I attended a speech that the Tiger Mom author gave. She said the main criticism that she received from her Chinese relatives was that her parenting was too lenient, that she had been infected by being in the United States.
This. When i was catching up in this thread, I thought that the whole problem here is children;s behaviors. That comes from home. I think the school system is tasked with something it was not designed to do. I think if a kid wants to learn we have enough resources in most of our schools they can be successful. At the end of the day the obligation to learn falls upon the learner. When academic success is required by parents, students are usually successful. I was not an especially motivated learner, but I was motivated to not face consequences for failing to meeting reasonable expectations. In the USA we mostly make excuses for why precious did not do right and label it a condition.
This is a bridge too far especially after colons and semis were beaten to death in the "Grammer Nazi" thread!
This is really not all that bad. Kids need a variety of activities in their lives which are not related to direct learning. It is interesting to note that schools that have struggled on standardized tests show improvement just by adding an art class. It is also worth noting that physical activities also tend to lead to better classroom performance and better test scores. But, I would ask, to what end? There is a reason there is a high suicide rate for school age kids in Japan and S Korea. Also, not everybody responds the same way to classroom education. But those who are able to succeed at this point are going to be successful. This I agree with, but what the parents want is not necessarily what is best for the student. I think it much more than this. It is a community interest in learning and education and working to make it happen. It is a difficult question on how to have that occur. Likewise. My motivation was to stay academically eligible, not to push for university. Make excuses, I'll agree with. But labeling some things a condition are legit. That said, teachers are expected to raise kids of the parents, not to teach them as it should be.
This could have gone in the Immigration thread, the fake news thread or the racism thread, but I will bump this one. An Article in the New Yorker about college affirmative action and the upcoming case of Asian students vs Harvard. Here is a section on how Asian Americans, specially of Chinese background using Chinese social media to organize against the repeal of the law that prohibits California colleges from using race to admit students and how it caught California politicians off guard. In a bit of beware on what you wish for because you may get it. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/15/the-rise-and-fall-of-affirmative-action The story does give some nice historical background of case law and how we got to where we are today.
A few years ago I learned of a Harvard economist looking at a Tennessee educational study which was measuring the effectiveness of kindergarten teachers on test scores into elementary and middle school. That student, in short, showed by by middle school, there was no measurable difference among the groups (relative to socioeconomic status). But the Harvard economist (forget his name) looked at long term outcomes, and found that those in classrooms that taught better "management" skills ended up having long term effects on the students. 20 to 30 years on, relative to their SES peers, the students who received better management skills training were doing better: high income, better jobs, ect., than their SES peers. With that in mind, I just listened to an episode of Hidden Brain featuring James Heckman: https://www.npr.org/2019/05/09/7217...the-overlooked-factors-that-determine-success What he did was take a study done in Detroit in the 1960s and look at the long term effects that pre-school education can have. What he found was that non-cognitive (non-academic) skills which were taught (sharing, critiquing of others work, etc), had long lasting effects. And these effects were not just on wages like in the Tennessee study, but on health, friendships, marriage, and also transferred to their kids. But he also found that to get this improvement, there needs to be significant investment as well. Apparently there was a different Tennessee study which tried to be cheap and was unsuccessful. But the long term benefits outweighed the initial investments. Lots to look at here: https://heckmanequation.org/
I guess this should be the appropriate thread. What an incredible gesture from Robert Smith. Some kids in this class had close to $ 200K of student debt and would take over 25 yrs to pay it off. What a relief and a way to start your life out of college. Billionaire investor Robert F. Smith told Morehouse College's graduating seniors he would pay off their student loans, about $40 million https://t.co/Kgt3GLYpzp pic.twitter.com/sCOBPnM2UP— CNN Breaking News (@cnnbrk) May 19, 2019
I heard that. My first thought was, did some small college somewhere consider inviting him, then decide, "nah, let's get somebody more famous"? If so, that committee better hope they remain anonymous. Then I read a bit more. He and Morehouse have developed a relationship. Good on him.
I am sure he will. This guy is the second largest donor to the African American Museum of History and Culture. He donated $ 20 M to the museum, right behind Oprah at $ 21M.
Jamie Dimon just ripped the student loan program. It should be curtailed, no forgiveness for existing loans, etc. So this is his -- and the GOP's -- solution for higher education. 1) Universities remain largely unsubsidized and therefore costly. 2) All qualified rich kids go. 3) Financing is available for only the elite among non rich kids. 4) The remaining non rich kids who are as qualified as the rich kids who go to college don't get to go to college, because their parents are not rich. That is the plan, which (as with so many GOP schemes) nobody will admit to. When the working class chants MAGA, that is one of the schemes that it is applauding. Go figure.
States could pay for it with higher sales taxes or property taxes. Make it an extension of High school, maybe split it into 2. 1. All kids that want to go to "free" college, can do 2-3 years of community college, this will be mostly general education classes with a optional 3rd year to try out majors. 2. Then 2 "free" years of University in your specific program. The federal government does not have to do any of this, maybe bribe states with their own money to get them to raise taxes.
If we can get get white kids to lower their occupational expectations,the immigration issue solves itself. 3D chess,boys!
The white working class is anti intellectual. Instead of getting commie social science degrees,kids should be learning welding. Do you believe the situation is otherwise?
Are you saying Damin's comments were directed at the wwc? That doesn't make sense to me. To me, he is directing his comments at anybody who wants to forgive student loans and anybody who has high student loans but is not in a job which pays well enough to pay them off. edit: wwc = White working class WWC = Women's World Cup. Just so y'all are clear.
That's a universal belief of Republicans, from the moneyed class on downwards. But for different reasons. Dimon doesn't want to pay for somebody else's kid to go college, that's why he wants the wwc to become welders. Whereas the wwc doesn't mind getting government help, but has been led by the moneyed class to believe that those programs would help somebody else, not them.[/QUOTE]
Low and working class whites largely look down on educated people particularly people who get degrees in fields where there isn't much work. They don't need a banker to think that an education that doesn't lead to a road out of Bumfcvkville is a waste.
My college drop-out brother told me back in the day that I would never make as much money as he did. He liked sticking it to the brother who got praised for getting his college degree. He was dead wrong, but to this day does not understand why. Which is a big reason, besides disadvantageous government policies, that the kids of wwc parents become wwc themselves. They don't understand how the job marketplace works. They are on the outside, looking in, and they don't ever get to the inside not only because they don't have the college degree, which is a form of union card, but also because they don't know people who do understand the system.
So very telling that he used future income as a reason to validate/invalidate a postsecondary degree. It's not just about the money. That's one of the worst assumptions someone can make about education. Colleges and universities would have had to fold by now if they didn't offer some BiG MonEy ZOMG majors, yes, but the idea that it's the only reason to attend is naive. He's your brother- I assume you both grew up in the same household. I'd get it if you'd said he didn't believe/didn't want to accept what YOU obviously took to heart, but it's not like he wouldn't have been exposed to the same ideas.
As I read it, Dimon didn't exactly say what you're claiming he said: “I think they should look at all parts of student lending, fix the broken parts, and then forgive those people need forgiveness, and then help people get into school, and then make sure the schools are responsible in getting the kids out,” Dimon said. “And what we've done is a disgrace, and it's hurting America..." https://finance.yahoo.com/news/jpmo...calls-student-loans-a-disgrace-171749043.html