Re: [Phys-L] Economist Kern Alexander Explains the Problem with School Choice

[John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>]

On 02/03/2013 04:32 PM, LaMontagne, Bob wrote:
> Choice may not fix the problem - but will it do harm to give people
> choice if they want it?

I'm having trouble taking the question seriously.  If you want
meaningful answers, please don't ask such simplistic questions.

  By the way, the simple answer -- as previously stated -- is
  "yes".  Choice makes some things worse, notably diversity.
  If you want to argue that the benefits outweigh this cost,
  you have to make the argument.  Asking double-negative
  questions doesn't cut it.  See also the actual data, below.

If you want to talk about substance, I would hope that almost 
everybody on this list knows that when it comes to "choice", 
the details matter.  By the same token, when it comes to "people", 
it matters quite a bit which people you are talking about.

*) One well-known "choice" algorithm has been known for a couple
thousand years at least, namely the /lion's share/.  That means
the lion gets to choose what he wants, and everybody else gets
the leftovers (if any).
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion%27s_share

People who are accustomed to getting the lion's share think that
"choice" is a grrrreat idea.  Other people, not so much.

   Please don't ask about "harm" to "people" without spelling
   out which people you are talking about.

*) Another notion of "choice" applies if you live in the Pays de 
Cockaigne or the Big Rock Candy Mountain.  You get to choose whatever 
you want, and you get it just for the asking.

*) If you want more fairness without sacrificing practicality, 
consider the cut-and-choose algorithm.  In a two-player situation,
I cut the cake and you choose which piece you want.  Or vice versa.
The cutter's optimal strategy is to cut as evenly as possible, so
that he does OK no matter what the chooser chooses.

========

In my experience, usually the people who talk to me about "efficient
markets" are trying to sell me something.  The folks who talk the
loudest about "efficient markets" rarely do the things that would
result in efficiency or even transparency.  Usually they just want
some rube to /think/ there is an efficient market, while they keep
their thumb on the scale.

There's a rule that says at every poker table there is a fish.  The
first thing you do when you sit down at the table is identify the
fish.  If you look around and don't see the fish, it's you.

=========

How's the "choice" thing working out for you in Providence, RI?

The "school choice checklist" is here:
  http://www.providenceschools.org/inside-ppsd/registration/school-choice-checklist

For each school, the percentage indicates the students whose test scores 
are on grade level or above grade level in math, according to:
     http://www.providenceschools.org/media/55815/hs%20eng12.pdf
"†" means not making adequate yearly progress.

Alvarez		 3%
Career & Tech	 0% †
Central		 4% †
Classical	49%
Cooley & PAIS	 3% †
E-Cubed		 4% †
Hope Arts	 4%
Hope IT		 4%
Mt. Pleasant	 2% †

These are not the results you would expect from a cut-and-choose
algorithm.  Also, this is evidently not the Big Rock Candy Mountain.  
It looks more like the lion's-share algorithm.

There is only one PPSD high school out of nine where more than four 
percent of the students are at or above grade level.  I reckon almost
all the parents /wish/ they could send their kids to a school with
decent scores ... but wishing isn't the same as choosing, is it?