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

71–80 of 553 posts

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

#71

Post by giantg2 »

atomicUpdate wrote: post #14

> There’s little doubt that racism played a role in identifying children as gifted even though the label was based on supposedly objective criteria. Why has the LA Times settled on racist teachers as the only reason for the skew in enrollment numbers, and why aren’t teachers upset the LA Times are calling them racists? I’m constantly surprised how often accusations like this are thrown around and how little pushback…

It's not that the teacher were racist. It's that the tests or indicators used to identify individuals as gifted were not evaluated well enough for bias. It's not overt racism. It's stuff like rich parents hiring tutors and the rich parents being more likely to be white (I would argue that implicit racism isn’t racism as it lacks intent, but is still a harmful bias to be eliminated). This goes back to their comment on high achievers getting into the program vs the inherently gifted. Another example is IQ tests administered in English to students who have English as a second language. Even stuff like parents training their kids for the format of the IQ test questions provides and advantage.

The problem I have with a lot of the stuff related to gifted learning is how it's structured and gate kept. In a public school, there should not be a limited number of seats for an academic program. Any student who can perform in that program should be allowed to participate, not just the top 10% or whatever. I think it should be measured on their current academic performance, not some IQ test or teacher recommendations. If you're consistently getting As in the regular course, you should be eligible to try the accelerated program. You may get more out of the accelerated program even if your grade drops from As to Bs. It also seems that many programs are all or nothing - either you're in the gifted program for all subjects or none at all. Being advanced in one or two subjects and in the regular classes for the others should be fine. It seems this is at least picking up more popularity in the past decade or two.

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

#72

Post by chimpanzee »

atomicUpdate wrote: post #14

> There’s little doubt that racism played a role in identifying children as gifted even though the label was based on supposedly objective criteria. Why has the LA Times settled on racist teachers as the only reason for the skew in enrollment numbers, and why aren’t teachers upset the LA Times are calling them racists? I’m constantly surprised how often accusations like this are thrown around and how little pushback…

>> There’s little doubt that racism played a role in identifying children as gifted even though the label was based on supposedly objective criteria

> Why has the LA Times settled on racist teachers as the only reason…

Notice how the extracted quote (and the article itself) never actually accuses teachers of racism? The accusation only appears in your complaint.

Systemic racism can exist without overt individual racism.

Likewise, the article explicitly leaves open the possibility of other causes by simply assigning racism to “a role in” rather than to, as you claim, “the only reason”.

Your complaint (with false accusations) is, without further explanation, simply manufactured outrage.

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

#73

Post by dogprez »

toast0 wrote: post #27
dogprez wrote: post #2

She makes some good points, but my take is that we in the 21st century are more bound to the success of our weakest links. Our world has become so complicated, one small mistake can have dire consequences. So, it's the state's priority to spend its limited resources helping those struggling to tread water. Gifted children will get the stimulus they need at home via independent study or from their family. I know since…

> Gifted children will get the stimulus they need at home via independent study or from their family. Or by disrupting the rest of the class. > Splitting gifted kids apart can warp them socially for life too. Single streaming gifted kids can also warp them socially. Gifted kids in a single stream classroom need to learn to play dumb or become a social pariah. My school district had tracked 1-6, and semi-tracked 7-12.…

> Or by disrupting the rest of the class.

Kids that are struggling in class can be just as disruptive.

> Gifted kids in a single stream classroom need to learn to play dumb or become a social pariah.

Aka learn to function in society?

Here's my story from the other side. I have one gifted child and one child with dyslexia, but doesn't qualify for special education. My school district has a gifted program that is a whole separate school, but they have a handful of specialists to help kids struggling to read. They are shared across the grades and hard to get assigned. One of them has to actually be paid for by the PTSA since the district won't pay for it. That's messed up.

