[HN Gopher] The case for mutual educational disarmament
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The case for mutual educational disarmament
        
       Author : jkuria
       Score  : 42 points
       Date   : 2021-08-21 19:33 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.economist.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.economist.com)
        
       | ilammy wrote:
       | I wonder if the same logic could be transferred to other parts of
       | the economy. Mutual disarmament for the amount of "growth", for
       | the amount of consumption, for the working hours, etc. I feel
       | that people would be much more eager to cut back on some things
       | if they knew that they would not be outcompeted into dirt if they
       | did so.
        
         | sokoloff wrote:
         | It's a society-wide prisoners' dilemma, but I think most of the
         | proposed cures are worse than the disease.
         | 
         | I don't want to rule out the possibility for someone to decide
         | to work harder/achieve more if they want or to try to compress
         | their working life into 10 instead of 40 years.
        
       | tibbetts wrote:
       | It bothers me that this article from the economist fails to
       | recognize the deleterious impact that lack of antitrust
       | enforcement has had on life outcomes and thus on the educational
       | arms race. The article mentions that competitive goods like
       | housing and social status drive the push for education. Before
       | the last 50 years of industrial consolidation there were more
       | opportunities to succeed in more cities, creating a greater range
       | of available competitor goods in those places. Now everyone has
       | to be competing globally for status and to a great extent for
       | housing (as people consolidate into a few cities) and career
       | opportunities (as fewer companies mean fewer paths to high
       | achievement). It's a nice idea to discourage unpleasant
       | competition among Hugh school students. But fixing other parts of
       | the economy could help address demand for this activity, and
       | improve aggregate outcomes in many other ways.
        
       | baybal2 wrote:
       | One big problem across the developed world, which was later
       | replicated in Asia is that high school exams morphed into
       | university entry exams.
       | 
       | A person can have god knows how much more educational, and work
       | experience in between high school+few years in instutute, and a
       | proper graduate education.
        
       | xondono wrote:
       | For anyone interested in following some of the themes of this
       | article, I always recommend Bryan Caplan's The Case Against
       | Education.
        
       | lordnacho wrote:
       | This is basically right. Quite a lot of education is a waste,
       | it's window-dressing actual learning.
       | 
       | For instance, you might have spent some time getting exam prep
       | advice: read the instructions, skip questions that are hard and
       | come back later, try to memorize this or that formula / molecule
       | / map / argument, if it's multiple choice strike out obviously
       | wrong answers, look for hints to part 2 in part 1, if you can't
       | figure out the integral guess that it's 0 or 1 (LOL a lot of high
       | school integrals are elegant).
       | 
       | You have to spend real time learning this kind of sharpening
       | exercise in order to do exams, or you will get less than what you
       | should get, given what you actually understand about a subject.
       | 
       | There's no value to this time. You'll never need to remember how
       | to reverse a linked list, because in real life when it comes up,
       | you will just find it in a browser. Similarly with most things
       | that require a precise answer, the effort in sharpening the
       | answer is way more than what might reasonably be worthwhile in a
       | real-life setting. Eg. I needed a Bessel function at one point in
       | my career. Could I write down its form from having seen it at
       | uni? No, of course not. Did I spend time doing just that at uni?
       | Yes.
       | 
       | The real damage is we end up not educating people. We give them a
       | bunch of answers to memorize and never test them on how the
       | question is important. Did anyone ever examine you on why complex
       | numbers are a big deal? Or what the big gap between classical and
       | quantum physics was? I bet you only had exam questions about how
       | to do the calculations and derivations. Get a number or a
       | formula, that's easy to test. Whether this formula makes sense to
       | use, that's hard.
       | 
       | The part about education being positional is also important.
       | There's quite a lot of jobs that could be done by someone with no
       | degree at all, including mine. My first boss in the City still
       | has no degree, and didn't need it despite options trading having
       | a reputation for being mathematical. All that's happened is
       | nobody wants to not go to uni, and nobody wants to hire a non-
       | degree holder to trade options anymore, because both groups think
       | that going to uni signals that you're smart. Neither group
       | actually thinks you need any of the actual skills you learn in
       | uni, though.
        
         | totetsu wrote:
         | never had to do any of that stuff to get my arts degree. never
         | found writing essays a waste of time. Just saying..
        
