) the larger portion of resources that is not discretionary in the same way because it is awarded by the government without the competitive grant application process. Of course, there may still be opportunities to also influence how that larger portion of resources is distributed, e.g., lobbying or maybe gaming the system to affect the distribution in some way.

Comment author: gwern 10 April 2013 06:54:12PM *  2 points [-]

That link did imply that the 10% of funding that is federal is structured as grants, which surprised me.

Hm, I'm surprised you're surprised. I thought it was widely understood that giving and withholding grants was the main way the federal government got around its lack of de jure authority over them and exerted pressure on state and local governments and school districts* - you can read coverage of the sequester's effect on them and the funding comes as grants, and Obama's "Race To The Top" program was purely about competing for federal grants.

* because they are in effect insolvent without federal money

Comment author: Randy_M 09 April 2013 03:17:42PM 1 point [-]

Using one standardized test to choose placement in an academic route would be called tracking and for some reason is a terrible thing to do.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 09 April 2013 03:38:39PM 0 points [-]

No, "tracking" is just having different academic routes - what the school is already doing. If you can find someone who has a strong opinion on the difference between tracking based on standardized tests vs local grades, I will be very surprised.

Comment author: Randy_M 09 April 2013 06:38:12PM 1 point [-]

Well, it would be tracking either way, but it wouldn't be called such if it was entirely informal, which is what it appeared based on the OP.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 09 April 2013 06:18:15PM 1 point [-]

It occurs to me that what could be going on is not that the individual embezzled the grant money, but that the money wound up in the school's general budget. If I believe that most money flowing through the school is from grants, then I conclude that it is needed to pay teacher salaries. So it is a decidedly good thing that it is not spent on ipods.

Comment author: CarlShulman 09 April 2013 01:59:45AM *  40 points [-]

Luckily, my firm started collecting data on teacher aptitude some time ago, and basically you can separate all advanced math teachers easily into two categories: Okay with blacks in their classroom. Blacks and whites both end up succeeding at equal rates. Not okay with blacks in their classroom. Whites end up succeeding, blacks end up failing.

There are a number of research groups tracking teachers and student test scores. If such results had been released anywhere, wouldn't they be front page national news? And this seems like something that, e.g. the Gates Foundation would want known: if true, it's a magic bullet.

Why haven't academics and foundations studying teacher quality and value-added metrics reported such results?

A certain principle...remember that as principle of a school

The word is "principal."

Comment author: buybuydandavis 09 April 2013 02:55:23AM 2 points [-]

The word is "principal."

The Principal is your pal.

Separate is a rat.

Comment author: sketerpot 10 April 2013 02:01:04AM *  3 points [-]

The Principal is your pal.

Ugh. There are three types of lies in the world: lies, damn lies, and people falsely claiming that their incentives are aligned with yours.

Comment author: wedrifid 10 April 2013 02:05:56AM *  14 points [-]

There are three types of lies in the world: lies, damn lies, and people falsely claiming that their incentives are aligned with yours.

There are three types of lies in the world: lies, damn lies, and mnemonics.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 10 April 2013 05:47:14AM 0 points [-]

Thank you. I know it's not very profound, but since someone did spell it wrong, and another felt the need to correct them, I thought I'd throw it out there.

Comment author: Alrenous 09 April 2013 02:30:31AM *  8 points [-]

P.S. I was going to ask about the terms of your NDA. While I agree with greater transparency, I (perhaps idealistically) hope it can be done without breaking promises.

However, I also have a principle, showing honour to honourless dogs is worse than useless.

He couldn't understand why he had needed to do this, and indeed, refused.

I have to disagree that this is ineptitude. He knows which evidence he has to conceal from you, and is doing so effectively. Of course by doing so he only confirms that it is harmful to his case, but it nevertheless grants plausible deniability. Especially as I expect anyone who can fire him will collude in the concealment.

When I submitted this to my boss for approval, she was flabbergasted, and explained that the evaluators job was to collude with the grant proposal submitter,

Sadly I cannot prove this, but I read this after writing the above paragraph. I wasn't primed on 'collude.' I'ma go ahead and conclude nothing happened to the poor bastard sideswiped by a thoroughly unexpected honest appraisal.

every single project I evaluated listed their 'process' and then said that their 'goal' was to enact the process.

Pays the piper, etc... Whoever informed you about the grant application was probably hoping you'd pick up that they were not to be taken seriously. The point of the grant program is to give goodies to certain demographics. The process was indeed the goal, no matter what anyone else said.

There's a limit to how incompetent the rich and/or powerful can be. A single spot check would have caught this, if it wasn't what was intended.

A third. This is, of course, absolutely unacceptable.

I wonder how many of the 2/3rds could have but understood that wasn't the point of the program and didn't bother.

--

I can also explain the parent/teacher/math class thing, but you won't like it. But, very short form: you can't say 'racism' and then just stop thinking.

--

Edit: I should mention I'm surprised that such overt racism still exists, and I'm going to update a few theories accordingly. Especially, that you can have lily white AP classes without instantly dying under a rockslide of disparate-impact lawsuits. I can't help but wonder if the gadgetry is related.

Comment author: Randy_M 09 April 2013 03:14:23PM 2 points [-]

"The point of the grant program is to give goodies to certain demographics. The process was indeed the goal, no matter what anyone else said."

The job of being the grant writer, and evaluator, are probably themselves goodies. In fact, the author of the article is probably viewed as ungrateful for doing the job he was hired to do so scrupulously.

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 09 April 2013 02:48:43AM *  15 points [-]

So what criteria are necessary to apply for these grants? I have a feeling there are a lot of smart people working on startups in the ed tech space. If you could get in contact with them, you might have more competent grant applicants, and those startups would find more revenue to pursue their (potentially workable) ideas for improving education.

Here are some ed tech incubators I found on Google. If you get in contact with the people behind the incubators, they'll probably tell all of their startups about the ease of getting funding this way. Their startups will have to work on one of the problems that there exists a grant for, but there should be a decent number that find this workable.

Comment author: ThinkOfTheChildren 09 April 2013 06:48:02PM 7 points [-]

You might have seen some of those sketchy advertisements, similar to the "Google will Pay YOU!!! To Work From Home!" ads, which say stuff like "Get Grant Money Here!". At least, I associate those two kinds of ads as being similar.

In any case, the process of finding grants to apply for is very simple. The Department of Education grants are all on http://www.grants.gov/. Pretty much every university's Research and Evaluation Department gives out grants to the local community; check out your local Uni's website. Sometimes large corporations give out grants, sometimes individual people. In general, get in touch with the education department of your county government to find out which grants are being offered nearby and how to apply for them.

Now that I think of it, this is the main request I should have of lesswrongers. I bet anyone on this website could write a damn good proposal for any grant they come across, and I bet their project would be better than the shit I evaluate.

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 09 April 2013 08:03:15PM 4 points [-]

Good info. Are you going to talk to the ed tech incubators and give them an inside contact or shall I email them a link to this thread?

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 09 April 2013 03:41:38AM 30 points [-]

The specific project I was evaluating had only gotten $800,000 out of the maximum $2m. Its strategy was to purchase the male students iPod Touches, the female students makeovers, manicures, and pedicures at a local beauty parlor, and all students were offered an additional iPod Touch or Makeover, respectively, if they passed the exam at the end of the current year. The grant proposal had specifically listed these actions as being the goal of the proposal. If the iPods and makeovers were purchased, that constituted success.

If true and documentable, I think there's a large section of the Internet which would be very, very interested and very, very loud about this because the males got iPods and the females got makeovers. (And justly so.)

Comment author: Kawoomba 09 April 2013 06:12:49AM 14 points [-]

It wouldn't be a more effective program if it had iPods for both genders. Up in arms over different gender incentives would target an en vogue failure point that isn't relevant over the one relevant criticism: That the program doesn't work.

Comment author: Randy_M 09 April 2013 03:11:45PM 2 points [-]

And is incapable of being designed to work by those paid to do so.

Comment author: MugaSofer 10 April 2013 04:05:32PM 3 points [-]

It wouldn't be a more effective program if it had iPods for both genders.

You know, it might. Most teenagers are interested in iPods; not all female teenagers are interested in makeovers. In addition, an iPod can be sold if you don't want to use it.

That said, absolutely correct about that not being the point.

