Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 553 posts

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#381

Post by [deleted] »

phil21 wrote: post #32
csa wrote: post #10

It’s not just California, but California may be one of the more egregious state neglecters. The push at the state level for policies that focus on equality of outcomes over equality of opportunities will not end well for the gifted and talented communities. Whenever I hear these people talk about their policies, I can’t help but recall Harrison Bergeron. Focusing on equality of outcomes in a society that structurally…

> Killing truly progressive programs for the purpose of virtue signaling is a loss for society It's not just a loss for society. It's society-killing. Taking resources away from those who move society forward and spending them on those who are unlikely to "pay it back" is a way your culture dies. Conquerers in the past used this strategy to win massive empires for themselves. It's a ridiculous self-own. This is perha…

[deleted]

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#382

Post by [deleted] »

zozbot234 wrote: post #368
mlyle wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I asked for sources, not a quibble on a sub-point. I disagree. I like rote and rigor, but I think it's a mistake to ignore developing problem solving and intuition early. A lot of programs overshoot, but figuring out how to make decent guesses and test them is important (as is getting lots of practice on well-defined problems). edit: it looks like you're editing your comment. You added: > As it turns out, hearing the…

> developing problem solving and intuition early. There's no reason why these things couldn't be developed in a more "structured" approach than the default (avoiding the overshooting you mention). The quick feedback cycle for every answer is really the most critical point.

[deleted]

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#383

Post by eitally »

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #376
eitally wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For better or for worse, when I was in school in the 80s and early 90s, tracking started in about 4th grade (not counting kids who skipped earlier grades entirely). I essentially had about 90% the same kids in all my classes from 4th grade through high school graduation (not counting the influx from other feeder schools that joined in 6th & 9th). The result was less distraction in the classroom because everyone wante…

>the social/emotional maturity of kids these days far exceeds generations past. I thought they were plagued by anxiety?

Nah, that was the aughts. These days the only anxiety is about cost of living, but it doesn't hit until college age. Speaking completely truthfully, my perception is that the teens of today are better adjusted psychologically than any generation before them.

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#384

Post by AnimalMuppet »

bunderbunder wrote: post #107

As an alum of gifted programs with many friends who were also alums, I think most of us would say, "good riddance". In fact, I'm pretty sure the strongest haters of gifted programs I know are people who used to be in them. For most of us, the reality was that our status as relatively studious kids created a situation where our area of greatest need was social-emotional development, not intellectual development. Gifte…

I know at least one person - a very, very smart person - who really struggles in flipped classrooms. I think there are people who thrive in them and people who don't, and that axis is orthogonal to the gifted/not gifted axis.

Flipped classrooms look wonderful - here's a group of people who were struggling before, and look, they're thriving! But you can miss that here's another group who were thriving before, and now they're struggling.

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#385

Post by sunshowers »

kelnos wrote: post #366
sunshowers wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I think each student should be challenged in ways that cause their skills to develop, unequal opportunities lead to unequal outcomes which in turn lead to unequal opportunities and so on. There isn't really a separation between opportunities and outcomes that way. But you also have to balance this with people in such programs not thinking of themselves as superior to others. This seems really hard -- I think it…

I didn't think the GP was arguing that. School systems are focusing on equality of outcomes, when they should be focusing on equality of opportunities. Gifted kids will be able to take better advantage of those opportunities and experience better outcomes. But that's ok; that should be how things work. When you focus only on equal outcomes, you end up with the lowest common denominator, and gifted kids get bored and…

To be clear I think the goal should not be to equalize opportunities or outcomes. I think the goal should be to equalize the amount of challenge each student experiences, wherever they are. (It's like strength training.)

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#386

Post by yieldcrv »

bobfromsf wrote: post #90

As a father with a son with IQ over 160, I can tell you unequivocally that California thinks gifted kids are the enemy. Gifted children, especially profoundly gifted kids like mine are special needs. He can’t function in a regular class because he would become bored and would act out and constantly get in trouble. Since my kid was a toddler we have had to completely rely on ourselves to figure everything out and we w…

The article goes over that.

specifically how it wasn't the grade that was the issue, it was the speed of the course material. so once your son catches up, the problems will resurface because of the slow people. just now compounded by the social isolation and lack of physical development in comparison to peers.

