Remix.run Logo
laserbeam 5 days ago

As a Romanian who has been very involved in Olympiads as a kid, I can tell that most of this is accurate. I’ve also lived in Denmark at university for several years and can contrast educational systems from first hand experience.

The sorting the author describes absolutely DOES happen in Romania. Exactly as he describes it, “getting into a good school” is incredibly important for students and parents here.

I’d also like to add the high school curriculum is very dense. The kind of math we did in 10th grade (there are 12 grades in Romania) was math people were only introduced to in their first year of university in Denmark.

There’re also a significant amount of optional after-school programs for contests, and I’ve only encountered students from good schools in them (as far as I can remember).

Yes, Romania is much better at filtering and at training people who are predisposed to intelectual work from a young age. Yes, Romania is bad at educating the masses.

However, I disagree with his conclusion and value judgement. I’d much rather see Romania adapt a system which educates everyone, rather than the world be better at filtering.

progbits 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I have mixed feelings. "Educating the masses" is important, at least to a certain baseline, otherwise we get failing democracies due to manipulation of uneducated voters.

But it's important to still have a separate track for the best students. Those will grow up to do the important work and move the society forward. If you put them into a mediocre class it will waste their potential.

sinuhe69 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I can only agree. Higher education for the mass is dangerous, especially when there are not enough jobs for them and they have to take a heavy loan to finance their education.

Peter Turchin has developed a mathematical model to predict the collapse of a society and one of the main factors is an over-supply of graduates (or elites). Adding to it the dynamics of AI and smart robots, the effect of over-supply can be only exacerbated further.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/06/us-societa...

morsecodist 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I am extremely skeptical of this mathematical model to predict history thing. There's just not enough history to do it and you bake in your biases when you go through the qualitative historical record and try to assign it to quantities. A lot of people analyze history and claim they figured it out and they've come to different conclusions and none of them have made reliable, specific conditions. If you say something bad will happen at some point in the future you'll probably be right but it's not enough to call it science.

username332211 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Nevermind the lack of data - what even would be the limits of knowledge in such a model? If it was widely believed that society will collapse at some point in the next 30 years, how would human behavior change in response? How would that affect the original prediction?

falcor84 4 days ago | parent [-]

If only someone would devise a Foundation to look into this

sinuhe69 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A few points for clarification:

-It’s a probabilistic model, so it only predicts the odd of a collapse

- Their main contribution was the creation and curation of a super detailed historical database: the Seshat. It spans almost 10000 years of human history with more than 400 polities from 30 regions around the world, using over 1,500 variables. Based on this data, Turchin & al devised the mathematical model for the prediction.

- One key area is to find surrogate data when others are not available. For ex. body size could be used to describe the nutrition and economic situation of the population.

- In 2010, Nature asked experts and super-forecasters for their prediction of 2020. Only Turchin predicted the coming collapse of America.

steveBK123 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Elite overproduction is an interesting topic and putting aside any suggestion that it's a precise mathematical predictor, it obviously creates societal problems.

That is - you've created a large class of intelligent achievers with nothing for them to do. Arguably that just naturally produces increasing societal upheaval. Whether that means revolution or just chaotic increasingly populist elections is a matter of degrees.

matthewdgreen 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

There is always something for a large class of intelligent achievers to do. The failure to put them to work is more of a societal failure than it is an indictment of the education system. (Maybe AI will change this, but only in the same way that it changes every part of our societal model.)

wenc 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

> There is always something for a large class of intelligent achievers to do. The failure to put them to work is more of a societal failure than it is an indictment of the education system.

This doesn’t quite resonate with me, because I’ve lived through it and seen it happen over and over again even in the most functional of societies.

Oversimplifying a bit, let’s call intelligent achievers elites. There is often a mismatch between elite supply and elite slots, and by definition elite slots are scarce — no matter how well your society is functioning.

Elite slots scale with the maturity and breadth of the economy. The U.S., with its size and diversity, has a much larger pool of elite slots than most countries. That’s one reason I moved here.

By contrast, in Canada (a country I love deeply), most Ph.D.s end up underemployed or they leave, because their skills simply aren’t needed at the level of specialization they were trained for. Some jobs only make sense when you have enough scale to support them — and without that scale, those elite positions just don’t exist.

Can intelligent achievers pivot to something else, like entrepreneurship? Sure, but in a smaller economy, the options are much more limited, even if they do a startup and invent new categories. They can also accept underemployment. There are inherent constraints in an economy due to natural factors like scale, geography, etc.

