This is a terrible idea. The reason it’s a terrible idea is that it’s virtually impossible. People who have worked with real data for years are often still abjectly terrible at it. As evidenced by the number of well credentialed experts who were revealed as charlatans by Covid.
https://twitter.com/gideonrachman/status/1341306297350762500
See also the number of people who think that supply and demand do not apply to housing.
The number of criminologists who refuse to accept that almost all of the two massive crime waves in America were driven by lead poisoning. And probably also teen pregnancy rates.
If our academic elite can’t reliably do it there is clearly no way a few extra school lessons are going to help normal people do it.
A list of of well evidenced propositions that people systematically deny for ideological reasons follows:
That educational attainment is almost entirely driven by internal characteristics of individual children and that neither school choice, teacher quality, or any other known intervention has large effect sizes. No private/grammar schools don’t improve exam results sorry.
That nevertheless pre-school does have large positive effects on life time outcomes for disadvantaged kids mainly through behavioural channels. It does this without improving educational outcomes.
That neither immigration nor globalisation systematically affect wages apart from possibly in weird sub sectors like nursing/doctors with strange underlying supply/demand dynamics.
That individual heritability not only of intelligence but other behavioural traits that are economically beneficial like conscientiousness is very high and that therefore kids of high earners will systematically outperform kids of lower earners in educational and economic metrics
That no fault divorce systematically affects who you choose to marry and leads to more assertive mating and higher between household inequality.
Assortive*
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
