The Most Active Threads since Friday

Since I took the weekend off from blog posting, today I'll look at the most active threads since Friday. The first of those was titled, "This is getting ridiculous" and posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. At first glance, this is simply another in a long list of threads complaining about the alleged unfairness of college admissions. The original poster complains that her son — whose stats objectively are impressive — has repeatedly been waitlisted or deferred by top universities to which he has applied to study computer science. What makes this thread somewhat different is its focus on computer science and the substance of the replies. Whereas most threads of this sort tend to get bogged down in self-pity among White males and Asians who are convinced the entire system is rigged against them, the replies in this thread look at other explanations. Many posters point out that computer science is currently very popular and universities have difficulties expanding their programs given the high salaries that potential professors are able to command elsewhere. As a result, there is a supply and demand problem that is resulting in disappointing admissions results for many very qualified candidates. Other responses suggest that the original poster's son might not be as uniquely qualified as she believes and some posters hypothesize that admissions committee members are not sufficiently versed in technology to adquately understand the qualifications of the strongest applicants. Eventually the discussion does turn to the usual trope that equity is causing the best candidates to be rejected. But, by now, forum participants are well-versed in the argument and able to provide solid counter-points. One slightly new twist in this discussion is a debate about whether computer science is a dead end field that will be replaced by artificial intelligence. As is soundly argued in the thread, believing such a thing suggests a significant misunderstanding of the field.

The second most active topic was posted in the "Off-Topic" forum and titled, "NYT Opinion Piece: This Isn’t What Millennial Middle Age Was Supposed To Look Like". The original poster linked to the article described in the title, but said very little about it. Since the article is behind the New York Times' paywall, most users were left at a bit of a loss about the contents of the article and therefore resorted to snarky replies. Longtime readers of this blog will be familiar with my deep animosity towards generational labels, and this thread is no different. Nevertheless, the US has suffered a series of setbacks and unwelcome developments in the past few decades which have inordinately impacted people of a specific age-range. Therefore, there is some commonality among those who pursued college during a period of increased tuition costs, thereby accumulating significant college debt, then witnessed multiple economic downturns, coupled with increased housing costs. This has created a mass of individuals saddled with debt, unable to accumulate wealth, and struggling to afford homes. However, to attribute all of these characteristics to an entire age group is simply wrong. Hence my dislike of generational labels. This thread is filled with examples of posters who do find themselves facing such struggles, but also with those who aren't. There is considerable debate about whether ending up in the type of bind described in the article is a result of poor individual decision-making or a factor of external developments outside of an individual's control. There are also lots of comparisons to other generations which I also find to be such over generalizations as to be of little actual use for the discussion. Central to the NYT article was the supposition that Millennials are now reaching middle age. Some posters who described themselves as being in their 30s objected to this description. It probably is true that with increasing lifespans, we may need to rethink when "middle age" begins.

Next was a thread titled, "MCPS Teachers Quitting? Who is replacing them?" and posted in the "Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)" forum. We have had thread after thread about the declining situation of area public schools and this is another of that genre. The original poster asks, as does the title, who is replacing the teachers who are quitting. The answers are all disappointing, generally saying that teachers who leave are not being replaced with fulltime teachers, but rather temporary substitutes. Posters claim that this is a country-wide problem that is not limited to this area. Posters who describe themselves as teachers say that the situation is only going to get worse and that teachers are increasingly likely to quit and replacements will be almost impossible to find. The constant stream of threads like this — all with the same dire predictions — makes me hope that DCUM is nothing but an echo chamber of disaffected educators. The alternative, that what is being described is entirely accurate, is very concerning. My children are almost done with school with one in college and the other finishing his senior year. But, I struggle to read threads like this because of the anxiety they cause. The DC Metro Area should have thriving public school systems, not systems on the verge of collapse. As always in these threads, those with answers about how to solve the problems really have no clue. Everything is simple to them as problems about which you know nothing often seem. Unfortunately, those who do seem to understand the situation have no answers, or at least no answers that have any hope of being fulfilled. Just about every problem this country faces will be made worse by a significant decline in public education. Yet, there seems to be very little interest in addressing the problem.

The final thread at which I'll look today was posted in the "General Parenting Discussion" forum and titled "Another mom invited herself to my kid’s birthday party". The original poster explains that her second grade daughter invited all the kids in her class to her birthday party which will be held at a party center. The mother of one child texted the original poster to ask if she could attend as well because her child is anxious and it would be easier for him if she were there. The original poster is upset by this request because she was looking forward to catching up with her parents and two other parents with whom she is good friends. She doesn't want to have to deal with a stranger. Many posters tell the original poster that at that age many parents will likely stay so she should prepare herself. Others argue that the original poster should be more gracious and welcoming. Frankly, I didn't have a lot of sympathy for the original poster from the start and what little I did have disappeared when I noticed that she sock puppeted a response to herself describing the other mom and the child as "weird". I'll probably be accused of "doxxing" like the last time wrote something like this, but I just don't think that exploiting the anonymity and the easy ability to sock puppet DCUM offers to say this sort thing deserves protection. Much of the thread consists of disputes between parents of kids with special needs who try to explain the challenges that their kids face and why it might be important for the other mother to attend and posters who have no interest in accommodating such children. Yesterday I removed several posts from this thread that expressed considerable animosity towards children with special needs. All in all, this thread is pretty disappointing.