           | lordnacho wrote:
           | For essay subjects as well, there's a way about writing the
           | exam essay that isn't what you'd do if you wrote an essay for
           | a magazine or a book.
           | 
           | I wrote quite a few economics essays according to a bland
           | template: introduce the question, arguments for with authors,
           | arguments against with authors, conclusion.
        
             | nerdponx wrote:
             | > I wrote quite a few economics essays according to a bland
             | template: introduce the question, arguments for with
             | authors, arguments against with authors, conclusion.
             | 
             | Doing this over and over is a learning exercise in and of
             | itself.
        
         | trabant00 wrote:
         | > needed a Bessel function at one point in my career. Could I
         | write down its form from having seen it at uni? No, of course
         | not. Did I spend time doing just that at uni? Yes.
         | 
         | From someone without formal education: you knew about the
         | concept and what to search for. I have to waste a lot of time
         | every time digging for this.
        
         | dougmwne wrote:
         | Basically what I came here to say. "Education" gets far too
         | much benefit of the doubt. Most of it is worthless, or even
         | harmful, teaching unhelpful and dependant patterns. Very little
         | of the content aside from the basics is validated to be worth
         | its ROI.
        
           | kook_throwaway wrote:
           | The schools I went to were more propaganda than education, I
           | don't regret dropping out to learn on the job one bit.
        
       | mmarq wrote:
       | It seems as if the author is convinced that in the German system
       | children are assigned to different high schools based on their
       | skills/intelligence/talent/whatever. But the fact is that you
       | will hardly find an upper class kid in a hauptschule and
       | similarly poor immigrant kids are underrepresented in gymnasiums
       | (and even middle class kids with foreign parents have been
       | historically underrepresented).
       | 
       | Maybe the point should be guaranteeing that all jobs pay enough
       | to live a decent life. Germany is much better than the UK on
       | this, which is probably the reason why the education rat race is
       | less of a problem there.
        
         | tsss wrote:
         | Foreigners always think the German school system (Hauptschule,
         | Realschule, Gymnasium) is 30/30/30 but in reality it's more
         | like 5/15/80. Almost every student is going to the gymnasium by
         | default nowadays. If you are not a total dimwit then you can
         | get in and as a result, the standard of education is not great.
         | I remember I had a student in my senior year English class who
         | couldn't even deal with the simple present and still got a B.
         | The discrepancies in performance between students on a
         | Gymnasium is probably greater than between Gymnasium and
         | Hauptschule. While the average education on a Gymnasium may be
         | better than on a US high school, the US high schools are
         | actually much better for capable students because the AP system
         | allows them to get away from the window lickers like the
         | Gymnasium was initially intended to do. The Realschule then is
         | for all the people who _could_ go to a Gymnasium but their
         | parents didn't let them. Finally, you have the lowest 5% in the
         | Hauptschule who are practically outside of society. They are
         | functionally illiterate or have such grave behavioural problems
         | that many of them are unsuitable for even the most simple
         | menial labor jobs (think stealing, regularly skipping school,
         | arriving hours late for a job interview, assaulting classmates
         | and coworkers, etc).
         | 
         | Since Gymnasium is already so easy that almost everyone can get
         | in, the only people who end up at a Hauptschule are those who
         | grew up "outside the system" in an environment that practically
         | prevents any kind of education. They live in a ghetto where
         | everyone receives social security, are often immigrants with
         | parents and friends who don't speak the language, have to deal
         | with domestic abuse and bullying everywhere... you get the
         | gist. Even the bright students among them who initially do well
         | are continuously put down by their parents and peers while the
         | teachers are hopelessly overwhelmed just trying to keep the
         | worst of them from literally killing another.
        
           | mmarq wrote:
           | Wikipedia says ~28% attended a gymnasium in 2010:
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gymnasium_(Germany)
        
         | choeger wrote:
         | The thing is that upper/middle class parents value education
         | more than lower class parents (on average). Unless you take the
         | kids completely away from their parents (horrible thought, was
         | somewhat tried in the GDR), the former kind of parents will
         | find a way to give their kids valuable lessons, even if it is
         | just sitting on the sofa and reading a book.
         | 
         | I recently met a woman that brought her son to the first day of
         | school. Not only did all her manners signal "lower class" when
         | she talked to the teachers, but also she explicitly mentioned
         | that she thought the kid would not fare well in math. I also
         | saw the boy and he did indeed not behave like the brightest,
         | but who knows what lies under the surface? That mother
         | basically made it very hard, if not impossible, for her kid to
         | ever reach higher education. She won't search for tutors, even
         | if she would not need to pay it. She will be content with bad
         | results. It's really sad to see, but I think there really is no
         | way to fix this inside the school system.
        