Comment author: Will_Newsome 09 April 2013 07:23:52AM 20 points [-]

Generating drama over inconsequential bullshit while the world burns is not justifiable. "One can lie by omission just by neglecting to choose a sufficiently important subject matter." — @aristosophy

Comment author: Dias 09 April 2013 12:51:43PM 3 points [-]

And they will be completely uninterested in the (if true) far more important elements of the story. 1938 is not the time to purge the Bolsheviks!

Comment author: Emile 09 April 2013 04:01:07PM 2 points [-]

I wouldn't be surprised if the description was simplified for brevity, and what actually happened is they were given the choice or something.

Comment author: roystgnr 09 April 2013 05:01:57PM 3 points [-]

If I hadn't recently seen that "students fighting segregated prom" story from credible news sources, I'd have considered this part of the story to be nearly conclusive evidence of trolling. I should be more charitable than that.

It's still evidence, though. Who could fail to anticipate the devastatingly bad PR from "iPods vs Makeover/mani/pedis"? For that matter, why didn't the devastatingly bad PR occur? Surely the students and their parents weren't under NDA too.

Yet a Google search for 'ipod makeover school -"chic school girls"' doesn't seem to find anything relevant, with or without outraged commentary attached. This random lesswrong page comes up for me in the first couple dozen hits, even on a browser with no Google login or cookies that might trigger personalized rankings.

Nobody ever felt it was worth blogging about how their kids were being given these prizes at school?

Comment author: wedrifid 09 April 2013 05:16:05PM 5 points [-]

If I hadn't recently seen that "students fighting segregated prom" story from credible news sources, I'd have considered this part of the story to be nearly conclusive evidence of trolling.

I can imagine some lesswrong users thinking it would be terribly clever for them to create a sock-puppet and "test" how gullible the lesswrong readerbase is via a post like this. If such a case were ever identified I would like to see the user banned by IP rather than rewarded with status and congratulations.

Comment author: Pentashagon 09 April 2013 09:35:28PM 6 points [-]

Banning by IP is useless at best and harmful in most cases (where hapless customers of an ISP get the old IP address of a troll). There is no way to prevent attempts to test how gullible we are; therefore we need to be generally immune to all attempts and not only to specific cases or instigators.

I'd estimate a 30% probability (but with a fairly large variance) that at least some elements of this article are inaccurate and an attempt at trolling. The "best" trolls are 90% truth with one or two outrageous elements using the halo effect to gain belief.

CarlShulman's comment has no satisfactory replies yet. What is the probability that the article's profound accusations are a) completely true, b) otherwise unreported, and c) first reported on lesswrong? It seems more likely that an actual whistle-blower would choose a more widely read media outlet (Wikileaks even?), and probably more than one. b) and c) could just be my inability to find similar information reported elsewhere. It seems to be fairly common knowledge that the education system is broken but not with the specific detail in the article.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 10 April 2013 06:00:23AM 1 point [-]

It seems more likely that an actual whistle-blower would choose a more widely read media outlet (Wikileaks even?)

The more widely read the media outlet, the higher the probability of the whistle-blower's anonymity getting blown.

Comment author: Pentashagon 10 April 2013 07:48:53PM -1 points [-]

The more widely read the media outlet, the higher the probability of the whistle-blower's anonymity getting blown.

Once it's released anywhere the risk of losing anonymity is basically the same in the end. Either it's a troll and will die here or it's true and will be disseminated everywhere. Such a strategy would only make sense if the original poster thought that this forum would replicate the research and publish it with no mention of the original source, but that seems more like the kind of thing an investigative journalist would do.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 09 April 2013 06:06:29PM 7 points [-]

If that program exists, it was tiny, which increases the odds that there' would be no public notice.

I suspect we overestimate how much of the world (not just the proportion of people, but the proportion of what's going on) is online.

Comment author: ThinkOfTheChildren 09 April 2013 06:58:09PM 3 points [-]

The only people aware that the project happened, as far as I know, are myself, my boss, the man in charge, and the 56 students (who were in 6-8th grade at the time, and all from poor black families). The issuer of the grant was the local government, and they issue so many grants that I seriously doubt there's anyone looking at all of them.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 09 April 2013 03:56:24AM *  23 points [-]

Technical person meets a bureaucracy. Good clean fun, like the Mr. Bill show. I wish I had been there when Thomas Sowell interned for the Department of Labor.

The only things about your story that surprised me was that you weren't shit canned within a month, and that an actual company exists that would hire you. You, and by extension them, rocked the boat and survived. That's not what anyone is paying you for. You're there to validate that they're doing the right thing. I don't know how you and your company have survived this long, but I'd like to thank you all for saving some students from the regularly scheduled destruction of their lives.

As for your conversations with the bureaucracy, do you really think their confusion was in not understanding your point? I'd guess that any confusion they had was in how you had a job there at all, while you were busy saying things that shouldn't be said. I think you were the one not "getting it".

Every so often someone says something that opens a new world to me. I'll pass on the new world to you.

The purpose of a bureaucracy is to further the interests of the bureaucracy, whatever goals they give lip service to. But even theoretically, you don't have the lip service goal right. That goal is not to help students. It's to remake society so that it looks right, primarily as measured by equality of outcomes for groups. Helping a white child is helping the white group, thereby making group inequality worse.

If you think in racial groups, everything makes sense. Blacks are more likely to have poor achievement, therefore you help blacks, regardless of achievement. But also, if you judge them by group, then you conclude they aren't ready for the advanced math classes either.

Why not use test scores? Because test scores are objective measurements. Can't allow those into the school system. Then the bureaucracy's performance can be judged, as you demonstrate. Can't have that.

And of course the proposal's execution is the goal of the proposal. Well, it's really the grant itself which is the goal, but they couldn't write "receive check" as the goal, so they write what they plan to do, something entirely in their power. If they wrote that the goal was the delivery of some objective measurement, someone crazy person might measure it and determine that they had failed. Can't have that. Who in the system would possibly want that? Only people like you who just don't "get it".

An anecdote from corporate bureaucracy. I was in a meeting with two managers, where they were describing back and forth what some other woman did. Except their story was completely false. And we all knew it was false. Having the foolishness of youth, if not the years and health, I came out and said "But she didn't really do that, right?" Silence. For a moment. Then the subject was changed and they moved on. People in bureaucracies spend much of the day telling each other social truths that are epistemically false. I don't say lying, because as George Constanza would say, it's not a lie, if you believe it. Their standard of truth is the socially useful. They forgot they had let a fool into the room whose standard was epistemic truth. That buffoon just doesn't get it. We won't invite him to more of these meetings.

Comment author: ThoughtSpeed 09 April 2013 05:33:02AM 4 points [-]

Not to lower signal-to-noise, but - I really liked this comment. It shows of a fine mind made cynical, a delicate sarcasm born of an impinging upon by a horrific, Cthulhian reality.

"People are crazy, the world is mad."

Comment author: Randy_M 09 April 2013 03:20:55PM 5 points [-]

"As for your conversations with the bureaucracy, do you really think their confusion was in not understanding your point? I'd guess that any confusion they had was in how you had a job there at all, while you were busy saying things that shouldn't be said. I think you were the one not "getting it"."

I'm torn myself; I could see it being due to self-interested playing dumb, but also the genuine kind given that we are talking about gross failings of basic education, after all, which has to have consequences down the line.

Comment author: wedrifid 09 April 2013 04:21:04AM 2 points [-]

There were math teachers who absolutely refused to allow blacks/poors in their classroom, or worse, treated them in such a way as to cause them to fail, thus confirming their worldview.

This is now? Not 100 years ago?

Comment author: [deleted] 09 April 2013 04:44:12AM 1 point [-]

There were certainly double standards when I was in secondary.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 09 April 2013 11:44:46AM 1 point [-]

When was that?

Comment author: [deleted] 09 April 2013 01:36:10PM 1 point [-]

Early 2000's.

Comment author: drethelin 09 April 2013 05:31:33AM 10 points [-]
Comment author: blashimov 09 April 2013 04:21:31AM 17 points [-]

I would dearly like citations for everything - I would really like to know if I am still terrible at estimating how awful the world is.

Comment author: PrawnOfFate 10 April 2013 05:46:51PM -2 points [-]

Not the world, the US.

