I think my ideal system would differ from Singapore’s in a couple important ways:
Classes would be grouped by subject+level. A student would progress in different subjects at different pace and level, and there wouldn’t be an overall “level of student” or “level of school”.
Employers would be banned from discriminating on education. They could only discriminate based on exam results relevant to the job, and the exams would be accessible to everyone regardless of hours of study.
Classes would be grouped by subject+level. A student would progress in different subjects at different pace and level, and there wouldn’t be an overall “level of student” or “level of school”.
I mostly agree; Singapore does some version of this, but it’s still tied to grade levels. There’s typically English I vs English II, Maths I vs Maths II, etc., so parents put pressure on the kid to be in the latter class (also which class you’re in changes the subjects you can take in O- and A-Levels, which determines the school you can attend). AlphaSchool seems to work well because it’s a lot harder to compare students when everyone is slightly different on subject + level, and the levels are loosely tied to grades.
Americans are less focused on pure academics—I wonder if this is partially downstream of the randomness of admissions. Imagine if the Ivy Leagues said that you had to score 1550+ on the SAT to get in; more parents would likely put pressure on their kids leading up to the SAT (ignoring the public backlash).
Employers would be banned from discriminating on education. They could only discriminate based on exam results relevant to the job, and the exams would be accessible to everyone regardless of hours of study.
Is this just like an IQ test? Most information-based tests require some level of studying, sometimes a lot
I’m against IQ tests for employment. My idea was more about job-relevant tests. They do require study, but the point of banning discrimination by diploma and allowing only tests is that people will be able to study for the test in any way they like, because employers won’t be able to demand Ivy League etc.
Thank you for writing this!
I think my ideal system would differ from Singapore’s in a couple important ways:
Classes would be grouped by subject+level. A student would progress in different subjects at different pace and level, and there wouldn’t be an overall “level of student” or “level of school”.
Employers would be banned from discriminating on education. They could only discriminate based on exam results relevant to the job, and the exams would be accessible to everyone regardless of hours of study.
Thanks for reading!
I mostly agree; Singapore does some version of this, but it’s still tied to grade levels. There’s typically English I vs English II, Maths I vs Maths II, etc., so parents put pressure on the kid to be in the latter class (also which class you’re in changes the subjects you can take in O- and A-Levels, which determines the school you can attend). AlphaSchool seems to work well because it’s a lot harder to compare students when everyone is slightly different on subject + level, and the levels are loosely tied to grades.
Americans are less focused on pure academics—I wonder if this is partially downstream of the randomness of admissions. Imagine if the Ivy Leagues said that you had to score 1550+ on the SAT to get in; more parents would likely put pressure on their kids leading up to the SAT (ignoring the public backlash).
Is this just like an IQ test? Most information-based tests require some level of studying, sometimes a lot
I’m against IQ tests for employment. My idea was more about job-relevant tests. They do require study, but the point of banning discrimination by diploma and allowing only tests is that people will be able to study for the test in any way they like, because employers won’t be able to demand Ivy League etc.