           | jkhdigital wrote:
           | > The thing is that upper/middle class parents value
           | education more than lower class parents (on average).
           | 
           | I don't know if I'd agree with this. It might be true in some
           | contemporary societies but I don't think it is universal. But
           | I do agree with your other point, which is that culture will
           | always dominate other factors in determining how much
           | education parents seek for their children.
        
             | nerdponx wrote:
             | The specifics aren't as relevant as the acknowledgment that
             | there are cultural factors and feedback loops that are
             | generally not part of the discussion (and might be omitted
             | specifically due to concerns about stereotyping and bias).
             | 
             | How involved in your kid's education can you be if you work
             | 60+ hours a week with a 90 minute commute each way? How do
             | you expect kids to focus or even care about school if they
             | come from a violent neighborhood or a broken home?
        
       | v_london wrote:
       | Holding university entrance exams earlier seems like a recipe for
       | disaster that would hurt disadvantaged students the most. This
       | may be just my experience, but the older you get, the more time
       | you get to catch up with students from better families. Coming
       | from a working class background, I only started to study actively
       | in high school (the culture I grew up in discouraged and actively
       | mocked boys who read books or liked maths) which means that had
       | the entrance exam be held at the beginning of high school, I
       | would not have done as well as I did at the ned of high school.
       | 
       | The problem with building a meritocratic system is that everyone
       | wants capable kids from poor backgrounds to raise to the top, but
       | the elite doesn't want their average kids to fall down in society
       | to their expected rank. One of the jobs of the elite schools is
       | to prop us these average kids and to make them seem smart to
       | outsiders: anyone who has studied in an "elite" university has a
       | story about the rich kids who spend their days partying,
       | intending to only pass the easiest classes in the school because
       | that's all they need - their parents have already arranged an
       | entry-level job for them.
        
         | parineum wrote:
         | >The problem with building a meritocratic system is that
         | everyone wants capable kids from poor backgrounds to raise to
         | the top, but the elite doesn't want their average kids to fall
         | down in society to their expected rank.
         | 
         | I disagree with the second half of this. I think it simply
         | creates an arm race that the wealthy win. A rich family looks
         | at what it takes to get their kid into Harvard and they do what
         | they can, no matter the cost. A poor family simply can't
         | compete on an otherwise equal footing. Even if we socialize all
         | the advantages that the rich currently have, they simply do
         | even more in response.
         | 
         | The real problem with a meritocratic system is that rich people
         | from good schools with private tutors actually get a better
         | education, that's what all the hubub is about. Poverty leads to
         | worse education and worse educated people are less prepared for
         | the more difficult course load of college. Through no fault of
         | their own, they are less ideal candidates. That's the
         | injustice.
         | 
         | It's cognitive dissonance to simultaneously recognize that
         | injustice but not recognize that poor students are actually
         | substantially less prepared for college at 18.
        
           | Spooky23 wrote:
           | Poverty leads to fewer social connections and that follows
           | the rest of the outcome.
           | 
           | People in a cohort fall into a bell curve. "Social lubricant"
           | is why the dumb or less capable kid in a rich suburb ends up
           | being some sort of professional in a nebulous job where the
           | smart kid from a poor neighborhood feels like Starbucks or an
           | LPN is a life changing job.
        
           | crusty wrote:
           | This just doesn't fit the evidence. I've wanted Freakonomics
           | or similar to cover this for a decade but haven't really
           | seen/heard seen anything...
           | 
           | If getting into top (TOP!) universities correlated with
           | education/aptitude alone, the wealthy would pay more to get
           | thier kids educated but the best teachers. But they don't do
           | this, they pay to dollar for their children to get educated
           | by the "best" schools. But what makes them the best schools
           | is their ability to get more kids into better universities.
           | If education were the critical component of these schools,
           | they'd pay premium rates for the best teachers, but often the
           | teacher salaries at these private schools are lower than
           | those at the public schools they compete with in the area.
           | That suggests that it isn't the education provided by the
           | teachers that's the most important component of these
           | schools. There's a whole stew of other factors that these
           | schools rely on to get kids into top placements that had
           | nothing to do with actual education.
        
