6 ms·

13 year old prodigy claims age discrimination by UConn

41 points by dmoney 17y ago

arethuza 17y ago
The university should have told him when he enrolled for the course that some classes might not be possible because of his age. "Summer field work" sounds like it could have a marked degree of risk and/or physical effort required. If that is the case, then I can see that it might not be a good idea for a kid to do them (regardless of how bright or mature he is).
- joshfinnie 17y ago
  Right, but replace a 13 year old with a 20 year old in a wheel chair and you can see where this gets interesting. If it is a requirement for his degree, I am not sure physical fitness can be used as a determent. I have to say though, I just finished up a fields method class and they are not easy. And mine was just in the woods of Connecticut not in Africa.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
  - badgerbombs 17y ago
    It's different. Just because a 13 year old succeeds academically does not mean he has the skills to handle himself outside of a protected environment. The world will not care what his IQ is and will not treat him as special. He's a liability in South Africa, full stop. It would take a lot of money and/or risk to send him, so I support their choice.
    - roboneal 17y ago
      So what assessment is made to ensure that any given 18,19,20+ year old " has the skills to handle himself outside of a protected environment"? That's right, none, but the arbitrary assumption that they are "old enough". It's just as arbitrary assuming THIS 13-year old is "not capable".
      - allenp 17y ago
        There is the difference in legal responsibility of the university. I think this is probably the biggest stumbling block here - even with parental consent there is risk to the school. Imagine facing the newspaper headline "UConn loses 13-year-old prodigy in South Africa" . . .
        roboneal 17y ago
        Per the article, his mother offered to chaperon him at her own expense...makes your point kind of moot.
        allenp 17y ago
        How so? He is still participating within the school's program. Just because his mom signs the field trip slip (or tags along herself) doesn't absolve the school from any and all responsibility for his well being. What sort of insurance policy do you think a school needs to fly a 13 year old from Connecticut to South Africa for a week? How about a 13 year old prodigy? I'm all for Colin being able to have this experience - I absolutely would have been thrilled to participate in something like this at any age. I don't think the school has any obligation to allow him to participate in this activity however.
        roboneal 17y ago
        If they allowed him to enroll in this field of study but are now limiting his access to the curriculum, they should have just refused his tuition. That's the legal obligation. Did you read the article? She offered to sign an explicit legal waiver and accompany him on the trip at her own expense? It appears they family is willing to go to extraordinary lengths to compromise. If the university would look to "solve" the problem vs. outright denial - the family would probably pay cost of any "additional insurance" rider.
- tokenadult 17y ago
  The university should have told him when he enrolled for the course that some classes might not be possible because of his age. This may not be reported in the submitted article, but if I remember correctly, some press report or another states that the family asked about this issue before enrolling the boy in UConn. He is pursuing a college major that involves fieldwork, and my recollection is that he took initiative to make sure that he would be allowed to do fieldwork before deciding where to enroll for his college major program. From involvement in the nonprofit organizations that I lead, I have also become aware of federal statutory law on the subject, which generally bars age discrimination (against the old OR THE YOUNG) in educational programs funded by federal appropriations, which would definitely include UConn. It would be the university's burden of proof to show that there is some specific reason that the specific student is unable to participate in the fieldwork (not likely, in this case) rather than the university's prerogative to declare that students below some age are ipso facto ineligible for the program.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
kevinh 17y ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it acceptable to discriminate based on age, except under the terms of the ADEA, which only protects people >= 40 in the workplace?
postfuturist 17y ago
It's not a question of whether or not age discrimination is going on (as the title seems to suggest), the question is whether or not the discrimination is legally justified. The courts will decide that at no small expense to the family and the university. There is plenty of legal discrimination regarding minors designed to protect them. You don't really have same rights as other adults in the US until you turn 18 or (even 21). In my opinion, the university should allow him to go with the provision that he is chaperoned by a legal guardian.
- roboneal 17y ago
  His mother offered to chaperon him at her own expense. That SHOULD have been the end of this story.
- kellishaver 17y ago
  I agree. With his mother willing to sign a waiver releasing the school of any liability and being willing to go with him, at her own expense, I think they should allow him to go. Without those two things, I think they're perfectly justified in saying "no" but with both of those in place, he should be allowed to go and study.
SlyShy 17y ago
I was a classmate of Colin's, and I want to emphasize that he is extremely well adjusted. When he was in high school he struck everyone as a bright--if a little smaller than usual--high school student. So I'd love to not hear any "he should go back and play with his age-mates so he can develop social skills, yadayada." The truth is, 13 year olds are obnoxious, and if I could've skipped that and started interacting with adults earlier I would've.
- pasbesoin 17y ago
  Why do people assume that "children" (I would tend to start applying the term "young adult") who learn everything else so quickly, somehow do not learn social skills and socialize at a faster than normal pace? Some individuals may not, but others may and, just as with intellectual capability, these other skills should be evaluated on a case by case basis. Further (as has been discussed here before and in several posted items), some people argue that one problem with kids these days is precisely that they and their culture are so cut off from adult and workplace culture, in general. From that perspective, Colin's interactions with adults might actually be healthy. I wasn't necessarily as bright as him, but I was considered bright. And was it ever frustrating at times to be forced into extensive interaction with my "peers" who were obsessed with isolated social ranking, posturing, and what was for me dumb/uninformed/boring behavior. Sure, you don't want a child to be taken advantage of, but a blanket response of "too young" is an excuse not to do your job and actually thereby takes advantage of that child in another way, constraining them for the sake of your convenience and peace of mind. In Colin's case, at least he has moved on to university, which should have broadened his social as well as intellectual environment. I guess a trip overseas might thereupon rather be posed as a challenge to his problem solving skills, and to his ability to adopt a sufficiently protective posture. (An adult is viewed, on the surface, as a more challenging target for victimization than a kid.) If he's getting himself through university with a 3.9 grade average and honor roll status, and in the face of the age difference with his peers, I'd argue that he already has problem solving skills at least equal to others participating in the program. I can imagine him, on the basis of his youthful and diminished stature, perhaps being prone to targeting by criminals and con-artists. I would think the program might be willing to put in a bit of work to counter-balance this concern (which might be legitimate, despite any waiving of liability, both out of genuine interest and out of concern for possible negative publicity). His traveling with a guardian, who can devote her full time to counter-balancing such possible threats, should resolve remaining concerns. This is an exceptional person. Can the university and program not be a bit exceptional, in return, in helping him achieve his goals? Hopefully, they'll admit the NSF work as equivalent and sufficient, for credit.
kljhgfvgbn 17y ago
My university is banning under 18s after several centuries of admitting brilliant child prodigies. Simply because government rules call for detailed background checks for anyone working with children. We aren't sure if this would only apply to a kid's teachers, all teaching staff, all researchers, all staff or even every other >18year old student they met. Not joking - there was a case about whether in high school any student who turned 18 in their final year needed a police check if they helped a still 17yro student with their work and so were 'in a teaching position'