Comment author: private_messaging 09 April 2013 04:35:09AM 6 points [-]

If you are a decision maker in education in your area, please, please, please look into the various Bayesian predictive models used for math placement;

Bayesian methods still can (and in practice, will) use race and the like as evidence, meaning, if you're black you need higher test scores and grades to qualify - they just don't entirely stone-wall you from qualifying, which is a step forward I guess.

The fair approach is to have an entrance exam for better math classes, blind to the race.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 09 April 2013 04:50:17AM 2 points [-]

higher test scores

Other way around. If you've begun with a socioeconomic disadvantage, then achieving a particular test score is an indicator of greater inherent ability, insofar as such a thing exists. Someone who can run a mile in five minutes while carrying a fifty-pound weight is a better runner than someone who can run the same mile in the same speed while carrying no additional weight.

Comment author: private_messaging 09 April 2013 07:02:23AM *  11 points [-]

That depends very much to specific priors and correlations.

If you're looking for the expected score on a re-test, you should apply regression towards the mean, and for a lower mean, that's more regression. A school may be interested in the probability of student success on a course, which is not a measure of inherent ability either but very much depends to the same disadvantages that lower the test score.

edit: that is to say, if you made a programming contest where the contestants write programs to predict re-test scores from score and a profile photo, given huge enough database of US students (split in two, one available to our contestants, one for the final test), winner code will literally measure skin albedo, and in some cases maybe also try to detect eyeglasses. Of course, the morale of the story is not that racism is good but that socially sometimes we don't want the most accurate guess.

edit2: Subtler measures may correlate too, besides the racial ones. E.g. angle between line connecting pupils of the eyes, and horizontal, the pupil dilation in the photo, use/non use of flash, strength of red eye effect, and who knows what else (how busy does the background look, maybe?). I don't think many people here want to have their math scores be adjusted depending to how they held their head in a photograph. edit3: ohh, and the image metadata, or noise signatures, that'd be a big one - is the image taken by an expensive camera? Get free points on your math test. And a free tip: squint. It will think you're asian or smart enough to squint.

Comment author: gwern 10 April 2013 06:49:13PM 1 point [-]

I think fubar may be right in a certain way: if you observe someone reaching a very high score while having a known poor environment (let's say you've tested them enough so one can ignore issues of <1 reliability causing a regression to the mean on subsequent retests), then you might then estimate that the non-environmental contributions must be unusually high - because something must be causing him to score very high, and it's sure not the environment. So for example, we might infer that his genes or prenatal environment or personality are better than average.

Comment author: private_messaging 10 April 2013 07:52:05PM *  1 point [-]

Yes. As I say, depends to what we are trying to predict and priors. Even with 1 test and significant regression, it's correct to infer higher non-environmental contribution, just not higher combination of environmental and non-environmental.

Comment author: cousin_it 09 April 2013 09:46:43AM 4 points [-]

It seems to me that private_messaging is right and explains his point beautifully. Here's a Robin Hanson post making a similar point. Also see this discussion, especially Wei Dai's comment.

Comment author: gwern 10 April 2013 06:47:28PM 3 points [-]
Comment author: DanielLC 09 April 2013 07:35:53AM *  0 points [-]

The fair approach is to have an entrance exam for better math classes, blind to the race.

Is it more important to be fair or accurate?

There are times where it's more important to be fair. For example, punishing a person because he's guilty discourages crime. Punishing someone because he's black does not. Thus, using the fact that he's black as evidence will mean more guilty people will go to jail, more innocents will avoid being jailed, and more people will commit crime.

I don't think that really applies here, though.

Comment author: private_messaging 09 April 2013 04:19:35PM *  2 points [-]

Well, what do you think about losing points because your profile photo has atypical proportions, or atypical posture? Points adjustment for round face, or for relative finger lengths? For having too many or too few facebook friends, likes, and so on? Weight, height, and blood type?

I don't think that really applies here, though.

Well, if you want to encourage education rather than encourage being white or having typical posture or other things like that, it does apply.

Comment author: DanielLC 09 April 2013 11:05:02PM 2 points [-]

Well, if you want to encourage education rather than encourage being white or having typical posture or other things like that, it does apply.

If you're giving prizes to the best students to encourage them, then it applies. If you're trying to match the teaching style to the student, I don't think it does.

Comment author: RolfAndreassen 09 April 2013 05:16:15PM 3 points [-]

if you're black you need higher test scores and grades to qualify

This seems to me mistaken. The reason race can be used as a proxy in the first place is that there is some correlation with performance on the standard tests. If you use the standard tests, then that entirely screens out all the race information; there is no additional information in race that you didn't get from the test. This is similar to checking whether the plane flies: All information from authority and from theory is screened out by the experiment.

More generally: If A is a proxy for B, and you use B, then trying to use A in addition is double-counting.

Now, perhaps you are arguing that race is a proxy for test scores and something else, and you can still extract the something-else? If so this should be made explicit.

Comment author: private_messaging 09 April 2013 07:18:32PM *  4 points [-]

Consider a test followed by a re-test (which we are trying to predict). To calculate expected score on the re-test you need to apply regression to the mean. For a population where you measured lower mean or (in high range) smaller variance, you'll have to regress more.

Of course, that mathematical fact doesn't make it non racist or morally right to do such adjustment. You could add a couple simple extra questions to the test, to obtain similar improvement in the accuracy. Or you could use some other side data instead - weight, height, and blood type, for example, there's a lot of other data you can use besides race, if the race is used but nothing else, that's because of tradition of racism, not because of some awesome rationality. It's fairly amusing to see how race realists justify racism with increased accuracy, but start complaining when you adjust your evaluation of them in much same manner using racism/non-racism as evidence...

edit: An important correction. The test-to-test variance may also differ between the groups. E.g. if we have some robots that always test the same, even if they have low mean, they'll have smaller regression to the mean than humans.

Comment author: RolfAndreassen 09 April 2013 08:48:45PM 0 points [-]

Consider a test followed by a re-test (which we are trying to predict). To calculate expected score on the re-test you need to apply regression to the mean.

This is only true if you assume there is some component of luck or guesswork to the score. I admit that this may be a good model for the kinds of tests you get in American high schools. However, it is not clear to me that "black people" is the correct population to use for the regression, because by construction you have an untypical member. Why not "high-scoring people" or "all students"?

Perhaps it would be helpful to construct an example using something other than race as the difference between populations, to avoid emotional entanglements?

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 09 April 2013 09:22:12PM 4 points [-]

Try neuroskeptic.

If there is no component of luck or guesswork or something that varies from test to test, then the retest will be exactly the same as the original test, but that's not what we see in pretty much any test. or any measurement of anything.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 09 April 2013 04:50:28AM 1 point [-]

Good data on the disparate racial outcomes for some advanced math teachers. What's the relative prevalence of the bigoted? Is this across other subjects as well? What region of the country are we talking about?

There were math teachers who absolutely refused to allow blacks/poors in their classroom, or worse, treated them in such a way as to cause them to fail, thus confirming their worldview.

They can't be fired/fined/reprimanded, or is there no will to do it?

Comment author: Nornagest 09 April 2013 05:45:26AM *  4 points [-]

They can't be fired/fined/reprimanded, or is there no will to do it?

As I understand it, it's exceptionally hard to fire teachers within the American school system -- it takes evidence of sexual misconduct or something similarly precipitous, and it's expensive, time-consuming, and legally hazardous. Even those charges aren't a sure bet. A teacher of mine in high school was suspended on sexual harassment charges -- well-founded ones from what I heard, although I have no direct knowledge -- leading to a lengthy punitive process that involved, among other things, investigators taking students out of their classes and interrogating them about the allegations. He was back in his classroom before the year was out.

Needless to say, ordinary incompetence won't do it. I don't think implicit racism would either, as long as it stayed implicit -- wearing a KKK hood into the classroom would probably be beyond the pale. Probably.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 09 April 2013 06:38:58AM 3 points [-]

I understand that it next to impossible to fire teachers, unless you hit on extreme hot button issues.

Sex with students is number 1. But I'd expect the long knives to come out for racism/sexism/homophobia as well, at least in some jurisdictions. Likely not in others. That's why I was asking about what region of the country we're talking about.

Comment author: Nornagest 09 April 2013 06:52:17AM *  1 point [-]

In all but the most liberal districts, and maybe even then depending on how cynical you are, I think I'd expect any of that to get a pass as long as plausible deniability existed. Unfortunately, that's plausible deniability from the standpoint of parents and administrators who generally aren't statistically literate nor inclined to take student impressions all that seriously, and that leaves quite a bit of leeway as long as the teacher in question is bright enough to couch their objections in the right terms.

