Slashdot Mirror
How Do You Fix Education?
TaeKwonDood writes "Carl Wieman is the 2001 Nobel Prize winner in Physics but what he cares most about is fixing science education. The real issue is, can someone who went through 20 years of science education as a student, lived his life in academia since then and even got a Nobel prize get a fair shake from bureaucrats who like education the way it is — flawed and therefore always needing more money?"
Get the parents more involved. For kids, school should be akin to their 9-5 job. In order to excel they need to put the time in at home, and the only people that can help instill that discipline are the parents.
Website Hosting
How can education be fixed when their is a war on critical thinking? Its better for those in power to rule by sound bites, innuendos, and accusations that appear credible enough to be believed.
Ron Paul 2008
Education was fixed with the no child left behind act.
Becuase to fix education is to admit that some kids are either smarter or work harder than others. Some are going to be left behind, and others will go on and learn to their full potential, but law makers can't tell that to parents. My mother has taught for about 30 years, and in her words, the problem is almost never the students, it's the parents.
A US$3,000.00 per student/per year federal voucher will fix education very quickly.
ever truly fix education?
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
"from bureaucrats who like education the way it is ".. really? do they? I have yet to meet one that does. However there seems to be a lot of argueing going on about what paperwork needs to be filed to get it changed, how that will documented, judged and administrated. Seriously one of the first things that needs to be done is to pay teachers a living wage so we can attract better talent to change the way the teaching is done. Don't get me wrong there are some GREAT teachers out there, who god bless them manage to hang in there despite everything. But take a look at the budget someday and ask yourself if schools are really getting a fair shake. You can change anything you want but unless teachers can be paid competative wages with other avenues they could take their talents to are our kids getting the best?
I Need someone to rebuild a Digitech Digital Delay pedal for me....for me...for me...for me.
Look it up if you have to. Failing that, how about some sort of cost-benefit analysis of the time spent in yr average public school (hint: most ppl I know agree that over 2/3 of school time is wasted.)
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
Comment removed based on user account deletion
get a fair shake from bureaucrats who like education the way it is -- flawed and therefore always needing more money?
I know I'll be in the minority here on slashdot for saying this, but society isn't divided into us (virtuous, intelligent, benevolent, and wise) and them (stupid, malicious, dishonest, and greedy). I think there are very few bureaucrats twirling their moustaches and gleefully chortling over the failures of the modern educational system. One of the symptoms of the failure of education is lack of critical thinking and objective reasoning, and one of the hallmarks of that is the kneejerk reaction that every bureaucrat is by nature evil and dishonest.
The bureaucrats like things the way they are because it leaves things in a crisis mode that they benefit from. The solution is to break apart the government's de facto monopoly on education K-12 so that there is a competitive marketplace for education.
Academic surveys have shown time and again that the majority of the people who are drawn to education are the bottom of the barrel of college students. Most of them are education majors, and they consistently tend to score in the bottom 5 of all majors with SAT and GPA scores from their high schools. If you want to fix that, and get higher quality educators, you are going to have to allow the market to create the incentives needed to make people of that level of intellect and talent desired to go into this profession.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Anybody who says "more funding" without saying what it would be spent on is part of the problem.
Want to fix education? Budget administration and recreation separately from the educational costs. Have the Education budget pay for teachers, facilities and supplies. Have the administration budget pay for principals, school boards, and secretaries. Have the recreation budget pay for athletics. Then people will know where the money is going.
Hopefully that leads to more centralization. Localities don't need control. Curriculum doesn't need to be micromanaged. Just because busybody parents want to have a huge say doesn't mean they should have it. Making those decisions thousands of times instead of 50 times, or even once is massively, massively wasteful.
Lastly, stop building new schools to replace perfectly functional old buildings. Yes, procuring federal funding for a new school building will win you votes in a US House election, but it's still stupid. The building doesn't teach your child anything. Unless it's a health hazard, suck it up and live with your 25 year old building. Do a little remodeling during the summer months.
1:Smaller class sizes!
2:Less memorization, more critical thinking and analysis.
3:Less passive listening and watching, more discussion and experiment (think Socarates).
None of these need tons of computers or facilities or whatever. What they do need are more teachers, and less burnout.
True, but this doesn't work too well, if the child doesn't enjoy the same things as the parent. I think a more formal education system isn't a bad thing, but the bureaucracy of the federal system has munged things up. For more urban areas, charter school systems are working out rather well... I think that at some point a more divisive school system will come into place... not everyone benefits from a "classic" education. Some people would be better in an apprenticeship or a trade program...
