Live data from Hacker News

Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement

hechingerreport.org

331–340 of 389 posts

Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement

#331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, so it raises the question: What is the relative importance of helping the best students verse helping the worst students? Even if we solve the talent identification problem, SOME kids are going to be the lower achievers.... are we willing to sacrifice helping them do better to help the top achievers do their best? How much are we willing to sacrifice in either direction?

Having grown up in public schools in a G&T cohort and participating in CTY/SET, I absolutely favor teaching all kids to the highest level of challenge they can benefit from. That’s going to mean some are challenged by simple arithmetic. Others by multi-variate calculus in 10th grade. I think that necessarily means segregating the kids by ability in a subject, but I’m not married to that input or mechanism near as muc…

Having been a kid who moved around a fair bit, and was in the "gifted" (cor, I hate that word) programs when they were available, and in the regular classes when they weren't, I decry this false dilemma.

The truth of the matter is, I learned more and was more intellectually stimulated when I was in the regular classes. Because they let me burn through the homework more quickly, leaving more time in the evening to pursue my own projects and pursuits.

The gifted programs were certainly more difficult. But they largely achieved that by assigning more homework, and it was invariably crap work - at best, something that was much more interesting to the teacher than it was to me, and just as often pure busywork that was made artificially difficult for the sake of "challenging" me.

In some sense, I even found them insulting, and I found my parents' need to put me in them insulting, because the clear implication was that the only achievements of mine that mattered were ones that could be written down and certified by the school. Spending my time learning more musical instruments wasn't an option, because school would only give me a report card grade on one instrument at a time. Spending my time learning an additional language - perhaps a more challenging one than anything my school offered - wasn't an option, because school would only give me a report card grade in Spanish. Spending my time learning linear algebra so I could do 3D graphics programming (this was before OpenGL was really a thing, so you had to DIY) didn't count, because that wasn't on the list of kinds of math that had been blessed by the school's curriculum. It was absolute BS; from my perspective my personal interests were being subtly curtailed because they couldn't be pursued in a way that let my parents feel like they were Good Students™ vicariously through me.

And the worst of it is, I'm pretty sure parents and school systems are so busy stumbling over themselves to create these elitist selective enrollment programs that they trap both the kids who do get into them and everyone else into a local minimum. The very best classes I experienced in school weren't the "advanced" ones, they were the regular (on paper) ones that followed more of an inverted classroom model, where the lecture time in the classroom was kept to a minimum, so that more time could be reserved for working together on homework. And the very best of those was a math class, where those of us who had a relatively easier time following the textbooks and lectures could put that advantage to good use by then trying to explain the new concepts to our classmates who were having a harder time. It was better for me intellectually, because, unlike what a lot of gifted programs seem to believe (or at least did a few decades ago), depth of knowledge is at least as important as breadth of knowledge, and there's no better way to ensure you've mastered a subject than teaching it to others. And it was better from a mental health perspective, too, because it steered clear of turning school into this awful competitive tar pit where the students who are having an easier time are seen as making everyone else seem comparatively inferior due to an unearned natural talent.

Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement

#332
post #11

I think in a few decades people will be looking back at the obsession over achievement and academics as something weird. People learn and achieve in different paces, and, assuming a lifetime of continuous opportunity for learning (as we have today), the metrics of specific ages are obsolete things.

even if everyone could have all their bills paid for them so they could learn all day at any age, it's ludicrous to suggest this would "obsolete" the discussion of how to treat intelligent kids in relation to others. also fluid intelligence declines over time so it is absolutely in society's interest to identify talent and assist it as early as possible.

what if intelligence becomes something that "can be cured"

Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement

#333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say the education system takes an input of children with a value of 1 and outputs educated people with a "value" between 5 and 10. Even if the system is overtly racist and only outputs minorities of values 5 and 6 it is still beneficial to everyone if the system is improved so that everyone gets a +1

So you mean a system that in practice separates kids by race. Didn’t we already try that before in the South? Ever heard of Jim Crow? Where do you think all of the funding and resources go when you do that?

Stop trying to put words in my mouth. I'm saying that the fact that a system produces unfair outcomes is not a reason to not make improvement that cause the system produce better outcomes across the board. No more, no less.

Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement

#334

I was fourth picked for g&t. First and second pick ended up being quite successful, as did the third picked. One has a high up, prestigious position at Amazon and the other retired from Microsoft wealthy. Me, I smoke weed and that’s about the only thing I’ve really done consistently since high school.. more consistently than music, and programming, even. Frankly, I wish I had been better separated from the other kids…

I find this argument uncompelling insofar as "smart" is a crap proxy for "needs protection from bullying". And, insofar as kids who aren't particularly bright have every bit as much of a right to not be mistreated at school, if our key motivation here is keeping kids from being bullied, a solution that is only available to a select few kids who are sometimes perceived as having greater personal worth would be entirely missing the point. Bullying needs to be dealt with in a way that works for everyone.

Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement

#335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you mean a system that in practice separates kids by race. Didn’t we already try that before in the South? Ever heard of Jim Crow? Where do you think all of the funding and resources go when you do that?

Stop trying to put words in my mouth. I'm saying that the fact that a system produces unfair outcomes is not a reason to not make improvement that cause the system produce better outcomes across the board. No more, no less.