You know and I know that if the bell curve on expected achievement is shaped such that 30% of the student population from some minority group should be admitted to an advanced math class, and 0% actually is, then after a couple of years that's as good as admitting racial prejudice. But I think that'd be a much harder sell to a review board, especially one that doesn't want to incur the wrath of the teachers' union or any further investigative costs.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 09 April 2013 07:12:50AM 2 points [-]

I'd think that normally the problem is you don't have the data, and just have anecdotes.

Particularly for admittance to class, I think you've got a problem. Generally disparate selection outcomes are treated as prima facie evidence of prejudice. Something as well controlled as this - when I picture the scenario, it's either the guy in trouble, or everyone circling the wagons and chanting the tribal truth because they don't want to open the door to routine measurement of what they do.

If a teacher is incompetent and can't teach anyone he won't get fired, but if he only can't teach blacks? Maybe they'll circle the wagons there too. I could see it going either way, but relatively more likely trouble for the teacher compared to most non sexual transgressions.

Comment author: Bakkot 09 April 2013 05:10:03AM 9 points [-]

I'd be very interested in a citation on

the evidence shows that teacher recommendations have zero correlation with aptitude in a field

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 09 April 2013 06:35:42AM *  3 points [-]

Seconded. A relatively low correlation I could believe, but none? As a friend pointed out, this would imply that if there's a math prodigy in the class, the teacher would be just as likely to recommend advanced classes as they would be to recommend the student needing extra help with basic stuff? I could accept prodigies slacking off due to boredom and therefore sometimes getting mistaken for people with bad skills, but 50-50?

Comment author: DanArmak 09 April 2013 08:27:32PM 1 point [-]

I wonder if the teachers making the predictions were the same ones who then taught the students, and examined them to determine the outcome.

Comment author: CarlShulman 09 April 2013 08:38:08PM *  6 points [-]

Here's a review of the literature on teacher self-fulfilling prophecies from Lee Jussim, who is skeptical but finds that they occur and are of nontrivial magnitude, moreso for grades vs standardized tests, although they dissipate quickly and teacher judgments are more driven by accuracy than stereotypes in the aggregate.

Comment author: Kawoomba 09 April 2013 06:49:13AM 15 points [-]

Since OP's clearly a bit venting, I'd give him some charitable leeway and interpret 'zero' as 'so small as to not be relevant'.

Comment author: James_Miller 09 April 2013 05:11:35AM *  11 points [-]

If you could prove this stuff you could become a hero to a lot of people.

Edit: I now think this post is probably a hoax. As EY writes "Your strength as a rationalist is your ability to be more confused by fiction than by reality."

Comment author: Kawoomba 09 April 2013 06:24:18AM 6 points [-]

Even an effective program that actually, verifiably works would have its problems: It would (as it stands) target standardized test scores of some sort, which then automatically lose some of their previous reliability as surrogate parameters. That effect has a name, which eludes me, can anyone supply it? (Loss of reliability when a variable is targetted directly and thus becomes subject to manipulations.)

Comment author: JGWeissman 09 April 2013 06:29:55AM 15 points [-]

That effect has a name, which eludes me, can anyone supply it? (Loss of reliability when a variable is targetted directly and thus becomes subject to manipulations.)

You are thinking of Goodhart's Law.

Comment author: Kawoomba 09 April 2013 06:33:08AM 1 point [-]

Cheers!

Comment author: buybuydandavis 09 April 2013 07:39:49AM 10 points [-]

make sure the criteria for math placement is based on achievement data

Make sure you collect achievement data. Bayesian calculations are fine and dandy, but I'd declare victory if they collected the data and let people see it.

Comment author: bentarm 09 April 2013 10:39:04AM *  2 points [-]

The specific project I was evaluating had only gotten $800,000 out of the maximum $2m. Its strategy was to purchase the male students iPod Touches, the female students makeovers, manicures, and pedicures at a local beauty parlor, and all students were offered an additional iPod Touch or Makeover, respectively, if they passed the exam at the end of the current year.... only 25% (14/56) of the students targeted by the program had failed the reading exam in the first place.

$800,000/56 students = $14,000 per student. Those are some expensive iPod touches!

Comment author: falenas108 09 April 2013 12:59:46PM 5 points [-]

See this part of the post:

I described in rigorous detail everything the man had done wrong, put in a strong recommendation to not award him grant money in the future, and suggested that some sort of corruption investigation be conducted to see if he had committed any crimes (23 iPods + 23 Makeovers does not total to $800,000, after all).

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 09 April 2013 11:03:57AM 6 points [-]

Some people have expressed some doubts about this story, and because it is anonymous, we can't verify it directly. I would like to use this opportunity to explore our models of the school system, and especially the difference between the models of insiders and outsiders.

This poll asks a pair of questions. The first question is about how the story fits your model of educational system. The second question is whether you are an "school system insider". That means whether you ever had a full-time job or a part-time job related to the school system; whether you were a teacher or a director of a school, an employee of a Department of Education, a school inspector, or an employee of a company working for education as much as the author of this article. (It is not enough to be a student, a janitor in a school, or an employee of a company which sold one product to schools but sells most of its products elsewhere.)

Submitting...

Comment author: Tenoke 09 April 2013 12:24:37PM 7 points [-]

You move from 'very difficult to believe' to 'seems like a very exaggerated version of true events,' which is almost the same thing but from that you directly jump to 'This story is credible' without any middle ground. I am sorry but this seems like a really poor questionnaire design.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 09 April 2013 01:45:46PM *  2 points [-]

Once the poll is made, the answers cannot be edited. The difference was supposed to mean approximately a) I don't believe this could ever happen, b) I believe it can happen exceptionally, but not all the time as the author claims, c) I believe this can be the way system works.

In other words, the second option is like: "I believe that with so many grant proposals, once in a while a crazy thing passes unnoticed; but I don't believe that it happens all the time, not even half of the time -- you have probably seen one or two bad cases, and now you exaggerate to make your case more appealing".

Comment author: Raemon 09 April 2013 02:50:47PM *  3 points [-]

I found myself wanting to say "I think this sort of grant proposal thing happens maybe 25% of the time, but not all the time, the way the post implies."

I also wished there was some kind of gradation for "school insider/outsider". I'm an outsider, but I talk a lot with a friend who teaches full time. I showed this article to her and she said "yes, yes, yes. This is basically how it is."

I actually DO still assign substantial probability to this being a hoax, despite it matching my understanding - we know the this is sockpuppet account, created ostensibly for NDA anonymity. But can think of some people here who might have created this explicitly as a test of rationality, who are sort of annoyed that the politics involved here get less scrutiny and want to demonstrate that.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 09 April 2013 03:26:28PM 3 points [-]

But can think of some people here who might have created this explicitly as a test of rationality, who are sort of annoyed that the politics involved here get less scrutiny and want to demonstrate that.

Spreading false data as a "test of rationality" would be actively harmful. But I can imagine people misunderstanding that.

Rationality is a method of working with the data you have. You should update on evidence correctly, instead of updating incorrectly. You should be able to recognize that this specific piece of evidence contradicts the model based on all other evidence, which makes this specific piece of evidence suspicious. But also should estimate your degree of certainty in a given model.

It is proper to say "I defy the data" when one's model is based on a lot of reliable evidence. Saying it more often would be overconfidence, not rationality.

Comment author: Raemon 09 April 2013 03:29:22PM 1 point [-]

I was assuming that if it were a hoax, they'd let people know in another few days with a gloating update.

Comment author: Desrtopa 09 April 2013 05:38:16PM 2 points [-]

I agree that this would be the most likely course of action if the essay is a hoax, but I think it would still risk being harmful overall, since retractions generally don't result in an appropriate corresponding decrease in confidence in the material that was originally presented. I'd expect Less Wrong members in general to be better at reducing their confidence in a retracted claim than most people, but better is not necessarily good enough.

Comment author: Emile 09 April 2013 04:09:41PM *  0 points [-]

Yeah, I also generally consider that posts like this have around 5% chances of being a hoax followed by a gloating "they swallowed it" update (here or somewhere else), though this post doesn't have any huge red flags (there doesn't seem to be any huge gloating potential, I mean it's basically just venting).

