Utah and the American Dream

[pogi]

30 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Sure if you append the condition on it, there is no correlation, we are told.  But keep in mind that does not say there is no correlation overall. 

  I don't think you understand the implications of the bolded part, or you wouldn't still be going on about this.  I also find it amusing that you are fighting so hard to hold on to correlation after rebutting me with "correlation is not causation."  

When the correlation of race to economic mobility is dependent upon the variable of single parents in an area , then race can be eliminated as a causative factor. The correlation disappears in the absence of other factors - there is absolutely NO "overall" correlation.  For there to be an "overall" correlation, the correlation would have to exist independent of other variables.  In other words, race is NOT the issue here according to this data.  There is no way to interpret this data to show that race has a correlation independent of the variable of marriage.  It can't be done!

 

[Ahab]

12 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Doesn't really work for elementary or junior high.

Blanket statement with no reasoning that you think I should automatically accept?

I can envision it working. Why can't you?

 

[clarkgoble]

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Blanket statement with no reasoning that you think I should automatically accept?

I can envision it working. Why can't you?

Because we've done volunteer work as a teacher's assistant in elementary school. The kids aren't mature enough to help the kids. There are some cases where they can, but when dealing with disruptive kids expecting other kids to solve the problem misses the nature of the problem.  A wise teacher will of course use kids more advanced to help others. Teams frequently work. But children from age 6 - 11 don't have the maturity to comprehend let alone deal with many problems.

[stemelbow]

5 minutes ago, pogi said:

  I don't think you understand the implications of the bolded part, or you wouldn't still be going on about this.  I also find it amusing that you are fighting so hard to hold on to correlation after rebutting me with "correlation is not causation."  

When the correlation of race to economic mobility is dependent upon the variable of single parents in an area , then race can be eliminated as a causative factor. The correlation disappears in the absence of other factors - there is absolutely NO "overall" correlation.  For there to be an "overall" correlation, the correlation would have to exist independent of other variables.  In other words, race is NOT the issue here according to this data.  There is no way to interpret this data to show that race has a correlation independent of the variable of marriage.  It can't be done!

 

I disagree of course.  as was suggested correlation is not causation.  Race could be a causative factor even if there were no correlation with race.  But, as we were told there is correlation with race.  Its impossible to eliminate race as a causative factor based on the notion that one subset of the race consideration doesn't show correlation. 

There's nothing simple about defining causation .  It's a complicated mess and correlation is really only used to help identify possible causes (even though it's possible there are causes without any correlation).  no correlation can't be used to eliminate causes, even if in some cases it proves to be a reasonable assumption. 

[stemelbow]

22 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

Well if you want to do your part, pack your stuff and move to Stockton,CA.

There are many ways to do my part.  I'd have no clue how moving to Stockton will help anything. 

[Ahab]

1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

Because we've done volunteer work as a teacher's assistant in elementary school. The kids aren't mature enough to help the kids. There are some cases where they can, but when dealing with disruptive kids expecting other kids to solve the problem misses the nature of the problem.  A wise teacher will of course use kids more advanced to help others. Teams frequently work. But children from age 6 - 11 don't have the maturity to comprehend let alone deal with many problems.

I wasn't talking about curing rebellion or stupidity. I was just thinking that any child who has figured out how to do something, or how to think about something, can help to explain that to other people.

Trying to stick to a time schedule is the biggest problem I see, with some students simply needing more time to process information.

[clarkgoble]

1 minute ago, Ahab said:

I wasn't talking about curing rebellion or stupidity. I was just thinking that any child who has figured out how to do something, or how to think about something, can help to explain that to other people.

Trying to stick to a time schedule is the biggest problem I see, with some students simply needing more time to process information.

Right, but that's not the only need for teacher's assistants. It also frequently goes beyond just time. You typically need people who understand the involved problems. Expecting a child with dyslexia who is having trouble reading (my daughter) to be really helped to get an issue by a fellow student is expecting too much. Again, that's not to say there isn't value in teaming up good students with struggling students. There is. But that doesn't really solve the problems (largely discipline and learning disability issues) that teacher's aids help solve.

[Ahab]

4 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

You typically need people who understand the involved problems.

Yes and I was suggestin using students who have found the solution to those problems.

 

4 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Expecting a child with dyslexia who is having trouble reading (my daughter) to be really helped to get an issue by a fellow student is expecting too much.

Not if the student aid also has dyslexia and has solved that problem or found a way to get through it.  And two people who share a common problem can better help each other to get through it.

[clarkgoble]

8 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Yes and I was suggestin using students who have found the solution to those problems.

