Hacker News Reader

>K-12 education is terrible for most people. You can get far superior education for your children by simply enrolling them in Khan institute and hiring tutors for subjects you are not great on.

I think that is silly. Really silly. You have no evidence for this. Learning is mostly a matter of motivation. It's like assuming that having an encyclopedia could replace instruction.

K12 education is way better than we think it is. It's just in the interest of k12 public education for people to think it is bad, so that it gets more resources. But it is one of the better functioning institutions in America. Much better and more per-dollar efficient at creating public value than the police, military or medical system.

Consider, would you rather have the bottom half of society skip it? I'd be terrified of a less educated populace.

> Learning is mostly a matter of motivation. It's like assuming that having an encyclopedia could replace instruction.

Or instruction can replace motivation...

That is precisely what instruction is for.

K-12 in the US was heavily influenced by Prussian ideology, to turn schools into factories of subordinate, authority-fearing citizens. It’s why schools are filled with abusive, inept tyrants that bore kids to tears and often scar them so much that they’ll never take interest in things like math or literature.

I find arguments like this difficult to argue with since there are so many unfounded assumptions and so little evidence.

But the author of this article took the time to address the rhetoric systematically. http://hackeducation.com/2015/04/25/factory-model

Germany heavily influenced American government and institutions (schooling, esp. the academy which usually ends up pushing cultural changes and crafting institutions when they become administrators) during the 19th up to early 20th century. I think it's short-sighted to say that (which she does in the article you linked) because schools aren't exact replicas of factories, the Prussian influence idea is completely unfounded history.

It can, but the exchange rate is terrible.

“I think the big mistake in schools is trying to teach children anything, and by using fear as the basic motivation. Fear of getting failing grades, fear of not staying with your class, etc. Interest can produce learning on a scale compared to fear as a nuclear explosion to a firecracker.”

--Stanley Kubrick

> K-12 education is terrible for most people. You can get far superior education for your children by simply enrolling them in Khan institute and hiring tutors for subjects you are not great on.

I'd wager social skills are the most important things you learn in school with peers. Having to work with others, compromise with others, build self-awareness, talk to the opposite sex, and understand social hierarchies.

You can always learn "stuff" later in life, but it's very hard to change your core social identity.

People with no social skills are basically the underlings of society, like 4chan shut-ins and incels. Dismissing K-12 just seems like a way to guarantee even more children are robbed of their social development.

Real world environments aren't age segregated with the only authority figure being significantly older. Middle school is hellish precisely because of this.

Degrees, especially from prestigious schools, have become a kind of writ of noble title that can be purchased. Systems like that can be very sticky. Everyone who has one has a vested interest in preserving their value (like taxi medallions) and HR people can easily use them as a shortcut to hiring decisions that they'll never look dumb for making. The latter is the "nobody ever got fired for..." effect.

The only thing that will break this is if demand for labor exceeds supply, forcing employers to hire outside traditional parameters.

> The only thing that will break this is if demand for labor exceeds supply, forcing employers to hire outside traditional parameters.

I don't think that is the "only thing".

Many employers look for degrees because they are seen as valuable. But they are not necessarily valuable in the most obvious way. A lot of time people are not really interested in what you went to school for at all. The are only interested if you have a degree or not.

This signals to employers that they are interviewing somebody that is willing to make major personal commitments and defer reward for years for POTENTIAL gain. There is no guarantees that spending 10's of thousands of dollars will result in a good job. People who pay for degrees are hoping this is true. A employer can take advantage of these people easily.

If I needed somebody to just be a cog in a corporate machine and I know that they are wiling to work their ass off and make huge personal commitments on the PROMISE of future pay... then that is awesome. I know they will work their ass off and make huge sacrifices for years and I really don't have to pay them that much at all to do it. And I know that their debt will keep them scared and living paycheck to paycheck so they are not going to want to risk unemployment because of how devastating this is financially.

This is why when I am looking for jobs and employers make hard demands on educational certificates that they are probably assholes. It's fine to want degrees, but they are not willing to take professional experience as a alternative then that is a huge red flag.

Yeah it's sticky, but you can't expect the current situation to last forever.

Great I really want my bridges cars and medical instruments developed by someone who consumed video bits explaining how it is done.

Just because this approach works for CS and a lot of humanities classes this can not be generalized. I have the feeling on here the technology optimism sometimes clouds the view on the reality.

Just some examples here: biology, biochemistry, chemistry, physics, medicine... To be any use you have to have more than a couple mooc classes.

Online videos don't work for the humanities either. You really need interaction with your peers to explore new aspects of your subject and move the arts forward.

Reading literature and discussing it over video chat or through online forums seems like a great substitute.

You didn’t spend much time in the library at school, did you? The amount of stuff not online is vast.

It is if you know where to look.

30 years ago only the wealthiest people in the wealthiest countries could have access to a lot of information. Now all you need is to know English and having a reliable internet connection.

The world is changing.

I invite you to find the Yellow Peril of Weiner online, or the Allepo Codex. I had to find a copy of Yellow Peril in Cerrar, still stamped declassified from WWII.

It's true a lot more research is online but lots of older books can be hard to find good quality pirated copies of, or have never been scanned.

Libgen and sci-hub will get you pretty damn far...

Khan Academy, not Institute.

Topical because a big push of academic libraries lately is information literacy.