> Added Maloney: “There’s a lot of attention on empowering girls. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with that, but males are the ones in crisis in education.”
It's no secret here that there is a crisis of masculinity and of men's role in our society.
There are plenty of men at the top, and plenty in powerful positions. Contemporary social justice movements certainly are aware of that. But what they don't account for is this: most mean are _not_ in positions of power, and a lot are living lives in the shadows of underemployment and partnerlessness.
In this environment men get squeezed at both ends: Painted as suspicious and exploitative when successful, but still shamed and unable to find partners when not successful. When people offer compelling messages that resonate with men - take for example Jordan Peterson's message of living honestly, embracing duty and responsibility, and promoting conscientious habits - it is immediately pilloried as regressive or simply horrible. And we end up back where we started: A relative handful of successful men that made it "over the hump", and the rest who live in society's margins with little interest or regard by broader society and increasingly distanced from wealth, mates, and family. There will be fallout still for generations to come.
Male teachers provide male role models for boys to look up to.
Male teachers have a more personal understanding of what it is to be a boy.
Men and boys communicate differently than women and boys do.
Male teachers show boys that education is something males value enough with their time and attention.
I feel like it has been true that many teachers target boys to make them do worse for a long time. I mean, let's be honest, there are always "those people" out there. And it's probably been true for many different groups of students by the way, not just boys. There are probably teachers who don't like Asians, or what if you're hispanic? or... heaven forbid... what if you're black for instance?
But I think, for ALL these students, the more helpful question to answer is, how do we help them to successfully navigate this and other obstacles to their education? Because they are going to run up against it, there's really nothing they can do to avoid hitting that obstacle in today's world.
If we can find an answer to this question, we'd really make progress towards improving outcomes in our educational system.
Here is an article about it from 2015 - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/parenting/wp/2015/02/19/...
Of those that struggled with coursework it was oftentimes males that received a disproportionate amount of attention from female teachers. While I would say at least part of it was usually due to lack of discipline, the disparity often existed and was noticeable.
I think this problem exists with all teachers towards different groups of students. Again, it's not just boys affected by this sort of thing, what if you're hispanic and the teacher just doesn't like hispanics?
Burying our heads and saying that the problem doesn't exist won't help us to make progress towards better outcomes. Which is the ultimate goal here.
We need to answer the question of how to help all students successfully traverse these kinds of obstacles? Answering that question and integrating such training into their educational practice will not only help them in class, but it's a skill that I have to believe will serve them well throughout their lives.
Boys behave differently than girls do. Boys need much more rough and tumble play time. These days that's going to result in a call to the police. Not to mention behavior is now a part of your grade, so normal, healthy boy behavior is penalized.
Boys tend to perform better on tests but relatively poorly on homework compared to girls. Grading emphasis has been tilted towards the benefit of girls here.
I want to be clear that I'm not advocating re-masculinizing education. It seems obvious to me that the maximal benefit to society would be a system in which everyone reaches their maximum potential. There must be a third path where boys are still encouraged to be properly socialized while simultaneously not penalized for being boys, and we must be able to do that without harming girls.
People make "claims without any factual backup or clarification of meaning" on HN all day every day, and no one bats an eye provided they are consistent with the proper thinking.
Once you see this, it can't be unseen. But getting to the point of being able to see it is easier said than done, it isn't merely having an alternative political ideology, but rather understanding how the human mind works. But once you've got a good handle on that, things like reading the news are completely different experiences than before.
Depending on the topic of conversation of course. When the topic changes to, say female representation in corporate board rooms, many of the same people will then say women are indistinguishable from men. And they sincerely believe both,
And this is why living in Western Society circa 2018 feels like living in an insane asylum.
Primary schools are on the front lines of this war and things are about to get very bad with funding.
The take away is that intervening in at-risk kids life can lead to both negative and positive outcomes and that it's important to further study which interventions are successful and which are hurtful.
This says nothing about children not at-risk. Furthermore it suggests there is the potential for really powerful intervention programs for at-risk youth.
Basically, if you want to volunteer to help the children please make sure you carefully select which program you help with.
Also, interesting to see how as soon as there is a gender disparity people reach for the "pipeline problem" as the most likely explainer.
The cost of tuition is simply far too high for the real value, of course this differs by majors and degrees.
Overall its just not worth the debt load.
I think the overall drive to send people to college simply turned it into a a high school diploma 2.0 except now we have soo many kids deep in soul crushing debt.
At the same time jobs are decreasing in value or total to exported labor or automation, we are really having multiple overlapping crises each making the overall domestic situation worse.
It's really concerning. I'm fully expecting a social revolution from the post millennials, whether it leads to good times or hard times, who knows.
But I do know I won't be sending my kids to a university in its current form, I'm hoping Khan Academy becomes the model for replacement.
EDIT: my kids won't be going to college for another 16 years. I highly doubt colleges won't undergo some kind of significant change.
IMHO, that's foolish. Education is too important to rely on unproven stuff Khan Academy.
It's totally their call, but I'm going to do what I can to encourage my kids to go to a reasonably good, but low cost state school.
In the mean time, I'm going to make it known to my state legislators that affordable public college education is my main priority from them.
1) Which degree you receive.
2) Which institution you receive it from.
3) Your total out of pocket expenses for four years. (Tuition + Fees + Living Expenses + Interest - Scholarships - Salaries)
My $55,000 out of pocket degree payed for itself and all opportunity costs in 5 years, and I fully enjoyed my college experience.
