The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021) • Hacker News Board

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#91

Post by zozbot234 » Wed, Jun 08, 2022, 5:14 PM UTC

whatshisface wrote: post #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…

> raising the difficulty of every class to what the most advanced student is capable

The alternate view is that we should very much do this as a meaningful challenge to K-12 math teachers. People throughout the Western world, at all levels of underlying aptitude (whatever might be meant by that), manage to learn their basic intro to algebra in junior high. It's not rocket surgery, FFS!

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#92

Post by mnw21cam » Wed, Jun 08, 2022, 5:14 PM UTC

jeremyjh wrote: post #18

derac wrote: post #11

Gifted programs are "unacceptably white". WTF does that mean? I had to pass essentially an IQ test to get placed into those classes. For me, it made a big difference in being engaged in schoolwork when every class consisted of reiterating content for days which I had mastered in minutes. Edit: I removed "I don't see what race has to do with it." I do see how race can affect this when the gatekeeper is a teacher with…

Just read what he wrote? > Black students are 66% less likely to be identified as gifted compared to white students with similar test scores. Black, Latinx, and Native American students are far less likely to attend a school that even offers a gifted program.

Forgive me if this seems all too simple to me. The solution is very clearly stop doing that then.

There's a lot of value in having a gifted track in schooling. Throwing that away because it is currently inaccurate at identifying students that are best suited to it is a stupid idea. Make it accurate at identifying the students that are best suited to it instead.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#93

Post by b112 » Wed, Jun 08, 2022, 5:14 PM UTC

googlryas wrote: post #73

whatshisface wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a bad analogy because the NBA is not the only accessible path to a stable middle class life while school, for many people, is.

Not even close to true. Going into a trade is a great way to get into a comfortable middle class life. And in those trades, you'll commonly find people who did horrible in school, and thought they were idiots because of it.

Yes, some trades pay way more, have more available jobs, and have better working conditions (work hours, etc) than PhDs in a variety of sciences.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#94

Post by gcfff » Wed, Jun 08, 2022, 5:14 PM UTC

thebooktocome wrote: post #17

_3u10 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t speak for everyone but they kept me from dropping out.

But would you (and the statistical student like you) have been better served by a different intervention? That’s the thing I’m curious about.

I think a new intervention should be demonstrated to be an improvement before current interventions be cut.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#95

Post by slowhand09 » Wed, Jun 08, 2022, 5:14 PM UTC

acchow wrote: post #19

whatshisface wrote: post #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…

> Why can't we just admit it and quit trying to make people who are unique the same? America keeps conflating equity for equality.

[flagged]

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#96

Post by jayd16 » Wed, Jun 08, 2022, 5:14 PM UTC

jmyeet wrote: post #51

There are so many topics that are hard to talk about nowadays without getting into politics but politics and structural inequality are at the core of this. For the benefit of non-US readers, know that how the US funds public education (K-12) is rather unique. It's done through property taxes essentially. Depending on your state and city your property taxes can vary a lot with the same value property. But what this me…

In California a large percentage is state income tax not property taxes.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#97

Post by cyberlurker » Wed, Jun 08, 2022, 5:15 PM UTC

jmyeet wrote: post #51

There are so many topics that are hard to talk about nowadays without getting into politics but politics and structural inequality are at the core of this. For the benefit of non-US readers, know that how the US funds public education (K-12) is rather unique. It's done through property taxes essentially. Depending on your state and city your property taxes can vary a lot with the same value property. But what this me…

In NYC they also flatten all Asians into one group and say the “gifted” programs aren't diverse enough because a high percentage are Asian. As if implying Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Korean, etc. all have the same life experience, cultures, advantages, disadvantages…

Also you nailed it on the property tax point. Often overlooked as the biggest issue with education. A similar sized home in a good school district can be 2 or 3x as expensive as one in a mediocre school district.

Edit: when talking about property tax, I am referring to most suburbs, not NYC.

Seems like a lot of people are posting evidence that the property tax point is correlated with better schools but the funding difference is made up for by the stare and federal government. Interesting.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#98

Post by harles » Wed, Jun 08, 2022, 5:15 PM UTC

mikece wrote: post #39

jeremyjh wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just read what he wrote? > Black students are 66% less likely to be identified as gifted compared to white students with similar test scores. Black, Latinx, and Native American students are far less likely to attend a school that even offers a gifted program.

Sounds like the problem might be with those who are selected to identify the "gifted" students. I am less interested in racial correlations to being identified as "gifted" and more interested in attributes such as whether the student is from a two-parent household, whether they are considered poor, whether they attend a local school or are transported to one outside of their neighborhood, etc. I suspect that we lose…

This assumes being gifted is something innate and simply needs to be brought out. I don’t think that’s the case.

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#99

Post by jaywalk » Wed, Jun 08, 2022, 5:15 PM UTC

superb-owl wrote: post #52

I've never understood this approach of "eliminating gifted programs" due to equity concerns. Why not just implement something along the lines of affirmative action policies - make sure the demographics gifted programs roughly match the demographics of the school district?

How does shoving a student into a gifted program they aren't otherwise qualified for solely due to their race actually help anything?

Re: The case for expanding rather than eliminating gifted education programs (2021)

#100

Post by Kaze404 » Wed, Jun 08, 2022, 5:15 PM UTC

colechristensen wrote: post #22

Still bending over backwards to accommodate a racial equity narrative. How about you don’t look at a child’s skin color before you decide how they are educated and instead focus on doing the best you can for each instead of trying to make everything about achieving social justice goals. Anything else is racism.

So simple! We just need to stop looking at color and all inequality will go away! I wonder why nobody's thought of that before.