Most people who take high school algebra and geometry forget about half of what they learn within five years
This is not a bug, it’s a feature. People forget what they don’t use. Most people don’t use algebra and geometry, so it’s okay for them to forget it. We teach algebra and geometry to everyone, because we don’t know who will need tem, because we don’t trust teenagers to decide what they want to do for the rest of their lives.
Their science knowledge?
You have to explain to me how science trivia knowledge relates to human capital, in the economic sense. I mean, the effect shouldn’t be zero, but it is most likely tiny.
If we got rid of school entirely, would adults score worse?
Good question. Are you going to answer it? It’s kind of important to your point. My own answer would be “yes, obviously”.
The portion from signaling is <...> probably mostly zero sum for society
Signaling creates obvious positive value. Without signaling, employers would waste a lot more time on hiring incompetent people (or they would just resort to nepotism). Of course, signaling also has costs, and it can be debated what the total sum effect is.
the entire field dedicated to studying this tries to deny that ability bias is substantive enough to be meaningful
I don’t understand why you spend half of your post on this. It’s completely irrelevant to your point. Should I guess that some logic error is hiding behind your attention to this?
Also, somehow you seem to have transformed “not meaningful” into “doesn’t exist”, which leads me to believe that you’re strawmanning the academics in other ways as well (though I don’t care to check).
This is not a bug, it’s a feature. People forget what they don’t use. Most people don’t use algebra and geometry, so it’s okay for them to forget it. We teach algebra and geometry to everyone, because we don’t know who will need tem, because we don’t trust teenagers to decide what they want to do for the rest of their lives.
You have to explain to me how science trivia knowledge relates to human capital, in the economic sense. I mean, the effect shouldn’t be zero, but it is most likely tiny.
Good question. Are you going to answer it? It’s kind of important to your point. My own answer would be “yes, obviously”.
Signaling creates obvious positive value. Without signaling, employers would waste a lot more time on hiring incompetent people (or they would just resort to nepotism). Of course, signaling also has costs, and it can be debated what the total sum effect is.
I don’t understand why you spend half of your post on this. It’s completely irrelevant to your point. Should I guess that some logic error is hiding behind your attention to this?
Also, somehow you seem to have transformed “not meaningful” into “doesn’t exist”, which leads me to believe that you’re strawmanning the academics in other ways as well (though I don’t care to check).