8 ms·

As someone that works in K-12 technology (and has for 15 years), the real monopolies aren't the tech giants, they're the Pearsons and Houghton Mifflins of the w

by dchess 6y ago

As someone that works in K-12 technology (and has for 15 years), the real monopolies aren't the tech giants, they're the Pearsons and Houghton Mifflins of the world that buy out competitors and lock school districts into platforms they can't escape without substantial migration costs. And don't even get me started on the way they have kept education hostage to high stakes tests.

ngold 6y ago
Education already does not have enough money, then these vampires come in with lock in anti competitive agreements. Ugg. I wish that money went to teachers.
- SllX 6y ago
  Alternatively: Education actually has plenty of money, but too much of it is leeched out by low value vendors charging high premiums for easily replaced commodities, low value administrative staff performing easily automated tasks, and public-sector unions filling their coffers and the coffers of friendly politicians, long before teachers receive a penny, many of which then have to shell out for materials out of their own pockets, materials which ought to be provided for by their employers. I went to public schools which were thick with staff, and for the life of me I could never figure out why there was any more staff than the faculty, the principal, the vice principal, a secretary and maybe a janitor and lunch lady. Even the libraries, IT tasks and sports equipment were maintained by faculty. Janitorial tasks and catering could be good exercises for the kids if you wanted to cut some staff because frankly a good number of kids, myself included, could have used the extra discipline growing up. Meanwhile there were too many unused classrooms, too many kids per class, too few seats and tables and too few lockers. Teachers were paying for printouts and unreturned textbooks (that the students didn’t return to the teacher) but the administration sure had a thick wad of newsletters, handbooks, forms, reports (not all to do with the students, mostly administrative crap) and all manner of garbage for us to take home every single week.
  - bsder 6y ago
    > Alternatively: Education actually has plenty of money It doesn't--even if you get rid of the "administrative staff". The Gates Foundation went through and analyzed this for younger students (early middle school and younger). It takes roughly $15K per student do what you need: two fully qualified adults in a classroom of 15 with sufficient resources. This allows you to bring your poor performers up to average in 3 years. Not good--just average. Every single one of those initiatives were cancelled because of money. People claim they want better education systems--until they have to actually pay for it.
    - SllX 6y ago
      What were the overhead costs associated with educating each student and why two adults? For a class of 15, 1 teacher is sufficient, and even if you reduce class sizes to 10, that's one teacher per 10 rather than 1 per 7.5. The school district I grew up in spent about $13K per pupil in the school year following my graduation (easiest year to find quick and dirty data for), and still had all of the problems I outlined. I assure you, it wasn't going to high teacher salaries when I was in school. So how about we do trim off some of that fat, give the teachers a raise, and then evaluate whether we need the additional spend?
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - lotsofpulp 6y ago
        I assume formal research from Gates Foundation has some credibility, at least compared to conclusions from anecdotal observations.
        SllX 6y ago
        Sure, but show me.
        lotsofpulp 6y ago
itronitron 6y ago
I might be okay with this if powerschool wasn't a total effing mess of a platform, but I'm not because it is absolutely a total piece of shit. While I appreciate that there is some complexity to what the platform needs to accommodate, navigating the user interface usually involves more work than completing an assignment.

by dchess 6y ago

ngold 6y ago

Education already does not have enough money, then these vampires come in with lock in anti competitive agreements. Ugg. I wish that money went to teachers.

SllX 6y ago
Alternatively: Education actually has plenty of money, but too much of it is leeched out by low value vendors charging high premiums for easily replaced commodities, low value administrative staff performing easily automated tasks, and public-sector unions filling their coffers and the coffers of friendly politicians, long before teachers receive a penny, many of which then have to shell out for materials out of their own pockets, materials which ought to be provided for by their employers. I went to public schools which were thick with staff, and for the life of me I could never figure out why there was any more staff than the faculty, the principal, the vice principal, a secretary and maybe a janitor and lunch lady. Even the libraries, IT tasks and sports equipment were maintained by faculty. Janitorial tasks and catering could be good exercises for the kids if you wanted to cut some staff because frankly a good number of kids, myself included, could have used the extra discipline growing up. Meanwhile there were too many unused classrooms, too many kids per class, too few seats and tables and too few lockers. Teachers were paying for printouts and unreturned textbooks (that the students didn’t return to the teacher) but the administration sure had a thick wad of newsletters, handbooks, forms, reports (not all to do with the students, mostly administrative crap) and all manner of garbage for us to take home every single week.
- bsder 6y ago
  > Alternatively: Education actually has plenty of money It doesn't--even if you get rid of the "administrative staff". The Gates Foundation went through and analyzed this for younger students (early middle school and younger). It takes roughly $15K per student do what you need: two fully qualified adults in a classroom of 15 with sufficient resources. This allows you to bring your poor performers up to average in 3 years. Not good--just average. Every single one of those initiatives were cancelled because of money. People claim they want better education systems--until they have to actually pay for it.
  - SllX 6y ago
    What were the overhead costs associated with educating each student and why two adults? For a class of 15, 1 teacher is sufficient, and even if you reduce class sizes to 10, that's one teacher per 10 rather than 1 per 7.5. The school district I grew up in spent about $13K per pupil in the school year following my graduation (easiest year to find quick and dirty data for), and still had all of the problems I outlined. I assure you, it wasn't going to high teacher salaries when I was in school. So how about we do trim off some of that fat, give the teachers a raise, and then evaluate whether we need the additional spend?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      I assume formal research from Gates Foundation has some credibility, at least compared to conclusions from anecdotal observations.
      - SllX 6y ago
        Sure, but show me.
        lotsofpulp 6y ago

itronitron 6y ago

I might be okay with this if powerschool wasn't a total effing mess of a platform, but I'm not because it is absolutely a total piece of shit. While I appreciate that there is some complexity to what the platform needs to accommodate, navigating the user interface usually involves more work than completing an assignment.