(My understanding is that Taiwan is in this situation -- highly educated people, limited industries that can employ them. Some move abroad, but many just curb their ambitions and try to get by with low pay and accept their lot in life, striving only for "little joys" they can afford like bubble tea and inexpensive street food)

steveBK123 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

AI seems poised to create more underemployment rather than fix the existing level of it…

username332211 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Can you name some examples? Virtually every major revolution or civil war I can think of, would involve intelligent achievers who've made it. In fact, the core of the rebellion would be a class that's often vital for the exercise for political power, but won't be allowed access to that same power.

English gentry, New England merchants, nobles of the robe, army officers, etc.

Only the Russian revolution would involve people who were nobodies before it, but they took charge after the disaffected elites that came to power in February spend most of 1917 undermining each other.

oytis 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

The core of Russian revolution were highly educated nerds who would cancel their friends over slight differences in understanding of obscure socioeconomic theories

sinuhe69 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Even the Russian Revolution was lead by elites: - Kerensky was lawyer - Lvov was an aristocrat - Lenin, Trotsky were highly educated and known for intellectual brilliance

lukan 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If you keep the masses intentionally dumb, then it makes sense to do the next step and also ban them from voting. And imagine to what kind of society this is leading.

username332211 4 days ago | parent [-]

Actually, voting is an excellent way to keep power away from the masses. A dictatorship has to constantly be aware of its approval ratings, whereas a parliament can ignore them for 3-4 years at a time.

lukan 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I do not have the impression that any politician who is not about to retire, does not care about approval ratings. There is more to democracy, than voting once every 4 years.

username332211 4 days ago | parent [-]

A ruling party having a catastrophic electoral position only for it to rapidly improve as election approaches is a fairly common phenomenon in modern democracies. Most recently, Canada was in that situation. Before that, Britain several times. There are plenty of historical examples as well, Reagan and Thatcher in their first re-elections for one.

The latter would have undoubtedly faced a revolution if Britain had no elections. Later, she'd go on to become an invincible electoral juggernaut.

miltonlost 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

This comment is insane.

oytis 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Oversupply ov elites has been a major factor of political and social progress so far.

corimaith 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I disagree. Improving education for everyone reduces the barrier for cross domain improvements to occur. An artist who may need some technical knowledge to realize a vision would not be able to do so if the basis of that knowledge was barred through inherent passion. It also provides the long term basis for startup and business creation, which is precisely the actual solution to elite overproduction.

siva7 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Peter Turchin has developed a mathematical model to predict the collapse of a society and one of the main factors is an over-supply of graduates (or elites).

I know i will get downvoted for this but i feel HN is losing its intellectual side over such elitist crap. The original article is from a well-known racist / eugenist and people here keep going on posting more dubious content that tries to paint towards political policies to keep the masses out of higher education.

cgh 4 days ago | parent [-]

Yeah, have to say I am a little surprised to see a Jordan Lasker article here. It follows his usual race-science pattern: innocuously well-researched article that he takes to a somewhat bonkers conclusion.

whimsicalism 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

This “elite overproduction” drivel needs to die out. It is not scientific or mathematical, it is just pop sociology. Producing a well educated populace is good, actually.

objektif 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Unfortunately, in my class of students, being good at solving Olympiad level questions did not turn out to be a good predictor of their contributions to society.

petre 4 days ago | parent [-]

Romania's current president is an international math olympic with two gold medals. We'll see how he turns out as a president. He's inherited quite some pressing issues and the President doesn't have all that much power. The parties made sure to neuter that institution. The alternative was a footbal hooligan with allegedly Russian funding behind him and a right wing discourse. Society is very polarised. Nearly half voted for the hooligan. Before, in the cancelled elections they voted for a nutcake Russian funded secret service puppet with a nicely sounding discourse void of any actual content and a very ballsy but quite dim witted woman, mayor in a small town. The Russians bet their money on multiple trojan horses, just in case one of them gets disqualified.

OTOH I am very impressed with how Volodymir Zelenski turned out. Who would have thought?

necovek 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

> OTOH I am very impressed with how Volodymir Zelenski turned out. Who would have thought?

He played his cards so well that Ukraine now has 100k dead people, another 300k injured, so much destroyed infrastructure and so many cities turned into battlegrounds. Yes, "impressive".

I am not saying he's to "blame" for this, but being "very impressed" is weird to me as well — whether it was possible to play the fine line between sovereignty and compromise I don't know, but I can certainly see less costly middle ground.

What would have impressed me was to have gotten Ukraine into EU, yet committed not to join the NATO and figured out a "neutral combat zone" for Eastern Ukraine — keep both Ukraine people and Russia happy, for instance.

tanjtanjtanj a day ago | parent [-]

So do what Russia didn’t want them to do and give Russia less than they wanted and they would be like “okay, cool. We won’t invade you then”?

