Upvoted—I think agree that people have become too negative about it, and I’d be interested in seeing another org in this space, though I think I prefer top university outreach still on average, so am probably still a bit more negative than you.
A. One reason is you didn’t put much emphasis on what I see as some of the more significant downsides. One is what Peter Hurford says:
One of the hardest parts of high school outreach I think will be getting people to continue to be engaged over their college career (assuming they go to college), which is four years of substantial chance of value drift before any direct impact happens. Whereas recruiting from college, the distance is much less.
With a college student, you can talk to them about decisions like moving to an EA hub, working in an EA org etc., which are steps that tend to get people onto great long-term paths. With a high schooler, you’d need to hope they get involved in an EA group while at university, which suggests we’d ideally make the university groups good first, and even then I think would have higher chance of drifting away.
B. Another is that I think EA advice to high schoolers is less useful than what we have to say about later decisions. The common sense advice of things like “go to a prestigious university” and “quantitative subjects keep options open more” and “do internships / interesting projects / build CV material” already seems pretty good to me and are widely known.
In contrast, when someone is working out where to donate or which cause to work on, we think some options are over 100x better according to their values in a way that’s not widely known. This isn’t to say many people don’t make mistakes in their choice of university / major or how to spend their time at college, but I still think the delta between having EA advice and not having it is smaller.
Our crux might be this:
I think the EA and rationality communities have lots of tools that help people become overall better at thinking, and potentially vastly increase their lifetime impact.
My take is more that this advice is useful, but it’s not radically better (for most people) than other sources out there (plus the other downsides you mention). E.g. a bunch of value comes from ideas like ‘actually optimize for your goals’, but you can get this from other smart self-help advice, following top Silicon Valley people etc., reading Dalio’s Principles.That’s just one example, and to repeat, I still think it’s better to have these ideas than not, just I don’t think the delta is as big.
On the other hand, if people had 4 years longer to think about which cause to focus on, and to learn a lot about that topic, that seems pretty useful.
C. The age data I mention in the other comment.
D. I think the lack of track record is still a negative E.g. we have a lot of examples of great university groups bringing in great people, so I feel confident that starting another good university group will be useful. Doing more high school outreach is great as an experiment, but overall I’m less confident it’ll work, and it’s also harder to measure. (Though I haven’t seen data from SPARC, which could change my mind.)
Another is that I think EA advice to high schoolers is less useful than what we have to say about later decisions. The common sense advice of things like “go to a prestigious university” and “quantitative subjects keep options open more” and “do internships / interesting projects / build CV material” already seems pretty good to me and are widely known.
I generally agree with your point but I do think there are a few things one could suggest e.g.
Suggesting Economics/PPE as particularly great options for undergrad that keep options open whilst also leaving significant potential for doing good through career or further study
Similarly suggesting Econ as a good A-level option
Suggesting to those wanting to study maths/science at uni to consider something else technical but probably more useful, for example Econ/Econ+Maths or Computer Science (emphasis on “suggest” I realise the danger of pushing people into something they don’t want to do)
Suggesting philosophy as a credible A-level to do! I think it would be good for people to introduced to philosophical ideas earlier
Making the classic EA point that counterfactual impact as a medic is small! This could save people from doing expensive six year medicine degrees and then have little impact
I know these suggestions aren’t all that radical but they could still be somewhat useful. I am also aware that these suggestions would have to be made with care and the danger of being too pushy!
EDIT: I don’t have examples but I’m sure there are certain projects/internships one can do that are higher impact than others e.g. policy-related work
Yeah I totally agree there are useful things to say, though my impression is these kinds of changes are smaller and this kind of advice is more out there already (except the last one).
I think the hope for more radical changes would be giving people more time to mull over the worldview, and maybe introducing people to a general ‘prioritizy’ mindset, that can sometimes payoff a lot (e.g. thinking about what you really want to get out of college and making sure you do).
(On the specifics, I think maths & physics probably trumps economics at A-level, if someone has the option to do both. At undergrad it’s more unclear, but you can go from maths and physics into an econ, compsci or a bio PhD but not vice versa.)
OK I generally agree with your points, including on the specifics—it’s highly relevant that one can go from physics/maths undergrad to econ PhD but not the other way around. Taking that into account maths undergrad actually seems like something pretty good to promote, especially given its ETG potential.
I agree on the potential value from giving people time to mull over the worldview and introducing people to the general mindset at a younger age. One possible (although indirect) way to do so is through promoting philosophy in schools which is something I wrote on a few months ago.