Comment author: fubarobfusco 09 April 2013 05:56:14PM -1 points [-]

b) I believe it can happen exceptionally, but not all the time as the author claims

That sounds very different from "This story seems like a very exaggerated version of true events". One is about frequency (how often do things in the author's intended reference class occur?) while the other is about severity (how bad are the events that actually happened to the author?)

Comment author: Randy_M 09 April 2013 03:34:21PM 2 points [-]

I have taught in a school and subbed in others. I had very little say about who could come into my classroom, though I was only a first year teacher. (Quit after 1 year). I don't have any reason to believe education beaurocracy is generally bright or honest, but can't say I've seen that kind of thing in the grant process, possibly just because I wasn't involved in it.

Comment author: wedrifid 09 April 2013 05:11:35PM 1 point [-]

That means whether you ever had a full-time job or a part-time job related to the school system; whether you were a teacher or a director of a school, an employee of a Department of Education, a school inspector, or an employee of a company working for education as much as the author of this article

I'm a school system insider by this standard. This makes the survey rather broken because I know very little about schools in your country. I recommend correcting your language.

Comment author: prase 09 April 2013 11:34:47PM 1 point [-]

I know very little about schools in your country

Whose country? Viliam_Bur's country is most probably not the same country as the OP author's.

Comment author: wedrifid 10 April 2013 02:03:40AM 1 point [-]

Whose country? Viliam_Bur's country is most probably not the same country as the OP author's.

In that case the survey makes even less sense to me.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 10 April 2013 08:01:40AM 4 points [-]

The educational systems seems to me similar enough in different countries. When I read stories of teachers in Britain or USA, of course there are differences, but the similarities are also obvious. Some of the stories could have as well happened in my class.

The biggest differences are: How the school is organized. (Are teachers in a union? Who appoints the director? Is there a management layer between the director and the teachers?) Which minorities underperform, and what political consequences does it have. (Black students? Romani students? Are there ethnical quotas? Affirmative action? How often are teachers accused of racism; what is the typical reason and typical consequences?)

Another significant difference is the level of violence at school -- but this varies also within the country, and changes during time. (How often and how severly do students attack each other? Do students attack teachers? Do parents attack teachers? What are the consequences for the agressor?)

And here are the similarities: Bureaucracy. Decisions made by people who don't have a clue, and often have zero educational experience. Supervision and assessment according to unintelligible or actively harmful criteria. Pseudoscience, and aversion to measuring outcomes. (Tests are bad. Teachers shouldn't explain, but entertain. If any recommended technique doesn't work, it is always the teacher's fault, never a problem with the technique. Knowledge is a lost purpose, the true goal of the school system is to make students happy.) People making big money selling pseudoscience to schools. Random minor changes in school system to make voters see that politicians care about their children. Textbooks containing nonsense. Parents treating teachers as babysitters.

Comment author: wedrifid 10 April 2013 08:29:21AM 0 points [-]

The educational systems seems to me similar enough in different countries.

Ok, I've answered the survey adopting this assumption. I chose "Very difficult to believe, school system insider". But note that I would also have found the prom segregation difficult to believe if not for the somewhat credible sources so discount the results as appropriate.

Comment author: wedrifid 10 April 2013 08:32:42AM *  2 points [-]

And here are the similarities: Bureaucracy. Decisions made by people who don't have a clue, and often have zero educational experience. Supervision and assessment according to unintelligible or actively harmful criteria. Pseudoscience, and aversion to measuring outcomes. (Tests are bad. Teachers shouldn't explain, but entertain. If any recommended technique doesn't work, it is always the teacher's fault, never a problem with the technique. Knowledge is a lost purpose, the true goal of the school system is to make students happy.) People making big money selling pseudoscience to schools. Random minor changes in school system to make voters see that politicians care about their children. Textbooks containing nonsense. Parents treating teachers as babysitters.

I mostly agree (strongly) with this. However the "Tests are bad" part in particular doesn't seem to be completely general. More testing and measurement seems to be the direction things have been going here.

Comment author: mwengler 09 April 2013 05:26:11PM *  1 point [-]

I voted earlier then came back to this post to see how it was going. How do I view the results? I tried voting again, but it won't let me, and I'm sorry, I can't guess how to view the poll results anymore.

EDIT: I figured it out, on the off chance anybody else wonders, hit the chain-link looking icon at the bottom of the poll to go to a page where you see results (at least if you have voted). That link points to: http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/h5z/problems_in_education/8qa5

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 09 April 2013 11:50:08AM 3 points [-]

I voted credible/outsider so that I could see the poll results. I'd have gone for plausible/outsider or preferably "no strong opinion, but I want to see the results" if either had been available.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 April 2013 04:12:51PM 0 points [-]

I was in the same situation as you, and I flipped a coin between “exaggerated” and “credible”.

Comment author: educationrealist 09 April 2013 01:46:28PM 21 points [-]

Man, I registered just so I could vote and then it turns out there's something called karma.

This post is almost entirely nonsense. I give it "almost" simply because in certain all-URM school districts the corruption level is high. It's within the realm of possibility that "fake grants" to "fake grant programs" that are nothing more than chump change doled out by large employers who can wave the program in front of Jesse Jackson and his ilk--look! We're providing gravy!--so I won't call it an outright lie. But it's certainly not the norm. Did you notice that this guy acts like the education world is comprised solely of blacks and whites? If any element of his story is true, it's because he lives or works in an all black school district that is, indeed, corrupt. Detroit, New Jersey somewhere, or the like. And that's a generous interpretation.

The second half of his post is so risible I'm amazed anyone takes it seriously. We live in a world where, as I write this, federal settlements are forced on schools that suspend or expel minorities at a higher rate, never mind the details, and anyone believes that schools assign classes by race? It's not just wrong. It's an outright LIE. Even in very rich schools that have low income URM students (and I can think of five within 20 miles of my home), the pressure to integrate classes when the kids are unprepared is huge. Principals are at risk for losing AP classes if they don't put enough URMs in them. They face lawsuits if they do use tests to assign kids to advanced classes, much less if they assigned by race. As for the idea that black students do well if the teachers like them there? Please. Teachers have next to no say as to their assignments---it's one area in which principals have a great deal of control.

Every word beginning with "unfortunately" is such a lie I'm astonished anyone would credit it.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 09 April 2013 01:59:05PM *  14 points [-]

Is it possible that different parts of USA have different situation, because of a different state, different county, or just depending on whether the parents in the specific school are politically savvy, know their rights and fight for them?

Sometimes the official rules are the same for everyone, and yet what actually happens, depends more on the local culture. Maybe the lawsuits get big media attention, but in reality they happen rarely and require a lot of effort on parents' side (or a coincidence that some political group decides to push this cause), so most parents don't even try.

Comment author: Desrtopa 09 April 2013 02:07:30PM 10 points [-]

Is it possible that different parts of USA have different situation, because of a different state, different county, or just depending on whether the parents in the specific school are politically savvy, know their rights and fight for them?

In a country where some school districts have higher college acceptance rates than others have high school graduation rates, I would say this is a near-certainty.

Comment author: Emile 09 April 2013 02:59:09PM 23 points [-]

I upvoted this comment, because I'm interested in hearing a dissenting view on this, but ... I find this to be pretty poor dissent.

You should tone down your accusations, and especially make them more precise - on the face of it, I'm not sure to what extent the things that you're saying (like "the pressure to integrate classes when the kids are unprepared is huge") actually contradict the OP, as opposed to merely being evidence that supports a different interpretation (and you'll find arguments for both sides on any disagreement).

Mostly, from my French point of view, I'm seeing American politics cloud up issues here, and I would much rather see a dispassionate discussion of the facts rather than flinging accusations back and forth. Too much "THIS IS A LIE AND YOU ARE ALL IDIOTS", not enough "this particular specific statement appears to be false, and here is why".

Comment author: [deleted] 10 April 2013 02:38:39AM 5 points [-]

Likewise upvoted, likewise would prefer higher-quality criticism.

Given how incredibly important education is and how few citations there are here (at the moment, from both 'sides'), forgetting to actually think about something for five minutes before updating your beliefs would be a very bad idea.

Comment author: Raemon 09 April 2013 03:03:52PM *  9 points [-]

I actually think there's a decent chance this story is a hoax, but not because it is remotely implausible. It sounds exactly like everything I've heard about the NYC school system.

Comment author: Randy_M 09 April 2013 03:26:29PM 9 points [-]

Upvoted because I'd like to see the OP address your questions.