 

Not if the student aid also has dyslexia and has solved that problem or found a way to get through it.  And two people who share a common problem can better help each other to get through it.

If the question is hiring that's a big assumption to base spending upon. And again it also assumes that just because a student got something that they comprehend how they got it.

[rongo]

23 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Expecting a child with dyslexia who is having trouble reading (my daughter) to be really helped to get an issue by a fellow student is expecting too much. 

Relevant tangent: has anyone here read Malcolm Gladwell's "David vs. Goliath?" It's a book about underdog/favorite struggles, and how we often misinterpret them (the title story discusses how David, as a slingshot archer [artillery] had a huge advantage over Goliath [infantry]. Goliath never had a chance; it was assumed that David would engage him on his terms, not on David's). There is a whole chapter on how dyslexia can be a huge advantage, aside from the struggle in school (an abnormally large number of CEOs have dyslexia. The struggle helps develop strengths in other areas, such as memory).

There is also a chapter on class sizes, and how the conventional wisdom that smaller class size = better achievement, teaching, learning, etc.

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, clarkgoble said:

If the question is hiring that's a big assumption to base spending upon. And again it also assumes that just because a student got something that they comprehend how they got it.

No hiring. I was talking about students helping others to understand what they understand.

[pogi]

11 hours ago, The Nehor said:

You hear them complain that they deserve better and I have to bite my tongue to keep from saying: "You really don't."

11 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I am not convinced that this is a skill problem. I think it is more a character one.

With the exception of a few psychological disorders, people are capable of learning good behavior.  Some may need more extensive psychological work in healing from past traumas which may influence their poor behavior, but others simply lack effective life skills.  Regardless of how "broken" a person is, I believe that a few life skills can improve any relationship and save many marriages.  A few come to mind: 

1) Interpersonal skills

2) Stress management and coping skills as well as anger management

3) Basic finance skills

4) Emotional/physical intimacy skills

I am a firm believer that the solution to most of the worlds problems begin in the home.  Healthy families = healthy world.  I understand that each situation is unique and complex, and that there is no easy solution or cure-all to many problems/nasty people.  But I do believe that a more consolidated and focused effort on the family will have a greater impact than almost any other investment.  The church seems to agree with me in that effort. 

[Rain]

 

1 hour ago, rongo said:

Relevant tangent: has anyone here read Malcolm Gladwell's "David vs. Goliath?" It's a book about underdog/favorite struggles, and how we often misinterpret them (the title story discusses how David, as a slingshot archer [artillery] had a huge advantage over Goliath [infantry]. Goliath never had a chance; it was assumed that David would engage him on his terms, not on David's). There is a whole chapter on how dyslexia can be a huge advantage, aside from the struggle in school (an abnormally large number of CEOs have dyslexia. The struggle helps develop strengths in other areas, such as memory).

There is also a chapter on class sizes, and how the conventional wisdom that smaller class size = better achievement, teaching, learning, etc.

I've just started his book "blink". I keep hearing his name since starting. I'll put that one on my list as well. Thanks.

[thesometimesaint]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

Relevant tangent: has anyone here read Malcolm Gladwell's "David vs. Goliath?" It's a book about underdog/favorite struggles, and how we often misinterpret them (the title story discusses how David, as a slingshot archer [artillery] had a huge advantage over Goliath [infantry]. Goliath never had a chance; it was assumed that David would engage him on his terms, not on David's). There is a whole chapter on how dyslexia can be a huge advantage, aside from the struggle in school (an abnormally large number of CEOs have dyslexia. The struggle helps develop strengths in other areas, such as memory).

There is also a chapter on class sizes, and how the conventional wisdom that smaller class size = better achievement, teaching, learning, etc.

There are differing levels of dyslexia. For some it is the simple transposition of 2 letters. IE; Inability to distinguish lower case "b" from lower case "d" except in context. For some it is a serious inability that makes a printed page a jumbled mess of unrecognizable letters and signs. With the first example an appropriate education focusing on determining the differences works. for the latter they may not learn how to read at all, or at a very low level.

[clarkgoble]

Gladwell's books often don't grapple well with the research. They're usually provocative and worth reading but then followed up by research that disagrees with him. A great example of this is his 1000 hour claim regarding expertise whereas most research notes that the type of practice one engages in matters a great deal. i.e. 1000 hours is misleading.

