Originally posted by finneganFinnegan: This would clarify why Normbenign is so obsessed with popular level economics. He thinks a system of tautologies based on "common sense" type observations can survive without being tested, supported or otherwise justified by empirical evidence.
What a hilarious display of breathtaking stupidity.
If it is intrinsically left wing to undertake properly conducted and accountable social research in order to inform policy debate with well grounded evidence, then I would imagine that more people would rush to be considered left wing in these terms.
Instead we are to consider the argument that an ...[text shortened]... s almost disturbing. It suggests a fearful level of paranoia and a weak grip on social reality.
This is a good description of Von Mises' "praxeology". Norm is a big Von Mises fan though "praxeology" is generally considered crank "science".
Originally posted by wittywonkaI taught high school math for seven years ans I still do lots of tutoring. I believe that homework allows anyone who is interested in helping a child (parents/ tutor) the opportunity to see what the teacher expects the child to be able to do. It gives the adult an opportunity one on one to help the child and to independently evaluate their child's progress. I don't think it helps for adults to micro-manage or do the homework for a child but it seems highly unlikely that the average adult would teach things wrong or decrease a students learning. Furthermore, parental involvement reinforces the idea that homework and school is important.
A recent article in The Atlantic reports a study that concludes that parents' involvement in their kids' education doesn't appear to have a demonstrable, immediate effect on their kids' success in school, in terms of test scores, even when measured across a wide range of variables.
http://m.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/04/and-dont-help- ...[text shortened]... tial to reframe the discussion as to how decentralized the overall education system ought to be.
This sort of involvement seems far more valuable then bake sales (no educational value) or parental input in curriculum (not experts, should not dictate policy.)
Originally posted by quackquackShould any social science research be conducted or should we just rely on anecdotal comments for our knowledge in such areas?
I taught high school math for seven years ans I still do lots of tutoring. I believe that homework allows anyone who is interested in helping a child (parents/ tutor) the opportunity to see what the teacher expects the child to be able to do. It gives the adult an opportunity one on one to help the child and to independently evaluate their child's progr ...[text shortened]... (no educational value) or parental input in curriculum (not experts, should not dictate policy.)
Originally posted by no1marauderAnyone who abdicates their parental responsibility based on a very questionable social science research project is a fool. I'll check on my kids homework and stay involved in the day-to-day on goings of my children's in school life. I'll recommend that others do the same. You can do whatever you want.
Should any social science research be conducted or should we just rely on anecdotal comments for our knowledge in such areas?
Originally posted by quackquackHey now, the study said that parents told their kids that school is important. I guess that means it doesn't matter what parents say. We all know that parenting is nothing beyond telling your kids things.
Anyone who abdicates their parental responsibility based on a very questionable social science research project is a fool. I'll check on my kids homework and stay involved in the day-to-day on goings of my children's in school life. I'll recommend that others do the same. You can do whatever you want.
Originally posted by EladarI think we agree. Kids learn from their parent actions a lot more than what their parent say. Parental involvement is an excellent way to show kids that school work is important.
Hey now, the study said that parents told their kids that school is important. I guess that means it doesn't matter what parents say. We all know that parenting is nothing beyond telling your kids things.
Originally posted by quackquackGee it sure looks like the Sun revolves around the Earth; what the heck do those wacky scientists know?
I think we agree. Kids learn from their parent actions a lot more than what their parent say. Parental involvement is an excellent way to show kids that school work is important.
Originally posted by quackquackThis is more of QQ's "I was a crappy teacher but it was the kid's and their parent's fault not mine".
Anyone who abdicates their parental responsibility based on a very questionable social science research project is a fool. I'll check on my kids homework and stay involved in the day-to-day on goings of my children's in school life. I'll recommend that others do the same. You can do whatever you want.
Originally posted by no1marauderI certainly wasn't a crappy teacher so you definitely misquoted me.
This is more of QQ's "I was a crappy teacher but it was the kid's and their parent's fault not mine".
More importantly I don't share your idiotic belief that parents should not play in active role in helping their kids succeed.
But I can see where selfish people (like yourself) rather do nothing to help their kids and then blame others (here the teachers) when their kids inevitably fail.
Originally posted by no1marauderScientists have shown that people remember more when they discuss then when they read. Parents can discuss school topics with their kids. To think that this is only relevant scientific study is just stupid.
Gee it sure looks like the Sun revolves around the Earth; what the heck do those wacky scientists know?
My response after checking that original post again is that this research is not particularly interested in giving parents advice about how to support their children through education. What it seems to me to do is call into question government led programmes that oblige schools to invest increasing resources into securing active participation by the parents of their pupils in all aspects of school life. Government cannot function rationally without adopting some form of objective measure for effectiveness and performance in its programmes. We may argue another time about the measures chosen. But on those measures, designed by government to measure the effectiveness of government action, this research says they are wasting everybody's time and money and need to think again.
I have trouble seeing this attack on a government programme as a left wing conspiracy to take children away from their parents at birth and expose them naked on a hill top to weather and wolves, but I am not perhaps well enough tuned in yet to the American educational debate.
What I can say is that the same debates and issues are taking place in the UK for the perfectly simple reason that our idiot politicians keep trying to take ideas from the US and apply them over here. They never learn. The idea is to insist that teachers and the universities leading educational research are (you guessed it) a left wing conspiracy and we need to introduce modern management methods in order to drive up standards and establish a knowledge economy in which the least urchins of our least advantaged back streets will become knowledge entrepreneurs and leading edge scientists or engineers.
As they introduce one innovation after another, driven by some fad or some chancer posing as a guru, teachers look wearily and ask the same question over and over - what evidence do you have that your stupid political ideas actually work? And of course, politicians never seek or require such evidence because they KNOW. As Normbenign might say, it is common sense.
And the knowledge economy? Graduates stocking the shelves for a supermarket of course, stupid. What did anyone really expect?
Originally posted by finneganSuch distinctions are impossible to get through the thick head of a QQ. If a scientific study says that parental participation doesn't raise test scores, his nitwitted response is to shout that anybody who accepts this reality is supporting parents taking no interest at all in their children's schoolwork. Such non sequiturs are his standard MO on this forum.
My response after checking that original post again is that this research is not particularly interested in giving parents advice about how to support their children through education. What it seems to me to do is call into question government led programmes that oblige schools to invest increasing resources into securing active participation by the parent ...[text shortened]... aduates stocking the shelves for a supermarket of course, stupid. What did anyone really expect?
Originally posted by EladarYes, I read the part of your post where you agreed with the authors, insofar as they concluded that parents' talking with their children about the importance of college did not influence their children's performance in school, as opposed (speculatively) to the influence of surrounding their children with successful adults who embody the importance of academic success. But that's not the part of your post I was addressing. Rather, I was addressing your statement, "From what I've read of the article, it as [sic] made by fools." Why do you draw this conclusion? Do you have a methodological grievance with the study?
You are really that stupid you can't see it for yourself? Wow!
Originally posted by quackquackThe study didn't conclude that parents don't have the capacity to be supportive in a way that actually leads to meaningful improvements in their children's education. Rather, it supported the claim that parents on the whole just aren't doing that great of a job at it.
Scientists have shown that people remember more when they discuss then when they read. Parents can discuss school topics with their kids. To think that this is only relevant scientific study is just stupid.