Comment author: Emile 09 April 2013 01:52:29PM 0 points [-]

Nice article (as usual, if true). Minor nitpick:

Anyway, this is an important problem that I'm working on, but literally I can only make a difference for my county in my state, and it's clear that the problem is everywhere.

I think you mean "in the US" - things are different in France, or in Finland, or in Japan, or in China. You may see some similar patterns, but I think the whole "black/white" thing is pretty specific to the US; you get complicated relationships between ethnic groups in many countries, but they work differently (look at Belgium, or Ireland, or Canada, or China, or Rwanda, or Egypt, or Singapore - though Australia seems to be one of the rare countries comparable to the US).

I think taking a more international perspective is useful not only to be more accessible to non-US readers, but also to detach the issue from local politics (especially with examples from countries whose politics are quite different), and get a larger sample size in which it's easier to see which theories hold water.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 April 2013 04:19:38PM 5 points [-]

Huh. Even I, who am usually very peeved by that kind of things, automatically took “everywhere” to mean ‘in the US’ in that context without even noticing. (Possibly because the first paragraph explicitly mentioned the US twice, and because of the “county” and “state” earlier in the same sentence.)

Comment author: Kawoomba 09 April 2013 04:35:14PM 7 points [-]

Everywhere is all-quantified concerning the location, so obviously it means on other planets and in other civilizations as well. Elementary, my dear Watson.

Comment author: wedrifid 09 April 2013 04:58:46PM 3 points [-]

though Australia seems to be one of the rare countries comparable to the US

That doesn't seem right. Australia's "black" group (which isn't labelled 'black') is more closely analogous to Native Americans than African Americans in history and current status in ethnic politics. It would be altogether ironic to equate Australian Aboriginals with African Americans simply because they have similar skin color.

Comment author: Emile 09 April 2013 05:16:53PM 1 point [-]

Can't say I disagree with that, but do you agree that the American black-white situation is closer to the Australian situation (in term of current political and social dynamics, not in terms of history) than it is to the Walloon-Flemish situation, or the Hutu-Tutsi situation, or the Han-Tibetan situation?

Comment author: wedrifid 09 April 2013 05:22:53PM *  1 point [-]

Can't say I disagree with that, but do you agree that the American black-white situation is closer to the Australian situation (in term of current political and social dynamics, not in terms of history) than it is to the Walloon-Flemish situation, or the Hutu-Tutsi situation, or the Han-Tibetan situation?

I'm afraid I can't speak with confidence about any of those other ethnic situations. I'm not particularly familiar with them. Australia and the United States are the two countries in which I have resided and the cultures I am least unfamiliar with. I'll take your word for it that the dynamics are more similar than the others mentioned.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 April 2013 04:22:59PM *  5 points [-]

The specific project I was evaluating had only gotten $800,000 out of the maximum $2m. Its strategy was to purchase the male students iPod Touches, the female students makeovers, manicures, and pedicures at a local beauty parlor, and all students were offered an additional iPod Touch or Makeover, respectively, if they passed the exam at the end of the current year.

Besides everything else, the iPod touch doesn't sound exactly like the kind of thing that already having one makes you more likely to want another. What the heck should I do with a second iPod touch if already have one? (Beside selling it or giving it to my sister, that is.)

Comment author: mwengler 09 April 2013 05:23:44PM 19 points [-]

My top candidates for what is up here are: 1) fabrication as part of a social experiment on how credulous we are 2) fabrication by a sociopath with a very odd idea of self-entertainment 3) incredibly erroneous interpretation of what is going on by a crank

But it is SO full of red flags that I would be surprised if it is not intentional. Call it 66% chance it is intentional hoax.

And it is so far from the mark of a true post that I would be very surprised if it had more than a glancing connection to the truth, call it 95% that it is barely connected to actual facts.

I have kids in California public schools. I have read, over the years, many critiques of public schools and public funding generally. As bad as things are, they are quite obviously nowhere near as bad as this article suggests in the schools my kids have gone to and are now going to. Further, I am quite good friends with a long time teacher, administrator, and union officer in NYC. I by no means share her respect for the union and DO believe documented horror stories of "turkey farms" where truly impossibly bad teachers are stored while being paid rather than following the more expensive process of firing them. I do believe other horror stories. But I can tell you for sure, while things are not amazingly wonderful in California public schools, they are simply not even vaguely close to that bad in many real Calfifornia schools I am exposed to.

So at bare minimum, if there is any truth to the allegations in the original post, the idea that these things are universal, or at least pervasive in American public schools is wrong.

Next argument: many of us reading this board, and even being taken in by this post, went through the American public school system ourselves, and by my standards, (I'm 55) many of you went through quite recently. Many of us, I dare say, were in advanced classes. Does the OP fit even vaguely with what you saw with your own eyes? It is miles from my 40 year old experiences.

Next, there is a thriving critique of publicschools in this country. With the amount of negative attention public education has drawn, is it really plausible that NONE of this critique has discovered the depths of waste and stupidity described as routine by this post? It is not plausible to me.

Next, public spending and public education tends to be a pretty open process. If these are Government grants, there is a crap load of information that has to be public.

Finally, to make such extreme claims with absolutely NO linkage to any source other than the post itself, would require remarkable naivete about how an intelligent audience should perceive claims like this, an innocence which is belied by the beautiful craftsmanship of the post itself. Really, EVERY program discussed needs to be obfuscated? No agency involved can be mentioned?

I googled "black men ipad education grant" hit nothing similar to the OP claimed program.

The real question is how long before the trap is sprung and we are told we were naive to believe this at all and we are really no better than birthers and creationists when the story fits our fears. I think it is better than 50% we will get such a message, but we'll see.

Comment author: gjm 09 April 2013 09:29:59PM 1 point [-]

FWIW I estimate 30% chance something of the sort is going on; if so, my guess is that the OP is actually a ... well, I suppose he might use the term "racial realist" ... who wants to show how those lefties on Less Wrong will believe even the most ridiculous claims if they allow them to blame underperformance by "blacks and poors" on systematic mistreatment rather than natural inferiority.

Comment author: gwern 09 April 2013 10:01:51PM *  13 points [-]

Next, there is a thriving critique of publicschools in this country. With the amount of negative attention public education has drawn, is it really plausible that NONE of this critique has discovered the depths of waste and stupidity described as routine by this post? It is not plausible to me.

Every scandal was at some point not yet known. Consider an apropos contemporary news event: the Memphis cheating ring, which embraced an entire school district in cheating far worse than merely sustained incompetence and racism. It apparently may have started as early as 1995, and only began coming out in 2009.

Comment author: Desrtopa 09 April 2013 11:21:52PM 20 points [-]

The variation in educational standards and practices between districts in America is too large to make generalizing from one's own experience very useful except insofar as it demonstrates that the critiques given in the article cannot be universal.

When I talk to friends who went to decent schools (which is pretty much all of my friends,) their experiences, cynical though they might be about them, don't reflect the sort of scandal the OP describes. When I talk to acquaintances who work as teachers for seriously disadvantaged schools through programs like Teach For America, the general consensus appears to be "No matter how bad you think it is, it's always worse."

Comment author: jimrandomh 09 April 2013 05:37:24PM 33 points [-]

I believe you're posting this because you want the problems fixed; but in order for that to happen, you need to make it happen. There are a variety of escalation strategies to consider: you might go to your state's secretary of education; you might go to your state's attorney general; you might go to the press. Note that NDAs usually do not hold up when you're making accusations of criminal activity, and some of the accusations you have made are criminal in nature. There are "whistleblower protection" laws, which vary from state to state. Also note that if someone is your lawyer, then you have the absolute iron-clad right to tell them everything ("attorney-client privilege") regardless of what you may have signed. And if what you say is true, then there are probably quite a few groups that would happy to provide you with a lawyer, or lawyers that would work on contingency. In any case, talking to a lawyer should be your next step before taking any major action; it's just a question of which one.

Your career as an auditor that people pay to evaluate themselves is completely doomed and you should sacrifice it before it explodes. Your career as an auditor that people pay to evaluate others has promise.

Also, you should realize that having a scandal ready to release in a controlled fashion gives you some powers, and you should think carefully about what your objectives are. Depending on the location, size, spin and time of release, you can take out any one person of authority, possibly (but not necessarily) as high as the state governor. If you have political savvy, you might maneuver into a position of authority yourself.