I would never have gone there if I had to pay those prices.
I did not go to the most prestigious school I was accepted to. I went to a less prestigious school that offered a much better deal. I suspect many students can receive merit based aid by selecting a lower tier school.
Statistically, those who make more than others within a given year are more likely to have degrees, but that is not the same thing as the degree providing a return on investment. People who make more within a given year also tend to drink more alcohol, but that does not mean alcohol provides return on investment either.
From the article:
"People with bachelor’s degrees earn 56 percent more, on average, than people with only high-school educations, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York."
I have seen many variants of this number, but all are in this same ballpark result. People who get bachelor's degrees make a lot more than those without.
Over the course of a lifetime, that really adds up.
There are of course examples of individuals who do very well without a post-high-school degree.
A big part of it, in my view, is how driven the person is. Some people are not very driven. If you're not driven enough to go to (and get through) college, you're probably not driven enough to do much more than low-skill, low-paid work. So taking for argument's sake that statistic is true, it doesn't say anything about cause and effect.
If you're driven to succeed, you'll find a route to success, whether it's college, military, vocational/trade school, self-teaching, or other non-traditional paths.
Maybe don't go to college if you're planning on being an entrepreneur but otherwise I'd recommend it.
Is this not a little contradictory? According to several sources on the internet, 40% of working-aged Americans have 2+-year college degrees and only 33% have 4+-year college degrees. Going to college is the one that is doing something different than what everyone else does. Not going to college is the norm.
In the trades, after the job was over or I had turned over to the oncoming shift operator, I didn't think about work at all until my next shift, it was great, my off-time was mine. It was much better mentally compared to now where I have to have my phone on me at all times and respond to emails from our customers (granted, my customers or Transmission System and Distribution System operators controlling the electrical grid, so it is pretty critical when the applications experience issues). There are pros and cons of each, with pay being roughly equal (outside of the major tech hubs). Am I glad I switched? Sometimes, but the skilled trades (electrician, pipe-fitter, plumber, HVAC tech, welder, etc.) are definitely a good way to go if you want to learn a useful skill and have a relatively stable middle class life.
For example how many Floridian contractors know about Bora Care? From my interactions, few. It poisons wood. Termites can’t eat it. In Florida you can charge an extra 1k for a house and permanently protect the home from termites. Few even know to offer as a perk on restoration. Think about it, for $75 plus labor a reno contractor could termite proof your kitchen studs while they redo the walls. Poor training.
Home renovation is also where a lot of bottom-feeders end up. It's very easy to do and doesn't require much skill to get into.
When I was talking about skilled trades I was mainly referring to your union/licensed/Journeyman types. We had continued training programs to keep up with latest NEC/NFPA/ASHRAE/ASME changes. We also had the option of teaching at the union hall (all apprentices work normal days and go to training at the hall on Tues/Thurs) to earn a little bit extra money.
I've met good craftsman as well as lazy ones, but like you said, now that I'm a full-time developer, the same still holds in our industry as I'm sure it does in most industries.
Like everything in America, just focusing on ethnic or gender groups before class doesn't really work to reverse the more real disenfranchisement that exists in society.
But it's always been true, so what changed?
I think the bitcoin billionaires and millionaires are mostly men, and good evidence of something changing.
>> Males are enrolling in higher education at alarmingly low rates, and some colleges are working hard to reverse the trend.
This may not be alarming depending on how you weigh the value added by college. Conference of credentials by/for authority vs competence and independence with work.
We could start by fixing this problem, which seems like it should be one of the easiest to solve. Lets make sure college is not a hostile environment for anyone, including men.
Unfortunately, I don’t really have a solution other than “don’t do that” because those people are out there, you never know who they are, and it requires constant vigilance.
And what if the perceived hostile environment is, in fact, not hostile? What if it is the result of being exposed to new ideas, new group dynamics, an inability to separate oneself from the group they are a member of, breakdown in communication/terminology, etc.?
What if actions taken to improve the environment for one group is felt to be hostile to a different group? Then what?
No, I think this problem is significantly harder than you believe.
Seems like something that HN loves to push.
I don't think that's so much the case as it is men are shamed and discouraged in popular culture right now and particularly on campus. There are so many women's programs (which I have no problem with), yet how many men's programs are there?
The typical rebuttal is always "man up and take it" or men have an inherent advantage, but what happens when that advantage has actually disappeared? If I attempted to form a men in engineering group when I was a student I would have been sued and expelled for gender bias or sexual harassment or something.
We need to make sure we continue to make men feel valued by society. I think with the 24/7 news cycle and how focused it is on the bad things that some men do (and how all men are subsequently guilty be association) it's no wonder that men are dropping out of society.
Access to higher education for women is still a relatively new thing, historically speaking, so why is it even surprising that the demographics continue to change?
If the pipeline is a problem one way, it's a problem the other way even if it's still close to 1:1.
I'm for equal opportunities (and upbringing and social environment to encourage use of those opportunities) for both genders. I hope others who share that view will be consistent in their application of it.
For example, if as a result of the education imbalance, some day in the future the pay gap is such that men earn 70 cents on the dollar to what women make, are the same people who say "that's not okay" if it's true about women going to say "that's okay" when it's about men? My anecdotal experience leads me to think that might happen.