             | zhdc1 wrote:
             | > If getting into top (TOP!) universities correlated with
             | education/aptitude alone, the wealthy would pay more to get
             | thier kids educated but the best teachers. But they don't
             | do this, they pay to dollar for their children to get
             | educated by the "best" schools.
             | 
             | Simple! People receive a benefit from peer group
             | connections (status) and quality-based assessments (in
             | economic terms, reputation). If you are well educated and
             | intelligent, on average, you will have access to more
             | resources if you are also associated with high-status
             | institutions, such as prestigious schools and high ranked
             | universities.
             | 
             | The good news is that, under competitive conditions and
             | provided that everything else is equal, being "good at
             | something" (reputation) eventually leads to high-status
             | attainment. So, if you happen to receive a good education
             | but graduate from a less prestigious university, you have
             | an opportunity to eventually recoup the difference in
             | resource availability (on average & assuming that your
             | production translates to the market).
             | 
             | Likewise, if you're a less prestigious institution,
             | providing a superior education and employing people who do
             | "good research" will eventually increase your prestige.
        
               | tibbetts wrote:
               | It can be difficult to overcome initial conditions and
               | shine if you are locked out of the best opportunities.
               | The bimodal outcomes for law school graduates are a good
               | example. That's not how the whole economy works, but it
               | is a potential failure mode.
               | 
               | https://www.biglawinvestor.com/bimodal-salary-
               | distribution-c...
        
               | zhdc1 wrote:
               | > That's not how the whole economy works, but it is a
               | potential failure mode
               | 
               | There are others. E.g., if you're line of work doesn't
               | allow for high-status recognition (e.g., a blue collar
               | job), being good at what you do will likely not allow you
               | to benefit from reputation -> status transfer.
        
             | tibbetts wrote:
             | Friends of mine work at these private schools for lower
             | salaries than public schools. The reality is the job sucks
             | a lot less. You get ~100% engaged students, supportive
             | parents, and a school administration with minimal perverse
             | incentives. Struggling students and discipline problems get
             | filtered out and sent somewhere else. There a loads of
             | qualified teachers, and really plenty of very capable
             | teachers. There is no need for the schools to pay a premium
             | to get the best teachers.
             | 
             | Imagine if 99% of programming jobs were on Win32 native
             | apps using tools from 1998, and 1% of them were using
             | modern tools on a modern Unix-derived stack? Would the 1%
             | really have to pay a premium to get top 10% developers?
        
               | jkhdigital wrote:
               | I was about to compose this exact comment... thanks for
               | saving me the trouble. In K-12 education, and especially
               | elementary level, the job is _at least_ as much about
               | daycare as it is education. And well-socialized children
               | makes the daycare part of the job a lot easier, so less
               | stress = less demand for financial inducements
               | (compensation).
        
               | throwaway316943 wrote:
               | Best answer and a good metaphor. Paying more only goes so
               | far in attracting talent. You need the job to be
               | manageable, the environment needs to be at the least not
               | actively hostile, and the system the job exists within to
               | not be completely broken.
        
               | jkhdigital wrote:
               | Incentive alignment would help too. If only there was a
               | socially and legally tractable way to pay teachers like
               | sales reps...
        
             | fallingknife wrote:
             | You are only considering salary and not overall quality of
             | life. As one of my teachers at private school said, "you
             | get paid a little less, but you don't have to worry about
             | being robbed by your students in the parking lot."
        
           | Retric wrote:
           | Innate intelligence is a huge factor in education. Rich
           | parents can prepare their children very well, but it's only
           | changing the minimums. This is why elite schools always have
           | an easy track to graduate they don't want to dispel the
           | illusion that their actually elite schools, but they also
           | don't want to turn away the children of billionaires etc.
        
             | RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote:
             | > Rich parents can prepare their children very well, but
             | it's only changing the minimums.
             | 
             | If you need an example of this, take a look at the
             | admissions scandal with Lori Laughlin, et al. No denying
             | they were rich, but despite how rich they were, they could
             | not tutor their kids way to a good SAT score and had to
             | resort to outright cheating that was so blatant that they
             | had to go to prison.
        
           | andi999 wrote:
           | Might be good for society as a whole if the elite has at
           | least to study hard. (not in terms of equality, but outcome
           | compared internationally). A failed state is where the kids
           | of rich ppl flunk school and still become leaders.
        