(To all the other commenters in this thread: this is one of those cases where you should be providing actionable options to the original poster, not going meta, not expressing outrage, not trying to collect the information to act in his place. Comment as a consequentialist, not as a conversationalist.)

Comment author: TimS 09 April 2013 05:58:06PM 11 points [-]

In particular, if any of the children evaluated are in special education, parents have fairly strong leverage to punish school districts who are doing stuff that no one could think would work. Attorneys and non-attorney advocates in all 50 US states are available to help the parents, who often have no idea what their rights are or that the school district is being foolish.

Separately, the American's with Disabilities Act prohibits retaliation against anyone who acts to protect a disabled individual's rights. Alas, proving this is a difficult matter. You might consider looking at my post on one way to document verbal statements in writing.

And for clarity, disabled in this context is a broader label than cognitively impaired, blind, or deaf. If a child has a medical condition that impairs their ability to learn, they are a "child with a disability" under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.


Disclaimer: This is a general statement of the law, not legal advice. Consult your own attorney, because reading this does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Comment author: jimrandomh 09 April 2013 06:51:41PM 13 points [-]

Pulling a bunch of money out of the system with a lawsuit is not a winning outcome if it leaves the existing corrupt power structure in place. Be warned that for many lawyers, the goal will be money, not improvement. Do not use a lawyer whose goals are different than your own.

You should be collecting evidence. If you are ever alone with an incriminating document, photograph every page. You may later wish to allow these documents a chance to go missing (eg, by making a FOIA request) before you reveal that you've copied them. If you are in a state where it is legal to do so without telling anyone, record every interesting conversation. A recorded statement like "the evaluator's job is to collude with the submitter" is a political instakill if given to the press, and the threat of releasing it is significant leverage.

Pay attention to the specific people involved, especially the ones who are higher up, and the ones who are keeping themselves hidden. Try to figure out who's good, who's evil, who's smart, and who's dumb. Try to predict how each will react to scandal. Assume that by default, the evildoers will successfully deflect blame onto the stupid, unless you have specific incriminating evidence.

Comment author: [deleted] 10 April 2013 01:52:04PM 1 point [-]

Your career as an auditor that people pay to evaluate themselves

As-yet-uninvented rationalist career niche?

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 09 April 2013 06:07:32PM 6 points [-]

I'm torn between thinking that if this is a hoax, the hoaxer should be banned with extreme prejudice, and hoping that there will be another hoax designed to appeal to right-wingers.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 09 April 2013 06:36:40PM 0 points [-]

That would be the first 7 paragraphs.

Comment author: ThinkOfTheChildren 09 April 2013 06:40:28PM 0 points [-]

That's interesting.

If this were a hoax, it would certainly appeal to right-wingers. In general, the way the school board is debating this issue, the democrats are in favor of teacher recommendations and "helping the poor black kids", whereas the republicans (although, on the school board, they're all teapartiers) are the ones running with the "Data Driven Decisions D^3" slogan.

Comment author: Randy_M 09 April 2013 07:16:43PM 0 points [-]

What specifically is the school board debating? Allow the Principal to keep some minority students in honors classes?

Comment author: Randy_M 09 April 2013 06:43:59PM 8 points [-]

I'm surprised you think the appeal of the OP is confined to left-wingers. The bad guys are all government beaurocrats, the current boogey men of the right and a group championed by the left.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 09 April 2013 07:24:47PM 2 points [-]

You've got a point. The OP would appeal to both-- I was probably biased by the left-wing appeal being at the end of the post.

Comment author: IlyaShpitser 09 April 2013 07:48:17PM 7 points [-]

The sign of a good Usenet troll post is that it is a mirror held up to as many groups as possible.

Comment author: mwengler 10 April 2013 12:15:05PM 4 points [-]

I'm torn between thinking that if this is a hoax, the hoaxer should be banned with extreme prejudice, and hoping that there will be another hoax designed to appeal to right-wingers.

I come down strongly on the "hoax" side because I spend a lot of time "reviewing" the emails that my father and other relatives exchange. These are of the sort Obama born in Kenya, Obama dissed dead soldiers and their families, Obama pushing Sharia law, Obama hates Flag pins.

As far as I'm concerned, I have seen 100s of the hoaxes designed to appeal to right wingers. You can see them too: go to snopes.com, search on Obama and False ,stop reading when you get bored.

As to banning, if we really are supposed to be learning rationality here, how does it help to erase all evidence that in large numbers we got tricked? And it didn't even take Omega to do it to us, it was just another Beta like ourselves? If this does turn out to be a hoax designed to appeal to us, it should be taught as something we need to watch out for.

Comment author: [deleted] 10 April 2013 06:35:50PM 1 point [-]

Seconded.

Comment author: OrphanWilde 09 April 2013 11:12:04PM *  21 points [-]

I don't know about the rest of the country, but this fails entirely to be surprising [eta: given the region of the country I grew up in, Texas]. My family has seen too much shit go on in schools.

The most egregious case that happened -to us- was a school that put one of my siblings in a fucked-up experiment (paid for by a grant!) without my parents' consent, and indeed told all the children involved not to tell their parents or bad things would happen to them (we grew up being taught very firmly to question authority, so of course my parents found out, and a shitstorm was raised - with nothing ultimately happening. One of several reasons we moved out of that school district.). The experiment involved shit like telling the (extremely young) children to imagine they were in a crashing airplane, and there's nothing they could do, they were going to die, and how did they feel about this?

Some of it seems exaggerated, but the basics - half-assed school grants funding ridiculous shit - ring a little too true to me to outright reject the post. I've seen too many things happen in schools that remain completely unreported on, like prayer in school, to think that the scarcity of information on the internet means anything, as well.

Comment author: knb 09 April 2013 11:57:02PM *  18 points [-]

This post is popular not because it is accurate, but because it repeats the popular misconceptions about the US education system, and tells both left and right what they want to hear:

Of course, the biggest myth that the media reporting of PISA scores propagates is that the American public school system is horrible. The liberal left in U.S and in Europe loves this myth, because they get to demand more government spending, and at the same time get to gloat about how much smarter Europeans are than Americans. The right also kind of likes the myth, because they get to blame social problems on the government, and scare the public about Chinese competitiveness. We all know that Asian students beat Americans students, which "proves" that they must have a better education system. This inference is considered common sense among public intellectuals. Well, expect for the fact that Asian kids in the American school system actually score slightly better than Asian kids in North-East-Asia!

American students generally outperform their racial group in other countries. White Americans have higher PISA scores than any European country except statistical outlier Finland. Asian Americans beat every Asian country, and are second only to the wealthy, elite Chinese city of Shanghai (another statistical outlier).

Hispanic Americans are mostly Mexican-Americans, but outscore Mexico by a healthy 41 points. They are only 15 points behind Spain--and note that many Hispanic-Americans are recent immigrants and don't speak English as a first language (but had to take the test in English), while Spaniards take the test in Spanish.

African-Americans outperform Trinidad (Trinidad is a developed country with a high per capita GDP, and has a substantially African population, which makes them perhaps the most comparable group.)

This really seems to disconfirm both the liberal and conservative talking points. The US education system is not underfunded, as liberals say, nor is it underperforming, as conservatives say. It also is not correct that the US is systematically failing racial minorities due to institutionalized racism (as the OP claims).

The picture I have of the US education system is that there are a large number of smart, dedicated, people spending a lot of money trying get the best outcomes they can with the students they have to work with. This is all irreconcilable with the claims the OP makes.

Comment author: Desrtopa 10 April 2013 12:18:17AM *  14 points [-]

The picture I have of the US education system is that there are a large number of smart, dedicated, people spending a lot of money trying get the best outcomes they can with the students they have to work with. This is all irreconcilable with the claims the OP makes.

Not so irreconcilable, if you don't suppose that "a lot" means "most."

The current average likelihood of a high school freshman in America making it to graduation is about 78%, and that's the best it's been in quite a while.

At the public high school I went to, it was a pretty big deal if a year passed where someone failed to graduate, and students would ask each other, not if they were planning to go to college, but what college they planned to go to. The only student I ever asked or heard asked that question who said they weren't planning to go to college, went to college. And not a two-year or community college, but a pretty decent state college.

That was a good high school, but it wasn't by any means renowned. With schools like that bringing up the national average, consider the state of the schools dragging down the national average.