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#387

Post by roguecoder »

newsclues wrote: post #316
roguecoder wrote: post #297

The whole point of "gifted" was that these are kids who are disproportionally likely to drop out of school, engage in risky behavior, get pregnant, get bad grades, etc. The problem is that A. they called it "gifted" so people thought it was something you _wanted_ your kids to be and B. the screening test they used was the IQ test, which you can massively improve your score on by studying for it. So parents were deter…

I was in the gifted program in Canada and while that may have been an aim, it was also to identify the best and given them opportunities to excel, to allow them to grow and go on to be extraordinary citizens.

That kind of moral value being given to what is just neurodiversity is a huge part of the problem. By implication, you've just called people with learning disabilities "the worst".

Neither group of children benefits from morality being attributed to their neurodivergence. Least of all the kids who overperform and have learning disabilities at the same time.

It is good that people are different. It doesn't make gifted kids better.

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#388

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

thimkerbell wrote: post #167
bobfromsf wrote: post #90

As a father with a son with IQ over 160, I can tell you unequivocally that California thinks gifted kids are the enemy. Gifted children, especially profoundly gifted kids like mine are special needs. He can’t function in a regular class because he would become bored and would act out and constantly get in trouble. Since my kid was a toddler we have had to completely rely on ourselves to figure everything out and we w…

What U.S. state has the best resources for kids at the gifted end of the spectrum?

Nevada? https://www.davidsonacademy.unr.edu/

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#389

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

eitally wrote: post #383
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the social/emotional maturity of kids these days far exceeds generations past. I thought they were plagued by anxiety?

Nah, that was the aughts. These days the only anxiety is about cost of living, but it doesn't hit until college age. Speaking completely truthfully, my perception is that the teens of today are better adjusted psychologically than any generation before them.

Huh, why is that?

Re: California's most neglected group of students: the gifted ones

#390

Post by didibus »

hintymad wrote: post #374
didibus wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So, pushing students to realize their potential will be against equity, but will be the best way to minimize the equity gap. That's not what equity is, but it's a common messaging by those trying to move the popular opinion against it, so I understand why you wrongly thought so. Equity isn't about holding back high-achieving students or bringing everyone to the same level. Instead, it's about ensuring everyone has…

> Equity isn't about holding back high-achieving students or bringing everyone to the same level. Instead, it's about ensuring everyone has access to the resources and opportunities they need to reach their full potential, while recognizing that different people might need different levels or types of support to get there. Isn't this equal opportunity, which means equality, which I also support? > The goal is to lift…

> Isn't this equal opportunity, which means equality, which also support?

Sorry, I forked the convo in two different replies. I explain the difference with equal opportunity in my other response. But basically, the introduction of the idea of equity was because the prior idea of equal opportunity assumed everyone starts from the same place, or has the same potential.

With equal opportunity, you give everyone the exact same education.

With equity, you give everyone the education they deserve.

> I thought California, or at least SFUSD, did exactly opposite. For instance, they pushed the algebra to Grade 8 (or grade 9?) and geometry to grade 9, in the name of equity. That is, they try to restrict the access from even the ordinary kids (many kids have no problems studying algebra before grade 8) in the name of helping the challenged.

Ya, instead of providing additional support to help struggling students access advanced math earlier, they essentially "leveled down" by restricting access for everyone. That case is often cited as an example of how misunderstanding equity (or using equity as a cover for other goals, let's be honest) can lead to policies that actually increase educational disparities rather than reducing them.

I can't explain it, and I don't support it. But it's not an example of equity, even if it pretends to be.

I think sometimes the political deadlock results in stupid things like this. Like, they wanted funding to help struggling students, got opposition to it, so resorted to this "cost-free" but harmful alternative, and labeled it as "equity" to try to make it more palatable and fool the people who wanted them to implement equity polices to believe they did.

Post reply on HN