Others would do better from education geared more towards arts, language, or math/sciences. I think that the "well-rounded" requirements of x-years language, x-years math, x-years science is wasted on many people. Some would have done better to have x+1 years language, and no math beyond basic math and science. Not everyone is meant to be shaped from the same mold... I think we need to stop forcing people into them.
I feel that once you hit high school in this country, you should be able to have a primary, secondary, and elective track... the primary being math-science, culture-language, culture-art and the secondary being a trade skill, and elective being one's personal choice... This way more time can be spent into the areas of interest, and less on getting every student through more english, or chemistry when there is no interest, and little chance of it's expanded use in their lives.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
I think the biggest thing that can be done to "fix" education would be to make it the primary focus of schools! I'm all for extra curricular activities, but it seems that in many places in the US, those are treated as far, far, more important that actual learning. Sports is a great example of how the focus in schools has been taken off of education.
Another thing would be to stop trying to make everyone equal, and allow faster students to excel instead of teaching to the lowest common denominator.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
to do Physics right, you need calculus. Which most kids don't get until senior year in high school if at all. That's why I thought it came last. I suppose you could do it out of order for different levels of students(does this still exist?).
There is this silly competition mentality in higher ed--competing for being bigger and badder. Everything is becoming so "corporate" in culture.
There is an unhealthy arena of competition for grants and research funding that puts the focus on the research track instead of education. The competition manifests itself by the universities pushing a "brand name" and trying to become larger.
In the end, the university becomes an entity who doesn't care about the student but rather its reputation and rankings in magazines.
This is kind of a problem that stems from the new breed of philanthropy that really isn't philanthropy--it's advertising and marketing for the donors. The development departments are getting suckered into making these silly deals with donors (especially corporate donors) that places the focus on promotional consideration for the donor rather than the spirit of the cause.
Small schools with low ratios from teacher to student are probably the best way to go to maximize your exposure in the apprentice model.
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
I went to public schools with kids who had marginal skills at reading and math. Rather than passing them along and bogging down the education of kids doing well, don't pass them until they're actually meeting standards. Note, I am NOT talking about burning time on standardized testing. I'm talking about teachers being given more leverage to hold slow kids back. I think this is a big motivator for a kid to do better (as well as a confidence builder the second time around). This is based on my anecdotal knowledge, not science so I could be very wrong here.
If kids can't cut it after say 2 or 3 grades being held back, give them some some early out like a GED program say after the 10th grade. It's sad to see high school kids who can barely read because our education system isn't strict enough about standards.
I think by enforcing performance for passing, you'll also be able to increase the level of work being done at higher grades.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
>Do things right at school, and perhaps there won't be any need to get the parents involved.
This simply is not possible.
I used to be a huge proponent of "teacher accountability" until I shared a 7 hour plane ride with a teacher friend of mine.
She explained the obvious to me.
All students require motivation to learn. Most students are not self-motivated. Teachers lack the authority to instill motivation in their students through punitive means, and there are very few inspirational teachers. Thus for most students, their primary motivator is their parents.
You can have the most intelligent teacher on the planet combined with the most patient, compassionate teacher on the planet - Albert Einstein crossed with Mother Theresa - and it won't matter a whit if the student is not motivated to learn.
Some very few students are self-motivated. But by and large students require external motivation, and the only people with the authority to do that are parents. The days of teachers beating students into their studies are long gone. But not so for Mom and Dad.
The single-most important thing to "Fix Education" is to increase parental involvement and stop the mentality that school is a place where you "send" your kids "to be educated". Too many people have come to view the educational system as a "service" - a place where you pay your taxes and then send your kids to be educated, with the whole burden of the process on the system. In fact, the system is merely the water - they can't force the kids to drink it. Only Mom and Dad have that power.
Unless you are extremely lucky and find the rare self-motivated student you simply cannot remove parents from a successful edcuation.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
I've found that there's a fundamental conflict in place. The improve something you generally need some way to measure the improvement. Without measurement, either slack and/or bad processes will creep into the picture.
However, the easier it is to objectively measure a skill, the more likely that skill is to be offshored or automated. Repetitious and well-documented (commodity) skills drift away from the US work-force to machines or 3rd-world labor.