It doesn’t produce better outcomes for the people you pull out of the system then get ignored and they don’t get the resources, access, or networking opportunities they need. That’s exactly what happened during segregation.

Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement

#336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what are your thoughts on this? https://web.stanford.edu/~joboaler/Jo-Boaler-reveals-attacks...

She does absolutely nothing to dispute the points they made about her actual research. It’s ad hominem attacks on her critics and pointing out her own credentials. She’s never refuted any of their attacks on her work itself, because she knows her work can never be replicated.

Did or did you not create a new account solely to bash on Dr. Boaler?

Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement

#337
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you not feel that gifted/nerdy/aspy kids reciprocated? It might just be that I’m a complete asshole, but I grew up in Mississippi feeling very isolated and estranged from everyone around me. I think I definitely felt like I was bullied when I was very young. But by high school and college, I was being outright toxic to people. If I am generous to myself, a lot of that could be attributed to anxiety, depression, la…

In my school, the 'gifted/nerdy' group had significant (but not complete) overlap with the 'socially/athletically outgoing' group, with the 'aspy' kids sprinkled around and generally respected by their peers. A lot of the dichotomies being described in this thread are therefore alien to me. The bigger divide was between the 'gifted/nerdy/popular/athletic' group and the 'prone to violence, nihilistic body modification…

I never had any enthusiasm for sport, though and felt trying hard to win at a sport is stupid. Always tried to sit everything out. On the other hand, I also felt trying hard to achieve good results in other subjects isn't worth the effort, since the material was mostly useless with the exception of math. But there I never had to try hard, though, I probably would have, if it was more challenging and also interesting.

Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement

#338
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amen to this. I was separated (went to Stuyvesant HS in NYC) and it made a world of difference for me, as compared to JHS or elementary school. Prior to Stuy, I was bullied like crazy, beaten, and it was very difficult to try and fit in with many of the others around me who, frankly, just didn't give a fuck . It really sucked. Stuy was a different world, and the first time in my life I felt the opportunity to actuall…

> Prior to Stuy, I was bullied like crazy, beaten, and it was very difficult to try and fit in with many of the others around me who, frankly, just didn't give a fuck. It really sucked Can't we fix bullying in the first place ?

I haven't given this topic a lot of thought, but at first glance it sounds like one of the very hardest problems imaginable to solve? It's hardwired deep into human psychology, and you have limited ways of affecting - or even communicating with - school-aged kids.

Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement

#339
post #232

I actually wonder what's up with bullying in US schools. I grew up in Moscow, Russia in the 90ies (many people were not well off to say the least) and I was both super nerdy and extremely eh, daring (I would talk back to other kids who were much stronger/more popular than me all the time etc.). Sure, I was not popular, yet I was bullied lightly and almost never physically, mostly by a couple classmates who were just…

People still get bullied today for sure, but it is less than it was 30 years ago. There are kids today who grow up and have never gotten into a fist fight. This is incredible to me because as a child most of the boys would fight now and then.

Why does bullying appear to be more prevalent in the United States. I can only take guesses.

First guess would be because there has long been (since the founding) a strong vein of social darwinism in the US. For a very long time the idea of "rugged individualism" was held up as the model citizen. Independent, able to take care of him or herself without depending upon the authorities/government, etc. There is a fine line between "rugged individualism" and social darwinism.

Second, people in the US have long been taught to break the rules. We idolize rule breakers, rebels, and teach a general distrust of authority. In the US this attitude really resonates with the poor, as the systems we have set up do not serve them well. If you are wealthy or gifted it behooves you to follow the rules and use the systems put in place.

Third, maybe self-obsession is a factor. We encourage children to find themselves. Reflect on themselves. Figure out what is best for them. We don't often tell our young people to think of others, and even those that are taught to think of others are taught to the think of others in a patronizing, not empathizing way.

Finally, it might be the result of America's melting pot. We have always been a country of many cultures living together. The Italians, Germans, Irish, and later Hispanics, Africans, etc. all used to fight with each other in school. Today differences are more due to income and family status.

Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement

#340

The author of this article is an academic fraud who makes unsubstantiated claims in everything she does. Jo Boaler has an agenda without the data to support it, and her lies are used to support structural changes to school programs. Instead of responding to critics with facts and information, she just calls everyone who criticizes her a “bully”. https://www.nonpartisaneducation.org/Review/Essays/v8n5.htm

what are your thoughts on this? https://web.stanford.edu/~joboaler/Jo-Boaler-reveals-attacks...

Well, this citation: "For instance, after San Francisco Unified de-tracked math, the proportion of students failing algebra fell from 40 percent to 8"

Comes from this article:

https://www.nctm.org/uploadedFiles/Standards_and_Positions/W...

But as you can see, the change involved moving Algebra 1 from eight grade to ninth grade. Withholding this fact is pretty egregious in my opinion.

I tried looking for the other numbers she mentions by following her links, but the links she provided didn't contain those numbers. And the pdf I linked here wasn't provided by her, in fact not a single one of the numbers she used were supported by her links. I'd guess that the other numbers have similar problems as this one, but I can't know since she didn't provide a way for me to see where those numbers came from.

About the conflict between her and the others, it is hard to know who is right or not so I don't know. But judging by this opinion piece she cares more about her agenda than actual truth.

Post reply on HN