This is the SEED school, a 100% Black public boarding school in DC.
These disadvantaged students here enjoy a rigorous study schedule and a spending per student of 63000$ per year, comparable to some of the best schools in the country.
So, how and what do they do? Thread🧵
First SEED takes its unique place as being the first school of its kind, SEED was chartered almost 30 years ago and has been serving mostly Black kids in Washington DC.
They enroll mostly disadvantaged students, only 23 percent of applicants live in a two-parent household and 62 percent live with their mother. 75 percent of students qualify for free lunch.
Here's a map with the school's applicants and the poverty rate of their neighborhood.
Students here report more motivation and interest in their studies than their peers at other local schools; compared to their peers, SEED students report:
-Doing 4 more hours of homework a week
-Receiving more tutoring from adults
-Participating in student leadership activities
-More academic motivation
The students are kept on a quite intensive study schedule
Here's a 6th grader's schedule:
And here's the High School Curriculum:
Because there are a limited number of seats the school holds a lottery. It is random so we can fairly compare the students who won and were given the opportunity for the school and those who did not.
This gives us insight into the school's effect on all manner of outcomes.
First, test scores:
Here is the effect for two cohorts over four years
And here is the effect for a few other cohorts:
As you can see there are few significant differences between the groups.
Given that, the school sadly has performance comparable to that of the surrounding public schools.
The PARCC is an assessment given to DC students, it is scored on a scale from 1-5 where a 4 is meeting expectations.
Overall, for the SEED high school, the percentage of students who achieved a 4 or higher for the years available was:
ELA: 2.4%-12%
Math: 4%- 7%
For the NWEA MAP assessment, the average student performance ranges around the 30th percentile, sometimes higher.
This is not good for a school.
For the AP tests that the students take I was only able to find evidence that one student from one year has received a passing score.
That student received a 3 (out of 5) and was the only one to do so out of the 26 test takers that year. (3.8%)
Here is the enrollment data over time:
It seems that many of the students that attend de-enroll
Also in terms of lottery comparison, the school saw little change in risky behavior. In fact, the only significant difference was where the SEED group performed worse: general risky behavior.
In fact, there was no significant difference in pregnancy/ fathering a child at 26.7%
Overall SEED lottery winners are no more likely to attend college or graduate high school.
There isn't much in the way of measured positive long-term effects.
And in general, the presence of charter schools has a small effect on other schools in the area.
Taleb / Carr have an erroneous 'insight' over the nonlinearity of IQ along with a conceptual misunderstanding.
On linear and non-linear IQ relationships 🧵
Here's the interaction, the premise is that :
a) There exists some (unspecified) degree of nonlinearity
b) This is somehow a 'devasting' critique of IQ
Note that the above is a simulation. This can motivate a point but you need to back it up with data, as we'll see this only happens in certain situations.
Critically, the point that IQ isn't efficacious at the high end fails here.
About the paper behind this figure: The moral circle
🧵
The paper is from Nature, entitled "Ideological differences in the expanse of the moral circle" by Waytz et al. They combined a few different surveys to produce this study.
The first takes a broad look at the moral differences between conservatives and liberals:
Their 'love' scale produced statistically significant differences for all measures, although the absolute differences themselves were small.
Mackenzie Scott plans to donate her and Bezos' $36 billion divorce settlement. She has given over $2 billion this year. An update on what exactly she funds🧵
First, her most well-funded focus has been on racial causes (and prev. years at ~$5 billion). In fact, over half of the recipients have a racial focus.
Here's the picture for all years:
It's quite similar despite most of the recipients being new orgs she has not donated to before. Her mission is clearly similar through time.
Over the years she has donated anywhere from $1.5 billion to $4 billion. This year is nothing special in terms of money.
The Chinese Communist Revolution consolidated its power by taking land from the elite. In the following generation, the previous elite once again reclaimed their social advantage.
This is not an isolated phenomenon: A Thread on the persistence of status 🧵
The Cultural Revolution is one of the most extreme efforts of wealth equalization in all of human history, over 43% of all land assets were transferred to others. The goal was explicit: to eliminate income and wealth differences between the rich and poor in perpetuity.
The vision of the revolution was to ensure that the elite could not pass on their status to future generations. So, beyond confiscating wealth, the Communists eliminated merit-based admission into universities.
Vision is expensive. One bit of information in a photo receptor costs 100x to 1000x more energy than in a synapse.
This adds up to ~4% of the entire body's energy budget.
A Story of Energy, Information, and Evolution (Thread 🧵)
This is the base reality: The number of ATP molecules used to power transmission is much greater in photoreceptors and LMCs (A type of photocell in flies) than for a regular synapse.
In doing so each photoreceptor can make use of about 10^6 photons per second!
Perhaps this is one of the reasons why our field of view is so limited, here's a plot of the field of view of the right eye from the perspective of the viewer (Imagine diagramming on a contact lens).
People with better childhood health are more Conservative; those with the best health were 16 percentage points more likely to be conservative than those with the worst.
This study also measured other attributes, academics....
Academics had the opposite effect in the attribute pathway model, with Adolescent Vigor being most strongly associated with conservatism and academics being most strongly associated with liberalism.
Another study found a genotypic relationship between polygenic scores for Educational Attainment and left-wing beliefs.
Perhaps a similar relation exists for childhood health?