If we use subjective approaches in order to stay ahead of the automation/offshore curve, then bias sneaks in, resulting in inconsistencies and political squabbles.
These two contradictory forces push and pull against each other: measurement against flexibility. I don't think there's any easy fix. Staying on the cutting edge requires risk and experimentation. Education is no different. Do we want measurable cookie-cutter skills that are likely to become obsolete, adaptability that is slippery to measure and manage, or something in-between?
Table-ized A.I.
How about stop passing failing students? When was the last time you heard of a kid being held back to repeat a grade?
The amount of arrogance and condescension in your post is truly astonishing. I don't know where your political affiliations lie but you just managed to display nearly every single negative stereotype about Liberals. And before anybody shoots the messenger you should know that I'm a liberal Democrat.
Have you actually spoken to the people in the lower 50% of our population?
So are you saying that the people who have a lower socio-economic status than you or I shouldn't be allowed to home school their children?
it's easy to forget that many people exist that do not car about education in the least
Says the person who couldn't be bothered to proofread his post for spelling mistakes and/or typos. Sorry, I had to dig you for this one ;)
Not to mention the people who turn home schooling into bible schooling. Not that it's bad unless they crack down on critical thinking or don't teach evolution at all or something, but you know some people will do that.
So what? Shouldn't parents have the right to teach their kids whatever they want? Why is it any business of the Government what I choose to teach to my kids? Personally I don't want my kid taught creationism in biology class (that's what theology class is for) but I also don't want the Government telling me how to raise him either.
And you want those people to home school their kids?
You actually used the term "those people"? If I was referring to a minority group as "those people" I'd probably be called a racist. Think of the language you are using and how it might read.
Our education system does homogenize our society, but for the poor/unfortunate that is usually a good thing.
Do you realize how arrogant that statement sounds?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Get the government out of it. We need free market competition. Let failing schools fail. Let failing teachers get fired. Let failing students get expelled. Let schools compete to provide the best education for the lowest cost. Let voluntary charities choose who is most in need and able to benefit from education charity. Education is too important to let government continue to completely cluster f*** it. Won't somebody please think of the children?
Let the poor get even poorer education, let the poorest be locked out of education entirely, let the rich monopolize the best resources, let the wealth gap grow even more obscenely.
Sorry, "the free market", which never really existed in the first place, is not a panacea for social ills, and in the case of services labelled "public necessity" will exacerbate them.
For a real world example of what privatization of schools will do, see: the current US broadband market.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
Well, a classic education is no longer being taught. Where's the Socratic logic class in High School? Where's Latin? Why arent Plato's works discussed? Where are the Geometers? What about teaching Leibniz calculus to high schoolers? Even elementary students know what acceleration is.
What ever happened to civics class? It depresses me that most people don't understand basic concepts about our political system.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Let the poor get even poorer education, let the poorest be locked out of education entirely, let the rich monopolize the best resources, let the wealth gap grow even more obscenely.
Sorry, "the free market", which never really existed in the first place, is not a panacea for social ills, and in the case of services labelled "public necessity" will exacerbate them.
For a real world example of what privatization of schools will do, see: the current US broadband market.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
Yes, students that have the power to choose which students they will educate can exclude those most expensive to educate, and schools that you only end up in as the result of an active choice by your parents end up with students that have parents that are more involved in their education.
This is not surprising.
This would be easier to argue if it had been true of, say, high school before high-school became mandatory and part of the free public system in most parts of the U.S., or for grade school itself. The fact is, the U.S. had what you recommend earlier in its history, and it didn't work as you describe. So, if you want to convince us that it would now, you need to explain why it would work differently now.
Rewards work also, no doubt.
But there is only one thing that kept me in line academically as a kid, and that was fear of my father's foot in my ass.
See for me, I could blow off rewards. Oh yes, it would be nice to get $5 for A's on my report card, but I don't really /need/ the $5 for anything. Oh it might be nice to watch a movie, but I could just as easily watch it on the internet. Leaving class might be nice, but where would I go? The only consistent motivator for me was FEAR of PUNISHMENT.
