The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)
1–10 of 922 posts
Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)
#2I’m not aware of studies showing that gifted programs have a positive impact on student performance.
My hunch is that the typical school district is looking for a palatable excuse to reduce funding needs.
Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)
#3>I agree that it is unacceptable to have eighth grade Algebra I classes and gifted education programs that disproportionately exclude Black and brown children. But if equity is the goal, we should be mandating that every eighth grader takes Algebra I—and then structure the entire pre-K to seventh grade student experience to ensure this is a legitimate possibility for every child. Since when does equity mean everyone gets nothing?
I don't know whether Algebra I is above or below what eighth graders can be expected to do, but raising the difficulty of every class to what the most advanced student is capable of is not the answer either. Everybody knows someone else that is better at math than they are, and someone who is not as good. It is universal common knowledge that the ease with which one takes to math is different for different people. Why can't we just admit it and quit trying to make people who are unique the same?
Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)
#4It’s all Harrison Bergeron all the way down.
Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)
#5"The current population of students we identify as academically gifted and talented is unacceptably whiter and wealthier than the actual student population of academically gifted and talented students should be."
A typical IQ threshold for a gifted program is 130. The average IQ overall is 100 with standard deviation 15. For black Americans the average score on IQ tests is about 85, which explains why blacks will be under-represented in gifted programs unless racial preferences are used. The makers of IQ tests would like to reduce racial differentials while maintaining the predictive abilities of their tests, but they have not been able to.
Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)
#6Eliminating “gifted” programs because they offend the racial sensibilities of the managerial class is a blatant exercise in privilege and ladder-pulling.
I think it’s grotesque how many privileged people are happily destroying the lives of others (often, those they pretend to care about) so they don’t have to think critically about or be uncomfortable thinking about race.
Seattle is the epitome of “privileged White liberals hurt everyone for their comfort”:
The bourgeois have become the baizuo.
Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)
#7No post body was provided.
Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)
#8I’m not aware of studies showing that gifted programs have a positive impact on student performance. My hunch is that the typical school district is looking for a palatable excuse to reduce funding needs.
I can’t speak for everyone but they kept me from dropping out.
Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)
#9> I do not doubt the good intentions behind the decisions educators make in the name of equity.
I do. Or rather, I doubt the good intentions of the decision makers. I don't think educators are making these decisions. The more I experience the public education system through my child (I did not experience it myself, as I was homeschooled), and the more stories I hear from parents, the more it looks like school administrators are politicians looking to cut costs and get on a track to end up in city council. The actual welfare of the children doesn't really look like it ends up a part of the equation.
Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)
#10Author cites the research on minorities being less likely be identified as gifted given comparable test scores, but selectively leaves out all of the research on the effects of eliminating gifted programs.
I guess Teach for America assumes their readers are too dumb to notice?