Obviously EA outreach is more direct than general philosophy, but I think the tradeoff is that it is difficult for EA outreach to be consistent for students, making it hard for them to stay engaged. I suppose this could be mitigated by having EA-aligned teachers at certain schools who can try to keep students engaged through talks/societies etc. Indeed I think some people with philosophy degrees who are struggling to find high-impact options may find their comparative advantage in teaching philosophy at prestigious schools such as Eton, and doing what they can to promote EA outside the classroom.
Hey Buck,
Upvoted—I think agree that people have become too negative about it, and I’d be interested in seeing another org in this space, though I think I prefer top university outreach still on average, so am probably still a bit more negative than you.
A. One reason is you didn’t put much emphasis on what I see as some of the more significant downsides. One is what Peter Hurford says:
With a college student, you can talk to them about decisions like moving to an EA hub, working in an EA org etc., which are steps that tend to get people onto great long-term paths. With a high schooler, you’d need to hope they get involved in an EA group while at university, which suggests we’d ideally make the university groups good first, and even then I think would have higher chance of drifting away.
B. Another is that I think EA advice to high schoolers is less useful than what we have to say about later decisions. The common sense advice of things like “go to a prestigious university” and “quantitative subjects keep options open more” and “do internships / interesting projects / build CV material” already seems pretty good to me and are widely known.
In contrast, when someone is working out where to donate or which cause to work on, we think some options are over 100x better according to their values in a way that’s not widely known. This isn’t to say many people don’t make mistakes in their choice of university / major or how to spend their time at college, but I still think the delta between having EA advice and not having it is smaller.
Our crux might be this:
My take is more that this advice is useful, but it’s not radically better (for most people) than other sources out there (plus the other downsides you mention). E.g. a bunch of value comes from ideas like ‘actually optimize for your goals’, but you can get this from other smart self-help advice, following top Silicon Valley people etc., reading Dalio’s Principles.That’s just one example, and to repeat, I still think it’s better to have these ideas than not, just I don’t think the delta is as big.
On the other hand, if people had 4 years longer to think about which cause to focus on, and to learn a lot about that topic, that seems pretty useful.
C. The age data I mention in the other comment.
D. I think the lack of track record is still a negative E.g. we have a lot of examples of great university groups bringing in great people, so I feel confident that starting another good university group will be useful. Doing more high school outreach is great as an experiment, but overall I’m less confident it’ll work, and it’s also harder to measure. (Though I haven’t seen data from SPARC, which could change my mind.)
I generally agree with your point but I do think there are a few things one could suggest e.g.
Suggesting Economics/PPE as particularly great options for undergrad that keep options open whilst also leaving significant potential for doing good through career or further study
Similarly suggesting Econ as a good A-level option
Suggesting to those wanting to study maths/science at uni to consider something else technical but probably more useful, for example Econ/Econ+Maths or Computer Science (emphasis on “suggest” I realise the danger of pushing people into something they don’t want to do)
Suggesting philosophy as a credible A-level to do! I think it would be good for people to introduced to philosophical ideas earlier
Making the classic EA point that counterfactual impact as a medic is small! This could save people from doing expensive six year medicine degrees and then have little impact
I know these suggestions aren’t all that radical but they could still be somewhat useful. I am also aware that these suggestions would have to be made with care and the danger of being too pushy!
EDIT: I don’t have examples but I’m sure there are certain projects/internships one can do that are higher impact than others e.g. policy-related work
Yeah I totally agree there are useful things to say, though my impression is these kinds of changes are smaller and this kind of advice is more out there already (except the last one).
I think the hope for more radical changes would be giving people more time to mull over the worldview, and maybe introducing people to a general ‘prioritizy’ mindset, that can sometimes payoff a lot (e.g. thinking about what you really want to get out of college and making sure you do).
(On the specifics, I think maths & physics probably trumps economics at A-level, if someone has the option to do both. At undergrad it’s more unclear, but you can go from maths and physics into an econ, compsci or a bio PhD but not vice versa.)
OK I generally agree with your points, including on the specifics—it’s highly relevant that one can go from physics/maths undergrad to econ PhD but not the other way around. Taking that into account maths undergrad actually seems like something pretty good to promote, especially given its ETG potential.
I agree on the potential value from giving people time to mull over the worldview and introducing people to the general mindset at a younger age. One possible (although indirect) way to do so is through promoting philosophy in schools which is something I wrote on a few months ago.
Obviously EA outreach is more direct than general philosophy, but I think the tradeoff is that it is difficult for EA outreach to be consistent for students, making it hard for them to stay engaged. I suppose this could be mitigated by having EA-aligned teachers at certain schools who can try to keep students engaged through talks/societies etc. Indeed I think some people with philosophy degrees who are struggling to find high-impact options may find their comparative advantage in teaching philosophy at prestigious schools such as Eton, and doing what they can to promote EA outside the classroom.