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

#74

Post by danans »

scarmig wrote: post #52
ironlake wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> settled on racist teachers If the population of gifted kids is statistically over-represented by white kids, then one of these must be true: • The test doesn't measure giftedness, but rather level of education. So we would expect kids from worse schools to perform worse. This is institutional racism. The opportunity is not equal. • Gifted kids from minority communities don't have equal access to the test or the cla…

> This is institutional racism. The opportunity is not equal. The test is not a form of racism, institutional or otherwise. It's doubling as a proxy measure for the socioeconomic disadvantage the students have experienced up to that point. You can't get rid of socioeconomic disadvantage by refusing to measure it, no more than you can cure COVID by refusing to test for it.

> It's doubling as a proxy measure for the socioeconomic disadvantage the students have experienced up to that point.

A socioeconomic disadvantage which in the case of California - and almost certainly elsewhere - is caused in significant part by historical racist policies (i.e. redlining).

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

#75

Post by jvanderbot »

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…

There's a lot of strong words thrown around regarding this topic. You need a little of both. Consider a re-framing:

Rather than trying to focus on the less-achieving third (half, tenth, etc) with the goal of bootstrapping entire groups (for your definition) via equality of outcome, it would make sense to put into place opportunities for gifted students and high achievers without regard for where they live or come from.

It would also make sense to put aside some extra resources for those we know can achieve but are held back by specifically addressable hurdles like money or parents or etc.

If you only focus on churning out the most A-students possible without attempting to help those up to the level they can achieve, you end up with a serious nepotism / generational wealth issue where opportunities are hoarded by a different class of not-gonna-pay-it-back'ers. Legacy admissions, etc.

There are some who immediately consider this socialism, but I think it fits squarely in the definition of equality of opportunity.

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

#76

Post by iwontberude »

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…

You are totally over romanticizing institutional learning. It’s worth abolishing and starting over.

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

#77

Post by r0p3 »

The author links to a Teach For America article as evidence of the "removing gifted programs in the name of equity" trend. That article in turn references 2 gifted programs potentially being suspended in Boston and Anchorage, one temporarily for a year due to administrative constraints and one due to budget cuts.

Why does the author claim this is a broad trend with social justice and equity goals at its heart when that isn't what the evidence provided suggests? (Imo: clickbait.)

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

#78

Post by JoshTriplett »

resource_waste wrote: post #6

What is the goal for gifted students? Skip a grade and teach them stuff ahead of time (No, their social skills cant handle it apparently) Teach them extended topics... aka waste their time on stuff they can already do. I was able to skip 1 grade in college due to my insistence on taking college classes in high school. Everyone from parents to teachers were against it. Had a random adult I met working tell me about it…

Help them learn to the full extent of their ability, at the full pace they can learn. There are many different paths that could achieve that successfully, but it's well-established that "have a uniform class grouped by age and punish anyone who stands out" is not a path to success.

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

#79

Post by anonCoffee »

marcus0x62 wrote: post #24
dogprez wrote: post #2

She makes some good points, but my take is that we in the 21st century are more bound to the success of our weakest links. Our world has become so complicated, one small mistake can have dire consequences. So, it's the state's priority to spend its limited resources helping those struggling to tread water. Gifted children will get the stimulus they need at home via independent study or from their family. I know since…

> but my take is that we in the 21st century are more bound to the success of our weakest links. Bound in what way? Gated by? Morally obligated to?

Chained to our legs, making every step harder. And you're a bigot if you refuse additional chains.

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

#80

Post by [deleted] »

scarmig wrote: post #52
ironlake wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> settled on racist teachers If the population of gifted kids is statistically over-represented by white kids, then one of these must be true: • The test doesn't measure giftedness, but rather level of education. So we would expect kids from worse schools to perform worse. This is institutional racism. The opportunity is not equal. • Gifted kids from minority communities don't have equal access to the test or the cla…

> This is institutional racism. The opportunity is not equal. The test is not a form of racism, institutional or otherwise. It's doubling as a proxy measure for the socioeconomic disadvantage the students have experienced up to that point. You can't get rid of socioeconomic disadvantage by refusing to measure it, no more than you can cure COVID by refusing to test for it.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN