Slashdot Mirror


When Does School Life Begin? Zuckerberg's New School To Admit Fetuses

theodp writes: Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan's latest initiative to tackle educational inequity is The Primary School, a "private, non-profit school" which will eventually provide both free education and free healthcare for 700 low-income students from the Palo Alto area. "In addition to early childhood and K-12 education," Zuckerberg explained in a Facebook post, "The Primary School will also provide prenatal support for families and on-site healthcare for children. By bringing healthcare and education together in one place, the goal is to support families and help children from underserved communities reach their full potential." A job listing for Assistant Teachers notes that "the school will admit students at or before birth." Zuckerberg joins other Silicon Valley luminaries like Elon Musk and Sal Khan in what Wired calls The Tech Elite's Quest to Reinvent School in Its Own Image.

170 comments

  1. How interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Only in a Brave New World would children be conditioned so early on in their life.

    1. Re:How interesting by kheldan · · Score: 2

      "One believes things because one has been conditioned to believe them."
      "...most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution."
      "Most human beings have an almost infinite capacity for taking things for granted."
      "I'd rather be myself," he said. "Myself and nasty. Not somebody else, however jolly."
      "Two thousand pharmacologists and biochemists were subsidized in A.F. 178. Six years later it was being produced commercially. The perfect drug. Euphoric, narcotic, pleasantly hallucinant."
      "A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude."

      ..yeah, I don't trust Zuckerberg, Facebook, or their 'school' any farther than I could throw them, and I don't recommend anyone else do so, either.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    2. Re:How interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only in a Brave New World would children be conditioned so early on in their life.

      Thanks to Zuckerberg and his ilk of capitalistic communists.

    3. Re:How interesting by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "One believes things because one has been conditioned to believe them."

      Zuckerberg has been conditioned to believe that there are poor people in Palo Alto, where the median income is $163,000. It is the 3rd richest city in America, behind only Bethesda, Maryland and Greenwich, Connecticut.

      If he wants to help "low income students", he picked one of the worst possible places to start.

    4. Re: How interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all bullshit anyways. Donating money offsets taxation; which is fine, his prerogative. But come on, he didn't dream this as a "when I get rich" moment of moral obligation.

    5. Re:How interesting by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 0

      Only in a Brave New World would children be conditioned so early on in their life.

      Get them hooked on things (like Facebook) while they're young and still gestating. That's the future.

      "Money before people," that's the company motto. Engraved on the lobby floor. It just looks more heroic in Latin.
      - Veronica, "Better Off Ted"

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    6. Re:How interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting AC because mod points. The article says "Palo Alto area", not Palo Alto. East Palo Alto is a poor neighborhood with issues, if he is trying to help those kids, it is a *good* thing.

    7. Re:How interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      capitalistic communists.

      What?

    8. Re:How interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      East Palo Alto is NOT a poor neighborhood.

      Median household income, 2009-2013 $50,142

      http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0620956.html

      I can in 5 minutes come up with at least 100 better cities in the US that he would be better off doing it at. Hell Probably that many cities in California that he can do this at.

      He is doing it in East Palo Alto area so he can drive past it in ten minutes and feel better about himself. Its BS, and to be honest not even that great of an idea.

    9. Re:How interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is it that liberals always want to tell other people how to spend their money when they've not done anything themselves?

    10. Re:How interesting by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      East Palo Alto. Also there are parts in Palo Alto itself, and Menlo Park, that are poor. The divide between rich and poor is just a hell of a lot higher in those areas than most others.

    11. Re: How interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't blame me I voted for the Communist Nazi Party

  2. Ugh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Feel pretty bad for the kids that have to put up with these tech companies fucking with their curriculums. Guess they should look forward to their wage slavery future.

    1. Re: Ugh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is pretty awful that these shitty low income families are getting anything close to a real education. They should just be shot and dumped in the river.

    2. Re: Ugh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shooting them is a waste of ammo. Gas them and feed'em into a furnace.

    3. Re: Ugh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's far more to a "real" education than learning Javascript coding.

    4. Re: Ugh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Waste of bullets. Gas'em and throw'em into a firepit.

    5. Re: Ugh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be a waste of resources. Why consume the resources to heat up a furnace and then destroy perfectly good protein in it? All sorts of more eco-friendly solutions come to mind, including Spam, hot dogs, and bologna for school lunch programs.

  3. Irony by sycodon · · Score: 2

    College dropouts championing schools.

    Zuckerberg, Jobs, Gates, Dell, Ellison, Branson, etc.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, just championing enough so that all they have is a high school diploma so that they will be guaranteed to be less competiive for jobs.

    2. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical survivor bias. They think they have it all figured out because they are successful. Amazingly they don't even remember how they got where they are, and recommend something completely different to others. Malicious or stupid? Take your pick.

    3. Re:Irony by gstoddart · · Score: 0

      Well, yes, they want fully indoctrinated, indentured servants, educated to their specifications.

      This has nothing to do with giving a damn about children, as it does creating their workforce of the future, which has been raised on the kool-aid and is beholden to them.

      I trust Zuckerfuck not at all in this situation.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    4. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jobs never "championed" schools. He always told people to start a business first, and only go to school later as a backup plan.

    5. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you went with Zuckerfuck instead of Fuckerberg?

    6. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That or they learned from observation that there were a bunch of lessons that would have been less painfully or expensively learned in college.

    7. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well of course. Rich people hate competition, the last thing they want is more people like themselves. By controlling the "education" of others, they also control future competitors, and make sure the next generation of workers aren't filled with nonsense about law and rights, but instead are conditonned to keep running on that treadmill.

    8. Re:Irony by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      It could also be pragmatism: there is definitely survivor bias at work in our treatment of the 'too-genius-and-disruptive-for-college' narrative; but even if you recognize that your "drop out of college and make a zillion bucks in internet money" story is wildly non-representative; you will still recognize that your business has need of a great many technicians, at the most aggressive prices available. Using your position of influence to experiment with new ways of producing them is only logical.

    9. Re:Irony by Raseri · · Score: 1

      Malicious or stupid? Take your pick.

      "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice." -some slashdotter, many years ago

      --
      Writhe your naked ass to the mindless groove.
    10. Re:Irony by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      College dropouts championing schools.

      They are championing early education, not college.

    11. Re:Irony by non0score · · Score: 1

      You have to first go to school before you can drop out. :)

    12. Re:Irony by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      College dropouts championing schools.

      Zuckerberg, Jobs, Gates, Dell, Ellison, Branson, etc.

      Dropouts from (if I recall correctly) fairly well-to-do families...

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    13. Re:Irony by Solandri · · Score: 1

      College gives you a piece of paper which tells a prospective employer that you aren't lying when you say you're competent at the job you're applying for. That piece of paper is unnecessary if you're starting your own business - you can't lie to yourself about your own competence (well, you can, but people who do that usually wind up bankrupt pretty quickly).

      The folks you've listed didn't drop out of college because they lacked competence or didn't think education wasn't important. They dropped out because they were presented with a business opportunity with a much better potential payoff than completing college for that piece of paper.

    14. Re:Irony by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      College dropouts championing schools.

      The best way for them to prevent competition and ensure their place.

    15. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As well as the title stating low income + Palo Alto.

      Low income of families that make on average 150K/yr?

    16. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the wealthy want you to be wealthy so that they can make more money from you. You can make more from a wealthy person than you can from a poor person.

    17. Re:Irony by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      He gave stuff to schools, but that was mostly a marketing push. Get kids hooked on Apple products early. The machines were often left unused because there was no training or guidance on how to use them.

    18. Re:Irony by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      College degree doesn't say anything about job competence, and it's not really the point. What the degree says is that you've been educated, you understand the concepts, possibly there was a little training on the side, but mostly it says that you learned how to learn. Thus an English major degree is better than nothing because there's been at least a year or two of rigorous mental activity, learning how to write, learning how to research, etc, stuff that you almost never get in a high school.

    19. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just go with Fucker.

  4. Instead of birth certificate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They can give the fetus a new facebook account with the child's REAL NAME.

    1. Re:Instead of birth certificate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They can give the fetus a new facebook account with the child's REAL NAME.

      And when that fetus is aborted, will it still take 90 days to delete their account?

  5. Get 'em young by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Psst, kid. Want a Facebook?

  6. No, dumbass by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Prenatal support" means that the program serves pregnant women, not that we're educating the fetuses.

    1. Re:No, dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeesh. Well, time to grab the gloves and ask my wife for those books back...

    2. Re:No, dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You have to forgive him, theodp is a confirmed life-long virgin. He doesn't know what all the terms are and how it all works.

    3. Re:No, dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Next story on Slashdot: What's all the fuss I hear about violins on television?

    4. Re:No, dumbass by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      I heard they initially tried educating the fetuses, but it was more trouble than it was worth. First there's the time consumed in getting each mother miked up to communicate, then you have the fetuses disrupting the classroom by spouting Republican talking points in their tiny high voices.

    5. Re:No, dumbass by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Especially the German ones. Seems a day doesn't go by without someone complaining about the Saxon violins...

    6. Re:No, dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Non-refundable deposit required in the event of an abortion

    7. Re:No, dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I generally frown upon name calling but I think that 'dumbass' is entirely appropriate here.

      Please lay off the clickbait, Slashdot.

    8. Re:No, dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey dumbass, try reading the linked Assistant Teacher Job description in TFS:

      At TPS we:
      Begin serving children at birth: The school will admit students at or before birth, and will provide family-based supports, ensuring that students are school-ready by the time they enter the elementary school grades. Full time school begins at age 3.

      What other interpretation can you get from that sentence, other than a fetus could be admitted as a student?

    9. Re:No, dumbass by vux984 · · Score: 1

      then you have the fetuses disrupting the classroom by spouting Republican talking points in their tiny high voices.

      While literally leeching off the people around them. :p

    10. Re:No, dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then you have the fetuses disrupting the classroom by spouting Republican talking points in their tiny high voices.

      While literally leeching off the people around them. :p

      Now they sound like Democrats. Which is it?

  7. Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by trybywrench · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My kids are 5 and 3, my oldest spent a lot of time in daycare as an infant since both my wife and I were working. Here's a couple honest suggestions if anyone is listening

    Our best experience with a daycare was one with a stable solid staff. The lady that ran the place was a no nonsense hardass. A stickler for procedure and didn't take shit from anyone. This really helped us feel like someone was in charge and on top of things. The lady who took care of our infant was there the whole time we were enrolled and had been there for quite some time before. It really helps the child when there are no staff changes, the child has to get adjusted and use to the adult and feel comfortable and secure. If there's high rollover then it can really make things awful for the child and therefore the parents.

    One final suggestion, it would be useful to have some sort of program that reaches out to parents and helps them emotionally as much as possible during enrollment and especially the first day. It's pretty gut wrenching to drop off your child who hasn't left your arms in months to a stranger, you can always tell the new kids because their parents are the ones crying their eyes out in the parking lot. It's hard on fathers (i cried) but especially mothers. My wife couldn't do it, I had drop off duty every day.

    --
    I came to the datacenter drunk with a fake ID, don't you want to be just like me?
    1. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here is another thought.

      Stop pursuing money for gain while you have kids under 60 Months of age. Whatever you spent on daycare it wasn't worth it. Your kids would rather have you, than the things the second job affords.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    2. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by trybywrench · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Stop pursuing money for gain while you have kids under 60 Months of age. "

      For our first we didn't have an option. However, I was able to make a large jump in pay when the second came and my wife is now a stay-at-home-mom so it's a much better situation. She's going to go back to work ( she's a high school teacher ) once the youngest is in 1st grade. No mother I've ever met chose daycare out of convenience it's usually just not an option to stay home.

      --
      I came to the datacenter drunk with a fake ID, don't you want to be just like me?
    3. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good thought. Now if only everyone had a stable job that would last at least 5 years (or 7 or 10 if you have more than one child..) .. oh wait.

      Funny having to explain this on a tech forum; this is simple redundancy. In most cases the second income is eaten up by the daycare cost. In this scenario either parent can lose their job and become primary care giver if necessary with food and shelter still being provided.

    4. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by naughtynaughty · · Score: 1

      Is pursing "money for gains" different than pursuing money for the rent, electric bill or diapers? Life is like diapers, one size doesn't fit all.

    5. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be great. But a 60 month employment gap usually makes someone unemployable. And to live in a nice neighborhood in a good school district, both parents need to be working. That's not even considering the cost of education. At the current rate the child will have a six figure debt when graduating college if parents can't help out.

    6. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Choose one: successful career, or time with family. There was a fight for a 4 hour day/4 day week many many years ago, and that is totally doable, but UNIONS turn people into communists, so we can't do that.

    7. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. However, depending on where you live, the government AND people punish you for thinking like this. For example, Canada has an option for income splitting for 1 year, which was a great help to single income families earning below the average household income as they would pay a lower tax rate on their household income. Voters have chosen to scrap this for a reduction in general tax, which benefits dual income earners (especially those earning double the household average) and increases the tax burden on single income families.

      FWIW, the average household income in Canada is about $85k, and the benefit for single income families maxed out at $73k. The new tax structure will greatly help those earning up to $90k, thus meaning a $180k dual income household will get far more benefit than a single income $73k household.

      Yay politics!

    8. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is difference between pursuing money for stuff like rent, electric bill or diapers and your child not seeing you whole week because you are competitive with other guys. It is difference between sacrificing your role in raising child because you have no choice vs because you do not really care about raising that child. I am not saying that fathers and mothers should sacrifice all to child raising, but when you pursue money to the extend of 60 hours a week, then you can not be much of a parent. It is different when you do it because the child would be hungry otherwise vs you do it because your passion for work/money beats your passion for family.

    9. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somehow people come to 1st world countries with nothing. They don't get to live in nice neighborhoods, with good school districts. Somehow they and their children excel, at a rate way beyond all the natives.

      Every 3rd or 4th generation (or later) 1st worlder, becomes an F35.

    10. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by jitterman · · Score: 1

      Amen. My first wife wanted to get right back to work. I disagreed, but respected her decision. Fast forward 10 years: second marriage, second son - wife back in university (on line courses) and is at home with our boy, of whom we both get to see more of this way because there's no lost commute time for HIM. I earn more than I did before, but not so much that this isn't a sacrifice in some ways. But the way that it's not? My family. The time with them is worth so much more, and even the older two (she had a daughter from a previous marriage who is an amazing addition to our family as well) don't care a bit about "stuff" that they might otherwise have. Those things will come eventually, but this time will only last for a short while, and they actually get that.

      --
      For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
    11. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by nwaack · · Score: 1

      How cute. You must be very lucky and/or wealthy to be able to just up-and-quit your job for five years and assume that something similar will be available to you when you get back. Here's yet another thought. Don't judge people you don't know.

    12. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Annnd let me call bullshit.

      Me and my then girlfriend were both latchkey kids, both had parents that rationalized working more as best for the family, and left us thinking this isn't the best way to raise a child.

      And neither one of us could manage much better than minimum wage.

      We managed on a single income. No, it wasn't easy, but it is a question of priorities. Each would take a few years working at what was available while the other stayed home.

      Used the same model to allow each other to attend college.

      Redundancy is having two people available to work, not that both must work.

    13. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Coming from a country where poor people starve to death is certainly a big motivator. There is a lot of stress among the young in southeast Asian countries where academics are pushed so hard. Young kids don't play outside, or inside for that matter. They stay home and study. Cheating is rampant, and what is learned is of dubious value. There are few projects for building practical experience, only tests. The answers on the test have to be verbatim from the book, or they are wrong. A few of the better institutions are not like this, but the majority are. Furthermore, those that migrate here or other Western countries are not just random people, they are a highly motivated subgroup that possess higher motivation and abilities than those choosing to stay where they were born. My wife was one.

      Giving our child a good education without turning it into a life or death struggle is, I think, a good goal.

    14. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by crgrace · · Score: 2

      The vast majority of people who use daycare do it because they have to. Kids need a place to sleep and food to eat. Also, a recent study showed that kids cared for by others do not develop significantly differently from children cared for exclusively by their parents. Since you'll probably be asking for a reference, here you go:

      Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, DHHS. (2006). The NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development (SECCYD). Findings for Chidlren up to Age 4 ½ Years (05-4318). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    15. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You are choosing to ignore the fact the the majority of families today are two income households. This is because for the majority of families it is not ALWAYS an option to be stay-at-home. The world has changed and your perspective is out of date, get back in touch with reality will ya

    16. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got Empathy?

    17. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some people are questioning the feasibility of this. I also question the desirability.

      I spend several hours a day with my two-year-old in the evenings. Would he really benefit from spending ALL day with his mom and me? I doubt it.

      He goes to an excellent daycare where he makes friends and likes the teachers. He comes talking about new things that he wouldn't have experienced at home. He spends ample time out on the playground.

      I think the only thing that would be accomplished by taking care of him more is that our nerves would be worn thin to the point where we'd yell at him more and we'd just end up with more discipline problems.

      Sure, it costs an arm and a leg, but I think it's better than keeping him at home all day.

    18. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to apologize or make excuses to anyone.

      Some daycare is good for a kid. Gets them out of the house, makes them meet new kids. Kids in the USA don't run around the neighborhood playing with the neighbors anymore; even if you sent your kid to do it, there would be nobody else out there to play with. Daycare is the best alternative these days.

      And staying at home these days means just one parent. No grandparents, aunts, uncles around like it would have meant 100 years ago.

      Sure, you don't wanna start them in daycare too soon if you can help it, but by around 9-10 months it's good for them to get out of the home.

    19. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Sitting at home or running errands with Mom and/or Dad is not the best way for kids to grow. Kids like being with other kids.

    20. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 1

      Here is another thought.

      Stop pursuing money for gain while you have kids under 60 Months of age. Whatever you spent on daycare it wasn't worth it. Your kids would rather have you, than the things the second job affords.

      For us, that would have meant either:

      • My wife abandoning her Biochemical, Molecular and Cellular Biology PhD about18 months before completing it, or
      • Me abandoning my career and us selling our modest house to move into a studio apartment, as PhD stipends don't make good sole incomes for a family of three.

      We put our kid in my wife's school's day care center, which effectively cost us as much as my wife earned at her PhD program. Our kid thrived there: she got some outstanding early education, grew socially, blew past developmental markers, and still had two loving parents to come home to at the end of the day. Today, Doctor Mom is doing valuable schizophrenia and bipolar disorder research, Dad has earned a few promotions, and kiddo is in effervescent, inquisitive, caring first-grader. We moved into a nicer home, we have more financial security, more free time, and we both feel like we're great role models for our child.

      We have no regrets about putting our kid in day care. It was absolutely right for our family--mom, dad, and kid alike. I continue to be bemused by people who believe that the One True Way To Rear Children requires a constant, dedicated parental presence. For us, doing that would have led to a worse life for all three of us.

      --

      Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    21. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Cost of Day Care vs Stay at home?

      If you are paying for daycare, you have choices. You might not think of them as choices, but they are there. I have a 20 year old car, because I spend my time with my family, not chasing the dollar. The problem is, you do have a choice if you're paying for daycare.

      All the other things you mentioned are necessities, but paying for daycare isn't one of them, that is a choice. Unless you're in the mostly preventable single parent realm, you have choices.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    22. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are usually more educated than the natives. Just because they arrive here with nothing doesn't mean they came from poverty back home. They usually come from middle class backgrounds going back several generations. They had the preparation to succeed.

    23. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      So, your choice is to have kids or a career. Or is having a career worth sending your kids to be raised by others? Because quite frankly, I hate people who make the choice of having kids and careers, because the kids always suffer.

      Or, as my dad always said, "Nobody, on their deathbed, ever says 'I wish I spent more time at the office!' "

      Your kids are only kids for a short period. Spend your life with them, not at work.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    24. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I didn't judge anyone. I said paying for daycare isn't worth it. That is a value judgement. And unless you are part of the mostly preventable "single parent" family, you do have choices. And yes, I can judge others, just like they sneer at my wife who stayed home to raise our family (how quaint).

      IMHO the people who keep saying "don't judge" know they aren't doing the right thing, and don't want to be reminded it isn't the right thing. Make the choices you want to make, and I will think whatever I want. If you're okay with your choice, then what I think shouldn't matter to you. I can judge all I want, it is free country (for now)

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    25. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by jedrek · · Score: 1

      This is a massive oversimplification. Preschool does a lot more than let parents go back to work, it teaches kids to interact with adults and children they're not related to. It gives them a chance to fight for their wants and needs, to get people to pay attention to them, all this stuff that's useful later in life. Good day care and pre-school are well worth it.

    26. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Single Parenthood is a mostly preventable problem. It is a mostly* a result of poor choices. Don't punish your kids because you can't choose your mates better.

      *I say mostly because in the more rare cases, single parenthood isn't a choice due to a death of one of the parents. In almost all other cases, poor choice in life mate isn't an excuse.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    27. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Your kid liked day care more than mom and dad, and you think that is okay?

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    28. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Stop pursuing money for gain while you have kids under 60 Months of age.

      That requires either paid parental leave or ridiculous levels of savings.

      Your kids would rather have you, than the things the second job affords.

      The things a second job affords is increasingly including such luxuries as a roof over your head.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    29. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      Just out of curiousity, why was it your wife that stayed home? Couldn't you have taken the care duties and stayed home?

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    30. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on what quality of living you're hoping to afford (eg. newer car, bigger house/apt, nice food, ability to go out to dinner). It's a choice for many more people than realize it, but certainly not everyone.

    31. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is another thought.

      Stop pursuing money for gain while you have kids under 60 Months of age...

      Hey parents, here's another thought. Learn the definition and application of the word years for fuck's sake already.

      Sincerely,

      - The Grownups

    32. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 1

      Your kid liked day care more than mom and dad, and you think that is okay?

      Wait, I said that?

      --

      Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    33. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I earn more than my wife. I could have stayed home too. I also spent 40 hours working, and not 60-80. It cost me plenty, but the rewards I received are infinitely more precious to me.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    34. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      It was absolutely right for our family--mom, dad, and kid alike

      For it to be "right" for your kid, s/he must have liked day care more than being home with mom and dad. You might want to ask him it if was "right" for him, or if he would have preferred to be home with you and your spouse. My guess, your idea of "right" and theirs is not the same.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    35. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it is much easier if you don't name them in the first place.

    36. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Different AC here. You're assuming that reproduction is an imperative. Bear with me here. I believe strongly that one partner should be a stay-at-home husband/wife until the child is no longer a child and is an adolescent. I think in a first world country with a skyrocketing GDP and skyrocketing worker productivity, there should be no problem obtaining the financial security to allow for one breadwinner in the household and one homemaker. (Before somebody flames me for regressive views on gender, watch the first episode of Madoka Magica. That's what I have in mind.)

      Yet wages have been stagnant since the 1980s. Over 100,000,000 in the USA are out of work, yet they're not on the streets homeless either. This double income family thing is horseshit, especially given that a single income family was the norm 70 years ago. (Granted, the USA was busy rebuilding Europe and the only major industrial nation at the time besides Russia. Huge demand for workers, especially knowledge workers => let the good times roll.) How did economic conditions for the average family (not saying that technologically, at least, we're not better off than the 1950s) completely regress?

      So, there are two options (well, probably a spectrum of options). Either keep your "I'm such a good person because of how many sacrifices I've had to make!" puritan narrative or work towards a basic minimum income. The catch is that with the former, I'm going to have to agree with GP, no matter how cruel it may sound. Sure, there will always be some form of welfare, but it'll never make ends meet without both parents working. In fact, the way things are going in the USA, we may get to the point that it won't make ends meet as long as there's a father in the picture. But, we've figured out how to provide for those divorced or never-married fathers! Stick them in jail! Go USA!

      Stay away from major cities beginning around 2019. I hope you have a spare can of gas, otherwise the walk to the gas station will be for your own good.

      UNLESS

    37. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mom and dad are boring, dad gets tired faster then I do, so cant play as long. Mom is busy trying to keep the house I spend the day trashing clean. It is more fun to play with other kids all day. Thanks for asking Archangel Grumpy!

    38. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why have children before you can afford them? She should have finished the PhD, and you should have entered a tenure-track program before considering children.

    39. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poverty level for a family of 3 is around $20k/year. If one of the parents isn't making that much, they shouldn't be having children.

    40. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you raised a child, in modern times, with a single income at or near the minimum wage then you probably did not do so without my aid. I'm okay with that. Don't get me wrong but let's be honest. I paid for your child's health, food, and other necessities. It's okay. I'd rather pay your wife to stay home than pay for your child to be in prison. I just ask that you be honest about it.

    41. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, that's like what, two dollars American?

    42. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, your choice is to have kids or a career. Or is having a career worth sending your kids to be raised by others? Because quite frankly, I hate people who make the choice of having kids and careers, because the kids always suffer.

      Or, as my dad always said, "Nobody, on their deathbed, ever says 'I wish I spent more time at the office!' "

      Your kids are only kids for a short period. Spend your life with them, not at work.

      So you admit to having an irrational hate for people that make choices that differ from your own opinion?

      I'm sure the kids suffer inconceivable horrors from having to socialize with other kids and interacting with adults other than their parents. /s

    43. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't judge anyone.

      Yes you did. We can see your post history right here in this thread.

    44. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such smugness.

      Nope, no welfare, no family assistance (beyond what I took when I moved out), nothing really but a desire to make a better way. And not surprisingly, thousands of black sheep of the family manage the same. You probably did fund a portion of my education through EIC.

      So let me turn the honesty back to you.

    45. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which has fuck all to do with what he said.

    46. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Day care is bad for babies:

      http://www.smh.com.au/news/nat...

    47. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's retarded logic. If you feed your kids peas because it's the right thing to do and they don't like it then it must not be the right thing to do? You're a fucking nitwit and a fag who doesn't even have children. Don't worry. My kid can and does beat the shit out of your kid and will be fucking your daughter.

    48. Re: Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Doesn't mean" because you are a mindless drone. We just reached the conclusion talked with them and now we are one house-worth richer happier and the kids know who their mom is.

    49. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a kid doesn't have a stay-at-home parent, it's better off not being born? Lots of happy successful people had parents who worked.

    50. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Kellamity · · Score: 1
      Daycare often costs so much at the end of the week you're not even gaining a lot of extra money by working.
      Some people work because they LIKE getting out of the house and enjoy their chosen careers!

      I enjoy my job and can't imagine being at home all the time. You'd go crazy! The prospect is extremely unappealing to me. A couple of guys I work with only do 4 days a week and spend the extras time with their young families. That seems reasonable. If I met a guy and we decided to have kids and he wanted to stay home, and we could afford it, fine. Not for me though.

    51. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      Funny that. A few posts ago you were telling someone else to give up the pursuit of wealth to care for his kids. That's just a tad hypocritical, don't you think?

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    52. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 1

      For it to be "right" for your kid, s/he must have liked day care more than being home with mom and dad. You might want to ask him it if was "right" for him, or if he would have preferred to be home with you and your spouse. My guess, your idea of "right" and theirs is not the same.

      Goodness yes, my wife's and my idea of "right" is decidedly different than that of a preschool child! I mean, even today my daughter would vastly prefer to not go to first grade in favor spending her days riding bikes with dad, baking with mom, painting, playing with friends, and visiting grandma and grandpa--but abandoning her schooling to satisfy these desires would be a pretty dumb thing for her parents to do, yeah?

      Woe to the parent who uses their two-year-old's wants as a compass for determining what's good for them.

      Again, go back and actually read what I actually wrote; that you called my daughter "he" suggests you haven't really done so. I'm not saying that stay-at-home parenting is the wrong decision. I'm simply saying that it isn't the only possible right decision, and that daycare was the right decision for our family.

      --

      Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    53. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Here is what I know about day care babies. They aren't raised by parents, but by strangers.

      1) wake up, get ready for "Day Care", have breakfast and a commute to the day care center.
      2) Drop off at day care, parents off to work.
      3) 9-10 hours later, the parent(s) come and pick the kid up
      4) Go home have at most an hour with "exhausted" parent(s) who has been at work all day
      5) Get ready for bed
      6) Go to bed, sleep 10-12 hours
      7) ????
      8) Profit!

      You think that is "right" ? Oh, you have the kids on the weekends. This prepares them for your eventual divorce system of sharing kids on alternate weekends.

      Daycare is hardly right for anyone's family, especially if it is a choice.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    54. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Hate, everything is "hate" with liberals. I differ in opinion, and it is "hate"? Geez, lighten up Francis

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    55. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      You are choosing to ignore the fact the the majority of families today are two income households.

      Not ignoring it. This is still a choice.

      This is because for the majority of families it is not ALWAYS an option to be stay-at-home.

      This is still a choice. Claiming "I didn't have a choice" doesn't make it less of a choice. It is always an option.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    56. Re: Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you can afford to put them in day care, then you can afford them.

      Some people want to have children but not quit their jobs to do so. It's not weird.

    57. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      My commute is 8 minutes, when there is traffic. I have no debt and only make about 50K year. I have a house, my car is 20 years old and I don't make payments on it. It cost me $1700 when I bought it.

      The problem is, that people WANT things, a nice BMW, Diamonds, big screen TVs and leverage their future to get their toys. I want a happy family, and that doesn't cost a nickel, but it is expensive.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    58. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 1

      ...and yet here we are, my wife, daughter, and I, the three of us happy, loving, and well-adjusted. Thanks in no small part to her early and routine exposure to lots of other kids her age, our daughter has a natural comfort interacting with her peers that my wife and I lacked at her age. Her math and reading skills are several years ahead of her age group, thanks in no small part to the well-designed curriculum of her day care center. She's inquisitive, adventurous, kind, thoughtful, and boundlessly energetic; we love each other more than we could possibly have imagined; and we couldn't be more proud of her.

      You seem not to really understand what day care is. You also seem to think that our decision to place our daughter in day care predicts a hostile end our loving, devoted, fifteen-year marriage. That doesn't really make any sense to me.

      --

      Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    59. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      You're deflecting. You started the thread by attacking the thread opener for caring more about pursuing wealth than caring for his kids. You just admitted you did the same.

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    60. Re:Honest suggestions from new'ish parent by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      Look at the little exhange I had with him upthread. It's not about day care. It's about you being a bad role model because you don't think your wife should stay at home and care for the kids.

      He is just rationalising his sexism and using the kids as a shield. Quite a despicable little toad.

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
  8. Controlling for all educational outcome factors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're covering all the bases: prenatal care through kindergarten is widely considered the first and most critical time to influence a child's development. The family environment itself after that is held as the reason "underserved" (what a delightfully bland euphemism for "poor people and minorities") children attend school and stay involved until graduation.

    tl;dr: They're coming as close to genetic engineering of humans as it's possible to get, and this will probably settle the nature vs. nurture question beyond a shadow of a doubt.

  9. Dumb title and summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FTFA:

    The school will admit students at or before birth, and will provide family-based supports, ensuring that students are school-ready by the time they enter the elementary school grades. Full time school begins at age 3.

    It simply means that parents can reserve admission for their future children, and the mothers can receive aids. The listing further says they'll work with health care organizations for maternal support. Now you can spin it as you like, but it still doesn't make it a question about "When Does School Life Begin?"

    1. Re:Dumb title and summary by halivar · · Score: 1, Funny

      and the mothers can receive aids.

      So you're saying they're literally dying to get their kids educated?

    2. Re:Dumb title and summary by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It's well established that children who are helped to develop before starting school tend to do better there. Learning to speak properly, maybe some basic reading (recognition of characters etc.) and the enjoyment of books and educational learning, that sort of thing. So it appears that the programme is trying to assist families with that.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Dumb title and summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and the mothers can receive aids.

      So you're saying they're literally dying to get their kids educated?

      1. aids is plural of aid
      2. aids != AIDS
      3. With today's drug cocktails AIDS isn't dying any more than AGING
      4. Yes we got your point, you are an nit-picking asshole (or simply homophobic?)

    4. Re:Dumb title and summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3. With today's drug cocktails AIDS isn't dying any more than AGING
      4. Yes we got your point, you are an nit-picking asshole (or simply homophobic?)

      You're up to date on #3, but you're somehow behind the times on #4. People in Africa are dying of what is an entirely preventable and survivable disease in Western countries. GP wasn't homophobic. GP was racist!

      (Yes, yes, I probably should have just posted *WOOSH*)

  10. Palo Alto Public Schools by unixcorn · · Score: 1

    Palo Alto public schools spend around $14,700 per student when the average cost per student in the nation is around $8500. Someone needs to tell Zuckerberg he is opening the school in the wrong place if he truly wants to help the "underserved".

    1. Re:Palo Alto Public Schools by truck_soccer · · Score: 2

      If he truly wanted to help people he would have never created facebook.

    2. Re:Palo Alto Public Schools by Alascom · · Score: 1

      "...free education and free healthcare for 700 low-income students from the Palo Alto..."

      Low-income in Palo Alto? That is like offering a free house to everyone living on Mars.

      A few facts about Palo Alto:
      Median home value: > $2,500,000
      Median Income: $125,000/yr
      Per Capita Income: $80,000/yr
      Bachelor's degree or higher: 80%
      Demographics: 94% white or asian.

      I guess this is what passes for poor struggling working class to Billionaires in 2015.

    3. Re:Palo Alto Public Schools by crgrace · · Score: 1

      He is providing services to low-income kids in the Palo Alto area . That includes East Palo Alto.

      Since you're so interested in demographics...

      A few facts about East Palo Alto:

      White alone 1,754 â" 6.2%
      Black or African American alone 4,458 â" 15.8%
      Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 18,147 â" 64.5%

  11. "Silicon Valley Luminaries" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Silicon Valley Luminaries like Salman Khan, who lives in Boston and got his three degrees from MIT?

  12. Another theodp anti-education diatribe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I am not sure how theodp gets all of his rants on the front page. The school doesn't "admit fetuses". The school provides prenatal health support for LOW INCOME PEOPLE where no support exists. Theodp needs to JUST STOP with his anti-education diatribes. Disgusting.

  13. Finally, someone gets it by enjar · · Score: 1

    Make your snide comments, but as a parent, this approach makes a pile of sense. Especially for poor/low income. I'm fortunate enough to have a decent income, education and a spouse with similar background and income. Even with what advantages we have, having kids and supporting kids is a fucking mess of administrivia, not to mention a pile of money.

    So getting into a program like this when you are pregnant can literally be a life-changer for a low income person. Not because of the educational content per se, but because you cut the administrative bullshit down tremendously. You know your kid is going to have day care, so you don't have to rush around in panic and get on waiting lists, hoping your kid can get in somewhere. You know what it's going to cost so you can plan your expenses. You can have stable work hours, allowing you to work with an employer on regular hours. Just that right there can make the difference from you being the employee who is on time and dependable versus being the flake who is always late, leaving early and swapping shifts.

    Same thing on up into preschool and grade school. There's a plan, there's a structure. That can help tremendously when you don't have a decent salary and pile of money to fall back on. In the case of our kids, there was always a "rolling the dice" moment when it came to child care, preschool, full day vs. half-day kindergarten, etc. Then it's a patchwork of after school programs that you don't know if you got into or not, and if you don't get in, you need to scramble, then somehow get your kid from school to the after school thing, etc. It's a damned mess, and for single parent households or people who work hourly, stupid stuff like not having the after school program in the same physical location as school just makes it impossible.

    Then try and get your kid to the doctor's office, which is only open 9-5, and you have to work ... and if you aren't working, you aren't getting paid ...

    1. Re:Finally, someone gets it by Sangui5 · · Score: 1

      Beyond what you (enjar) mentioned, there is also the insane competitiveness for spots in good schools (and preschools and daycare) in the Bay Area. *Accepting* infants before they're born is new, but letting people put their name on the list is old hat. The silly joke is that you should sign up on a waitlist for a preschool when you get engaged, because that's how long the wait is. If you wait to sign up until you have a positive pregnancy test you're already too late.

      I wish that was more of a joke than it is. We didn't know how bad it was when we tried to get our 2 year old son into daycare; the only programs which had immediate openings were "we watch your kids while they watch TV". The "we watch them while they play/fight in the yard" program was still a 3 month wait; the blessing of that program was it taught my son some independence (they did expel the biter after the third incident....). We put our 6-month old daughter on the waitlist for several better schools expecting that by the time she was 1 year old she'd have gotten into one. We didn't think she needed a top-end program at 6-months (we watch them sleep would be enough), but we signed up so there wouldn't be too long of a wait for when she hit 12 months.

      They finally had an opening at 26 months........

      It is stupid and silly and insane, and I myself am insane for playing this rigged game. But it is the only game in town, so I have to play. Zuck offering *anything* better than "we watch them watch TV" to disadvantaged children is one the most effective forms of charity imaginable; I'm paid quite well and my wife doesn't work but preschool is still difficult to manage. If both parents have to work, or if there's only 1 parent, or if the work schedule(s) aren't flexible, or if someone gets sick, or if money is tight, or if, or if, or if...

      Good job Zuck.

    2. Re:Finally, someone gets it by enjar · · Score: 1

      Yep. People hear the term "good daycare program" and they think it's somehow the equivalent of the Ivy League of daycare. It's not. It's a program with adequate staffing levels, no televisions and plenty of stuff to keep the kids engaged. For infants to preschoolers, that means stuff like toys, blocks, coloring books and so on. Not rocket science. When you go below "good daycare program", it gets scary and it gets scary fast. Day cares where kids are provided nothing but orange food. Day cares where the workers are overburdened and kids sit around in dirty diapers too long and get rashes. Day cares where the TV never is turned off.

      Of course, the "mom stays at home crowd" turns up soon after, but the economic reality of many households is that you do legitimately need two incomes to pay for housing, food, electricity, etc. There's a stereotype that many dual income people have lavish lifestyles taking expensive vacations, driving expensive cars and eating out all the time. In reality most of the dual earners we encounter at school have solid, but not high paying jobs -- for example, one is a teacher and the other has some mid-level professional job. The income is solid but there's no way in hell to afford housing in many metro areas, and the day care is priced such that you still come out significantly ahead by using it.

      Then the "just move" crowd shows up ... but they forget that many people have grown up where they live, and have a network of family and friends they can depend on to help out with the child care when they need it. Moving to another part of the country that's cheaper cuts off the ability to call in reinforcements when you need them, and sometimes you need those reinforcements with little or no warning at all.

    3. Re:Finally, someone gets it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's questionable whether it's a good idea to have mom stay home with the kid these days anyway.

      What does that kid do? None of the other kids around will be home with mom, they'll be at daycare.

  14. Embryos hooked on F******k by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder what they plan to implant them to make them slaves of "social" for life. I guess this is the reaction to hordes of kids running away from the Network because they hate the parental control that comes with it. Zuckerberg still has a firm grasp on the baby-crazy moms, they're his most active clientele, now he wants to use them to get to the next generation.

  15. Mark is attacking my abortion rights!!11!11! by __aasehi2499 · · Score: 0

    SJWs to the rescue!

    1. Re:Mark is attacking my abortion rights!!11!11! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All snarkiness aside, I do wonder about the mental gymnastics involved.

      It seems a fetus operates on a Schrodinger plane of existence, at once being just a pile of tissue and a baby.

      Suppose a woman goes through his offering, but then aborts at a late trimester. Is this fraud?

  16. Inevitable extension by willworkforbeer · · Score: 1

    What with FB's new "premie-book" social media accounts, where you share your InstaSonoGram posts, and enjoy in-the-womb targeted ads for Pampers.

    --
    Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
  17. Buying karma by Kohath · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of the episode of the Sopranos where Paully donated to the church fair. He thought donating money would partly make up for all the bad things he'd done and was planning to do in the future.

  18. Will Admit At/Before Birth by perotbot · · Score: 1

    This is a new trend, not educating fetuses, but allowing parents to register their kids for the school as soon as the parents know the kid is coming. This has been happening in several "private" schools for years. It's to reserve a spot in a competitive school. This is the same nonsense that Manhattan pre schools use now in advertisements where they say XX% of our students go on to Ivy League or something similarly silly. More fuel for the hype train. 700 kids? drop in the bucket, want to do real good? Put the schools like this is one of the states where education is a complete failure and give the parents an honest opportunity to get a good education for their kids. Palo Alto spends over 14K per student per year.... put this somewhere where they spend 2K per student per year

    --
    ~corporate tool, but employed~
    1. Re:Will Admit At/Before Birth by Hussman32 · · Score: 1

      My guess is EPA, where it's much less. Also, 700 kids is an entire K-8 school in the Redwood City district, the annual operating costs of an entire school including construction, teachers, supplies and administrators is millions.

      I'm in the Bay Area, and we're talking about parents hiring aids for our teachers because the student to teacher ratio is 30:1. Any relief from the local communities is welcome. All of the weird projects California funds without funding art, physical education, and music in the local schools really shows how skewed the priorities are.

      --
      "Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
    2. Re:Will Admit At/Before Birth by enjar · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind that this includes day care. It's very common to line up day care before a kid is born, it's not like you can turn up somewhere with your baby and just drop it off without prior notice. Day cares need to make sure they have adequate staff and space. When we had our first kid we had this all sorted out well before we gave birth.

  19. Separate the charity from the school here... by Hussman32 · · Score: 1

    I'm having a hard time seeing the negatives. This is a prototype to try new educational ideas, but really what they are doing is helping the local community. Odds are good it's East Palo Alto (EPA) that will be most served, Palo Alto schools are quite good. The EPA schools are rated low, and any family brought into it will be getting more than they could get from public schools.

    And if underprivileged children should have project-based learning that adapts to their learning capabilities, is that really so dystopian? They are trying something new, and offering it to those who wouldn't normally have the opportunity.

    --
    "Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
  20. obligation of your state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Education and health care is the obligation of your state (tax payer money). Not of any private entities.

    If you put this in private (profit oriented) hands you inadvertly create a two-class society: one that can afford healthcare and education, and one that can't.

  21. low income by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Low income; Palo Alto Area
    Pick one

  22. again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sadly this guy knows nothing about schools/pedagogy/testing/etc. He will continue to make ill-advised decisions like this until he sits down and actually speaks to educators. In the process, he will continue to waste crazy amounts of money. He's right in the fact that poverty is the greatest issue facing school-aged teachers, not curriculum, or (gasp) unions. He just doesn't respect schools or teachers enough to listen to their informed opinions.

    http://www.cnbc.com/2014/05/23/where-zuckerbergs-100-million-gift-went-wrong-pros.html

  23. Re:Slavery? by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    A few people have essentially called me a slave, but they never come up with convincing reasons for me to escape my "slavery".

  24. This is Zukerberg's Asperger's... by jtara · · Score: 1

    This is Zukerberg's Asperger's coming through, loud and clear. I do not mean this in a mean way.

    He simply does not understand why most people would not embrace this. It seems perfectly logical to him. It is efficient. It is through. It saves time and energy. It puts a "team" on raising your kids.

    And it is not what most parents would want. It is creepy as hell. It is corporate parenthood.

    For kids who have medical issues - and their parents - they can be unavoidably public, or intensely private. I think we have to be very careful about "integrating" medical care with education. It already is, to some necessary degree (immunizations, screening), although I think some of that has changed in my lifetime for the better. When I was a kid, we got some immunizations AT SCHOOL. We had TB screening AT SCHOOL. I had to suffer some bullying because I had a large TB test reaction. (All my family had to be tested, and I had to get regular X-rays until I was 18. Nothing ever showed up, thankfully.)

    You can have strict privacy rules, but let's be honest - it's a school. Stuff gets spread around. And not just by the kids.

    Mark probably would not understand this. At all. He probably has to remind himself to shake hands, and look people in the eyes when he talks to them. Here's one more thing for Mark to remind himself of. Other people are more sensitive about this stuff, and their feelings are hurt about it. Make logical sense? No. But it's the way most people's brains work.

    It's creepy corporate paternalism. And Mark goes "sounds great to me!"

    Arrrrggggghhhhh!

    1. Re:This is Zukerberg's Asperger's... by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      He simply does not understand why most people would not embrace this. It seems perfectly logical to him. It is efficient. It is through. It saves time and energy. It puts a "team" on raising your kids.

      And when the time comes, they'll trust the company enough to be easier to cook and eat -- hold on, that line wasn't supposed to make it into the press release. Send it back to PR and have them review *the whole thing* and let me know when the next draft is ready. Sheesh.

  25. Zuckerborg's new server farm by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Imagine Beowulf clusters of coding fetuses in jars

    1. Re:Zuckerborg's new server farm by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      I for one embrace this brave, new world.

  26. "Low Income" in Palo Alto? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess that means making under $250k a year?

  27. This has been done before by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    Google, now FB think they're being innovative; what's old is apparently new again:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    "Historic Pullman was built in the 1880s by George Pullman as workers' housing for employees of his eponymous railroad car company, the Pullman Palace Car Company. He established behavioral standards that workers had to meet to live in the area and charged them rent. Pullman's architect, Solon Spencer Beman, was said to be extremely proud that he had met all the workers' needs within the neighborhood he designed. The distinctive rowhouses were comfortable by standards of the day, and contained such amenities as indoor plumbing, gas, and sewers."

    Look how well THAT turned out. It's good on the ups, not so great on the downs.

    I believe Hershey, PA is another.

    --
    -Styopa
  28. Hubbaville by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

    Many years ago(previous millenium) I lived and worked on the Peninsula, not too far from PA.
    It was a wonderland of opulence, beauty, charm, character, and the weather could not be beat.

    During my work routine I had to occasionally make a deliveries to East Palo Alto, which was, at the time, a very different place from PA and the rest of the Peninsula. East Palo Alto was a low income "working class" neighborhood/town that was 180 degress different than PA.

    Crossing over into EPA, aka "Hubbaville"(a reference locals made to people who would go to EPA to buy crack cocaine) was an abrupt change. The two communities were so close to each other physically, yet so far apart in many other ways. It really was sad to see, with all the obvious cultural/social/economic stereotypes one would expect to see playing out right before my eyes.

    --
    We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
  29. I feel sorry for the kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure they'll be sucked into what ever the latest SJW approved teaching methods and subjects. Of course they must code! They will likely be so fucked up that they'll _have_ to work at Facebook as no one else would likely employ such damaged individuals. Yay! Enjoy blowing your money Zuckerburg.

  30. start pre-fetus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A big deal is being made about starting with the fetus.

    To have really good results, you should start pre-conception.

    Choose a mate that has good education skills. This is the largest predictor of success in school.

    1. Re:start pre-fetus by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      I'd say that actually choosing a mate, period, is a pretty damn good predictor already.

      Ie, actually putting some thought into the process of when and with whom you're going to create womb-fruit, instead of it being the result of some drunken anonymous coupling like stray dogs in the street (well, stray dogs don't have Tinder, that is).

      --
      -Styopa
  31. Low Income in Palo Alto? by non0score · · Score: 1

    Low income in Palo Alto area? What's that? $200k annual household income? :P

  32. Hello Europe! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hurray!!!! U.S. discovering Europe's reality through Zuckerberg....

  33. Your privacy for Socialism by sdinfoserv · · Score: 1

    Congratulations! All of your personal, private data, intimate thoughts, shopping lists, and friends - even those without accounts - is being harvested, categorized, mined and cross referenced for sale to marketeers who will spam you, inundate you with click bait, and harass you will illegal robocalls so 1 man can live like a king while he builds a socialist institution.

    An I didn't even get flowers.

  34. A page from the Jesuit playbook by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

    Ignatius Loyola is purported to have said "Give me a child until he is seven, and he will be mine forever". Sounds like The Zuck believes that too.

    The sad thing is that a large percentage of the population-at-large will probably think this initiative is a good thing, instead of seeing the dangers inherent in it. What better way to extend and entrench the hold that corporations have on the lives of 'free' citizens?

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
  35. East Palo Alto != Palo Alto by slew · · Score: 1

    Palo Alto public schools spend around $14,700 per student when the average cost per student in the nation is around $8500. Someone needs to tell Zuckerberg he is opening the school in the wrong place if he truly wants to help the "underserved".

    East Palo Alto != Palo Alto. This school is actually intended to tap from the Ravenswood City School District in Palo Alto

    Although East Palo Alto spends nearly $13,000/student, about 2/3 of the students are English language learners. The district many full-time Spanish translators for school office, classroom support, and attending parent-teacher meetings as well as to comply with special education requirements (the law requires reports to be translated for non-english speaking parents).

    A few years ago, they had to cut down the school year to the bare minimum required by law to fund these fixed offsets and pretty much leaves no money for the "extras" that you see in the Palo Alto School district across highway 101. Then there's the additional parcel tax in Palo Alto and the funding from the non-profit Palo-Alto Partner's in Education (formed by parents to help fund extra curriculars for Palo Alto, not East Palo Alto/Ravenswood City). So yes, Ravenswood City area (EPO) is certainly deserving of the label of underserved.

    1. Re:East Palo Alto != Palo Alto by Sangui5 · · Score: 1

      Also, every school in the Bay Area hits up the parents for volunteer time and charitable donations which are not accounted for in the $13/14K per student numbers. The not-for-profit private preschool I send my kids to has a quota of hours of volunteer time! I showed up and did 8 hours of miscellaneous woodworking/construction/yardwork last year, and my wife was essentially a part-time unpaid administrative assistant the full year. Even the public schools endlessly nag their attendees for cash donations.

      Somehow, I think that the working-class no-I-don't-get-sick-time residents of East Palo Alto (EPA) don't have as much ability to give extra time and/or money (well, it's time and money, there is no "or" realistically) to their schools than the residents of Palo Alto do. There is something to be said for parental involvement in the school being beneficial, but the extent to which it is realistic to expect the disadvantaged residents of EPA to provide the additional support the schools expect (and get) in Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, or Cupertino is questionable. "Do yard work at my kid's school, or work the on-call hours of my job and get paid (and not fired)" is a hard choice that makes the Ravenswood school district a lot worse than would be apparent from the simple count of dollars the state spends.

  36. Nothig new here. Move along. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    This has been happening in several "private" schools for years.

    It's been happening at least as far back as the late '40s:

    For instance: The University of Michigan education department ran a laboratory school until a couple decades ago. Each class year initially admitted 30 boys and 30 girls. The students were subject to longitudinal tests for research as they progressed - so when someone had to leave (for instance, as a foreign exchange student) another was admitted to fill the place - and the student also readmitted upon return (to help make the longitudinal data retain accuracy). Thus a typical graduating class had maybe 33 or 34 of each sex.

    They also served as the testbed for the actual teaching-a-class internship for School of Education students. So each one-year subject class was taught by a two-person team: A full professor of education and, for a half-year each, two college Education majors.

    The education was superb, and slots for students were highly sought after. Children of high-ranking faculty (such as tenured professors) and officials were preferred - not just as an employment perk, but because they'd be less likely to move away, taking the kid, and thus corrupt the research data. (It also meant the school had access to a lot of data about the parents and perhaps other family members, who would typically be well disposed to its use in research.)

    Given the quality of the education (and the financing of it by the school), there was a very long waiting list for openings. Many employees of the University would submit their kids' application as soon as they knew they were pregnant - which STILL wasn't any guarantee. (I only got into the school for my junior and senior high school years, when an opening for another boy finally occurred.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  37. Smell My Vagina! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Inhale that funky Zuckersnatch

  38. Parents out, schools in by Macdude · · Score: 1

    This is an excellent plan, soon we will be able to raise children completely in a sterile homogeneous government/corporate environment and won't need parents at all!!!

    --
    "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
  39. Not free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So after dropping $100 million on a 5 year project to transform Newark, New Jersey schools and failing miserably, Zuckerburg wants to spend millions to satisfy his wife's vanity by partnering with a federally funded healthcare center and a federally funded school building.

  40. Just kill off the school. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    These van der Snoot Academies do far greater harm than good.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  41. Female Foetuses only, I guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Boycott sexist code.org

  42. hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    School life begins at conception

  43. Re: Slavery? by ememisya · · Score: 1

    Because you're free. As in beer.

  44. hmmm by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many of those 'low income students' parents work for Facebook?

    --
    blindly antisocialist = antisocial