But that is merely a personal anecdote. I readily admit that motivation can be both positive and negative. But either way, I still beleive the most motivating influence on students is usually their parents. In my experience, teachers are usually either non-empowered or un-inspired to motivate.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
Think I'm kidding? My Mom taught in public schools for 24 years, my Dad was a Professor for 30. When I graduated High School (1974) every teacher had a degree in what they taught and a minor in "Education". The NEA lobby got every state to require an "Education" degree to be allowed to teach. Now we have big "Education" Departments at Universities turning out people that might (and I do mean might) know how to teach but the students are lucky if the teacher has a minor in what they teach. See the problem? It applies to every subject, not just the Sciences.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
How to fix education in 4 easy steps
1. Make going to school non-compulsory
Kids that don't want to be in school, who have parents that don't care if they are in school, do not need to go to school. They are nothing but a distraction for the kids who want to learn. Any teacher will tell you one disruptive student will ruin the class for everyone. Public schools in the U.S. force kids who have no discipline go to school, then they are surprised when they don't listen to the teachers. The kids know the teachers can nothing to discipline them, the kids know their parents will do nothing to discipline them. I fail to see the disincentive to goof off in class here, and so do the kids, so they will goof off. Schools do not need these children and in public schools, not only do they have to go, but the public schools want them to go so that make that ever important buck from the federal and state government, education be damned. I personally know more than one teacher who cannot kick a particular kid out of their class because the school administrators tell them they can't.
2. Privatize
There is a ratio of teachers to administrators in all schools, public or private. An administrator would be like a vice principal, guidance councilor, text book researcher, sensitivity director. In a private school, the ratio is about 1:7 in public schools it's almost 1:1. Meaning for every teacher there is an administrator. And every time someone says "there's something wrong with our schools" they just tac on more administrators in a blind attempt to "fix" the problem. Administrators fix nothing, ever. Which leads me to..
3. Do away with tenure and teachers unions
The idea that teachers unions somehow are for kids has got to be the biggest lie I've ever heard. Teachers unions are for, teachers. Some people didn't know this, but if you've worked in the LAUSD for more than 3 years you cannot be fired for anything short of molesting a child, it's called tenure. Tenure is for, teachers. There is no way you can argue that keeping poor teachers (tenure) or keeping teachers that have broken the rules (teachers unions) somehow helps the kids. With these two "protective" organization are in place it takes an act of god to get rid of poor teachers. There are no teacher's unions in private schools and the level of education you get in a private school by far exceeds that in a public school. Without tenure, without teacher's unions. So at the very least it's proof that excellence does not require tenure or unions. And there is a strong argument that they do more harm than good.
4. Allow parents to take their kids out of failing schools.
I think it's a travesty that the government is going to force parents to place kids into school that they know are going to be a bad influence on the child. Parents should be able to send their child to whatever school that is reasonably in their area. It's so bad that people actually buy houses in order to get their kids sent to a particular school, and I guess for those who can't afford to move or afford a private school... to bad? That's just wrong. If we are going to be forced to pay for schools we should at least be able to select which one we're going to send our kids too, or at least let us get our money back so we can send them to a private school. The only obstacle that stops this 'voucher' system is the teachers unions. I would love to hear how the lack of a voucher system helps kids, because I'm pretty sure it only helps teachers at failing schools.
I have no belief that any of these things will change, teachers unions are far to powerful. It a huge union with almost limitless money, but it's a self perpetuating bureaucracy with the honest belief that teachers should be paid more than any other profession in the world. More than doctors, lawyers etc.. no matter how much anyone else thinks teachers deserve.
The usage of the word education has evolved to mean a mechanical process whereby an institution can add knowledge and wisdom to an individual, like QuickLube changing your oil.
Teachers are taught that they can "motivate" students, that is, make them want something the institution wants them to want.
It is all part of the scientific pretensions of the academic "Education departments".
Let us replace this false belief in institutional "education" with the original concept of "learning".
It used to be that a person with knowledge and wisdom was called "learned".
Teachers should be thought of as helpers who assist those who want to learn, rather that god like knowledge creators who apply some "educational" algorithm.
Teachers should stop trying to teach a pig to sing, it wastes your time and annoys the pig. Instead, they should assist those with the desire and ability to learn.
Perhaps the best example of this is mathematics. Many (perhaps most) people lack the ability to do mathematics beyond what can be done by a calculator. Instead of egalitarian, futile attempts to turn these people into Eulers, teachers should focus on those with actual math ability. Civilization only needs a few people with the ability to do mathematics, the rest are incapable of it.
"The vast majority of kids don't really care about science, it's neither fun nor interesting to them."