For school size there's not a lot of good research and of course a lot depends upon the class size in question. The best overview I've found is this one:

https://www.brookings.edu/research/class-size-what-research-says-and-what-it-means-for-state-policy/

[clarkgoble]

Just now, thesometimesaint said:

There are differing levels of dyslexia. For some it is the simple transposition of 2 letters. IE; Inability to distinguish lower case "b" from lower case "d" except in context. For some it is a serious inability that makes a printed page a jumbled mess of unrecognizable letters and signs. With the first example an appropriate education focusing on determining the differences works. for the latter they may not learn how to read at all, or at a very low level.

There are many different kinds of dyslexia as well. There are specialists who can usually identify the type and do tutoring based upon the type of dyslexia. These are expensive though. Many forms of dyslexia affect memory more than just reversing symbols at varying levels. So two people can have dyslexia but have the actual learning impairments be radically different. 

[pogi]

18 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

An other way to look at the problem is that if Utah home life is so great, why don't Utah students score better in standardized tests? Why doesn't Utah with its great home life do at least as good as Massachusetts?

It just goes to show that high test scores do not necessarily convert to life skills and economic improvement. 

I think the education system puts way too much emphasis on test scores.  With the education system set up as it is, investing more money into it will produce better test takers - that is for sure.  But I don't know if that is what we really need.  Kids don't know how to apply the knowledge and have difficult retaining the information for that reason.  Instead of better test takers, we need creative people with applicable knowledge and basic life skills.  The school system doesn't teach any of these very well.

 

[rongo]

30 minutes ago, Rain said:

I've just started his book "blink". I keep hearing his name since starting. I'll put that one on my list as well. Thanks.

Blink, Outliers, Turning Point, David vs. Goliath. All fascinating and thought-provoking reads. They're all outstanding, but I would rank them in order: 1) Blink 2) David vs. Goliath 3) Outliers 4) Turning Point. That's no snub for Turning Point --- it was very good, too. Blink has some cross-over with inspiration, intuition, and revelation. 

clarkgoble: 

Gladwell's books often don't grapple well with the research. They're usually provocative and worth reading but then followed up by research that disagrees with him. A great example of this is his 1000 hour claim regarding expertise whereas most research notes that the type of practice one engages in matters a great deal. i.e. 1000 hours is misleading.

Clark. I always picture you looking like Clark Gable in my mind. 

As you say, academics dispute some of his arguments and conclusions, but they sound good to me.  The purpose of academia is to justify their existence, anyway, so they will always dispute and argue against everything. Not all academic dismissal is justified . . .  

More fascinating to me than his chapter on 10,000 hours being required to be world-elite in something was the thought of timing --- that Bill Gates and other innovators benefited from perfect timing and situation. Had he been born a little earlier, someone else would have been Bill Gates. The robber barons of the Gilded Age were all born in the same few years. The section on sports elites and birth month was striking (birth month heavily influences who will become elite in Canadian hockey, European soccer, and American baseball). 

I loved his chapter on the value of "near misses" in D vs. G. The idea is that it is good for people and society for people to live through horrifying things --- not the direct hits, but the ones who have near misses. They become resilient and psychological healthy (e.g., London during the bombing, near misses eventually going about their lives in the midst of falling bombs). The closing chapter about the French village that defied the Nazis was thrilling: they told the regime that they were harboring Jews and would not give them up under any circumstances. The Nazis completely left the village (and the Jews they were protecting) alone. Gladwell traces this to the generational experiences of their ancestors (persecuted religious minorities). Overall, I think his thesis that we vastly misread perceived "David vs. Goliath" match-ups, and the Davids often have tremendous advantages that the Goliaths cannot even fathom. 

[rongo]

43 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

For school size there's not a lot of good research and of course a lot depends upon the class size in question. The best overview I've found is this one:

https://www.brookings.edu/research/class-size-what-research-says-and-what-it-means-for-state-policy/

Gladwell doesn't argue that class size doesn't matter at all. He argues that there is a "sweet spot," after which you get the laws of diminishing returns and unintended consequences. For example, shy kids who have a real issue with being put on the spot cannot hide in a class of five, but have some "safety" and "cover" in a class of 18. 

I do think that class sizes of 40+ are not optimal, and have problems of their own with students being able to "hide." 

I'm lucky that I teach German, and my students a self-selected to be very good students. Living the dream!  

[ERMD]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

Blink, Outliers, Turning Point, David vs. Goliath. All fascinating and thought-provoking reads. They're all outstanding, but I would rank them in order: 1) Blink 2) David vs. Goliath 3) Outliers 4) Turning Point. That's no snub for Turning Point --- it was very good, too. Blink has some cross-over with inspiration, intuition, and revelation. 