41 points by dmoney 17y ago

The university should have told him when he enrolled for the course that some classes might not be possible because of his age. "Summer field work" sounds like it could have a marked degree of risk and/or physical effort required. If that is the case, then I can see that it might not be a good idea for a kid to do them (regardless of how bright or mature he is).

joshfinnie 17y ago
Right, but replace a 13 year old with a 20 year old in a wheel chair and you can see where this gets interesting. If it is a requirement for his degree, I am not sure physical fitness can be used as a determent. I have to say though, I just finished up a fields method class and they are not easy. And mine was just in the woods of Connecticut not in Africa.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- badgerbombs 17y ago
  It's different. Just because a 13 year old succeeds academically does not mean he has the skills to handle himself outside of a protected environment. The world will not care what his IQ is and will not treat him as special. He's a liability in South Africa, full stop. It would take a lot of money and/or risk to send him, so I support their choice.
  - roboneal 17y ago
    So what assessment is made to ensure that any given 18,19,20+ year old " has the skills to handle himself outside of a protected environment"? That's right, none, but the arbitrary assumption that they are "old enough". It's just as arbitrary assuming THIS 13-year old is "not capable".
    - allenp 17y ago
      There is the difference in legal responsibility of the university. I think this is probably the biggest stumbling block here - even with parental consent there is risk to the school. Imagine facing the newspaper headline "UConn loses 13-year-old prodigy in South Africa" . . .
      - roboneal 17y ago
        Per the article, his mother offered to chaperon him at her own expense...makes your point kind of moot.
        allenp 17y ago
        How so? He is still participating within the school's program. Just because his mom signs the field trip slip (or tags along herself) doesn't absolve the school from any and all responsibility for his well being. What sort of insurance policy do you think a school needs to fly a 13 year old from Connecticut to South Africa for a week? How about a 13 year old prodigy? I'm all for Colin being able to have this experience - I absolutely would have been thrilled to participate in something like this at any age. I don't think the school has any obligation to allow him to participate in this activity however.
        roboneal 17y ago
        If they allowed him to enroll in this field of study but are now limiting his access to the curriculum, they should have just refused his tuition. That's the legal obligation. Did you read the article? She offered to sign an explicit legal waiver and accompany him on the trip at her own expense? It appears they family is willing to go to extraordinary lengths to compromise. If the university would look to "solve" the problem vs. outright denial - the family would probably pay cost of any "additional insurance" rider.
tokenadult 17y ago
The university should have told him when he enrolled for the course that some classes might not be possible because of his age. This may not be reported in the submitted article, but if I remember correctly, some press report or another states that the family asked about this issue before enrolling the boy in UConn. He is pursuing a college major that involves fieldwork, and my recollection is that he took initiative to make sure that he would be allowed to do fieldwork before deciding where to enroll for his college major program. From involvement in the nonprofit organizations that I lead, I have also become aware of federal statutory law on the subject, which generally bars age discrimination (against the old OR THE YOUNG) in educational programs funded by federal appropriations, which would definitely include UConn. It would be the university's burden of proof to show that there is some specific reason that the specific student is unable to participate in the fieldwork (not likely, in this case) rather than the university's prerogative to declare that students below some age are ipso facto ineligible for the program.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