That solution flies in the face of the real world reality.

vixen99 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Romanians I've spoken to all say they voted for Nicusor Dan because the other candidate(s) were/was so dire.

wslh 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> due to manipulation of uneducated voters.

Educated voters are manipulated as well, it is just a different kind of manipulation, and in many countries they represent a small part of the electorate.

steveBK123 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

One challenge in this is how to prevent permanent alienation between the masses & high achievers where you separate them at increasingly earlier points of life.

I went to school in a small town where I still shared some non-core classes with the masses, and only had separate tracks for some science/math courses starting at say 13 or 14 years old. But I still had gym/art/homeroom/etc with the masses right until graduation at 18 years old.

The trend has of course been to split the smarter kids out at younger and younger ages.. you see completely separate smart kids schools starting at 14 or 11 years old. You hear stories of pre-K and kindergarten programs that require your kid test in, as if they can asses the intelligence of a 3 year old.

As a society I would observe it makes the masses more resentful & distrusting towards "the elites" and "the elites" more oblivious to what the life for 99% of the country actually entails.

kolbe 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Do you have any reason to believe you have a good algorithm to predict who these privileged few will be? Anecdotally, I've seen little evidence that being a good student at age X is reason to invest more heavily in that person going forward.

jajko 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

What is more important, raising next generation of Musks (albeit ideally much less broken sociopathic piece of shit as current one), or avoiding next generation of Trumps?

Both of those can add tons of societies (or avoid their downfall), but all of them have 1 in common - they are spoiled rich kids with 0 connection to lives of ordinary folks from Day 1. One of biggest tricks Trump pulled was convincing folks he is one of them, and understands and shares their plight.

So it seems we are already getting at least aome brilliant folks up where they belong, and lower rate of those ain't outright catastrophe for aociety. On the other hand - dumb trivial to manipulate general population can't be saved by producing more smart brilliant folks, populistic corrupt a-holes will still overcome them.

So I would focus on general education level much more, based on above. General prosperity over future trillionaires.

somenameforme 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The practical issue which so many people don't seem to want to acknowledge is that students are different. I have taught and there are some students that simply lack either the intelligence, discipline, interest, or some other aspect that makes it literally impossible for them to ever receive anything beyond a basic education. You could give them 10 on 1 specialized instruction from the the most competent/interesting/engaging teachers and tutors imaginable, and they're still just not going to excel.

And then on the other end of the spectrum there are kids who will proactively read, on their own, through e.g. their math textbook, understand everything with no difficulty, and basically get nothing academic out of their education (beyond that which they'd get from simply having the books) unless one engages in extreme 'differentiation' which is an educational buzzword that is basically just glorified in-class 'filtering' that imposes a massive workload on teachers, creates inequity within the classroom itself, and is really just quite dysfunctional.

And so the typical results of trying to give an advanced education to everyone is that you end up pulling the top down, rather than lifting the bottom up. This is even more true because the bottom is also often disproportionately filled with students who have extreme behavioral problems often alongside families who just don't particularly care about their education, while the top is rarely disruptive except for the smart-ass type who's generally just trying to get some giggles rather than being actively hostile.

---

I think seeing things as a teacher makes you view things radically different than you do as a student. You're probably one of those overachiever types given your comment, and perhaps you feel that you worked a bit harder, maybe were a bit interested in the material then your peers or whatever. But I can assure you - that's generally not it. There are kids that try hard, even some that get things like multiple in-home tutors, and they still just can't excel no matter how hard their parents, or they, try.

---

Edit: Just found this [1] interesting Wiki page. You can see the list of countries, by gold medals in the last 10 Olympiads. In order of medals: USA, South Korea, Thailand, Russia, Vietnam, UK, Iran, Canada, Singapore, China.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_medal_cou...

ACCount37 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

People talk about intelligence a lot, but the sheer difference in interest is just as big, if not a bigger factor.

In an average class, you get most kids - who are mostly content to be there. And then you get the outliers. There's that one kid who appears to be suffering something just short of physical pain whenever he's in class learning something. Then there's the kid who has already read all his textbooks in the first week, for fun, and even retained a lot of it, because he was engaged with the material.

They may have the same exact intelligence, but the outcomes could not be more different.

john-h-k 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I would be willing to bet intelligence is a much larger deciding factor in grades than interest is. Most people I know who got top grades had barely any interest in many of the subjects

Lu2025 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Interest and motivation comes largely from success. You try something, it works, it feels good so you continue doing that. The school's role is to enable this "easy success" early on so kids will continue.

somenameforme 4 days ago | parent [-]

I find this point of view somewhat difficult to support. It was the whole motivation behind the cultural shift towards 'everybody's a winner' - participation trophies, expanding honor roll with 'merit roll', character awards, personal achievement awards, and so on. But far from driving excellence across the rather vast number of fields where it was trialed, it only seems to correlate with the period of overall decline in educational performance.