You forgot to mention that while science, engineering and teaching pay better than factory worker, the pay sucks compared to corporate executive, marketeer, stock broker and lawyer. Unfortunately Capitalism in general and American in particular rewards the fields that suck most directly at the teat of capitalism. If you manage to invent something awesome, get the patents in your name and successfully sell it without the suits stealing you blind you might get rich but its a long shot.
If you get an MBA, kiss the right ass and rise to VP or above you are almost certain to make a killing. Most scientists and engineers are facing a very challenging education, followed by years doing challenging work and the best most can hope for is staying solidly middle class. If you are doing it for inner satisfaction that works, but if you have a wife and kids to feed, clothe, house and educate there is enormous pressure to go in to a field that pays well, and not one that is most worthwhile or satisfying.
Socialism sucks in most respects but it is fairly successful at creating a large cadre of scientist, engineers, teachers and other essential professionals because the system steers people to where there is a need. Capitalism only steers people to where the money is. Sometimes the money is where the need is, much of the time it isn't. For example the amount of money professional athletes make these days borders on criminal. Professional sports are a nice diversion and entertainment but they don't really deserve to suck hundreds out of an average joes pocket to go to one game in a billion dollar stadium watching people who will make more in one night than the spectators will make in a year.
If you want to find one of the most corrosive forces in most American universities its the priority placed on athletics and athletes over academics.
@de_machina
The wealth gap in the US is small enough that the richest quintile only outspend the poorest quintile by about 2.1 to 1. That's not really an obscene difference. Link.
"The days of teachers beating students into their studies are long gone. But not so for Mom and Dad."
Try taking a paddle to Junior in some states... it's an instant trip to jail for Dad, and a legal nightmare with "children's advocate groups" and the state's department of social services bringing down lawyers on the parents. You don't even need real proof to arrest a parent for abuse anymore, just an accusation. It's getting to the point that corporal punishment of any kind, no matter how appropriate, is being banned "for the children".
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
"There's the big misconception. Understanding art, literature, design, history, communications and yes interpretive dance IS in itself a core skill set."
More than that, even if you're a mathematician/scientist/engineer, if you don't have a strong, broad understanding of literature, history, and philosophy, I don't see how you can call yourself educated.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
> ..you're a failure if you don't go to college.
College isn't the only place to learn, probably not even be the best place. But expecting to survive in the Information Age with a junior high education (as the idiot I was aiming the flamethrower at was claiming) is just daft.
> The world needs ditch diggers too... and stockboys, coffee makers, and retail clerks.
It does today... but for how much longer? A person coming of age in the next few years will probably live to see many of those positions obsoleted. Not even many actual ditchdiggers today, lots of backhoe operators but not a lot of guys with shovels. Tomorrow it will be one guy supervising a bunch of semi intelligent automated equipment. That one guy will be the one holding the blueprints and making the big picture decisions the machines won't be quite smart enough to be trusted with. Bob the Builder in live action.. and with that nightmare thought I'll stop.
Democrat delenda est
"In the 1960s, we used to have parades that celebrated astronauts. Let me say this again - we had PARADES... for... ROCKET SCIENTISTS... To become one was something that was considered the height of a child's aspirations. No wonder we were sending people to the moon with a pocket calculator and a roll of duct tape."
We never had parades for "rocket scientists".
We had parades for astronauts, people that "rocket scientists" claimed weren't even neccessary for the space program. Werner Von Braun and his team initially wanted an unmanned program, and when we decided to send men up, the rocket scientists didn't want to give them any control at all... they wanted all operations to be done remotely from the ground. They viewed the men in the capsules as less than worthless.
The public saw it differently. The astronauts were really war heroes... Cold War heroes. So quit pretending there was ever a time when scientists were envied and lauded above all others. From the 30's onward, scientists were portrayed as Mad scientists more often than not. This era of respect for science you paint never existed. People have always been awed by scientific achievements, but were deeply suspicious of scientists themselves.
This Utopian era of love for scientists you describe never existed. America has always had a love/hate relationship with science.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
But also sorta wrong. Such people exist - Myra Hindley was a notorious example. The James Bulger case shows it needn't only be adults. However, the total number of such people probably averages out to one in a hundred million. In comparison, current estimates place the number of domestic sexual child abuse cases at one in every thousand. On the whole, the former - whilst it exists - simply isn't worth putting much time and effort into. Maybe some, but look at the relative payoff. For the same effort, you will prevent and/or solve a lot more actual crime dealing with the latter. Maybe not a hundred thousand times a much, but even if it was ten times as much, that would be an infinitely better use of resources.
