Earlier quoted context omitted.
This pseudo caste system was probably beneficial to you in the upper caste, but I don't think students in tier 3 and below saw their lives improve.
> This pseudo caste system was probably beneficial to you in the upper caste, but I don't think students in tier 3 and below saw their lives improve. It is hardly a child's responsibility to suffer from the violence, bullying, and general disinterest in any academic achievement by another group of children.
Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement
291–300 of 389 posts
Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement
#292When I was in middle school in the 90s, I think around 7th grade (~12yo), the school district experimented with a new way of organizing the student body where they separated us into six distinct, equally sized cohorts based on some evaluation of each student's performance and capability. From what I could tell it was rougly: 1. Gifted / clearly university-bound 2. Potential college prep 3. Community college 4. Normal…
Sometimes disruptive kids need to be told they are capable and put with other people that are capable. Being told you're an idiot (lowest tier class) generally leads to a self fulfilling prophecy and that's a problem for society. I was a trouble maker at school. In my final two years, my history teacher took a special interest in me for whatever reason. I now have a masters degree from Cambridge university. I was for…
Everyone has different motivators and different idea's of success. Some of those ideas can lead to being classed a criminal, but the state wont accept its own part it plays in people's failures. Until the state recognises this, you will continue to have failure's in people who shouldn't really be failing. Family can also contribute to a persons failure, you cant help it they have different idea's to your own but a lot of parents view their kids as possessions and they don't always accept a kid can form strong beliefs and desires from a young age even though we hear of people who have managed to pursue childhood dreams.
>Sometimes disruptive kids need to be told they are capable I'd agree with that, but having a suitable person to recognise this and guide them is hard, some benefit from a hands off approach others benefit from a hands on coaching position. Out of all the secondary school teachers only 1 would defend me in the staff room, I really pushed the boundaries and challenged people even teachers, but anyone will know cognitive dissonance can create powerful anger in one or more people. I don't think the UK is geared up to educating and exploiting the talent of each individual to their max yet but I hold out hope. >I think a lot of disruptive boys can really benefit from a strong masculine teacher Certainly at primary school I gave female teachers a hard time especially if they didn't "flirt" with me and yes kids can have feelings at that age largely controlled by oxytocin imo, but I think it was a respect to the hidden but generally controlled anger you would sometimes from older male teachers, it was a shocking sight in some ways because older people are generally more laid back so to see them lose their temper was more of a shock than a younger adult who lost their temper more frequently. I also respected the older teachers more than the young teachers, whilst at primary school (6-7age), I am supposed to have caused a young female teacher to have had a nervous breakdown which perhaps backs this idea up, but I came from a very strict background where extreme corporal punishment was also the norm. Even at primary school I was very competitive, often completing work in the classroom first then disrupting the rest of the class as I hated having to sit in silence. When the teachers started setting me extra work to keep me occupied, that lasted for a few days as there was no extra benefit, but it proves some primary school kids can be highly motivated and quite likely the most disruptive. I wrote my first program on a ZX Spectrum one summer around 7-8yrs when it first came out because student neighbour had one and was studying computer science at Uni. He taught me to write basic programs. I didn't know what I was doing was considered hard or difficult because I hadn't been socially conditioned into thinking it was hard, here was something novel and fun which fitted in with the scifi like Dr Who/Star Wars I liked to watch. That I think is an important point, kids learn when its fun, if you have everyone including the teacher saying we are going to learn some hard maths, physics or sciences, the teacher, parents and older peers have subconsciously created a barrier to learning in the classroom. Its why we need to be careful what we say around kids because they are sponges for knowledge and we should be exploiting that better, but I think AI will be taking over soon, which is my primary interest. Cambridge is nice, could have gone, but education held me back imo so I pursued my own non educational path. Do I need those pieces of papers, no, I work for myself because no one has yet to build a general AI and so no one can teach people how to build one. Having a belief in yourself is also important which can be hard some days when things don't go right and then it can be easy to blame others for our own failures which I see a lot of in this thread. Noone will do it for us, we need to do it ourselves, but getting the right environment to make that happen can be hard and we don't always recognise what is a bad environment for us, in fact that can sometimes take years to spot so having periodic times of reflection can be a good thing when looking for ways to do things better and trying to be the best in the world!
Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement
#293Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having been educated in probably a different country, with a different school system, I am surprised to read all these comments. Not saying my country school system is perfect, it isn't. And there are cases of abuse, bullying does exist. But 30 years ago I was the good, shy, student in a poor neighbourhood of a big city and never suffered or witnessed anything too bad (and from 4 to 12 year old we had a kid with Down…
At some point , every fully developed education system splits kids by ability. Not everyone goes on to advanced studies, engineering school, law, or medicine. Not everyone learns a trade. That split might not happen until age 18, but my wager is that it does happen everywhere. The question is when is the optimal time? I tend to think earlier rather than later.
Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement
#294Earlier quoted context omitted.
All well and good, but those people still get to vote.
There is no difference between voters who attended school only because they were forced to, and hypothetical voters who weren’t forced to attend school.
Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement
#295Earlier quoted context omitted.
At some point , every fully developed education system splits kids by ability. Not everyone goes on to advanced studies, engineering school, law, or medicine. Not everyone learns a trade. That split might not happen until age 18, but my wager is that it does happen everywhere. The question is when is the optimal time? I tend to think earlier rather than later.
How early is “earlier”? Children have no clue of possibilities or consequences. This is why we have an age of majority: to protect kids from long term consequences of life choices they are not ready to make. Why should education be different? - what right have we to put a big cross on a child’s future and declare “you can never amount to more than this” based on childish behaviours and choices they may yet grow out o…
Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement
#296Earlier quoted context omitted.
All well and good, but those people still get to vote.
There is no difference between voters who attended school only because they were forced to, and hypothetical voters who weren’t forced to attend school.
Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement
#297Earlier quoted context omitted.
This pseudo caste system was probably beneficial to you in the upper caste, but I don't think students in tier 3 and below saw their lives improve.
> This pseudo caste system was probably beneficial to you in the upper caste, but I don't think students in tier 3 and below saw their lives improve. It is hardly a child's responsibility to suffer from the violence, bullying, and general disinterest in any academic achievement by another group of children.
In both middle school and high school, I was bullied incessantly by kids who were doing just fine, academically. Some of them went on to be quite successful people. Bullies nonetheless.
It would be so convenient (and karmically just) if all the awful kids went on to be dropouts and losers in life, but sometimes it doesn’t work out that way. Sometimes they’re smart kids, but they’re just assholes.
Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement
#298Earlier quoted context omitted.
So? The arguments, statistical analysis and summary data they base the report on are all either in the report I linked or derived from publicly available data. You don’t need to trust anything they said. You can check each individual claim. There’s no appeal to authority here. If you don’t believe their analysis feel free to attack it on the merits. But if the devil says 2 + 2 = 4 it’s still true. Either the analysis…
The Heritage Foundation has been caught lying in their self-funded "studies" so many times that I find it difficult to give them the benefit of doubt.
Note this study was national news in the US when released and quite thoroughly discussed so if there are flaws you could either find them yourself or google for them.
Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
How early is “earlier”? Children have no clue of possibilities or consequences. This is why we have an age of majority: to protect kids from long term consequences of life choices they are not ready to make. Why should education be different? - what right have we to put a big cross on a child’s future and declare “you can never amount to more than this” based on childish behaviours and choices they may yet grow out o…
The split doesn't need to be permanent, you could always rearrange the top/bottom achievers in each group.
Re: Separating gifted children hasn't led to better achievement
#300Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would it have to be a one-time selection? Put kids in a class based on their current level of academic performance. If you're doing better than the other kids in your class then you go to the more advanced class.
It's a somewhat self fulfilling prophecy though, isn't it? The point of splitting kids out is that it will push them forward academically; by being held back because of their performance at one point, it makes it that much harder to excel further down the line to jump in to an accelerated class.