kevinh 17y ago

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it acceptable to discriminate based on age, except under the terms of the ADEA, which only protects people >= 40 in the workplace?

postfuturist 17y ago

It's not a question of whether or not age discrimination is going on (as the title seems to suggest), the question is whether or not the discrimination is legally justified. The courts will decide that at no small expense to the family and the university. There is plenty of legal discrimination regarding minors designed to protect them. You don't really have same rights as other adults in the US until you turn 18 or (even 21). In my opinion, the university should allow him to go with the provision that he is chaperoned by a legal guardian.

roboneal 17y ago
His mother offered to chaperon him at her own expense. That SHOULD have been the end of this story.
kellishaver 17y ago
I agree. With his mother willing to sign a waiver releasing the school of any liability and being willing to go with him, at her own expense, I think they should allow him to go. Without those two things, I think they're perfectly justified in saying "no" but with both of those in place, he should be allowed to go and study.

SlyShy 17y ago

I was a classmate of Colin's, and I want to emphasize that he is extremely well adjusted. When he was in high school he struck everyone as a bright--if a little smaller than usual--high school student. So I'd love to not hear any "he should go back and play with his age-mates so he can develop social skills, yadayada." The truth is, 13 year olds are obnoxious, and if I could've skipped that and started interacting with adults earlier I would've.

pasbesoin 17y ago
Why do people assume that "children" (I would tend to start applying the term "young adult") who learn everything else so quickly, somehow do not learn social skills and socialize at a faster than normal pace? Some individuals may not, but others may and, just as with intellectual capability, these other skills should be evaluated on a case by case basis. Further (as has been discussed here before and in several posted items), some people argue that one problem with kids these days is precisely that they and their culture are so cut off from adult and workplace culture, in general. From that perspective, Colin's interactions with adults might actually be healthy. I wasn't necessarily as bright as him, but I was considered bright. And was it ever frustrating at times to be forced into extensive interaction with my "peers" who were obsessed with isolated social ranking, posturing, and what was for me dumb/uninformed/boring behavior. Sure, you don't want a child to be taken advantage of, but a blanket response of "too young" is an excuse not to do your job and actually thereby takes advantage of that child in another way, constraining them for the sake of your convenience and peace of mind. In Colin's case, at least he has moved on to university, which should have broadened his social as well as intellectual environment. I guess a trip overseas might thereupon rather be posed as a challenge to his problem solving skills, and to his ability to adopt a sufficiently protective posture. (An adult is viewed, on the surface, as a more challenging target for victimization than a kid.) If he's getting himself through university with a 3.9 grade average and honor roll status, and in the face of the age difference with his peers, I'd argue that he already has problem solving skills at least equal to others participating in the program. I can imagine him, on the basis of his youthful and diminished stature, perhaps being prone to targeting by criminals and con-artists. I would think the program might be willing to put in a bit of work to counter-balance this concern (which might be legitimate, despite any waiving of liability, both out of genuine interest and out of concern for possible negative publicity). His traveling with a guardian, who can devote her full time to counter-balancing such possible threats, should resolve remaining concerns. This is an exceptional person. Can the university and program not be a bit exceptional, in return, in helping him achieve his goals? Hopefully, they'll admit the NSF work as equivalent and sufficient, for credit.

kljhgfvgbn 17y ago

My university is banning under 18s after several centuries of admitting brilliant child prodigies. Simply because government rules call for detailed background checks for anyone working with children. We aren't sure if this would only apply to a kid's teachers, all teaching staff, all researchers, all staff or even every other >18year old student they met. Not joking - there was a case about whether in high school any student who turned 18 in their final year needed a police check if they helped a still 17yro student with their work and so were 'in a teaching position'