         | summm wrote:
         | That culture is everywhere in schools, not limited to poor
         | people, also in middle class. These kids are suffering, and
         | thus culture needs to be fought. Instead teachers and society
         | are lazy and say "lol whatever boys will be boys, let's just
         | let this kids suffer and waste more time until they are grown
         | ups and then maybe the bullies catch up academically" Is that
         | what you are proposing?
        
         | inglor_cz wrote:
         | There isn't much meritocracy in the system, at least as far as
         | I can see. In Czech we have a saying "the wolf has eaten, but
         | the goat remained whole" for situations like that.
         | 
         | The American elite wants to be seen as anti-racist, which means
         | elevating at least some kids from the ghettos to the Ivy
         | Leagues etc. At the same time, the American elite is still
         | mostly white and does not want to jeopardize future of their
         | own offspring, and many of those offspring are indeed average.
         | 
         | It seems to me that the current way to square those two
         | interests is to raise tuition really high, combine it with
         | legacy admissions (even an average kid of rich parents will be
         | able to thread the needle there) and raise higher admission
         | obstacles for Asians who would otherwise qualify in high
         | numbers on knowledge alone.
        
           | watwut wrote:
           | The from ghetto don't go to Ivy League. These are middle and
           | upper class blacks studying there.
           | 
           | Like really, not every educated black rose from ghetto.
        
           | tomp wrote:
           | A disproportionate percentage of the US elite is also Jewish.
           | Yet they, as a society, seem to have mostly overcome the
           | tensions that have plagued Jews and white non-Jews in Europe
           | for a very long time. What makes you think that the US
           | "melting pot" culture cannot overcome other obstacles
           | (currently IMO mostly exemplified with the rising Asian
           | "elite")
        
             | inglor_cz wrote:
             | Well, I think it definitely _can_ and probably will; for
             | example, given how hard the Asian children tend to be
             | driven by their parents, I expect them to occupy a
             | significant part of the elite in 2050, bringing with them
             | very different perspectives, too.
             | 
             | (The same process, albeit on a much smaller scale, is
             | taking place in the Czech Republic. We have a Vietnamese
             | minority that began as convenience store owners, but their
             | children are rising fast into the educated elite of the
             | country.)
             | 
             | But that process will be fraught with a lot of conflict and
             | will likely require abandonment of any efforts to pre-
             | balance student bodies by ethnicity.
        
             | jkhdigital wrote:
             | The elephant in the room is culture, of course. The
             | relative freedom of the American economic system ensures
             | that any group with strong "meritocratic" cultural values
             | will eventually come to occupy a disproportionate share of
             | the economic elite.
             | 
             | The obvious advantage of Jewish culture is (in part) its
             | ancient tradition of demanding literacy from everyone. East
             | Asian cultures also place a high value on literacy, and the
             | Confucian emphasis on social harmony tends to promote an
             | ideal of "self-cultivation".
             | 
             | I think the real challenge here is that within the American
             | "melting pot," one particular group has a tragic history of
             | cultural devastation, and no amount of money or assistance
             | from outsiders can rebuild a strong culture--it can only
             | come from within. In fact, outside interference is likely
             | to obstruct this process.
        
               | inglor_cz wrote:
               | "Fresh" African immigrants are quite successful and I
               | believe that Nigerian Americans have the highest share of
               | PhDs of all groups. Selective immigration will do that.
               | 
               | But the fact that they share the same skin color with
               | African-Americans is unlikely to help the latter. Common
               | color does not mean common culture (as any white American
               | traveling around Ukraine or Caucasus Mountains can find
               | out quite easily) and rich and educated Nigerian-
               | Americans live in a different world than descendants of
               | slaves.
               | 
               | Paradoxically, a color-based affirmative action may help
               | the already advantaged fresh immigrants at the cost of
               | reducing the chances of one group it was supposed to
               | help.
        
           | fallingknife wrote:
           | Yes exactly. And also dumb down public schools by not
           | teaching advanced classes and getting rid of magnet schools
           | like the Democrats are doing in multiple states. While of
           | course still teaching those classes at the private schools
           | that upper middle class and above can afford. Gotta keep
           | those smart poor people in their place.
        
             | pclmulqdq wrote:
             | This is fairly new. Magnet schools and accelerated classes
             | for smart poor people used to be something that we
             | considered good, because we want at least a few smart
             | people getting educated. Now that "smart poor people"
             | generally means "people of asian descent," we're changing
             | course and getting rid of all of those programs.
        
             | okaram wrote:
             | Do you have a ref for any state that is eliminating
             | magnets? I hadn't heard ...
        
               | fallingknife wrote:
               | https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/18/nyregion/nyc-schools-
               | admi...
        
               | [deleted]
        
       | ZeroGravitas wrote:
       | I feel this is one of the obscure benefits of a universal income
       | and/or reducing wealth inequality.
       | 
       | Once you accept that every human deserves a basic level of
       | economic comfort, you need to structure society to actually
       | harness their talents.
       | 
       | If you can make your child's life easier by waving a wand and
       | making everyone in your society dumber and/or worse educated,
       | then that would be a terrible temptation, and that's basically
       | what we have now. Imagine a world where the simplest way to your
       | kids and grandkids being healthy and wealthy was to maximize the
       | human potential of the population.
       | 
       | This is the promise of meritocracy, but we seem to already have
       | hit the limits of that, with everyone jockeying to keep other
       | people's kids out of the good schools. Why don't we just build
       | another good school? Oh, because it's not about what they learn,
       | or how much they could learn, it's about dividing the population
       | into winners and losers.
        
       | twic wrote:
       | > Germany's custom of placing children on different tracks at age
       | ten or 11 also invites an interesting thought experiment. What if
       | the gaokao (and similar tests) were held earlier in a pupil's
       | career?
       | 
       | Shame this guy's never heard of the eleven plus:
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleven-plus
        
         | richardjdare wrote:
         | I failed my 11 plus and ended up at a high school where they
         | didn't even tell us about university. At school, I found
         | bullying and sadistic teachers completely overwhelmed the
         | educational aspects; my only goal was to get through each day
         | without being hassled.
         | 
         | The only circumstances where I would consider supporting
         | streaming would be if it was continuous, and people could move
         | between streams at any point in their education.
         | 
         | Putting all emphasis on a single test, taken on a single day at
         | age 11 is like something out of the hunger games. I still
         | recall breaking down in tears when my headmaster called out
         | "Time's up!" at the end of my 11 plus. I knew I hadn't done
         | very well.
         | 
         | Now I am a professional programmer (the only non-graduate in
         | the company), shipped video games on my own, and have had
         | writing published, so obviously the education system's estimate
         | of my abilities was far from accurate.
        
           | twic wrote:
           | There's a reason it has long been abandoned by all but the
           | most backwards counties!
        
           | yung_steezy wrote:
           | My partner is from Essex and I thought she was kidding when
           | she said she did the Eleven Plus. We learnt about it in high
           | school history class in Scotland! The module was on the
           | foundations of the British Welfare state and it was discussed
           | as a barbaric practice from the past.
        
       | neonate wrote:
       | https://archive.is/jQNxo
        
       | zozbot234 wrote:
       | The article misidentifies education as a zero-sum positional
       | good, whereas what's often zero sum is _credentialing_ , and
       | often a rather peculiar kind of credential that doesn't reflect
       | much real-world usefulness. Reduce the impact of these
       | credentials, and people will feel less of a need to wastefully
       | compete for them.
        
       | rewq4321 wrote:
       | Underwhelming conclusion to the article IMO:
       | 
       | > What if the gaokao (and similar tests) were held earlier in a
       | pupil's career? If these exams truly test the knowledge required
       | for university, they must be held just before university starts.
       | But if such tests mostly serve as filters, sifting better
       | students from worse, they need not be held so late. An aptitude
       | test at 16 years of age, say, will probably generate a similar
       | ranking as one held two years later. The tests would remain
       | stressful. But an earlier gaokao would save families a year or
       | two of costly cramming, shortening "the obstacle course", as
       | Hirsch put it, without much changing the results. Such tests will
       | always have high stakes. But they need not require such high
       | effort.
       | 
       | I was somewhat "late" in terms of some aspects of my development,
       | and so there's a chance I'd have been put on a particular track
       | simply because my peers were more biologically mature. I won't
       | pretend to know the solution here (though I'm interested in the
       | research around "mastery-based" learning), but I do know that
       | sometimes a system is in a deeper local optima than you expect,
       | and making small changes like the one suggested here isn't enough
       | to get it out.
       | 
       | [0]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastery_learning#:~:text=Maste....
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-08-22 23:02 UTC)