 

 

Clark. I always picture you looking like Clark Gable in my mind. 

As you say, academics dispute some of his arguments and conclusions, but they sound good to me.  The purpose of academia is to justify their existence, anyway, so they will always dispute and argue against everything. Not all academic dismissal is justified . . .  

More fascinating to me than his chapter on 10,000 hours being required to be world-elite in something was the thought of timing --- that Bill Gates and other innovators benefited from perfect timing and situation. Had he been born a little earlier, someone else would have been Bill Gates. The robber barons of the Gilded Age were all born in the same few years. The section on sports elites and birth month was striking (birth month heavily influences who will become elite in Canadian hockey, European soccer, and American baseball). 

I loved his chapter on the value of "near misses" in D vs. G. The idea is that it is good for people and society for people to live through horrifying things --- not the direct hits, but the ones who have near misses. They become resilient and psychological healthy (e.g., London during the bombing, near misses eventually going about their lives in the midst of falling bombs). The closing chapter about the French village that defied the Nazis was thrilling: they told the regime that they were harboring Jews and would not give them up under any circumstances. The Nazis completely left the village (and the Jews they were protecting) alone. Gladwell traces this to the generational experiences of their ancestors (persecuted religious minorities). Overall, I think his thesis that we vastly misread perceived "David vs. Goliath" match-ups, and the Davids often have tremendous advantages that the Goliaths cannot even fathom. 

After reading these posts, I just got on Amazon and bought a copy of Blink.  Loved The Tipping Point.

[rongo]

23 minutes ago, ERMD said:

After reading these posts, I just got on Amazon and bought a copy of Blink.  Loved The Tipping Point.

Aaargh. Tipping Point, yes. 

Freudian slip. We're reading things having to do with the World Wars and Communist East Germany in German class, and one of the preview vocabulary items was "die Wende" (which means much more than "turning point" or "change," but that's the best way to put it. It's what Germans call "when the wall came down and Germany was re-united again." East Germans in particular date things as "vor der Wende" or "nach der Wende"). 

I'm blaming my slip of the keyboard on that.  

You'll really like Blink. 

[Calm]

6 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Because we've done volunteer work as a teacher's assistant in elementary school. The kids aren't mature enough to help the kids. There are some cases where they can, but when dealing with disruptive kids expecting other kids to solve the problem misses the nature of the problem.  A wise teacher will of course use kids more advanced to help others. Teams frequently work. But children from age 6 - 11 don't have the maturity to comprehend let alone deal with many problems.

I started being a teacher's aide when I was in high school.  In junior high grade 8, I was a year or two ahead of the class having moved from another state as well as being gifted in math (those days are gone, sigh), but there is no way I could have helped younger students with that.  Besides maturity, one needs to not only understand the logic, but be able to express it to those who do not.    Very unlikely enough kids out there capable of doing so.  Older kids were great for helping with reading...not teaching it, but having younger kids read to them and correcting errors.  Other than that, my endless years of school volunteering and tutoring (starting as a sophomore in high school) demonstrated to me it would take more time than saved for teachers to use kids as aides.

[clarkgoble]

3 hours ago, rongo said:

As you say, academics dispute some of his arguments and conclusions, but they sound good to me. The purpose of academia is to justify their existence, anyway, so they will always dispute and argue against everything. Not all academic dismissal is justified . . . 

Right, what counts is the evidence. Admittedly research in education often isn't done as rigorously as one might hope. But there often are studies with larger sample size and that attempt to limit problems and reasons to criticize the study.

[Calm]

6 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Right, but that's not the only need for teacher's assistants. It also frequently goes beyond just time. You typically need people who understand the involved problems. Expecting a child with dyslexia who is having trouble reading (my daughter) to be really helped to get an issue by a fellow student is expecting too much. Again, that's not to say there isn't value in teaming up good students with struggling students. There is. But that doesn't really solve the problems (largely discipline and learning disability issues) that teacher's aids help solve.

My daughter had a teacher's aide in her classroom for all of elementary for an autistic child.  Big advantage for discipline because it was the same person and she took no nonsense, but was also very caring.  The teachers were variable in quality, but the social environment was aces until the girls hit that last half year and the alpha dog for some reason decided she needed to take out one of the midrange popular girls.  

Using students for discipline and social dynamics at that age is nonsense.  Too much resentment and blowback from other students would occur.

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, Ahab said:

Blanket statement with no reasoning that you think I should automatically accept?

I can envision it working. Why can't you?

 

I can envision unicorns and dragons. Does that mean they must exist?