Comment author: CarlShulman 10 April 2013 12:40:09AM 10 points [-]

The U.S. educational system can be better than most other countries' (assuming higher performance is not due to some other factor) and yet have much room for improvement. The U.S. economy has higher GDP per capita than almost all other countries, and yet it keeps growing, and there are many areas where policy is clearly forsaking GDP.

Comment author: AspiringRationalist 10 April 2013 04:24:00AM -1 points [-]

American students generally outperform their racial group in other countries. White Americans have higher PISA scores than any European country except statistical outlier Finland. Asian Americans beat every Asian country, and are second only to the wealthy, elite Chinese city of Shanghai (another statistical outlier).

Given that there are racial gaps in the test scores, it's not fair to compare the average of white Americans against the nation-wide averages of European countries, since they also have significant non-white populations.

Comment author: [deleted] 10 April 2013 05:06:33AM *  2 points [-]

The image appears to come from Steve Sailer, who is not the most reliable source in the history of reliable sources. Identifying as anti-establishment media seems to correlate with poor epistemic hygiene.

On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if some version of this is true after correcting for this, as your typical European country has an ethnic majority over 80%.

Comment author: knb 10 April 2013 05:21:54AM *  10 points [-]

If you follow my first link, you can see the author's analysis is demographically neutralized (it excludes 1st and 2nd generation immigrants in European countries, and compares to white Americans). In this ranking, American whites substantially outperform the European average, and only 2 small European countries (Switzerland and Finland) noticeably outrank American whites. US whites are outscoring the EU-15 (basically the core nations of the EU, before it expanded into Eastern Europe), by a substantial amount.

The second image is not demographically neutralized, but European countries have far, far lower non-white percentages than the United States. For example, Germany is about 10% non-white as of 2010.

Comment author: PrawnOfFate 10 April 2013 06:01:57PM 8 points [-]

Just imagine...there are countries where education can be discussed without bringing in race at all...

Comment author: OrphanWilde 10 April 2013 04:06:40PM 47 points [-]

Did some research. The claim that the proposals are poorly written leaps out at me as immediately true. Here's a website with successful grant applications, to be used as models to write them:

http://www.k12grants.org/samples/samples_index.htm

This is the first grant I pulled up (it's not the first, but it -was- the first I felt competent to evaluate, concerning primarily technology):

http://www.k12grants.org/samples/grantkay.pdf

First, the horrible spelling, grammar, and punctuation leap out at me immediately. Second, the claim in the post that grant proposals are written to describe what they're doing, rather than what they're intending to achieve, holds up, for this grant at least.

http://www.k12grants.org/samples/MH%20grant.pdf

This proposal is the best-written I encountered. It describes the specific problems it intends to resolve and the specific solutions it intends to use. Unfortunately, the only evidence it introduces is the evidence that there is a problem. It doesn't provide any evidence that its solutions work. Its stated "Method of Evaluation", moreover, exactly mirrors the claims made in this post - it evaluates whether or not its solutions are implemented, NOT whether or not the problem is solved. (Goal #5 seems like an exception, but remember the stated problem is mental health issues.

http://www.k12grants.org/samples/TARGET.pdf

This proposal is the best I've encountered. It is horribly written, however. (You can skip past the pages and pages of documentation about how exactly the money will be spent to read the goals.) The accountability section has this (this is a proposal, essentially, to buy more modern computers for students and teachers, and to hire support staff):

We will begin by taking benchmarks of our current situation with regard to number of computers per student (including the capability of that equipment), number of teachers and students currently using the PLATO or other learning systems, number of teachers using the Web as a training and communication tool, and student scores on the TABE and PLATO assessment tests. On a quarterly basis, we will review computer ratios and teachers/students using PLATO. Every semester we will use questionnaires and surveys, as well as observation, of staff to get feedback on the impact of professional development activities. Student scores will be reviewed after every semester. Results will be tabulated and communicated to school staff, superintendents, Advisory Boards and Texans Can! staff annually. Where indicated, adjustments in curriculum and instruction will be made to ensure that student performance continues to improve

Note that the accountability, as it pertains to this grant, is - wait for it - to make sure the grant money is spent as expected. You can change curriculum and instruction -without- the computers, remember. (I think this is a pretty sensible grant request, but the accountability measures it proposes provide no actual accountability. "Did we say what we were going to do? Yes? Then our grant was a success!")

http://www.k12grants.org/samples/FLAP%20Narrative.pdf

Setting aside the fact that I've seen better writing from middle school students, this is actually a decently written grant. It has specific goals, implementations, and even has accountability. (Although it does seem confused about who or what is accountable to who or what; the accountability section reads rather like the author's understanding of accountability meant the ability of students to measure their own improvements in performance. Notably omitted is a suggestion that the program's success/improvement rate be compared to non-program success/improvement rates.)

http://www.k12grants.org/samples/2003_Library&Literacy.pdf

A well-written grant I can't find fault with. (Except maybe its questionable notion of scientific evidence.)

So - some of the grants here definitely show symptoms of the problems indicated in the post. Some don't. A couple of these had no business being granted. ALL of these grants were successful applications - that is, the grants were granted.

After this exercise, my position shifted from "This post is credible" to "This post exaggerates the extent of the problem to some degree, but remains a valid criticism of the grant system as it exists."

And I tried to find a grant similar to the iPod/Makeover grant, and found this:

http://www.msmagiera.com/ipad-grant

Okay, not exactly analogous, as it at least pertains to education. However, given the grant's self-evaluation criteria, student scores could plummet and the project could still call itself an overall success. (Actual improvement in student abilities only accounts for a fourth of their apparently unweighted criteria.)

Comment author: Michelle_Z 10 April 2013 07:02:38PM 1 point [-]

How, exactly is it, that these people get hired in the first place?

Comment author: gwern 10 April 2013 07:20:34PM 10 points [-]

I'll put it this way: in the average GRE scores by intended field, education ranks below philosophy & STEM in every subtest, and various forms of education rank very low (early childhood education is, out of 50 groups, second from the bottom in 2 subtests and fifth from the bottom in the last subtest).

Comment author: Pentashagon 10 April 2013 08:00:02PM 1 point [-]

Education even ranks below Religion in every category. Also, Economics is only quantitatively better than Religion. </abuse of ranked lists of things>

Comment author: gwern 10 April 2013 08:13:08PM 4 points [-]

Also, Economics is only quantitatively better than Religion.

Yes, given that economics is apparently one of the most lucrative fields around going by Caplan's recent post on majors, it's interesting that the econ students aren't ranked even higher.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 10 April 2013 09:28:32PM 3 points [-]

Chicken-and-egg problem: Non-economics majors don't think economically enough to choose fields on the basis of their remuneration?

Comment author: Matt_Simpson 10 April 2013 09:46:14PM 0 points [-]

That seems to explain why Econ majors get a premium, but that doesn't seem to explain why econ majors don't rank higher, or am I missing something?

Comment author: Matt_Simpson 10 April 2013 09:47:15PM *  5 points [-]

Not surprising, given my experience. Most religion majors I've met were relatively smart and often made fun of the more fundamentalist/evangelical types who typically were turned off by their religion classes. Religion majors seemed like philosophy-lite majors (which is consistent with the rankings).

Edit: Also, relative to Religion, econ has a bunch of poor english speakers that pull the other two categories down. (Note: the "analytical" section is/was actually a couple of very short essays)

Comment author: [deleted] 10 April 2013 07:23:41PM *  4 points [-]

I wish I had computer acess to write out a longer reply to this, for now see educationrealists response and his blog in general. I was torn wether to upvote or downvote the article as I don't know whether it was exploiting or exposing key weaknesses of community rationality here.

Comment author: Bugmaster 10 April 2013 07:59:42PM 1 point [-]

However, this process yields sheer lunacy, mostly because of the ridiculous ineptitude of every single person involved. ... she was flabbergasted, and explained that the evaluators job was to collude with the grant proposal submitter...

I think you're mistaken, and that most of the people involved in this process are, in fact, acting quite rationally and efficiently. They are merely solving a different problem. Your goal is to improve education; their goal is to channel as much money as possible into the pockets of everyone involved. The system you describe works quite well for that purpose.

You could argue that such a system is immoral, but it is eminently rational (at least in the short term), since it provides a way to acquire significant resources at very low risk. This is better than, for example, betting on the stock market or creating a startup.