Academics is as much about studying as it is about resources

[Basman]

Had this epiphany about education while contemplating why it is the way it is. It dawned on me that the core issue of when it comes to the quality of public education boils down to resources. Society has to educate millions of people, but it simply doesn't have the resources to give every single person an education that is of high quality on an individual level. Hence bureaucratic tools like exams and ritualistic/symbolic educational requirements to get into higher education/get a job (degrees, diplomas, etc.).

educational attainment is contingent on resources and opportunities available. Genetics, interests and hard work can carry you to a certain extent but for most people getting higher grades requires simply more resources. A genetically gifted child can only get so far if he's born in Africa. Africa lacks the resources to give him a high quality education compared to a European country.

The education system is largely systemic in my opinion and only meritocratic to a certain degree. Which is why strict requirements for higher-education opportunities tend to filter out lower-class people. They don't have the resources to truly shine. 

So if you are struggling academically, consider that you just need to invest more money into it. 

[Leo Gura]

That's not quite correct.

The Soviet Union had low resources but very good education. The culture took education seriously. My father grew up in a small village in Ukraine and got a first class education.

It's not about crazy resources, it's about small classes, great teachers, and serious attitude. 

American children are so spoiled they cannot study.

American culture of spoilage and anti-intellectualism is more of a problem than resources. Kids are too lazy, too social, too entertained, and parents let them get away with it.

It is 1st world decadence. No work ethic.

Edited Saturday at 08:29 AM by Leo Gura

[Xonas Pitfall]

I think it's also about how relevant and helpful education is perceived to be. With the internet, kids are more likely to stumble upon "anti-schooling" content and realize how irrelevant many of the things taught are, so it’s even less motivating when online learning feels like a better alternative to traditional education. Personally, and for many of my friends, this has been a significant issue. When you compare traditional education to online resources, and also become aware of how little school guarantees a job (if anything, it might just get you into more student debt), it makes school even less appealing. I guess in the past, there was a sense of security that if you got a degree, you could get a stable job and stay with a company long-term with little fear of sudden laid-offs (though maybe that’s just a myth, I am not well-versed here).

Education fundamentally has to feel like a worthwhile investment compared to other alternatives, which is why people are pushing for school reform. There are (for example) plenty of AI tools that can potentially be implemented to personalize teaching for children, and that’s just one of the ways the system could potentially improve.

Before, students didn’t have as many distractions, so even if the teachers weren’t great, they could still get by. But that’s not a good situation, and it shows how many flaws have been overlooked in the system. Not saying teachers should be disrespected at all, but it’s clear that the education system has long been ignoring some key issues. It could push us to rethink how we engage students, allowing them to explore subjects they’re truly passionate about and helping them discover what interests them. This, to me, is what real education should look like. Obviously, it sounds somewhat utopian for now, but I do think many of the flaws in old-school approaches are slowly being more and more exposed. Which is good!  

Edited Saturday at 08:56 AM by Xonas Pitfall

[Daniel Balan]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

That's not quite correct.

The Soviet Union had low resources but very good education. The culture took education seriously. My father grew up in a small village in Ukraine and got a first class education.

It's not about crazy resources, it's about small classes, great teachers, and serious attitude. 

American children are so spoiled they cannot study.

American culture of spoilage and anti-intellectualism is more of a problem than resources. Kids are too lazy, too social, too entertained, and parents let them get away with it.

It is 1st world decadence. No work ethic.

The communist regime was, by almost all metrics inferior in comparison with the west. But it had some good characteristics. Education was one of the great things the communists did great.

During the 45 years Romania was communist, it produced the best engineers, mathematicians and physicians.

But the soviet style education system was also bad in many regards. Students were beaten with the ruller and put to kneel on corn beans for not doing their homework. The teachers always were very authoritarian.

When I was in school, the techers were nice and more liberal, overall my school years experience was very beautiful. But for my parents and grandparents, it was very strict and authoritarian.

But the soviet style education system was right. In order to produce amazing generations of people, the education system must be public, with no private schools allowed. Everybody must go to state funded schools. Public education across the whole country, a culture that values education, plus healthy stage blue aspects will generate the best outcomes when it comes to education. 

The soviet style education approach would be the best if it is also more liberal and a bit more soft and easygoing.

Edited Saturday at 10:36 AM by Daniel Balan