US High school students' scores fall in reading and math

I'm much younger than you, but I had the experience of having a difficult-to-find-info-on-the-internet subject for a high school paper, and the opporunity to researching the subject at a well stocked library. There was a lot of friction to the process that I wasn't used to, but the serendipity aspect was absolutely revelatory. There is something fundamentally unfiltered about walking past shelves of books with titles on subjects you never even knew existed.

I got shunted into remedial reading in the 1st grade because I had a visible disability. I was there for about a week before the teacher noticed I was bored to tears. Bless her, she had me tested. Turns out I was reading at a 4th grade level, so I immediately got taken out of that class and put into the 'gifted' class.

That class was the best kind of unstructured. We had a new teacher with little experience, but she just turned us lose on the school library and let us read whatever and then talk about it in class. I *ADORED* that class. It was getting an hour a day to basically do what I wanted to be doing anyway.

+1. Libraries are about more than just lending out books.

It's very sad... I went to schools in Arlington that were quite good when I attended in the 70s and 80s. Our high school routinely ranked high on the academic achievement ratings (% of students going to college, average SAT score, etc.) _AND_ we routinely sent our high school football team to district and state competitions. Our soccer team was undefeated for years.

I've often thought it would be a good idea to separate academics from athletics. Have a "school district" that runs the schools in a building next to the football field run by the "athletic district." I think both are important, but you're right, North Texas public schools have fallen quite far from the academic standards they used to hold.

I presume if AI does come in, it won't be replacing those "geniuses running things now". They'll be fine; it's all the teachers who will be replaced. They're expensive, and all that money can go towards more sports!

Bread and circuses seem to be the most important things.

I taught in the Japanese school system for 2 years. Very low funding, but actually the opposite of your example. Teachers had a high level of respect and ability to act in the child's life.

Also almost every kid had club activities in and in class all day long. Primary goal is to drill in discipline and conformity over education to be honest.

I think it's mostly that too much is spent on administration and middle-management type roles both in public schools and higher education. They're IMO largely a less than useful drain on funding that could be better spent elsewhere. At least as far as budgeting is concerned.

I have completely separate views on how kids are being raised and educated and how things have changed just in my half century on this planet.

I tend to think sports is good for kids. Not football though. My kids in high school marching band so I'm at the games. It's stupid how many kids get hurt on any given Saturday and some will go on to have CTE

Not to me! But then I think we should stop trying to think of K-12 education as a national issue because clearly there are regional differences and regional preferences. And I don't mean this as a red / blue thing-- there are places where the challenge is bilingual education and their are places where parents are uncomfortable with a non-christian education.

These challenges are more than a hundred years old! We have turned this into a national issue, made national standards and its not clear we are making that much progress. Many US states are effectively large countries. Why don't we let them decide what they want to do democratically. Whether you agree with it or not, it is what happens effectively. In the US you can move if you don't like where you live.

Having a library on location at a school is valuable. You can do research, you can discover new books, you can have a quiet place to study... I have loved every school library I've ever been in.

Any library is a nexus of knowledge and learning. They should be in schools.

The woodworking teacher also doesn’t have much funding, and free furniture grade lumber is attractive. I completely understand why the woodworking teacher is doing it, and I have no problems with my son helping in that endeavor… besides the… getting rid of the library thing

I consider the 'freedom' felt in the library as a successful part of my growth in elementary and beyond, and I don't like moving that further away from the education environment--even though city/county libraries in my experience have been fantastic.

Perhaps, but the past also needed more serfs than readers. I don't think that is good, but maybe it is too idealistic to think you can create a nation of 330m critical thinkers. Not because it isn't possible, but because not everyone wants to approach life that way.

When you preface your comment with "Unpopular Opinion", then proceed to make a sweeping assertion like "The purpose of education past 8th grade is to keep young people out of the job market", without any supporting evidence, that's what we call "inflammatory rhetoric". This kind of comment will always attract downvotes and flags. This style of commenting is against the HN guidelines, as is complaining about downvotes.

The correct response to downvotes is to think about how you could express your point in a way that people can connect with. That's the art of a good comment. The best comments on HN are ones that make a point that many in the community may have disagreed with, but it is expressed in a way that creates a pathway for people to see things in a new way, and persuades them to see the issue from the new perspective you're illustrating.

> Looking forward to your down-votes. Instead of arguing, it's much easier to shout and jeer and press the downward facing arrow. I expect nothing less since we haven't taught critical thinking in most public schools for quite some time.

I believe that's uncalled for. If you're looking for a discussion, that's not the way to go about starting it. You're just turning it hostile before it can even begin; what sort of response do you expect from such hostility?

> The purpose of education past 8th grade is to keep young people out of the job market.

If not for that pesky education system we could all be hiring fully capable 14 year olds into our empty job postings!

Of course, they might have trouble getting to the workplace. Or doing anything that benefits from a high school education. Maybe shuttle them to the mines?

> Every now and again there is an aberration where teachers actually teach something in a public school, but in the US, why take the chance? If you can afford it, send your kids to a private school.

Ignoring the existence of well-off suburban public schools.

Sometimes, you see a take that's so far-removed from any take you've ever heard someone speak that you're not even sure how to interact with the one stating it. This is one of those cases; it sounds like an argument made by a Victorian factory owner in London, angered that children aren't being allowed to work because too many lost an arm last month reaching into the grain mills.

However, trying my best to answer sensibly:

> Every now and again there is an aberration where teachers actually teach something in a public school, but in the US, why take the chance?

You seem to be backing up your argument that a high school education doesn't have value (and shouldn't be funded) by stating that the US has an overall-poor standard of public education. That's a circular argument which doesn't even try to address the reasons that the quality of education is lacking or comment on whether a higher-quality education would have general value. I can't understand your viewpoint that the actual education of students shouldn't be funded, because the quality is already poor. You seem to be ignoring the fact that a well-funded and correctly-motivated (in terms of education, not just which high school can build the most football fields) education system can produce graduates who go on to add extra value to society.

Why should a decent high school education be reserved for the wealthy who can send their kids to private schools?

Also, I'd recommend against including statements like the one that you make in your last paragraph. Saying (paraphrasing) "I'm right, everyone who downvotes my high controversial and unpopular opinion without spending time to reply is an uneducated idiot" is starting from an unconstructive place.

> [Edit: Hunh. Imagine that. I ask people to demonstrate their unwillingness to participate in meaningful dialog by down-voting this post and they do exactly that. Si Tacuisses, Philosophus Mansisses.]

I was considering commenting when I originally downvoted but thought it would detract from the core conversation.

But now that you’ve added this bit I’ll just say: a number of people (including myself) will auto-downvote any comment that complains about impending downvotes regardless of other content.

I challenge you to take a batch of any random 10 8th grade students and have them do any serious work. Would love to see how suitable for work and job markets they are.

I'm not sure this is all that unpopular of an opinion anymore. Government schools have been in decline for decades, and a lot of people were exposed to the truth of just how dysfunctional they had become during covid lock downs. Perhaps before that more people still believed in the noble myth of public education, but I, at least, have seen more and more people agreeing with the sentiment you put forward, minus the statement about keeping teens out of the job market.

Sounds very Florida public schooling. Just not the case in states like MA (re: quality and efficacy of education).

Texas is in the lowest decile in terms of high school graduation rates and the lower half of post-secondary educational attainment. It is not a paragon of educational achievement. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/educational...