And from a practical point of view, let's consider this. The mindset one is indulging with this is that it's okay to quit if something is hard. But how does indulging that mindset, change it? What happens when the easy successes end and things not only get hard, but very hard? Are you not simply creating false expectations?

calf 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's because your premise is contingent on a pragmatic framing, whereas these issues depend on science. If the science says intellectual aptitude is a function of nature and nurture then we as society ought to find ways to help our next generations flourish. That does not mean allocating 10 teachers to one child as you had so strongly put it.

corimaith 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

People are different but the demands of 99% of actual jobs are far below that those natural differences won't matter as opposed to standardized training.

And it's a good thing that it's like that, because we don't want our society to be reliant on a few Rockstars. As Napoleon stated, an individual Mamluk far exceeded an individual Frenchman, but 1000 Frenchman could always defeat 1000 Mamluks.

siva7 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

oytis 4 days ago | parent [-]

There aren't universally good teachers. A teacher who can help a good student achieve exceptional results will not necessarily be good at making sure an unmotivated student gets a bare minimum and vice versa.

Unmotivated students need predefined structure, repetition, simplification and gamification. Talented ones need discussing first principles, being challenged, working at the edge of knowledge

siva7 4 days ago | parent [-]

We don't have to speculate on this. PISA research has described that effective teachers should adapt their teaching and also why a system like in Romania is a bad idea for the society (except for the elites). It is the second poorest country of the Union and one of the most unstable. The data and research is all public. It's not a popular opinion with this crowd here - but then you can argue against the science instead of populist opinions..

oytis 4 days ago | parent [-]

I might be wrong here, but I never heard that PISA has proved that averages matter more than top results, I thought that's just the axiom they are basing their assessments on.

I understand why fostering top performants is a hard sell in a globalised society though. Poor countries will lose top talent to rich countries anyway, and rich countries can rely on the stream of talent from the outside. For the scientific progress of humanity as a whole, having geniuses matters more than rising average level IMO though

vixen99 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Here's one issue. Romania has a really lousy motorway system, what there is of it. I gather that corruption has much to do with this apart from construction difficulties involving the Carpathians. As an example there isn't even a motorway between Bucharest and Brasov (88 miles or 141 km apart), the latter being a favorite destination for tourists and wealthy and not-so wealthy second home owners alike. The trip by car either way is usually a nightmare. I should add that Brasov is one of the major towns of Romania not just a tourist attraction.

To the point! The plight of innumerable isolated rural communities trying to attract decent teachers and conditions for their kids is clear to see. Trains don't cut it. General poverty results with knock-on effects.

petre 4 days ago | parent [-]

It's a bit more nuanced.

The teachers will just move to cities with more schools. Qualified workforce too. Rural areas are already depopulated.

Yes, the trip by car to Brasov is quite daunting on a Friday evening or Saturday morning. But infrastructure is getting better thanks to the EU. The politicians learned that motorways with EU and government funds is a great way to get them voted and they created a current account deficit.

Brasov is nice. What's not that nice about it, is brown bears roaming freely at night on the streets. Trivia: was also named after Stalin during stalinism. It also had a Hollywood like sign post cut in the treeline on the main hill with the dictator's name.

Viliam1234 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I’d much rather see Romania adapt a system which educates everyone, rather than the world be better at filtering.

Be careful what you wish for.

I understand the sentiment, and I wish we could make education as good as possible for everyone. The problem is, "as good as possible" is still very different for different people. So if you change the system so that everyone learns the same and no concentration of cognitive elites is allowed, it will mean that you have to really slow down the curriculum, to allow the average (and below-average) students to catch up with it. So the smartest kids won't get the best education they can get, and probably not even the kind of education they can get today.

> The kind of math we did in 10th grade (there are 12 grades in Romania) was math people were only introduced to in their first year of university in Denmark.

I suspect that this is how it probably happened. You were better at math then average, so you were allowed to learn faster than the average. The kid in Denmark who was your equivalent probably had to learn math at the same speed as the average Danish student. That's why they had to wait to learn that kind of math at university.

> There’re also a significant amount of optional after-school programs for contests

Yes, but it's still a huge waste of time if at school you have the math you already know, and you can only get the better math in the after-school activity; when you could be learning it at school instead.

casey2 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The problem with this line of thinking is that nobody is "predisposed" to intellectual work" It's entirely a system designed to recreate elites and study to tests. There is no scientific basis for the claim that teaching young students specialized mathematics is beneficial to their education