h a l f b a k e r y
We don't have enough art & classy shit around here.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
So, it's a fairly common practice (at least in the US) for
colleges and universities to perform salary surveys of
recent graduates, to prove that a degree from them is
worth something. But how do you know you're going to
able to get into the good schools?
I propose that all education
levels, starting in pre-school
kindergarden, could start doing salary surveys of their
recent, but about when they would all be 22, and maybe
every decade thereafter. Obviously some students are
going to go nowhere despite the best educational prep,
and some will do well from the worst schools. But
statistically, better education at any step of the way
improve your chances overall, so with a large enough
sample, it should be somewhat
It would be a bit of a lagging indicator, admittedly.
||Great for identifying which schools were the best and
worst, but as all the teachers will have moved on or
become senile, I suspect that it will not provide a very
useful report of the current situation. However you could
use the data to estimate other peoples potential. i.e. if
that school consistently produced this type of person, and
these people also went to these schools then that means
these people could be potentially undervalued as future
employees, i.e. good value for my company. etc etc
||And in third grade we learn that it is spelled
||My high school published a list of where the graduating seniors went to college every year. Due to the lag issues that POCS mentioned I think it would be a lot more valuable to have a preparedness rating from the next school they go to, similar to what universities do. The teachers evaluate how prepared each of their students are for the current course so if a student starting high school went to a bad middle school that school will lose points for student preparedness.
||The problem with a preparedness rating is that, A) most students from a given lower school go to the same upper school, so knowing how well they're prepared within a curriculum doesn't tell us how well they're prepared for the working world.
||B)It doesn't cover people who drop out between schools.
||Honestly, a high school would only have a 4-6 year lag, which isn't to bad, as they don't change that quickly, and while specific teachers change (although not that quickly, in some locations grandkids end up with the same teachers), the institutional behavior of the school is somewhat more persistent.
||Oh, and [Rayford], it's my language, I'll mangle it how I want to.
||Won't this just map, more or less, to zip/postcodes?
||That's sort of the point. People always move to a given area when they have kids, because it has "the best schools", but the metric for that is generally standardized testing or similar. This should be a more real world metric, which would also indicate how well various other metrics really perform.