learning the history of Philadelphia's most selective public school
It was established as a middle school for advanced students. In 2021-2022, Philadelphia switched all schools to a unified lottery system, and the school's focus on excellence was systematically dismantled. 1/x
With the change, the school (along with all other Philly schools) had no discretion over who to admit. Its pipeline was broken: students from the middle school no longer received even priority at the high school.
Until 2020, it had an advanced math track for capable students. That track was eliminated due to diversity concerns.
In 2022, school administration removed the school's mission statement (to focus on academically talented students for advanced intellectual study). When it resurfaced, language about the accelerated curriculum had disappeared.
Even the school's seal changed:
Out with "Dare to be excellent."
In with, ah... "Middle & High School"
Why was the school's curriculum redesigned? Because school leadership did not want to "advantage" Masterman middle school students over other students who would be admitted to the high school.
Admissions criteria for the middle school were relaxed dramatically.
With that, unsurprisingly, the school's proportion of advanced students cratered.
In 2011-2022, its fifth graders became nearly indistinguishable from fifth graders at other schools.
People who target top-performing public schools in the name of "equity" destroy it: while wealthy parents can flee to private schools, talented kids from poor families rely on free options. In the past few years, Philadelphia has chosen to undermine that.
This was assigned, actually! I was gratified to see the professor included it; it very much dovetails with my interests but I hadn't been tracking it specifically.
I got sucked into this, and man, I have never seen a YouTuber commit so many blatantly illegal acts in his own video. Escalated a contract dispute in Oregon into getting stalking charges in Utah, and seems to have repeatedly lied about winning court cases as well.
anyway, Mob Justice is well underway and the family at the center of the initial dispute has more than been made whole at this point, so all's well that ends with a massive headache for all
people have also come to the conclusion, thanks to the YouTuber, that the reason the police department from the suburb next to where I grew up went after him was because they were Mormon and not, y'know, because he repeatedly showed up at a dude's house
I'm having a sort of split experience where on the one hand lots of my right-leaning mutuals say there's no way to work with the Dems bc it's impossible to make headway against Woke, while on the other a ton of people to my left are saying "that was a failure. let's adjust"
not to say everyone is suddenly seeing the light of Radical Centrism! far from it. but (twitter is not Real Life caveats aside) I think a lot of people are underestimating the degree to which the particular culture that drove everyone mad is collapsing
I think there’s a lot of reluctance to take “yes” for an answer from people who objected in large part because a monoculture swept over a large group who would brook no dissent. dissent has gained a lot of momentum! silencing it failed. the Overton Window is open again
the Utah War is one of the dumbest moments in US history. everything about it was baffling. the troops were confused. Mormons reacted by burning supply lines and then fleeing Salt Lake. eventually the troops went home and sold Mormons their supplies at a steep discount
a thread
almost immediately, Brigham Young responded by abandoning a bunch of settlements outside of Utah
the troops were sent to replace Brigham Young as governor. because he didn't get official notice of why, he treated them as a hostile mob and ordered martial law. no food to Gentiles. full mobilization. call up the militia.
the section on learning science was fun for me - interesting to see topics I've focused on for years through fresh eyes. I strongly disagree with the writer that they're intuitive, in part because the takeaway that teachers in front of classrooms are bad is not true at all!
Liemandt has a keen grasp of the issues. Note his treatment of AI in classrooms: Chatbots? Terrible idea. Generating personalized lesson plans and tracking kids' knowledge graphs and interest graphs?
this is interesting for having been written by Tao, but it doesn't feel attuned to the present day. Tao writes of the scientific ecosystem as basically functional and neutral without grappling with the way his colleagues have eaten the seed corn of expertise.
I sympathize with his position. He has spent his life focused almost exclusively on pure mathematics professionally. but around him, universities and many of his fellow researchers became explicitly political actors in a way that was destined to draw a political response.
it is wholly appropriate to argue that this is the wrong response, that there are better ways to address the problems, so forth. but he doesn't seem to accept the idea that there are any problems. and ultimately that makes the essay feel a bit hollow.
Checking sources is a superpower--you would not believe the stuff people sneak into things.
As one example: the book "Keeping Track" is by far the most influential anti–ability grouping book. Key to its argument is a claimed finding that 90% of students can master course material under the right circumstances to argue that all students should be placed into the same courses.
Where does that footnote - footnote 7 - lead? Benjamin Bloom's "All Our Children Learning." Not to a specific page. Not to a specific note within it. The entire book.
So let's dig in! What does Bloom say?
He notes his belief that around 90% of people differ in rate of learning rather than the level of learning theoretically possible, but that it will take some students more time, effort, and help to reach that level than others (sometimes prohibitively so). Some, he'll note, might take several years on high school algebra, while others can do it in a fraction of a year.
Then he provides suggestions. How do you structure a school so that students can learn at appropriate paces to meet his "90%" goal? He has a few ideas: 1. Give each student an individual tutor. 2. Let students go at their own pace. 3. Guide students towards or away from specific courses. 4. Provide different tracks for different groups of learners.
Did you catch that?
Bloom says: obviously kids learn at different paces, so if you want them to master the material, either let them rush ahead individually or group them by ability. If we do that, everyone's level will improve.
Oakes takes that, strip-mines the entire book down to a claim she paraphrases as "under appropriate learning conditions, more than 90 percent of students can master course material," and then uses it to argue that we should not let kids rush ahead individually or group them by ability.
This book has been cited more than 10000 times. It is by far the most influential single thing ever written on ability grouping. And it cites sources it knows nobody will examine to argue for the polar opposite of what those sources advocate.
Check sources.
oh, for crying out loud. I meant to quote tweet this! this is what I was responding to
For more educational malpractice, see our latest post at @CenterforEdProg, on how North Carolina schools keep many of their most capable students out of upper-level math, and how the state school board subverted the intent of law to keep it that way.