According to the UN, slavery in America is still a major plague, and with American attitudes of treating the victims far worse than the abusers, this isn't a problem that's going to go away. Reports that, in some States, police collude with organized crime gangs to facilitate such an evil trade do not bode well. Even if the reports exaggerate, America has had that problem before. That's the sole reason the sole-called "Untouchables" were considered exceptional. Depressing, isn't it, when you have to celebrate when police are doing their job rather than polluting society?
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Science education is a subset of science. It is science itself that is under attack. The government WILL NOT trust its own citizens to own, possess, and use chemicals, powerful electrical devices, stills, and a wide variety of the fodder that is the raw material for science.
Each of many Federal and State regulators grossly over-control, and outright ban, or make permit requirements so onerous only large enterprises can conform to rules.
Remember chemistry sets? If you ship one to a hobby store today (remember hobby stores?) the sheer number of hazmat labels required is astounding.
Like declaring uber small quantities of chemicals as "hazmat" will in any way improve shipping safety. Marking it in no way impacts whether or not the shipment is damaged, but it DOES greatly limit who can ship it, sell it, distribute or resell it, or worst of all, adding something to it and then selling it as a value added good!
Until the fodder of science itself is deregulated we will continue to become an increasingly nannystate population and become ever more distanced from knowing how the important building blocks of chemistry, ballistics, biological processes, physics, electricity, and other basic building blocks of science work.
Why is there no way to simply go to some face of the "police state", issue a letter of intention to make a "firework" or "still" or "tesla coil" or whatever, and have that local person who has talked with me issue that permission. Have that permission encompass the entire process of buying goods, storing them, using them, publishing the results, shipping stuff around as needed, and where the experiment involves some sort of dynamic act, permission to activate it.
Don't even get me started on the constitutional or BOR claim of "public access" vs. the reality of "governmental mandate, ownership, control and management" of education.
Not quite anon Jerry
The grandparent wrote:
To which you replied:
The grandparent wasn't "sorta right," he was right, and you said as much in the rest of the paragraph. The whole point of saying "to a first approximation" is when you want to address the 99.999999% of the cases and neglect the 0.000001% that are exceptions. To a very good first approximation, kidnapping child molesters do not exist. If you went around introducing yourself to random people at breakneck speed, say one person every three seconds, ten hours a day, seven days a week, 52 weeks a year, for the rest of your life you still probably would never meet one.
To a first approximation they do not exist.
--MarkusQ
The problem with the US broadband market is that competition isn't free enough - especially because you seem to have pathetic DSL offerings, due to poor legislation on copper access.
Here in Sweden (although we still have access problems due to the state-owned Telia still dominating copper access) we have seen much healthier DSL competition, due to freer competition in copper-access to homes.
This in turn helps keep cable and fiber offerings honest. In the last few years, the addition of fast 3G connections has also intensified the competition.
Interestingly, Sweden also has a rather innovative system for increasing competition and choice in education. However, it is important not to overestimate the gains that can be had from more choice in education. Indeed - people seriously overestimate the effectiveness of virtually all possible educational reforms in rich countries. But that's a topic for another day.
Education is already fixed. The fix is called internet.
'someone who went through 20 years of science education as a student, lived his life in academia since then and even got a Nobel prize', might just be the wrong person to talk to about education.
Education is completely overrated, the system works in the way that it keeps children of the streets and as a state subsidized system to offload parents. But in all other aspects it is a complete failure.
People (children) who want to learn can do that with internet, without the hindrance of the educational system. Freedom at last.
In my town, they fixed things up a little (much after I left, and long after I was a paper boy). The paper boy/girl still delivers the papers, but they don't collect the money anymore. It's really too much to expect a 12 year old kid to go around collecting money from people. It works out fine when the people are home, and when they pay. However, when the people just aren't at home at any reasonable hours, and the the kid has to become a bill collector, it can get to be a pretty bad job. Especially when the kid's pay comes out of a chunk of that money.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
This article doesn't even begin to address the social inequities that students and their families face. There are students whose families suffer from food insecurity (not knowing where their next meal is coming from), no employment for their parents or the students if they graduate, unsafe neighborhoods, inadequate access to health care and other resources.
Is it really any wonder that students in these situations don't do well in school? Sometimes people like to pretend that "it's the parents, stupid" or "the kid is just not that smart" It's a lot more than that.